Bill "I have read everything!" Reel

[_kjones]

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/718 ... verything/

[_lostindc]

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/71808-bill-reel-dbmormon-%E2%80%9Ci-know-everything/

I think the linked thread is displaying that Bill claims to have read/encountered 99% of the issues surrounding Mormonsim. Bill’s conclusion is Mormonism is easily falsifiable.

I believe Bill probably has encountered the vast majority of known issues that surround Mormonism. I also agree with Bill’s conclusion regarding Mormonsim not being true. Bill probably spends more time on Mormon history than most (not a Vogel, who is, but high up there) and he has a right to make his claims. He is doing a good job supporting those exiting the faith.

[_moksha]

Bede sounds like someone who will be a big hit at the MD&D board. Maybe Bede will even be asked to write some articles for the Saintly Interpreter about well-known critics of the sacred, such as Dr. Scratch, or Everybody Wang Chung.

[_I have a question]

I find it interesting that the TBM's are calling Bill Reel arrogant for claiming to have read all the troubling material and reached a conclusion. They didn't react so negatively when Elder Corbridge made the exact same claim...

As part of an assignment as a General Authority Seventy, Elder Corbridge needed to read through a great deal of material antagonistic to the Church, the Prophet Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon.

“There may not be anything out there (of that nature) I haven’t read,” he said.

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-a ... ials-48843

[Guest]

As mentioned above, Corbridge made the same claim just this year except from the other side.

The 99% stuff is of course an exaggeration to make a point. Has Reel read everything? Of course not... but I think his point is that he's read almost all mainstream stuff both apologetic and critical.

This is really a stupid argument to make (when attacking someone for saying that they're familiar with '99% of what's out there'), but it's one that is often made when it's easier to attack the messenger than the substance.

I did see Bill's Facebook post and it did come off kind of arrogant, so I grant that without question. But anyone who thinks Bill has literally read 99% of everything written is just looking for something to be offended by.

Same goes for the claim Bill makes that 99% of the problems are hidden from members. That's another exaggeration but anyone who claims the church doesn't still hide things is kidding themselves. Ask your local ward who has read the Gospel Topics essays and just enjoy those blank stares you get. They might know about polygamy, but most won't know how Joseph did it (or that he did it at all). You get the point.

[_Dr Exiled]

Maybe members should choose to not be offended by Mr. Reel? It supposedly is a convenient choice for Bednar, a serial offender. Regardless, Mr. Reel is correctly calling members out for being delusional for continued belief in Mormon nonsense. Truth hurts. Don't attack the messenger like you ask the world to not attack the duped missionary sales force. The history points to Mormonism being made up and desire to believe doesn't change that unpleasant fact. Why not just deal with the truth? TBM lurker, you'll be better off if you do, instead of clinging to unjustified belief in imaginary beings.

[_lostindc]

As mentioned above, Corbridge made the same claim just this year except from the other side.

The 99% stuff is of course an exaggeration to make a point. Has Reel read everything? Of course not... but I think his point is that he's read almost all mainstream stuff both apologetic and critical.

This is really a stupid argument to make, but it's one that is often made when it's easier to attack the messenger than the substance.

I did see Bill's Facebook post and it did come off kind of arrogant, so I grant that without question. But anyone who thinks Bill has literally read 99% of everything written is just looking for something to be offended by.

Same goes for the claim Bill makes that 99% of the problems are hidden from members. That's another exaggeration but anyone who claims the church doesn't still hide things is kidding themselves. Ask your local ward who has read the Gospel Topics essays and just enjoy those blank stares you get. They might know about polygamy, but most won't know how Joseph did it (or that he did it at all). You get the point.

Agreed

I want to add that Bill is going to continue to come across as arrogant because he carries himself in such a manner. To be candid, Bill sat on the sideline as a Bishop while 1,000s upon 1,000s of others already encountered the issues/sources Bill is posting about. I think Bill is still in the honeymoon phase and since he decided to take on a public persona, the honeymoon phase is a bit longer, especially since we have leader/follower dynamic with TBMs and Exmos.

I also agree with the rude poster from MD&D (linked in OP) that Bill is not nearly in the realm of research as professional academics that spent a lifetime in Mormon studies. Bill is new enough to the scene and many of these academics lived in the realm for decades. So for one to accept Bill as an expert, one likely needs to consider some TBM academics as experts over Bill.

[_lostindc]

Maybe members should choose to not be offended by Mr. Reel? It supposedly is a convenient choice for Bednar, a serial offender. Regardless, Mr. Reel is correctly calling members out for being delusional for continued belief in Mormon nonsense. Truth hurts. Don't attack the messenger like you ask the world to not attack the duped missionary sales force. The history points to Mormonism being made up and desire to believe doesn't change that unpleasant fact. Why not just deal with the truth? TBM lurker, you'll be better off if you do, instead of clinging to unjustified belief in imaginary beings.

Agreed here too.

[_Analytics]

As mentioned above, Corbridge made the same claim just this year except from the other side.

The 99% stuff is of course an exaggeration to make a point. Has Reel read everything? Of course not... but I think his point is that he's read almost all mainstream stuff both apologetic and critical.

This is really a stupid argument to make, but it's one that is often made when it's easier to attack the messenger than the substance.

I did see Bill's Facebook post and it did come off kind of arrogant, so I grant that without question. But anyone who thinks Bill has literally read 99% of everything written is just looking for something to be offended by.

He didn't claim that he read everything, or that he read 99% of everything. He said, according to your quote:

"I have read and studied every problematic issue in Mormonism."

If you disagree with what he actually said, give us some examples. What problematic issues in Mormonism has Bill not studied?

[_jfro18]

He didn't claim that he read everything, or that he read 99% of everything. He said, according to your quote:

"I have read and studied every problematic issue in Mormonism."

If you disagree with what he actually said, give us some examples. What problematic issues in Mormonism has Bill not studied?

That's a fair point, and I was not trying to bash Bill which I thought was apparent. I was just stating that often times we will say "I've read 99% of what is out there" and then you have people who will jump down your throat trying to hit you with the most literal interpretation of saying that.

I've run into that too when I say I've read both critical and apologetic responses and someone will say "WELL HAVE YOU READ THIS (VERY SPECIFIC) BOOK WRITTEN IN 2014?"

Obviously I haven't read everything, but I feel confident that I have read enough of both sides to have a general understanding of the arguments. Of course there's a fringe on both sides beyond that as well.