Bill Reel Invited to Disciplinary Council

[Robert F. Smith]

5 minutes ago, Duncan said:

and he's on record as saying he knows more than 90% plus people in the Church, well read, studied everything, his humility I don't know about

CFR

[Duncan]

4 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

CFR

i'm watching Wrestlemania 4 on daily motion, one sec!

July 11 ,  “I have personally studied every nook and cranny of Mormonism. I find Mormonism as interesting as any religion. It has taken me 20 years of serious thinking and reading to get to a place where I deeply understand my religious tribe inside and out. “ I am just a layman” FB post

Jul 2 someone asks him a question 

” Bill, Have you spent as much time reading positive information as you do critical information on the issues surrounding the truth claims of Mormonism?”

His answer “ I need you to not only hear my answer but feel it? I have read the Book of Mormon over a dozen times all the way through and have read from its pages thousands and thousands of times. I have read the new testament and old testament deeply as well. I had read and thought about the teachings on those pages so deeply and was one who pondered the scriptures continuously. I read all the correlated materials. manuals, periodicals, LDS.org. I read and studied the institute manuals. I read "Our Heritage and "truth restored", all of talmadge,[sic] Mcconkie, JFS, I read everything. I read the motivational guys like Wilcox, Millet, and so many others. Have you seen my LDS library. No doubt what so ever, I have read more faithful material than 99.9% of members as well as critical material in order to understand both sides. Are there folks who have read more. Sure but not many.”…. Let me know if you want another issue to study out. But trust me, not one facet of our story is the way the church taught it. But don't take my word for it." FB post

 

[hope_for_things]

44 minutes ago, Duncan said:

umm, are you sure about that? and the correct answer is no

Pretty sure, which part are you questioning?  I can DM you the language if you’re questioning that piece, I don’t want to violate the rules on this topic.  

[hope_for_things]

37 minutes ago, Calm said:

Seems unlikely given they have exed apostles before. More likely there are factors not shared with the public. 

Leadership roulette seems the most plausible factor 

[Duncan]

3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Pretty sure, which part are you questioning?  I can DM you the language if you’re questioning that piece, I don’t want to violate the rules on this topic.  

I just wonder how we can trust the second anointing dialogue by someone who put it online

[hope_for_things]

28 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

As far as the denial of the Holy Ghost goes - that is completely wrong. It is my understanding that the only ones that can commit this sin are those who are beyond faith - they have a sure knowledge and still reject Jesus Christ. Never heard the second class citizen bit; that must be local wives tales. 

I’ve heard some church leaders speculate about what Holy Ghost denial constitutes, but I can think of any canonical support for those perspectives, and you have to also consider the other statements and warnings at the same time.  

As for second class citizen comment I was referring to famous church members who were excommunicated or left the faith and came back later in life.  Surely you’ve heard some of these stories told as cautionary tales.  

[hope_for_things]

40 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Jeff Holland said in a public interview:

 

Those are good quotes to keep in mind, thanks for sharing.  I think Elder Holland’s approach is likely more lenient than others.  

An important point he makes is that there needs to be some kind of line drawn at some place, and I agree with that.  I personally wouldn’t draw that line in the same place he does, and I think where leaders draw that line will vary widely.  

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, phaedrus ut said:

The last word I read from him on the subject he said he hadn't resigned and wasn't called into a DC but he didn't consider himself a member. This was recently when the Sam Young court was in the news. 

That might have something to do with it.  Maybe since he doesn't consider himself a member, the church doesn't view him as a threat to the flock.

[hope_for_things]

20 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I just wonder how we can trust the second anointing dialogue by someone who put it online

Multiple distinct historical accounts helps increase confidence in their accuracy.  That’s not to say that the language hasn’t evolved as well, since we know it has for the other temple ordinances, in some cases quite significantly.  

[SouthernMo]

4 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

Bill, I know you read this. If there is even a small fraction of a particle of faith in you, then Do what you need to do to get right with the Lord.

While i certainly cannot speak for Bill, from my experience, you are missing the perspective of many who struggle with LDS traditional faith.

Being right with the church and being right with the Lord are not the same thing.  I know many strong LDS members believe this, but some do not.  Your genuine plea to get right with God misses the point entirely.

Lastly, who are you to judge if he is or is not right with God?

[SouthernMo]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

I think there is plenty of room for views and belief, but if it translates into apostate behavior (as defined in the handbook), discipline is warranted.

When did a handbook become God’s word and authority from which his children are judged? Perhaps scripture would be a better source than an ever-revising policy manual?

[Duncan]

3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Multiple distinct historical accounts helps increase confidence in their accuracy.  That’s not to say that the language hasn’t evolved as well, since we know it has for the other temple ordinances, in some cases quite significantly.  

I'm interested in how you read DC 20:32-34

32 But there is a possibility that man may fall from grace and depart from the living God;

33 Therefore let the church take heed and pray always, lest they fall into temptation;

34 Yea, and even let those who are sanctified take heed also.

Also this from Elder McConkie and this is what I am driving at

 "[T]he added blessing of having one's calling and election made sure is itself an encouragement to avoid sin and a hedge against its further commission. By that long course of obedience and trial which enabled them to gain so great a blessing the sanctified saints have charted a course and developed a pattern of living which avoids sin and encourages righteousness. . . . But suppose such persons become disaffected and the spirit of repentance leaves them-which is a seldom and almost unheard of eventuality-still, what then? The answer is-and the revelations and teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith so recite-they must pay the penalty of their own sins, for the blood of Christ will not cleanse them. Or if they commit murder or adultery, they lose their promised inheritance because these sins are exempt from the sealing promises. Or if they commit the unpardonable sin, they become sons of perdition." (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:343)

[hope_for_things]

10 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I'm interested in how you read DC 20:32-34

32 But there is a possibility that man may fall from grace and depart from the living God;

33 Therefore let the church take heed and pray always, lest they fall into temptation;

34 Yea, and even let those who are sanctified take heed also.

Also this from Elder McConkie and this is what I am driving at

 "[T]he added blessing of having one's calling and election made sure is itself an encouragement to avoid sin and a hedge against its further commission. By that long course of obedience and trial which enabled them to gain so great a blessing the sanctified saints have charted a course and developed a pattern of living which avoids sin and encourages righteousness. . . . But suppose such persons become disaffected and the spirit of repentance leaves them-which is a seldom and almost unheard of eventuality-still, what then? The answer is-and the revelations and teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith so recite-they must pay the penalty of their own sins, for the blood of Christ will not cleanse them. Or if they commit murder or adultery, they lose their promised inheritance because these sins are exempt from the sealing promises. Or if they commit the unpardonable sin, they become sons of perdition." (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:343)

Well I would agree that the language in the 2nd anointing is clearly in tension with many other teachings.  But that’s no surprise as the traditions of Mormonism are built on thousands of years of disparate traditions spanning a multitude of different authors.  A somewhat exaggerated but applicable analogy would be to find two disparate commentaries from different sources on the internet and pointing out how the perspectives diverge.  

 

[hope_for_things]

41 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

When did a handbook become God’s word and authority from which his children are judged? Perhaps scripture would be a better source than an ever-revising policy manual?

Sometimes I find it surprising how some leaders treat the church manuals.  I’ve had some treat them on par with the scriptures.  

[pogi]

3 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

But that’s just it, this is one mans perspective, just like all the perspectives of the past are a potpourri of perspectives.   

I think these perspectives should be tolerated and engaged with, not judged on a scale of coherence with the correlation committee.  That’s the kind of creed and litmus test enforcement that is the antithesis of what Mormonism was founded on.  

That is not true, Mormonism was founded upon the restoration of the priesthood, and the principles of faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, and the ordinances of baptism etc.  Not all “perspectives” are tolerated, nor should they be.  Excommunication has existed from the beginning of the church for those whose “perspectives”, teachings, and actions are antagonistic to those core principles.  Should we tolerate the perspective that open marriages are righteous?  Obviously, there have always been boundaries.  If you are antagonistic to the mission and principles of the restored gospel, then excommunication is warranted to protect the flock.  If you make a living off of bashing the church, then the church needs to sever ties  

3 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

We can only speculate as to how it impacts someone, that is a very personal thing and I don’t think should be discounted because someone’s perspectives may have shifted away from orthodoxy.  I trust those others who’ve experienced excommunication some of whom described it as a very traumatic and harmful experience.  Discounting the harm smacks of a very unempathetic and possibly callous dismissal.  

I honestly have a hard time feeling empathy for excommunication.  I have nothing personal against him, and I wish him well, and hope for a change of heart,  but he claims to have known that his actions would lead him to this inevitable conclusion.  He “knew” and therefore he chose it.  He felt that his podcast was more valuable to him then membership in the Church.  I am not saying that it won’t be hard for him in some ways, but spiritually he wasn’t really using his membership anymore, and he doesn’t really believe that his priesthood is tied to membership, and he doesn’t believe that participating in the ordinances is really that special, and he didn’t really agree with the leaders on almost anything.  Spiritually, nothing will be lost according to his “testimony”.  He will certainly feel the pings of rejection, and I can empathize for him there a little, but He has publicly rejected just about everything the church is, so it’s hard to feel much empathy when the wind starts to blow the other way.

Edited November 16, 2018 by pogi

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

...................................

July 11 ,  “I have personally studied every nook and cranny of Mormonism. I find Mormonism as interesting as any religion. It has taken me 20 years of serious thinking and reading to get to a place where I deeply understand my religious tribe inside and out. “ I am just a layman” FB post................................

His answer “ I need you to not only hear my answer but feel it? I have read the Book of Mormon over a dozen times all the way through and have read from its pages thousands and thousands of times. I have read the new testament and old testament deeply as well. I had read and thought about the teachings on those pages so deeply and was one who pondered the scriptures continuously. I read all the correlated materials. manuals, periodicals, LDS.org. I read and studied the institute manuals. I read "Our Heritage and "truth restored", all of talmadge,[sic] Mcconkie, JFS, I read everything. I read the motivational guys like Wilcox, Millet, and so many others. Have you seen my LDS library. No doubt what so ever, I have read more faithful material than 99.9% of members as well as critical material in order to understand both sides. Are there folks who have read more. Sure but not many.”…. Let me know if you want another issue to study out. But trust me, not one facet of our story is the way the church taught it. But don't take my word for it." FB post

Thanks for that info, Duncan.

Bill has often posted on this board in the past, and has often shown his deep prejudices and misunderstandings -- based on his extensive reading and experience.  The thing most noticeable about his comments is the absolute nature of them.  The LDS Church is completely wrong all the time.  Any organization would have a very hard time meeting that qualification.  In fact it is silly to imagine any church or other organization being so wrong all the time.  That is not even possible if it were intentional.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

when your temple covenants are revoked that you are essentially being kicked out of the Celestial Kingdom,

How can you be kicked out when you are not in the Celestial Kingdom yet since that doesn’t happen until resurrection?

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

While i certainly cannot speak for Bill, from my experience, you are missing the perspective of many who struggle with LDS traditional faith.

Being right with the church and being right with the Lord are not the same thing.  I know many strong LDS members believe this, but some do not.  Your genuine plea to get right with God misses the point entirely.

Lastly, who are you to judge if he is or is not right with God?

You may not have been here on this board in the past when Bill was holding forth with considerable self-assurance.  Some of those of us who were here may have strong opinions about what Bill has said and done.  Bill doesn't like what you call the "LDS traditional faith."  He has basically exed-himself.  With his level of contempt, why would he want to be a member anyway?  Most of us here wish him well, and we feel sorry for him.  He never did seem to get what the LDS faith and church were all about anyhow.

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

I’ve heard some church leaders speculate about what Holy Ghost denial constitutes, but I can think of any canonical support for those perspectives, and you have to also consider the other statements and warnings at the same time.  

As for second class citizen comment I was referring to famous church members who were excommunicated or left the faith and came back later in life.  Surely you’ve heard some of these stories told as cautionary tales.  

I have known a few, one in particular, that were great leaders, wonderful individuals, and strongly spiritual that fell and later came back. The individual I know personally never regained the spirituality and confidence that he once had, but I never stopped loving him or thinking of him as one of the most spiritual men I have ever met. I am not au courant about those that were excommunicated in the Utah scene.  Though I lived there a few years, it has not been where I have chosen to live the vast majority of my life. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

That might have something to do with it.  Maybe since he doesn't consider himself a member, the church doesn't view him as a threat to the flock.

He hasn’t been trading on membership to give himself credibility in persuading others to his POV as far as I am aware. No one has asked about him to FM questions list for years. And even when there was curiosity, it was always clear to the questioners he was acting in opposition and no one presented him as trying to convert others to his way of thinking. 

He may have been doing so, but he seems more of having gone for exposing the Church rather than persuading members or pressuring it into changing. 

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

i'm watching Wrestlemania 4 on daily motion, one sec!

July 11 ,  “I have personally studied every nook and cranny of Mormonism. I find Mormonism as interesting as any religion. It has taken me 20 years of serious thinking and reading to get to a place where I deeply understand my religious tribe inside and out. “ I am just a layman” FB post

Jul 2 someone asks him a question 

” Bill, Have you spent as much time reading positive information as you do critical information on the issues surrounding the truth claims of Mormonism?”

His answer “ I need you to not only hear my answer but feel it? I have read the Book of Mormon over a dozen times all the way through and have read from its pages thousands and thousands of times. I have read the new testament and old testament deeply as well. I had read and thought about the teachings on those pages so deeply and was one who pondered the scriptures continuously. I read all the correlated materials. manuals, periodicals, LDS.org. I read and studied the institute manuals. I read "Our Heritage and "truth restored", all of talmadge,[sic] Mcconkie, JFS, I read everything. I read the motivational guys like Wilcox, Millet, and so many others. Have you seen my LDS library. No doubt what so ever, I have read more faithful material than 99.9% of members as well as critical material in order to understand both sides. Are there folks who have read more. Sure but not many.”…. Let me know if you want another issue to study out. But trust me, not one facet of our story is the way the church taught it. But don't take my word for it." FB post

 

read the scriptures a dozen times? Really?  Hmm, I know I like to read, but just a dozen times? I can see where he is trying to impress upon you his role as an expert, but I am sorry. The vast majority of the individuals I know would first, never speak in this manner, and second, just quietly chuckle to themselves. I have only known Bill on this discussion board. I have enjoyed him at times and been perplexed by his desire to be disconnected from the Church and God. I can say that I like the fellow without really knowing him, but he seems to have followed in a well-worn path of apostasy. God bless him. 

[Duncan]

9 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

read the scriptures a dozen times? Really?  Hmm, I know I like to read, but just a dozen times? I can see where he is trying to impress upon you his role as an expert, but I am sorry. The vast majority of the individuals I know would first, never speak in this manner, and second, just quietly chuckle to themselves. I have only known Bill on this discussion board. I have enjoyed him at times and been perplexed by his desire to be disconnected from the Church and God. I can say that I like the fellow without really knowing him, but he seems to have followed in a well-worn path of apostasy. God bless him. 

what kills me, among other things, is if he indeed read Talmage you'd think he would spell his name right

[strappinglad]

1. With inflation and the Twitter world ,we are now up to at least 20 minutes

2. Anyone who thinks that God has no rules or consequences for life choices, hasn't read scripture. Nowadays accused sinners meet around a table with men

  who  more than likely want the best for them. In ancient times those men would be carrying large stones.

[rockpond]

14 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

1. With inflation and the Twitter world ,we are now up to at least 20 minutes

2. Anyone who thinks that God has no rules or consequences for life choices, hasn't read scripture. Nowadays accused sinners meet around a table with men

  who  more than likely want the best for them. In ancient times those men would be carrying large stones.

15 minutes... 20 minutes... 6 years...

He was first interviewed on Mormon Stories back in the summer of 2012.

He started podcasting shortly after.  He's built the Mormon Discussions Podcast into several hundred episodes with a half-dozen podcasters contributing.

 

[sunstoned]

10 hours ago, DBMormon said:

this still  represents my testimony quite well
https://mormondiscussions.org/discussion/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/03/The-Testimony-of-Bill-Reel.pdf

My thoughts and prayers go out to you and your family Bill.