Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Calm said:

I am issuing a CFR for each of the "concessions" DBMormon has claimed Jim Bennett made, a time stamp would be sufficient, but a quote as well would be nice.  

I would like to hear what Bennett said for himself rather than through the filter we are getting here given it appears Bennett saw the conversation in a very different way than how Reel saw it given his response (linked to above).

Also included in the CFRs is the claim posted on another thread:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71611-has-debate-ever-changed-your-mind/?do=findComment&comment=1209889461

I am not claiming that DBMormon has misrepresented Bennett, just that I see it as possible (not saying it is intentional, pretty obvious they went into that conversation/debates with different filters in place on what was happening) and I would prefer to hear Bennett's version.

I realize asking for a time stamp from 12 hours is significant, but so are the claims being made.

Calm, are you able to listen yourself, always helps IMO. So far I've listened to 1, 2, & 3. I guess the ride is supposedly going to get a little bumpy ahead, but so far so good. Jim makes some good points. Point one, is just because D & C 132 says that Emma could be destroyed for not letting Joseph live polygamy doesn't mean she would be killed, just that her exaltation or being with her family will be destroyed. And another point he made was that many of the wives of Joseph had spiritual experiences that spoke to them that polygamy was right. That always got to me. But then Bill makes a good point as well, when he points to the FLDS that live nearby him, and he most likely knows a few, that they are convinced that it is of God as well. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

he most likely knows a few, that they are convinced that it is of God as well. 

Did he say he knew them?  Just curious.

imo, you have to allow adults to speak for themselves.  I am not going to tell an FLDS they didn't have a witness if they said they did....but I am not going to assume they did just because it is a religious choice.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
On 2/22/2019 at 4:07 PM, let’s roll said:

I can’t take seriously anyone who claims the “to an outside observer” points are major concessions.

Those points can fairly be summarized as non-members don’t believe in Priesthood power and modern day prophets.  I hardly consider that a concession.  More like acknowledging the obvious.

But isn’t it the “outside observer” who we want to convert and baptize?  It does matter what their perception is.

Have you listened to the podcasts?  I listened to more last night and they are impressive (both men).  

I understand many here strongly dislike Bill, but you should listen to these if you want to comment with any credibility (about what’s in the podcasts).  Bill is respectful, but definitely is getting Jim to concede on many points.

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
On 2/22/2019 at 2:29 PM, Storm Rider said:

Hmm, not really anything about the gospel doctrine, but rather personal attacks on the character of Joseph Smith and the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ. Got it. No ad hominem attacks on you, but it is open season on dead men and old men. Yep, the very epitome of fairness, tolerance, and equality. 

Have you listened to the podcasts?  Because you are misrepresenting what takes place during the discussion.

They both really try to respectfully disagree and stick to good sources and things we know from church history (and how they can be interpreted differently by different members).

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
On 2/22/2019 at 3:54 PM, churchistrue said:

I listened some more. OK, I get a little more what RFM is saying and why you'd share that. The conversation turned a little more argumentative in trying to win point vs point. I wouldn't say that Bennett conceded to Reel. I would just say that to someone without tons of bias, or at least similar bias as what I have, would say Bennett got absolutely torched in this.

Wow.  I’m just part way through episode 3 and I’m seeing it progressing to this (just not there yet).  Did you listen to all 6 now?

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
On 2/22/2019 at 3:12 PM, JAHS said:

It's still doctrine that was important at its time but not at the present time.  Latter-day revelation.  Line upon Line. 

Where does the Adam-God Doctrine fit into this (and remember one Prophet later termed it "false doctrine").  Do you believe it was important though "at its time"?

Link to comment
On 2/23/2019 at 6:38 AM, churchistrue said:

Most evidences seem to reinforce our own established worldviews. I've changed my worldview a lot over the years, but this just reinforced mine. a) all scripture and church historical events are not literally true and defending it as such ends up making us think really illogical and silly things about God and the world b) the church is true in the sense that the lived experience is good and creates really good people like Jim Bennett. 

I'm with you regarding scripture.  But I do believe we have enough records, journals, witness testimonies and documentation to know that many of the church historical events that are causing members to have issue are "literally true".  But I do get your point regarding trying to debate these topics.

Quote

No, I didn't meant to convey that, at least as far as I understand your question. I think Bennett's a smart guy, super nice guy, who understands the FairMormon talking points very well from a logical standpoint. He's also very honest and willing to address every question. Bill is good match for him in terms of he is also well versed in all the CES Letter type issues from both FairMormon and critical standpoint to adequately address all the weaknesses in the FairMormon view. Both are above average smart, both are above average informed. Both are reasonably eloquent and adept at explaining their position. Neither are geniuses. Neither are particular experts in any one field. Similar to how I view myself in this world. But unfortunately, according to my own bias and perspective, anyone who spends 12 hours with someone like Bill who is explaining the FairMormon view and not ducking any questions, is going to get the stuffing beat out of them. I think it's just the nature of the strength of the respective positions.

I think you summed up nicely what most likely took place in this very long discussion between Reel and Bennett.  I have not had a chance to listen, but am definitely going to try to (at least to some of it).  But from comments from those who have actually listened, this sounds like a good analysis.

It's interesting to me that most all of those who have shown up on this thread to hate on Reel, either have not listened to these podcasts or refuse to.  I get there are biases, but then just don't comment on the podcasts unless you've listened and can actually address them with some intelligent comments. 

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
18 hours ago, Calm said:

I am issuing a CFR for each of the "concessions" DBMormon has claimed Jim Bennett made, a time stamp would be sufficient, but a quote as well would be nice.  

I would like to hear what Bennett said for himself rather than through the filter we are getting here given it appears Bennett saw the conversation in a very different way than how Reel saw it given his response (linked to above).

Also included in the CFRs is the claim posted on another thread:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71611-has-debate-ever-changed-your-mind/?do=findComment&comment=1209889461

I am not claiming that DBMormon has misrepresented Bennett, just that I see it as possible (not saying it is intentional, pretty obvious they went into that conversation/debates with different filters in place on what was happening) and I would prefer to hear Bennett's version.

I realize asking for a time stamp from 12 hours is significant, but so are the claims being made.

That's pretty difficult to do (with 12 hours and finding exact time stamps).  Maybe he can do that, but I'd like to read actual quotes from the discussion too.

Also, some who are posting who actually listened are backing up some of his claims (not specific topics though from what I've seen....but maybe they can and that would be helpful).

I really am going to try to get to listening to them, it's just not something I enjoy doing and 12 hours is quite the investment of time!

Moderator: We do not allow posters to respond to questions with a demand to read a book instead. Demanding that someone listen to a 12 hour podcast to respond to unsupported assertions seems equally unfair. CFRs are appropriate. If a claim is made about the content of the podcast, it needs to be accompanied by quotes or a timestamp. 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Calm said:

Did he say he knew them?  Just curious.

imo, you have to allow adults to speak for themselves.  I am not going to tell an FLDS they didn't have a witness if they said they did....but I am not going to assume they did just because it is a religious choice.

I'm sure Bill knows a few. In fact I want to attend a Sunstone Symposium that is going to happen in Short Creek this April and I'm sure Bill had a part in it, and I'm almost sure there will be a panel with FLDS. Last year or the year before, the SS in SLC, had a panel with active FLDS.

My last time of being in Colorado City it was a totally different picture, in fact I made my husband take me and my sons there while on vacation in St. George. And there was a truck with darkened windows that ran us right out of town by following us close behind. I hear it's a totally different town now, so I'd like to see it for myself!

Link to comment

Wow, although I listen during the night alot, I do wake up and take in quite a bit. In podcast 5, I was amazed by what Jim said. He seems to be more in the church but not off it as far as holding to the rod of believing the same as everyone else. He is so much the free thinker. And he said he gets some flack in Gospel Doctine class when speaking out against those that think a prophet can't be wrong on the subject of doctrine or current policies. Not his exact words. He is against the November '15 policy that keeps children from being baptised if they have gay parents. He mentions more but I'll need to listen again. I've taken a liking to Jim. He makes it sound like to me that I can attend the church and be myself and not have to tow the line, but be a free thinker. 

Link to comment
55 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Wow, although I listen during the night alot, I do wake up and take in quite a bit. In podcast 5, I was amazed by what Jim said. He seems to be more in the church but not off it as far as holding to the rod of believing the same as everyone else. He is so much the free thinker. And he said he gets some flack in Gospel Doctine class when speaking out against those that think a prophet can't be wrong on the subject of doctrine or current policies. Not his exact words. He is against the November '15 policy that keeps children from being baptised if they have gay parents. He mentions more but I'll need to listen again. I've taken a liking to Jim. He makes it sound like to me that I can attend the church and be myself and not have to tow the line, but be a free thinker. 

I haven't even started this yet...anxious to begin when I have time.  Very interesting and I have seen a Dehlin podcast with the new director of the Maxwell Institute with the Millers that simply amazes me!

Link to comment
6 hours ago, ALarson said:

It's interesting to me that most all of those who have shown up on this thread to hate on Reel, e

"Hate on Reel"...

And that would be who exactly?  Being a pretty significant charge in my view.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, ALarson said:

Also, some who are posting who actually listened are backing up some of his claims (not specific topics though from what I've seen....but maybe they can and that would be helpful).

Lack of specifics makes me wonder how much perception has been changed with Reel's post podcast narrative...'this is what you are going to hear' often leads to 'this is what I heard'.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I'm sure Bill knows a few.

Proximity does not mean relationship.  In Canada, I encountered members of a fundamentalist group quite often, they would come into the bookstore I worked at even on occasion.  I would be friendly, but nothing beyond requests for help were given by them though they talked among themselves extensively.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
4 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Wow, although I listen during the night alot, I do wake up and take in quite a bit. In podcast 5, I was amazed by what Jim said. He seems to be more in the church but not off it as far as holding to the rod of believing the same as everyone else. He is so much the free thinker. And he said he gets some flack in Gospel Doctine class when speaking out against those that think a prophet can't be wrong on the subject of doctrine or current policies. Not his exact words. He is against the November '15 policy that keeps children from being baptised if they have gay parents. He mentions more but I'll need to listen again. I've taken a liking to Jim. He makes it sound like to me that I can attend the church and be myself and not have to tow the line, but be a free thinker. 

Time stamp please.  Let Bennett speak for himself.

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, JulieM said:

Will you listened if you get the time stamp?  (Just asking because I’m not good at doing that!).  How about the quote?  

Yes, I will definitely listen.  Not sure about what you mean by the "quote".

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Yes, I will definitely listen.  Not sure about what you mean by the "quote".

Being able to read it instead of trying to find it with a time stamp.  Maybe you’re good at that but I’m not :mellow:

Maybe there will be a transcript but I know that’ll be awhile if ever!

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Calm said:

Yes, I will definitely listen.  Not sure about what you mean by the "quote".

Timestamps where Jim mentions a doctrine or policy is a mistake:

In podcast #5 start with:

Race and the PH ban: 12:50  

Prophets leading us astray: 27:00...and again at 44:00.

LGBTQ and the November 2015 policy: 51:00

But Jim feels they get a whole lot more right than wrong. 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, JulieM said:

Have you listened to the podcasts?  Because you are misrepresenting what takes place during the discussion.

They both really try to respectfully disagree and stick to good sources and things we know from church history (and how they can be interpreted differently by different members).

 

On 2/22/2019 at 2:05 PM, DBMormon said:

* as an outside observer the top 15 men of the Church give no impression of being anything more than 15 older men behind the times and making serious mistakes
* They are completely wrong on the LGBT issue
* He wouldn't let his daughter work in the Smith Home knowing what he does
* The book of Abraham in a vacuum is deeply in favor of the critics conclusion
* priesthood blessing to an outside observer have no more power to heal than the healing rituals of any other system
* Joseph lacked integrity and fidelity with Emma
* The Church teaches us to harm others at times (prop 8, miracle of forgiveness, LGBT policies)
And there are many others but this is a start

 

My statement, "Hmm, not really anything about the gospel doctrine, but rather personal attacks on the character of Joseph Smith and the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ. Got it. No ad hominem attacks on you, but it is open season on dead men and old men. Yep, the very epitome of fairness, tolerance, and equality." was in reply to DB's comments above.  I was not commenting on my perception of the actual podcast, but DB's review of the most important things conceded by Bennett.

 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

My statement, "Hmm, not really anything about the gospel doctrine, but rather personal attacks on the character of Joseph Smith and the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ. Got it. No ad hominem attacks on you, but it is open season on dead men and old men. Yep, the very epitome of fairness, tolerance, and equality." was in reply to DB's comments above.  I was not commenting on my perception of the actual podcast, but DB's review of the most important things conceded by Bennett.

I’d recommend listening Storm Rider, the conversation is respectfully done and both make concessions.  From what I’ve heard so far, Bill is accurate.  Of course each are bias in their review or feelings afterwards possibly, but have you listened at all?

Kudos to Jim for doing these podcasts.  I’m feeling he’s really more a middle of the road Mormon.

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I’d recommend listening Storm Rider, the conversation is respectfully done and both make concessions.  From what I’ve heard so far, Bill is accurate.  Of course each are bias in their review or feelings afterwards possibly, but have you listened at all?

Kudos to Jim for doing these podcasts.  I’m feeling he’s really more a middle of the road Mormon.

I so relate to Jim! I had no idea about this man, I would love to know the guy in person, and wish I'd known him when he ran for a political office not too long ago. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, JulieM said:

Being able to read it instead of trying to find it with a time stamp.  Maybe you’re good at that but I’m not :mellow:

Maybe there will be a transcript but I know that’ll be awhile if ever!

Much prefer to read, definitely.  Might not read the whole thing, but anything someone pointed me towards, sure would.

A transcript would be nice, even partial one.  Any volunteers?

Link to comment
59 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Timestamps where Jim mentions a doctrine or policy is a mistake:

In podcast #5 start with:

Race and the PH ban: 12:50  

Prophets leading us astray: 27:00...and again at 44:00.

LGBTQ and the November 2015 policy: 51:00

But Jim feels they get a whole lot more right than wrong. 

Thanks, digesting dinner...this is next on the list.  Got to charge my headphones.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...