Skip to content

Jim Bennett and Bill Reel and the Issues of the CES Letter Part 5

We sit down with Jim Bennett, son of former Utah Senator Bob Bennett, to discuss Jim’s response to the CES Letter. This interview takes place over several different days and comprises looking at the troublesome issues the CES Letter presents and reviewing where Jeremy Runnells and Jim Bennett disagree. I try to play a mediator between Jim and the ideas of the CES letter. Granting ground where I think Jim offers a reasonable response as well as pushing back where I think the CES Letter presents a credible case.

In part 5 we tackle Race and the Priesthood, The Church’s changing stance and present Doctrine and policies on Homosexuality and LGBT issues, and end beginning to get into the Prophetic mantle of LDS Prophets, Seers, and Revelators.


13 thoughts on “Jim Bennett and Bill Reel and the Issues of the CES Letter Part 5”

  1. Jim. I wonder if you will get talked to about you disagreeing with the brethren. I’ve seen people get cut off at the knees and exed for similar stances.

    1. So true. And then he can go either of the two basic directions we’ve observed over and over for being punished for being truthful and honest in his dealings and turning to Jesus before Leaders: He can still try to follow Jesus and the church simultaneously (serve two masters?) and grovel and forever try to prove he was and still is being the very most faithful to the real church faith (a futile exercise in self flagellation and self deception).

      Or, the “Truth can set him Free” of the “Lie upon Lie, Decept upon Decept” we are commanded to never question, but only to trust and justify why They must always be right. Separating the goats from the sheep, wheat and tares…

      Of course either of those two basic paths has it’s own sub-paths (ie. Atheism vs Not tossing baby Jesus with the filthy stinky bathwater we’ve “lovingly” tried to drown him in, calling it baptism).

      1. And Christ’s principle of agency for leaders is true, but the real problem is those leaders saying Christ is taking away the agency of the members who must be bullied and punished if they question run-amok leaders forcing salvation for extra celestial credits, the glory to them?

        That is Satan’s plan. Also changing the Law of Common Consent into coercion, force and punishment twists the church rudder 180 from Christ. Step by step, carefully led by chains down to hell? Good is bad and night is day… Isaiah 5: 20-21 Prideful Leaders? Or do they get a free pass from Jesus, again?

        But too often new “revelations” add to previous bad revelations, or try to correct past revelations compounding the problem of leadership through dictatorial “revelation” and call it good works in His name? One step forward, two steps back. The pile grows, not diminishes. When is the Lord going to correct this mess and clean it up? Just keep obeying Satan in Jesus’ name till that magically happens?

        “Obey Us! Don’t question Us!” is a mistake (Satan’s Plan, of course, and we can justify that too, and “must.” ?). So why do we follow that outright evil which Jesus could not warn against enough? Matt 7: 20-24.

        You are right, the members must stop whining and simply demand that we follow Christ again. With no ifs and or “butts.” But the sheeple are too busy Obeying and worshipping Leaders 180 from Jesus to see or make the demand that the Prophet, Baal and Saint’n are not our Gods.

        I think we can Not justify anywhere near what we or you do. Our church is loaded with corruption. Absolute power always corrupts absolutely and no Jesus would give that to his Leaders. This corruption following Saint’n has happened though, as God has given us what They want?

        Our motto needs to be “Start seeing Christ and not Leaders” instead of “Follow the Profit.” Christ told us that no Leader is ever the way and the light to Him (Holy Middle Men to him who always corrupt). He denounced that idea as promoted by the children of Satan. Jesus told us to stop justifying evil in His name (apologetics). Blind obedience (Prophet worship) Does lead us astray as Jesus warned: Matt 15: 14

        Yes! Doctrine does mean teachings. We should only follow true doctrine then, not doctrines of men who flap in the winds and shifting sandy foundations, as Jesus once again said. If it is not of Jesus we should still be able to raise our hand in common dissent, now or later to change the mistake and not get harassed, threatened, bullied, abused and punished as is currently part of the bogus and changing doctrine. We have twisted the mean of “sustain” to “obey and don’t question rather Satanic “Dictatorship in Christ’s name.” Oh, the pesky truth again, might set us free to Choose Christ (CC rings? choose the Right does not mean to blindly follow dictatorial Leaders)? – Matt 7: 20-24

        “You might be a Zoramite if you blindly follow dictatorial Leaders.”

  2. As a follow up to the final statement you made Jim (and I love the debate and conversations and respect both of you have had. I agree mostly with jim and more recently in this podcast 5, with Bill) and that is this… but we CANT have different opinions than the 15 brethren of the church. If you do then you’re disciplined.

  3. A prophet speaks for GOD. If it does not come to pass then they are or never were a prophet or prophetess. You can NOT be a prophet and be wrong. If the mormon prophet is speaking as a man then he damn well should say so or he should shut up. Too many people are damaged by their words and no MAN should have that power.

  4. No doubt Mr. Bennett is a very intelligent, well-read man. He would have to be to create the expert level mental gymnastics he comes up with to make the church “true” for him.

  5. Deanna Kessler-Drinkard

    Great discussion, Jim & Bill! Jim, my heart goes out to you regarding your daughter’s accident. And, Bill, sincere thanks for sharing your brilliant mind with all of us. Perspective is surely everything. In regard to the November policy: a business maneuver made by the Church in my own estimation.

  6. Man, I really wish this awesome Mormonism Jim talks about existed. Been in the church all my life and I’ve never seen the tolerant, openminded, and inclusive church he describes.

  7. In the last few minutes, Bennett talks about “no other organization” provides compassionate service like the LDS church. He’s obviously not aware of an organization in Utah County called Utah Valley Post Mormons (UVPM) or other organizations that are mapped throughout the world on the website Mormon Spectrum.

  8. Love all of these but this one did make me feminist nerve flinch.
    When you refer to the Priesthood Ban, you forget that women where also effected. Consider using the term “Temple Ban”.

    Also, you quote the B of M scripture “male, female, black, white” several times without acknowledging that women are still not equal at church. Maybe you address that later?

  9. Bill, please give footnote references for citations of OAKS and COOK saying change in temple was NELSON talking face-to-face with god.

  10. This was a great conversation, but so damn frustrating. Both Bill and Jim almost completely bypass the church’s treatment of women in their discussion of social issues. The fact that both perspectives would take the oppression of women within the church for granted is heartbreaking. Even the episode on polygamy did not sufficiently deal with it. How can we make an argument that the church will bend towards equality when they have so often backpedaled with women?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *