Notable Emails #22 “My prediction is that those who accept the gospel of Bill Reel (non-literal historicity of the Book of Mormon) will ultimately either loose all of their faith…”

Lately I seem to be getting emails from lots of foreigners. Today I am going to share email correspondence from an Australian followed by someone from Romania.

Good post u just did bro. [Regarding Moses and Aaron being a type of Joseph and Oliver] 

Great find on the parallel between the Numbers passages and JS. I like it!

Got a thought- why wasn’t JS translated as JST Gen 14 says he ought to be if he was part of (or held ) the Highest Priesthood ?

My response

Great question. I think the same could and should be asked about Moses.

BTW, the corporate church teaches that Moses was translated because of a misinterpretation of Alma 45;19. however I call BS on that one.

The OT says Moses died about 7 different times and the Lord himself told Moses that he would need to die before crossing the river (as part of his punishment for committing sin, in my opinion). None of those passages were changed in the JST. I am convinced that Moses died.

So back to your question. My opinion is that various prophets had different callings and Moses and Joseph both drew the short straw regarding the ministry they got and the people they would minister to in that they both had to labor among a group of people that would not convert as a group and both Moses and Joseph had to offer up an intercessory atonement offering in behalf of apostate Israel, which required that they take upon them the sins of the people and they had to die as part of their offerings. (The group Joseph was assigned to failed because of wheat and tare mingled together until the time of harvest), I don’t know if the is the case with the group Moses had, I suspect it was)
One of the things that occurred to me while researching the life of Moses is that Moses was just as righteous as Enoch and had reached the same status with God as Enoch, he simply had a different calling and therefore could not be translated. I think the same is true of Joseph. I think the world is going to be astonished when they find out just how righteous Joseph really was at the time of his sanctification before his eyes were covered and the sins were placed upon him… his calling did not allow him to show forth the miraculous works that Enoch (and even Moses) showed forth and God made him look like a fool in the eyes of the world. Indeed, poor old Joseph is really taking it on the chin at this time.. ouch… his ears must be burning with what is being said about him on the anti, ex, and alternative Mormon folks.
Enoch drew a longer straw and got to minister to a people who could be called to repentance. Jonah drew a long straw and got the people to repent and was pissed of about it LOL..
It is also interesting how the saints who successfully lived in a Zion society in the Book of Mormon did not get to be translated like the saints in the city of Enoch. Again, I think it has to do with the time frame they lived in and the callings that they had. I think those folk are going to return and help build Zion hence, the Lord did not want to rapture them up in to the city of Enoch…
Take care bro


Comment from Romanian-

Hi Watcher, thanks for response, and the pdf. So my question was that there is this idea by Old Testament scholars that the Old Testament is largely a myth (especially, anything before King David, that isn’t empirically and archaeologically verifiable). Now, from my reading of your blog, i believe you are very much literal at your interpretations of these texts. So I was wondering if you have ever considered an alternative explanation to, say,  Adam wasn’t a real entity as portrayed in the Genesis (but a mythical story),  Moses really didn’t exist to lead that large multitude across the Red Sea, etc.

I know the Prophet Joseph Smith took these texts literally (maybe it is, or maybe he was a product of his time, I don’t know!), but I am only wondering if you have considered how those who don’t take the literal path can benefit from your discoveries. (Because like I said my wife’s only brother lost his testimony because of this and how Joseph took these stories as actually literal history).

Thanks a lot!


I have just been bombarded with so many things sorry about the delay. Your question is such a good one and really deserves more time than I am able to give to it so I will give my short, gut response now and then I hope at some future time to provide a detailed response.
Question:  “I am only wondering if you have considered how those who don’t take the literal path can benefit from your discoveries. (Because like I said my wife’s only brother lost his testimony because of this and how Joseph took these stories as actually literal history).”
I believe that true faith followed by true knowledge in God’s true religion REQUIRES a literal interpretation of God’s word.
First of all, it is true that the scriptures are full of parables and allegories and stories that are not literal, that is a given. And it is important to pay close attention to the narrative and to listen closely to the spirit, in order to catch when something is not being presented as literal. HOWEVER, everything that is presented by God as literal, in my opinion, must be literal because God cannot lie.
Lectures on faith states the following: 
 “And again, the idea that he is a God of truth and cannot lie, is equally as necessary to the exercise of faith in him, as the idea of his unchangeableness. For without the idea that he was a God of truth and could not lie, the confidence necessary to be placed in his word in order to the exercise of faith in him, could not exist. But having the idea that he is not man that he can lie, it gives power to the minds of men to exercise faith in him.
Question 20: Is it not necessary also, for men to have an idea that God is a being of truth, before they can have perfect faith in him?
It is; for unless men have this idea they cannot place confidence in his word, and not being able to place confidence in his word, they could not have faith in him; but believing that he is a God of truth, and that his word cannot fail, their faith can rest in him without doubt. (3:22)
It is impossible to exercise enough faith to be saved if one thinks that God lies or is incompetent. God has given us his attributes and among them are the attributes of having all knowledge and never telling lies. If someone does not have confidence in what God says, they simply cannot have sufficient faith.
Once a person begins questioning if the word of God can be trusted, they find themselves on a slippery slope and eventually they loose faith in everything.
There is a very dangerous trend taking place in the church at this time. It has to do with people who are now rejecting the historicity of the book of Mormon yet claiming that it is divinely inspired and that God is the author of it, dispite the fact that it was fabricated and not historically valid.
A great example of this is a fellow by the name of Bill Reel who had a podcast and who questions the historicity of the book of Mormon and claims that is it “messy” yet he counsels people who are having a crisis of faith to believe that the Book of Mormon does not necessarily need to be a true historical record as it claims to be in order to be a valid guiding path for salvation.
This is non-sense.
People come up with this rationalization in an attempt to accept the claims of scientists that claim that there is no evidence of the Book of Mormon, while attempting to maintain their belief that the church is a good institution that is somehow inspired by in a God the tells lies and builds the foundation of his church upon lies.
This is a doctrine of the devil.
Regarding you question about how my research might help someone that does not take the scripture literally, I think there are numerous things brought to light in my discoveries in the scriptures and the history of the church that demonstrate the unwavering exactness and truthfulness of God, and the fact that He never lies and that he knows all things.
When I have the time to create a detailed response I will provide lots of examples showing that God is always telling the truth even when it appears as if he is not.
There is no middle ground on this issue in my opinion. Either God is who and what he claims to be or he is not. If he is lying to us about who and what he is, He could not possibly have the power to save us.
His response-

Thanks a great deal for making out time for me, I really appreciate it.

I do also look forward to a detailed response in future (as your response seem to indicated, or maybe I am misreading it). And whilst you gather your thoughts, I do have some issues with this line from you, “HOWEVER, everything that is presented by God as literal, in my opinion, must be literal”. My in-law believed this way until Documentary Hypothesis and other Old Testament scholarships knocked out his testimony.

Thanks for the suggestion of paying close attention to the spirit.

And oh all of us (Myself, Yourself, Reel Bill, Terryl Givens, Daymon Smith, Dan Peterson, David Bokovoy, Brian Hales, etc.), we’re all struggling to make sense of the contradictions of the restoration the best way we can, whilst staying true to it (in one form or the other). I don’t know, but I feel, that in a world of over 7 billion people, we can all perceive and understand eternity equally, hence the various approaches (even our dear LDS inc., has a mind of its own…. LOL!). Well, May God help us all.


My response to his response


I understand how you feel.

I am simply sharing my opinion based on my search.

 If believing that God had Joseph Smith fabricate the Book of Mormon and build the church on the foundation of a lie, (Moroni 10:3-5) as a way of bringing people to the true gospel of Christ works for Bill Reel or anyone else, more power to them, I am simply going by what I have learned. The quotes from LoF ring true to me, I just don’t think you can have faith in a God that lies or is incompetent. I know I can’t. A God that cannot be trusted only produces fear and doubt.  It is impossible to not have doubts if you believe in a God that does not know all things and that intentionally lies to His children
My prediction is that those who accept the gospel of Bill Reel (non-literal historicity of the Book of Mormon) will ultimately either loose all of their faith when the opposition, afflictions and tribulations descend, or perhaps will be blessed with an epiphany of faith through the grace of God, and their faith will overcome their doubts and their trust in science and the arm of flesh. One or the other must happen before probations ends, I just don’t believe they can be brought to salvation by believing in a fabricated document. That does not pass the test of faith.
“persons whose minds are under doubts and fears cannot have unshaken confidence, and where unshaken confidence is not, there faith is weak, and where faith is weak, the persons will not be able to contend against all the opposition, tribulations and afflictions which they will have to encounter in order to be heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ Jesus; and they will grow weary in their minds, and the adversary will have power over them and destroy them.” LoF
In theory, if believing that way enables a person to hang on until they gain faith, then it may be an exceptable interim way of struggling with a crisis of faith, but I am very skeptical about the fruits that such a philosophy will bring forth.
Again, if his logic works for anyone else, that is great. I am simply sharing my two cents worth.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: