The Holy Ghost and the CES Letter

Hello and welcome to another episode of Inside Out. My name is Jim Bennett and I am here with the Magisterial Egypt— I couldn't even get through Magisterial Ian Wilkes is what I wanted to call you. How's that?

Thank you. Thank you very much. I do prefer the title as Supreme High Lord Commander, but I'll go with that one today.

All right. All right. Supreme High Lord Commander Ian Wilkes has joined me here and we're going to talk. We've had several discussions about what we wanted to talk about. And at one point you wanted to talk about the CES letter. As a whole document. And we've sort of taken stabs at doing that, but it's so long and it's so— there are so many topics in it that I think that trying to do that within the confines of a single podcast or even a few podcasts is probably not doing the subject justice. But you came up with a topic today that actually is addressed in the CES letter. Do you want to frame that for everybody as to what we're going to talk about? Sure.

I think it's one of the most important topics we can discuss, and I think it's one of the most important topics that interests many, many people across the world, across different religions, different faiths, not just the Mormon faith. People of all ages, all backgrounds, all circumstances, all cultures. And it's the question around how do you know if it's the Holy Ghost or not? If you have a, an experience, emotional, spiritual experience, how do you know that is the Holy Ghost? And how do you interpret that? And I, it, it, it is addressed somewhat or referenced in the CS Letter. I think it's another example of the CS Letter being somewhat imbalanced, but I think this conversation, this question around how do you know it's the spirit, how do you really know? I think that's one of the most intriguing, compelling, and significant questions of the ages alongside who am I, why am I here, what happens after I die. How do you know that God is actually speaking to you? How do you know it's the Spirit? And I'm sure many, many people have asked this question when they've had this experience. How do they interpret something like that? So I wanted to have this conversation for quite some time. And I think this will resonate with many people, again, of all backgrounds and different circumstances.

No, I think you're right. And I think it's such a huge challenge because we rely so heavily in the church on spiritual experiences. And, you know, trust your spiritual experiences. You know, we're given the gift of the Holy Ghost as our constant companion. And for me, I get really kind of frustrated with people who talk about spiritual experiences somewhat lightly. In that the spirit is essentially holding their hand and guiding them in everything they do. The example I use is the spirit tells you what brand of toothpaste you ought to be using. I don't think the spirit tells you those things. I, I can count on one hand essentially the times I've had things that— experiences that I can undeniably attribute to the Holy Ghost and not to just sort of a heightened emotional state. And I think to kick this off, I want to read some of the CES Letter here because Jeremy Runnels gets into spiritual experiences and calls them unreliable and focuses on the idea that all they are are heightened emotions. And he says things like, I felt the Spirit watching Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List, both R-rated and horribly violent movies. I also felt the Spirit watching Forrest Gump and The Lion King. After learning disturbing issues, I attended a conference where former Mormons shared their stories. The same Spirit I felt telling me that Mormonism is true and that Joseph Smith was a true prophet is the same Spirit I felt in all of the above experiences. Does this mean that The Lion King is true? That Mufasa is real and true? Does this mean that Forrest Gump is real and the story happened in real life? How would you answer that, Ian?

I can, I can see and understand why he would say that and think that. He cannot say that for sure. You know, he's interpreted that experience in that way using those examples. I, I think he, uh, he, he makes the, uh, describes a common spiritual experience in a quite frivolous way. And I think it's somewhat, could be disrespectful to a lot of people who do feel the spirit. You know, is The Lion King real? Yeah. Can a little bit of a joke of that. That's what comes through to me at least. If it's a little, as you take him at face value, you've met Jeremy. I haven't, I don't know him. So you could speak to, I believe he's an authentic individual, or I should say a very genuine, from what I understand. But I think those experiences, um, you know, when we feel those emotions, those spiritual experiences, we can feel them. I mean, as an example,, to, to that, uh, when I was investigating the church and the missionaries shared the, well, it wasn't the video, I'll give my age away here. It was the, um, the film strip, the film strip with the noises, the tape and the film strip. That's, that's how, that's how old I am. Exactly. And they showed, uh, families are forever, the Jamie, uh, I'll build you a rainbow. I, I, I think that video would mean something quite different now, by the way, compared to what it did back in the, uh, back in the '80s.. And they also showed the same poster, they showed Man's Search for Happiness. At that time in my life as a young 16-year-old, I felt very vulnerable. I was alone, frightened, uncertain about the future. And family life wasn't great, as I shared with you earlier. And the missionaries taught me that I was the son of God, that I was loved, needed, all the things that I needed to hear. The questions I had about the purpose in my life, they weren't necessarily profound about, you know, why am I here, where am I going at? I was so confused about my life. I didn't even think to ask those questions, but I was lost and I knew I was lost and I felt quite alone and my self-esteem and self-confidence was low. And the missionaries, and they were extraordinary people, taught me that I'm actually worth something, I'm valuable. And they shared those, those videos, those materials. And I felt a profound— I had a profound experience. I think I shared that. I felt the feelings that we teach, we taught as mysteries, which is in Galatians 5:22, which says that the fruits of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. I felt a lot of that. I also felt a tingling. I got a tingling feeling, uh, in my, in my body. And the missionaries taught me that that was actually the Holy Ghost. I, I thought it was extraordinary that God was, was speaking to someone like me. And so I associated that experience with, uh, the Holy Ghost. Fast forward to, and again, I'm sharing this not to be disrespectful, but I'm sharing this to, to understand, uh, Jeremy's comments there in the CS letter. Fast forward to one of the Marvel movies, I think it's the Infinity War, where Thor arrives with the Stormbringer axe just in time. In Wakanda, uh, just before they defeated, and the music and the scene and the whole act of that particular scene, I felt a tingling feeling. It was amazing. So very similar tingling feeling. So I can understand Jeremy's connection to that. It doesn't mean you can ask, you can argue in the same logic, is the Infinity War that true movie upon the face of the earth. You know, is, is Thor, um, real, right? However, it, it's all about context. And, uh, of course, you know, the, the latter experience is, uh, unlikely to be the Holy Ghost or religious experience, but it's associated with a good feeling. I think the music that, and he references this in the, um, in the CS Letter, the heartfelt music, uh, psychological components of that. I think there is a relationship between those movie experiences and music to generate an emotion. That's not— that's no secret. That's universal. That's been around for a long time. And I think that's part of the movie and music experience. We can think of songs and music that, uh, not necessarily religious, but connect with us on a very personal level for different reasons and different ways. And it, it, it can be and is a spiritual experience. The emotional experience can, and it's appropriate to interpret that as a, not as a, a spiritual experience. And the spiritual, it's hard to separate emotional from spiritual because we've said in Galatians, uh, 5:22, you know, love, joy, peace, these are emotional experiences.. And they're also spiritual experiences. And so going back to my time when I was investigating the church and, and hearing what I wanted to hear, and, and, and still now believing that was Lord Journey, I believe that was a spiritual and an emotional experience confirming my value, my worth. Uh, the, the question though is, does it mean it's, um, is it specific, exclusive to the Mormon faith? That the missionaries taught that that was exclusive and specific to Joseph Smith being a prophet, that, that was essentially, this is the only true church and the only way, only path to God. And I, that's how, how I interpreted it. That's what they taught me to interpret it back then. That's what they said. This is how you interpret this. This is, this means that this is the only true church and you have to join. That was basically the message. I've now come to learn that that was a universal experience that other people who are taught universal principles of value, love, and worth, and acceptance, and you have a purpose in life that is now universal. Uh, I also believe that it can and does come from God, that the, a power, the spirit, you can call it what you want, the Holy Ghost, that there's an energy, a power that has, that's outside of the body, that is very real. And very significant. And it has and can and influences people in very, very profound ways. It's connected to, I believe, universal principles like what we described earlier— love, joy, peace— and that people can experience those beyond the Mormon faith. It's not exclusive. Mormon Church doesn't have a monopoly on these experiences. I personally believe, and I'm outside of the church, that these experiences come from a higher source, independent beyond our influence. They're real. And I've had some profound experiences in the church and since I've left the church, which confirmed that there is a real force, power, and energy. Is it the Mormon God, the Mormon Holy Ghost, as it's defined? I don't believe so anymore. I think anymore, I think this is a universal experience. It can be universal experience. And so going back to the Jeremy Reynolds, uh, CES letter, I think, uh, my interpretation of what he reads and how he writes, he trivializes something, um, something that could be, uh, and often is a, a significant, powerful religious, emotional, spiritual experience. It doesn't mean that the Lion King is, is really means that at that particular point in the movie, it's a feel-good factor. And, and I think that is, that can be spiritual. We can see movies. One of my favorite movies, A Wonderful Life. That's like, you know, made-up movie that, you know, it's a fictional movie. However, it has a lot of real meaning. And reality in it is quite profound. You know, that didn't happen in real life, of course, that story, but the messages that that conveys and the feeling that I get when I watch that is very profound. I watch it every year, Christmas with my family. I get emotional. I never get bored of it. It never happened, but I know that those principles that are in there, what it's trying to teach, are real. And significant. And I think you can get that from music, religious and unreligious. I think you can get that from movies, religious or non-religious. I can think of lots of movies that are not to do with religion where they make me feel good. I think I come out of the movie thinking, wow. I remember going to see Rocky 3, and I felt I was on top of the world. I came out, I'm like, wow, I just felt so good about Rocky. Um, it doesn't mean that Rocky's a prophet or anything like that, but I think the danger in the CS letter, I think, and, and it's a, it's a problem I have with it, and I think it's, um, I think it's wrong actually, inappropriate to trivialize, um, something that could be a positive, uh, spiritual and emotional, um, experience that is, um, a natural human, uh, phenomenon, a natural human experience. And we can get that from all kinds of sources. Excuse me. And I get that from nature as well. When we go into nature and we walk and we walk in the woodland, in the trees and the forests and lakes, there's a profound, you can have a profound experience in nature. So I think spirituality is connected, is separately connected to emotions, not that you can separate them. They can be extremely positive and very beneficial. I think it's inappropriate to trivialize them. I think that, you know, as humans, we built and designed in this way for a reason. And I think most of us, not all of us, some of us have passed feeling that we don't feel that side of life, unfortunately. But a lot of us, most of us, I think, you We respond to, you know, when we hear something or feel something that's good, we feel it. It's an emotional thing. And I think it's a good thing and I think it is spiritual. And I do believe it's, you know, the original source of that are the, yeah, the origins of that are beyond this world. But that's not to say that, you know, God is, there's, is behind every, you You know, every movie. I think those, what I'm trying to say is that those emotional, those good emotional experiences are universal and we can get them from lots of different sources. So that's my, uh, response to that. I can see where he's coming from, but I think he trivializes it and I think that's, uh, I think that's unfortunate because people who have had real, you know, experiences that they, to them are very real. There's a danger now of them thinking that that wasn't real, that wasn't meaningful. And the reality could be, in fact, it was, and it did mean something, and it was important. And now there's trivializing it. They probably write it off and, and probably quite sad and feel that's unfortunate. And so that's the, I think that's where the CS letter is biased in and not about— that's my response.

Well, I don't think Jeremy was asking that question in good faith when he's asking, does this mean that Mufasa is a real character? I mean, is physically real? I mean, he knows that that's not what that means. But it's fascinating because this section, more than anything else in the CES letter, I found troubling because it, it said to me that the church really let Jeremy Runnels down. I mean, if he is that misguided about what a spiritual experience is, if he doesn't have enough context to separate the difference between an emotional response to a movie from a response from the Lord revealing some truth to him. I think that means he was able to go through the church for 3 decades or so. He was in his early 30s, I think, when he left, but he was able to go through the church for the majority of life and never really understand what a spiritual experience is. And that makes me sad. It also demonstrates to me, I think, and one of my problems with the CES Letter as a whole, I remember talking to Stephen Smoot, who Jeremy Runnels really can't stand. Stephen Smoot is a young scholar. He's getting a doctorate in Egyptology. He's sort of the rising new Hugh Nibley out there. But he made a point to me when I was talking to him about the CES Letter, and he said, when people leave the church, very often all they do is switch jerseys and they're just as black and white once they've left the church as they were when they were in the church. And the CES letter to me is an example of the kind of black and white thinking that is problematic in the church and can be equally problematic out of the church. If you're not willing to sort of— if everything is all or nothing, if everything is black and white, if there's no way to sort of navigate some kind of middle space, then I think you have no choice but to leave the church because the church is not perfect. The church is not 100% absolutely pure, wonderful, perfect. There are problems there. There are things that you have to navigate. And if it has to be all or nothing, then it's going to end up being nothing. But to your point of spiritual experiences and to your point of, you know, you felt great coming out of the Rocky movies. Rocky III though, I don't know that that's the one I would choose. Well, Mr. T's awesome in that movie. You know, what's your prediction for this fight?

Pain.

That's the best fight in that movie. Anyway. I think the spirit is— so Joseph Smith said a number of interesting things about the spirit. Obviously, I'm still coming at this from an inside-the-Church perspective. I certainly agree with you that, that people everywhere can have these spiritual experiences, that the Church does not have a monopoly on spiritual experiences, that God does not exist solely in the box of the Church of Jesus Christ of of Latter-day Saints. Uh, so I, I, you know, but some of the things that have been taught in the church have been remarkably profound to me in understanding what the Spirit is and how the Spirit works. And Joseph Smith at one point said, no man can receive the Holy Ghost without receiving revelations. The Holy Ghost is a revelator. And, you know, we talk about revelation as being some— this big, grand, sweeping thing. But I think every time you watch It's a Wonderful Life at Christmastime and you feel those kinds of feelings, something is being revealed to you. And what is being revealed to you is the truthfulness of the principles that are embodied in that film. You know, the Book of Mormon talks about by the power of the Holy Ghost, you may know the truth of all things, which is different from knowing all truth. In other words, the Holy Ghost will testify to you that something, something is a true principle, that there is truth here that is of value to you, and there's something that God wants you to be paying attention to. For Jeremy Runnels to then say, oh, well, that means it's like ringing a bell, essentially, that when you feel the spirit, then that must mean that Mufasa is a true corporeal lion and that this actually happened. And I don't think he even believes that. I think he's trying to use that as kind of a, as kind of an absurd example. But we get into trouble with that because we tell people to pray about the Book of Mormon and we tie that into the Book of Mormon, that when we say, okay, well, the Book of Mormon is true. So that means that the Book of Mormon's historical claims or the historical claims that have been made about the Book of Mormon are also true. All of that is wrapped up into that wonderful experience you have. As you are reading the Book of Mormon. And I think that that is a fraught thing for the church to have perpetuated over the years, because there are a number of, you know, I think the power of the Book of Mormon, the reason the Book of Mormon resonates with me is the power it has to connect me to God. I call it a divine access point. And I, the older I get and the more further down the road I get, the less interested I am in the question of Book of Mormon historicity. I can have a discussion about it. I think the evidence for Book of Mormon historicity is stronger than critics are willing to allow, and we can probably have a long discussion about that. I think that's its own separate podcast. But none of that is the reason why it matters to me. Why it matters to me is it generates these encounters with the Holy Ghost. It generates these kinds of spiritual reinforcements of true principles in a way that connect me to God. Now, does that mean that people who don't read the Book of Mormon and people who are not members of the Church can't have those kinds of experiences. It absolutely does not mean that. And, and no part of my spiritual journey is reliant on discrediting the spiritual journey of somebody else. I think there was a point in my life where I kind of not only had to sort of prove the church was true, I had to prove that somebody else's church was not. I had to prove, okay, well, for my church to be true, your church has to be false. Your spiritual experiences have to be invalid. And you see so much of that in social media, in Mormon social media particularly, is that you have these people who are fierce defenders of the church who pretty much rejoice in the suffering and sadness of people who have left. They see that as vindication of their own faith. And you see them doing everything they can when somebody like an Ian Wilkes says, oh, I'm happier than I've ever been and my life is great. They have to poke holes in that. They have to say, no, no, no, no, no, your life's really not great. You're really not happy because that's not possible if you leave the church. And I think that's just absolute nonsense. And I don't understand the desire to tear down somebody else's happiness or to tear down somebody else's spiritual experience and to sort of base your own faith on someone else's faith destruction. And you see that in the church all the time, and you see it publicly in the church all the time. And it's really a problem. And I think it's something that, that absolutely needs to be addressed. But getting back to what Joseph Smith has said about the Holy Ghost as a revelator, he also said in the 8th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, he talked about the fact, he says in verses 2 and 3, yea, behold, I will tell you in your mind and in your heart by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart. Now behold, this is the spirit of revelation. Elsewhere he talked about the idea of pure intelligence flowing into you. And, you know, there are a lot of definitions there. Joseph Smith talked about intelligence, light and intelligence, and all these kinds of things that have very sort of specific definitions in a Mormon context that they may not have outside of that context. But this idea— President Joseph Fielding McConkie, who was my mission president after you had left, said, never has the Lord given a mindless revelation. You're not supposed to check your minds at the door when you come to church, because the Holy Ghost speaks to both your mind and your heart. So there is an intellectual engagement as well as sort of an emotional stirring that happens, which is certainly a product of this. So, I mean, I had countless sort of experiences. You talk about music. It's one of the reasons why I treasure singing in the Tabernacle Choir, because every time I sing this beautiful music, I have a spiritual experience. Now, it's not the kind of spiritual experience where I feel like I've received a revelation that's going to change my life, but it is a reinforcement of the truth that there is a God, that this God loves me, this God loves all of humanity. And I feel his presence. I feel his, his love and his joy in music. And it's one of the reasons why I've sort of tied myself so closely to that as my preferred form of worship. You know, it's just such a lovely way to me to participate in the church because it sidesteps to some degree the stuff that I don't find lovely, that I don't find uplifting, which is the bureaucracy and all of that kind of stuff that just, the older I get, the less patience I have for it. But so to your point and all of these things, I don't think you know, you should discount the fact that there is a spirit operating when you see a movie that uplifts you, that reminds you of a true principle, that reminds you of some kind of broader reality beyond yourself. And I think you find that in movies. And like you said, you can find it in nature. You can find it everywhere. Truth is everywhere. And every time you encounter it, you, you have the opportunity for the Holy Ghost to reinforce it and sort of reveal it to you again and say, hey, pay attention, this is true, this matters, this is significant in your life. And so I think you can do that in the church. But I also think that you can do that out of the church as well. When you left the church, were you concerned? Because the church emphasizes the idea that, okay, once you leave, you are forfeiting the gift of the Holy Ghost that is given to you at baptism. Did that, did that frighten you? What was the, was the actual experience of leaving? Did any of that register? Did you feel like you had lost some kind of spiritual beacon that you would have before?

It's a great question. I never thought about it in those terms prior to leaving the church. For me, attending the church was an ordeal. It was making me ill, frankly, mentally, psychologically, physically. It was extremely difficult to continue to go to church and hear and see things that I knew just weren't correct or weren't true. And so going to church was actually impeding and restricting my spirituality. I was less spiritual going to church. And when I stopped going to church, I felt almost immediately, well, less religious, yet more spiritual. And I think there's a distinction there. You can be spiritual and not necessarily be religious. And that was my experience. I became and feel more spiritual, more in tune with the universal principles of what in that scripture, Galatians 5:22, love, peace, and those kinds of experiences and feeling it at one moment. And the universal principles of kindness and love and understanding and tolerance. I was, I was more of that, I believe, I feel, and as other people have commented. And, and going to church, I was less spiritual, I was more judgmental, was more dogma, was more judgmental. I was looking at the world through this very narrow prism of rules and regulations and conformity and a lack of agency, frankly, going to church where I didn't feel free to ask questions, to think openly, freely, critically. I didn't have that freedom in my mind and my spirit going to church. When I left, the opposite happened. I felt, um, free and I felt, uh, I, I felt I had more, um, I'd escaped, uh, the shackles of that, uh, constrained mindset, that thinking, that very narrow thinking. Think like this, feel like this, do this, do that. Very prescribed set of conditions that you have to think and feel and behave and act and respond in a certain way. When I left, I, I felt freedom and more universal, less judgmental. So my spirituality advanced and accelerated and heightened post leaving the church, especially when I resigned. I felt a sense of liberty when I resigned. It was extraordinary because when I had joined the church, all those years ago, I felt the same feelings, Jim. I felt a sense of peace and long-suffering and a sense of freedom that I'd escaped the world. Excuse me. And here I was in this extraordinary organization that was the only true and living church upon the face of the earth. And this is the only way, you know, only path to God. And I didn't see it in the, you know, back then in the same way that I do it now. So now I am more spiritual. I'm connected in a very profound way with my spirituality. As humans, we're spiritual beings. I believe we have a spirit inside of our body. I believe that spirit goes somewhere after we die. I don't know all the details about what happens. I don't believe in the Mormon way of, you know, that they specific teachings of, you know, what happens after we die. I believe that if you're good, you go to a good place, and if you're not good, then I don't know what happens there. And then I used to think I knew all the answers. You know, as members of the church, you get taught very clear, very defined answers to what happens. You know, celestial kingdom, celestial, terrestrial, there's a defined path, a plan of salvation. It's very clear, you know, go to the temple, get married, serve in the church. These are the kingdoms. You know, a lot of it is very, it's kind of laid out for you. It's the plan. It's the plan of salvation that gave me a degree of certainty, stability, predictability, some assurances if you like for the future. Now I think I expected when I left the church to feel a bit frightened, scared. And there was at those times when I felt that, I'm like, my goodness, what now? I don't go anymore. And what have I got? What anchor do I have to hang on to? Now I'm kind of free falling. But in the whole experience of free falling, I rediscovered myself and learned a bit more about myself and learned that I do have a purpose and I don't need to go to a building to, you know, to be spiritual. And I'm more— I have more time, I have more time with my family, more time to serve, And I'm not attending meetings for the sake of meetings. You mentioned earlier about the Book of Mormon, and I don't believe that the Book of Mormon is a literal, accurate historical text. I don't accept that, and that's another conversation. However, if I read the Book of Mormon now, or I was reading this in a very private, personal way, I know that there will be passages in there that are quite universal. That if I read them, I would feel some emotion, some spirituality because of the universal. And so the Book of Mormon teaches universal principles. The Bible does. There are many other literature that you and I are familiar with. C.S. Lewis, Shakespeare, you know, teaches things that, and expresses in such a way that is quite profound. We're talking about these movies in the and the, um, and Assange. But I do want to pick up on something that I think is very significant in the CES letter. I think this is a problem, uh, that spans, uh, uh, quite a lot of the CES letter. And I think this is a document that has been— too much weight, I think, has been placed on the document. And it, it, it is the document in parts at least are not balanced. And I wanna give an example of what I mean by that, cuz I think it's really, really important. I think the document contains some really helpful information, but I think it's imbalanced and I think it has some holes, it has some gaps. So if you look at, uh, and again, it's important to be very specific and provide some examples. Look at the section here, Testimony and Spiritual Witness, uh, uh, Concerns and Questions. Jeremy, uh, straight into it, goes into what I would describe as his own personal bias. So he's had an experience with the church, he's over the years, he, he may or may not have had some spiritual experience, which he may not be able to interpret it as that. I don't think he has. He, I think he puts that down to, um, an emotional experience like you get in the, uh, in The Lion King. Excuse me. And I just wanna just, just be clear about what we mean by cognitive biases, cuz we all have them. And a cognitive bias is a systematic thought process caused by the tendency of the human brain to simplify information processing through a filter of personal experiences and preferences. The filtering process is a coping mechanism that enables the brain to prioritize and process large amounts of information quickly. And that's one definition. And if you look at the— again, if you look at my experience of visiting the church, where I desperately wanted to hear all of the information, the message that the missionaries were sharing, and they interpreted that for me, that was the Holy Ghost.

I—

it was easy for them. It was an easy sell, if you like, in that respect. The sell's not the right word. I take that back. That's inappropriate. It was a genuine— sell makes it It— I fall into the trap of being like Jeremy Reynolds if I use the word sell. And I take that back. I think that was a mistake saying that, because back then, for me, that was a very real experience, Jim. Very personal, very profound, very emotional. There were tears, and it was very real. And, and the missionaries, um, taught me that I was actually worth something. I was—

it was—

it was very real. I can't ever, ever trivialize that. The word I don't believe they were selling to me and I don't believe I was being sold to. I think they were universal principles. But if you look at the Jeremy Runnels, uh, this section here, uh, and in the context of cognitive biases, he goes straight into the testimony and spiritual witness section, uh, with his own bias. And there's no opposite balance. It just doesn't exist in this section. For example, he said we should, uh, he talked about some of the quotes from the general authorities there and You know, uh, well, Fairmont blog, sorry, not General Authorities. We should not just go on our own feelings and everything. Granted, our feelings can be wrong. Of course they can be wrong. We do need to advocate before we submit to the Holy Ghost to guide us in truth. He quotes that from Fairmont, you know, and I understand what he's doing with that. What I'm saying is that straight out the gate, he's going into— he's searching the internet for quotes that support his bias straight out the gate in this, and that's wrong. I think that's a mistake. He says here also, our unique strength is the ability to touch the hearts and minds of our audiences, evoking those feelings, then thought, and finally action. He's talking about the Malcolm Rand creative goal, heart, soul. Well, although I don't think it's wrong, when I was listening to Messages for Happiness and Palm Desert Forever and got that music and that experience, I think that isn't necessarily a bad thing. I think, look, Wonderful Life, right? I don't think Wonderful Life is trying to convert you to Mormonism or convert you to God. I don't think they're saying, look, after this movie, you now need to go to church. That's not what Wonderful Life is saying. What it is saying through the music and through the messages and through the story and the compellingness of the story, it's saying that, you know, family and love and support and help and friendship and friends Um, it was that quote at the very end of it that, uh, struggling to remember what it was. It's my favorite movie and I can't remember.

Something about the, the, the richest man is owner if he has friends or something.

Exactly. Your memory's better than mine. To me, that's a very profound message. He's not telling me to go to church, nothing like that. And so, and I think that's where Jeremy's section, this section along, among with others, is it, it's, uh, inaccurate. I think it's misleading, disingenuous, and he's automatically straight off the bat going into his own bias. He quotes Barton Goldsmith, the PhD, that feelings aren't facts. Sure. However, you can't separate, uh, you know, facts from feelings because, you know, when we hear facts, it's common because of who we are and the very nature we are that we can have a feeling. You know, we, we, we, we hear about a mother's intuition. There are mothers out there who've got this gift, this ability to know their own kids and their family. It's built into the system. It's emotional. I believe it's spiritual. It's psychological. It's part of evolutionary, you know, to protect family, offspring, children, et cetera. Very powerful. Mothers, you know, moms who are hearing this will know this. Far more than me. My mom knew stuff that I don't know how she knew about me, but she did. And I think, you know, those, you know, sometimes there's based on facts or limited facts. And so yeah, feelings are not facts. I get that. And I agree with that. But also there's a relationship between feelings and facts. And if you go onto the next page, he's saying, uh, using the argument that other people who said that their church is the only true church, like the fundamental, uh, the FLDS, RLDS, and LDS, and other, uh, faiths who stand up and say that theirs is the only true church. And, and I think when they speak universally about the principles of love and kindness and long-suffering and forgiveness, I think that that's true. I think those messages, those experiences are universal. And anyone can say those across any faith, but that's not a bad thing. He, Reynolds, uh, it comes across my interpretation that that's actually, um, you know, I, I, what it's trying to say is that the church cannot and does not have exclusivity on, um, the Holy Ghost or truth or divinity. And, and it is correct if that's what he's trying to say is correct. But I think he's going into this with his own biases, but he is also going further by saying that these spiritual experiences are actually, my interpretation is that they're not spiritual experiences, they're just emotions and it just should be interpreted in that way. That's my, that's how I interpret what he's trying to do. So he's got his own biases, he is, he is going You know, he talks about, I think I've heard him talk about cognitive bias, but he himself has got his own biases. And I think it, it's hard to analyze something when you yourself are part of the thing that you're analyzing. And so I think it's important to be more balanced document. And I see this throughout the, the document. And I think in that sense, it's quite, it's quite broad. The whole document, a lot of it is based on his own experiences, own biases. If I was writing this, this section. And I hope we have time to talk about this in this podcast. I would share several or a couple of very profound experiences that are explainable, that are profoundly spiritual. It certainly didn't come from me. I have no power to create these experiences that I'm thinking of. But I would have shared some of that in a way in this section and given the reader a balanced perspective. You know, not trying to convince the reader that, you know, these experiences are not from God, are not from the spirit. And that's what I get from this section. But I would've give it, I would've given a more balanced position that yes, you can look at in this way. That's one way of looking at that. Nothing to do with spirituality. It's purely emotional. You can get them from anywhere. Anyone can say them all universal or whatever, and it's just part of that physiological evolutionary component of the human experience. But then I think you need to give the other side, where people have had real experiences, that for them, those experiences are very real, very profound. The other thing as well, I want to highlight here, this is an important thread distinction, I think. In my experiences, I think this is— lots of people have had these similar experiences. What happened to me couldn't— it was no doubt it was an outside external force. It couldn't— it's not something I could have created or influenced in any way whatsoever. And the— what happened, uh, there's no way that the things that happen in this situation, uh, couldn't have happened without some other external force. There was a force that was in place that was behaving and acting in a certain way and influenced certain things that were not coincidental. And I think that for me at least, that was very, very profound and very, very significant. And many people have those kind of experiences and they're real and they're really real. And I believe that. And I'm speaking from somebody who's not religious necessarily, not as religious, uh, and more spiritual and more universal. And I, there's no way I could or even would write off the, the physical evidence as well as the spiritual evidence that I had, and I had even since leaving, leaving the church. So I think the CS Letter is an example where in this section, he goes straight into it in a very— in his own biases. And it's deliberately leading people in a certain direction. And the danger here, Jim, is that the risk is that individuals who've had a real, real experience with the Spirit, that they now discount that and think, well, it's just an emotional experience and it's a bit like The Lion King because, and they feel silly because, hey, it's like The Lion King and, and that's kind of absurd. I think that's the word that you use.

Well, you raise two issues that I think are, are, are interesting and I want to explore a little bit. Of this whole issue of cognitive bias is something John Delenn grilled me about when I was on his podcast. And he kept asking me, it's like, well, how do you know? I mean, if you were raised as a Muslim, if you were raised as a Catholic, if you were raised outside of your faith tradition, wouldn't you be saying the same thing about your own spirituality and spiritual experience? You know, and Jeremy Runnels gets into that in the CVS letter too. And he talks about how everybody outside the church sort of frames their spirituality this way too, and they talk about how the spirit has told them that the Catholic Church is true, or that the Jehovah's Witnesses are true, or whatever else. And in my reply, I get into the fact that that's really not how a lot of other churches frame spiritual experiences. They don't You know, Catholics don't have testimony meetings where people stand up and talk about having a spiritual witness that the Pope is the true authority of God. It's, it's just not the way they're structured. It doesn't mean they're not having spiritual experiences, but it does mean that if we, that if we try to frame everybody else's spiritual experiences in a Latter-day Saint context we're demonstrating our own cognitive bias. And, you know, I've thought many times I answer John Delenn. It's like there's— there is no way to answer that question because I can't know what my life would have been like in any other context.

I—

and if I were to leave the church, I, I would still be taking with me So much of what the church has taught me without even realizing it. And as I listen to you talk and your experience, you have still held on to— for instance, you say you believe we have a spirit inside of a body, which is something that the church has taught you. It's not universal. I mean, it's not exclusive to the church. There are plenty of other religious traditions that teach the same kind of thing. But I, I am hearing you process spiritual experiences through a lifetime of experience on your part within, within the church. And I don't know that there's any way to sort of separate that, or even if you would want to, because I think you have taken with you the parts of what you were taught that continue to resonate with you and have left behind the parts that do not. But, you know, when I look at that and when I look at the whole— all the claims of exclusivity are so unimportant to me now. I mean, I'm willing to argue them. I'm willing to discuss them. You know, when John— that was the first question John DeLynn asked me, is, do you believe this is the only true church? And my answer to that question is yes, but— and the but is, what does that mean? What do you mean when I say it's the only true church? Uh, I, I— what I mean by it is that we are the church that has the responsibility to bless the entire world and has the authority to do that. And, and it is a, it is a, it is a, an assignment of responsibility, not a, a boast of exclusivity, if that makes any sense. That's the only way I can sort of embrace that in a way that makes sense to me, because I think, I think everybody eventually— I become somewhat of a universalist. I believe everybody eventually gets back to where they need to get and that we have been given as members of the church greater responsibility to facilitate that universal process. And I think that's a very different answer or a different meaning of what that means from your rank-and-file member that'll stand up on a testimony meeting and say, I know this is the only true church. They're doing that to sort of set up a wall and say, okay, we have this exclusive access to something that nobody else has access to, and aren't we great? And the scriptures are replete with condemnations of that attitude. No more so than in the Book of Mormon when they talk about the Rameumptom, where people stand up and talk about how great it is that we're saved and everybody else is going to hell. I just don't— I don't fathom why that kind of a faith would be appealing to anyone. When I had that kind of a faith, and I think I did, it frightened me. It made me sad to think that everybody outside the church wasn't going to get to return to Heavenly Father, that they weren't going to get all these blessings. And so I believed that and it broke my heart. It made me sad. And the more I experience God, the more I experience the Spirit, the less I believe that, the more I realize, okay, the church has been given a charge. The church has been given a responsibility to bless the lives of the whole earth. It has not been given a medal that it's supposed to congratulate itself with and just stand on its rameumptom and, and chuckle at all of the people that are going to burn in the flames of hell. And, and so better understanding that It becomes okay, right? And I think that's part of the reason why so many people in the church, Ian, have sort of cast you off, is that in order for their faith to be valid, your happiness, your spirituality can't be. You know, you have to be lying, or somehow their faith is shaken. And I see that as such a fragile and weak kind of faith in the church that relies on that, that relies on anyone else's unhappiness to justify their own happiness. And so, you know, as I look at this and I look at Jeremy, you know, I have met Jeremy Runnels. I think I've talked about that experience on this podcast. But it's so much easier to take potshots at Jeremy when you haven't met it. You know, I found this in my own experience. It's much easier for people to take potshots at me for my CES letter reply or for whatever else I've said until they actually talk to me, until they've met me. And then it's all of a sudden, okay, there's a whole person here. There's not just the piece that I'm seeing on a piece of paper. There is a whole person, and that whole person has value, and that whole person is a child of God. Regardless of where their church records are. And God loves each of them with an intensity and a totality that we cannot understand. And that has sort of reinforced my spiritual convictions about God's love for everyone through my experience as a parent. I think about, okay, if my kids were to do something terrible, uh, and I've been blessed with the greatest kids anybody could ask for, uh, but I think, okay, well, what is it that they could do that would make me say, all right, you've fallen short, you can no longer be my child, you can no longer— we can no longer have a relationship. If they were mass murderers, I would be disappointed. To say the least. But I would continue to love them and I would visit them in prison and I would continue to maintain a relationship with them and do everything I could to help them. And the idea that God is going to cut us off because we didn't join the right church, or even that we did something terrible in this life, that he is going to cut us off for eternity, forever, with no hope of reconciliation. That doesn't make a lick of sense to me. The Spirit does not testify to me that that is a true principle. And when I embrace, uh, more universal principles, when I embrace everyone, when I recognize that people in and out of the church are still children of God, and that people who leave the church do not leave their decency behind when they do so. The Spirit reinforces the reality that that is absolutely true. And so that's what I'm pursuing. And I continue to do so within the boundaries of the Church, and I expect to do so within the boundaries of the Church for my mortal life. And I do so recognizing that that is not the journey of everyone. And it is not my responsibility to condemn, to judge, to belittle, to do anything, to cast aspersions on those who have chosen a different path, if that makes any sense. So that's kind of where I am. We seem to be up, up against the hour. Do you have any concluding thoughts?

I, I, I do have one other piece I always want to bring in real quick in regards to— and I appreciate you sharing those, those thoughts. Um, I've got this thought and, and probably some concluding thoughts after that, so we're close to, uh, you know, closing this, uh, podcast, which has been fascinating. And, uh, I don't think the story ends here. I think there's so much more we can discuss and share on this. And I think the— going back to getting back to the CES letter, I, I, I don't doubt Jeremy's authenticity and his genuineness as an individual. I do question the level of bias that I see frequently throughout the CS Letter. It's not everywhere, but it certainly is in quite a lot of places. And I just want to highlight another example of what I think is a problem with the CS Letter. And it's in the same section because we're talking about that. And it's the bit where he quotes David Whitmere, which talks about some revelations of man, some revelations of the devil. He talks about we've all fallen, revelation came through the stone and some revelations of God, et cetera. So he talks about the, the, the, uh, the stone presumably is referring to the Stone of the Hat. When I, I heard it, I heard about the Stone of the Hat years ago on my mission and put it right down to anthropomorphism and stuff. Um, I didn't have any problem with it back then if it was, uh, real. I thought it was quite fascinating. I know a lot of people got a problem with that. And then when the church officially came out and said, yeah, he put a stone in a hat, he used a stone. And by the way, here's the actual stone. I think that was in the end sign. I think the reaction of a lot of people were astonishment, maybe dismay. And it sounds quite ludicrous. It might surprise you that for me it didn't. I thought it was amazing that you could get revelation from a stone. And the reason why I share that. And, and the reason why I'm highlighting, and yet another example of this is letter that I, that I think is quite biased, is that if you look at the Jeremy Reynolds, how he references this, I, I get the impression he's trying to make the church look absurd, look ridiculous. It's, it, it's hard not to come to that interpretation reading this and many of the sections throughout the CS letter. You know, by talking about this and referring to it in this, in this way and, and highlighting the stone of the hat, which it is for many absurd, not for me, by the way. But it is absurd. It also, it, it, it tells me that there's a bias there and he's out to not trivialize, but he's out to make the church look ridiculous and look absurd. That's, that's how I interpret this.. And so just going back to the stone for a minute, the reason why I don't have a problem with the stone is that, and I think a lot of people, this will resonate with them. If you think about any object that you've got, okay, uh, that you, uh, any possession that's sentimental, personal, emotional, spiritual value, have you, uh, uh, experienced any, gained any spirituality from that, any meaning from that. I have, I'll give you an example. I have a very old Timex watch. It's a very old, I sound really old. It was given to me by my mom actually for, uh, I was coming out the hospital. I had appendicitis, was in hospital a few days, going back a bit. I was 7 years old and my mom picked me up and I was walking out, um, at the hospital feeling pretty, pretty crap. I'd just had this operation, felt pretty low. And my mum took me to a cafe and she bought me a— we didn't have much money. This might sound a bit absurd, but she bought me a milk chocolate. I, I think it was the only time we ever could afford to buy milk chocolate. We, we really had nothing. We didn't go out to restaurants, nothing like that ever. We just didn't. We had no money. It, it was, it was a treat. We went to this cafe. The cafe's still there, by the way. It was the Tartan Cafe, Tartan Cafe in Castlebar. And she bought me a little chocolate and she said, I've got something for you. She gave me a gift. It was a little Timex watch and I've got it here in my office and it doesn't work anymore. I should get it working again, but I treasure it. Treasure that moment. It reminds me of something that was an act of kindness and love on the part of my mom. And, uh, you know, time when we, I were close at the time back then at 7 with my mom. I felt closer than I did later on in the years. And I won't forget that. It's a very distinct memory. It's very clear memory. And I, I've got this, uh, watch, this Timex watch. I don't claim to, you know, get revelation for the world through the watch. It's not like, uh, you know, it's got any special powers, but for me it's a very, um, very profound, uh, uh, uh, triggers lots of positive experiences. And, uh, I, um, that's how I interpret that physical object. I don't, I, have I got revelation from that? Well, if, if The memory of a very wonderful moment with my mom is a revelation, then yes. Is it spirituality? Yes, for me it is. Is it an emotional experience, positive? Absolutely. Is it a revelation or inspiration? Yes. Does it come from God? Yes. Is it a universal principle associated with a physical object? Yes, I think so. And so again, I think that's where the CS Letter falls down, where it doesn't see the other side to physical objects. I can see why people have a problem with Joseph Smith having a sword in his hand and getting the revelation from that. I believe Joseph Smith believed that was happening, by the way. I don't, I don't doubt for one second Joseph Smith didn't believe or accept that, you know, revelation you know, wasn't coming from the stone. I believe that he felt in a very real way that real revelations from God were being communicated through the stone. I believe he believed that totally, completely, 100%. Whether that was happening or not, that's up for debate. And so does anything good— was the question is, is anything good, any universal principles or revelation that Joseph Smith learned or gleaned through the stone in the heart process? Well, yes, because he translated the Book of Mormon, or you could argue translated it or wrote it or had other benefactors that wrote it with help, etc. That's another podcast for sure. And then we go back to the question, is there anything in the Book of Mormon that is universally good that came from the stone in the hat? Well, yes, I've said earlier that there's things in the Book of Mormon that if I read them right now, I think, yeah, that's good, that makes sense, that's a good thing. It doesn't mean that this is the only true church upon the face of the earth. For me, it doesn't, it doesn't. I don't interpret that as Joseph Smith being a true prophet, I don't see that anymore. I believe there are parts and times in Joseph's life that were good and genuine. I think there were some good elements. I think there's a darker side to him. Very bad side, I believe that. But I think there's some good in him for sure. I think at times there was good intent. I think that came through in the— what I think is a relatively 19th century text in the Book of Mormon, Good Universal Principles, they came through the stone of the heart or through some other way. I have no problem with that. I just don't associate that or attribute that to being exclusive authority and the only prophet upon the face of the earth and the source of all truth and knowledge. I just don't see that anymore that I used to. But what I'm saying is that physical objects can generate spiritual, emotional, inspirational experiences. Is it just for me? And I think if Reynolds had shared that side of, of, in this section, that we can associate, we can have those experiences with physical objects, I think, be a more balanced document. So I just want to highlight that, because that's another example of a level of bias, and trying to make the church look ridiculous. And I think it does. I think it does look ridiculous to many, you know, the story of the hat sounds absurd. I, I know people, friends of mine who are in the church who think it's, it's just the strangest thing they've ever heard in their life. I have no problem with it, uh, for reasons that I've shared. But again, I, I can see why people would, would say that. And so these are a couple of examples for me at least, who've gone through the CS Letter and tried to understand it. And again, this is another example of bias and, you know, making the church, you know, coming into the document and making and having a position before you come in. And going out and researching information that just confirms your bias. And so I have a problem with that. I just think it's not as balanced as it could be.

Well, I can probably ride there, but I appreciate you sharing your personal spiritual experiences. And the story about the Timex watch, I think, is is really instructive, is that the Lord uses what's on hand to touch our hearts. He speaks to us individually through our own personal individual experiences. So, yeah, there's a lot more we can say, but I think we are out of time here. So let's save that until the next episode. And we look forward to seeing you all again. In our next episode of Inside Out. Thank you very much, Ian.

Thank you, Jim Bennett.