Survey Says: Part One

Ian and Jim take a Church survey that was mistakenly sent to a larger audience than the Church intended. Part one of a series...

Episode Transcript

SPEAKER_00 (00:01):
Hello and welcome to the latest episode of Inside
Out.
My name is Ian Wilkes and I'mjoined with my extraordinary

(00:22):
podcast partner, the stupendousJim Bennett.

SPEAKER_01 (00:27):
Yes, stupendous is a good word.
Always think of Calvin andHobbes.
Do you remember Calvin andHobbes?
I don't know those two.
Is that just an American comicstrip?
It's probably the best comicstrip ever written.
Calvin's like a five-year-oldboy and his stuffed tiger,
Hobbes, and his alter ego wasstupendous man.

SPEAKER_00 (00:49):
Nice.
I like it.
Notice I said stupendous and notstupid.

SPEAKER_01 (00:54):
Well, I think they're quite close.
I think the line between them isreally kind of blurry.
Yes.
Yes.

SPEAKER_00 (01:03):
Well, uh, not in your case, you're a very
wonderful individual.
And as always, I'm grateful tobe having these conversations
with you.
Remind our listeners, you know,about inside out, uh, what we're
about.
We want to help.
We want to have theconversations that are going to
help people wherever you are inyour experience in your life in
the church.
If you're out and you're tryingto, you're still connected and

(01:26):
you want to hear these differentconversations and they're
helpful, great.
If you're in or you navigate inyour faith, you have questions,
again, the podcast is designedto bring these issues, the
challenges, but also a lot ofsuccesses that the church
achieves as well.
We We are focused on being abalanced voice, if you like,

(01:46):
about the church, talking abouta range of different topics and
issues.
Some of them are verychallenging.
You know, the church is goingthrough, as it always has done,
extraordinary change.
Sometimes that change is fast.
Other times, often it's slow andit takes time.
But overall, our hope is thechurch continues to improve and
be increasingly a safe place forpeople who are navigating at

(02:11):
different levels across allkinds of experiences, all kinds
of backgrounds.
Hopefully that reminds us alittle bit about one of the
objectives, if you like, of thepodcast.
Today's an interestingconversation because recently
the church appears to havecommissioned a survey.
On the podcast, Jim, as youknow, we've talked often about

(02:32):
the revelatory process in thechurch, right?
We've said repeatedly the churchclaims that in Scripture and on
the record repeatedly, less sothe last decade, I think, but
makes a bold claim that it isthe only true church upon the
face of the earth and thatPresident Nelson, or the living

(02:53):
prophet at the time, is the onlyexclusive mouthpiece for God and
Jesus Christ upon the entireearth in the history of
revelations between God and man.
So that's quite an extraordinaryclaim and a very significant
responsibility that rests uponthe shoulders of President
Nelson.
So he speaks, communes with God,and God directs and instructs

(03:18):
the prophet on the earth who isthe leader of the only true
church.
And so all that information, allof the direction, instruction,
revelation, decisions,confirmations, et cetera, and
lots of other things areincluded revealed to the prophet
directly from Jesus Christ andfrom God through the power of

(03:41):
the Holy Ghost.
And so why, if you had such anextraordinary source, which I
believe they have, notexclusive, I don't believe the
church has got exclusiveauthority on revelation or
inspiration at all.
I think you know my thoughts onthat.
But I do believe they do haveaccess to the same inspiration

(04:04):
that we do as individuals in theworld and rank-and-file members
in the church.
And so why would, with makingthat kind of claim and having
that extraordinary power andauthority and direct hotline, if
you like, to God to discuss andpray and and ponder about all

(04:28):
kinds of challenges and issues,why would you need to commission
a survey?
Why would you need to askmembers of the church for their
feedback and input?
But that's what the church hasdone, and it's done that
recently.
It's not the first time, Jim,that the church has commissioned
a survey.
I remember when I was in the UKyears ago, it wasn't online back

(04:49):
then, but it was a a survey thatwe were asked to do in the Joint
Priesthood Relief Society thatwas commissioned by the church
on all range of issues.
I think I've participated in anumber of surveys that the
church has commissioned over theyears.
Before we get into the detailsof this more recent survey, have
you been part of any surveys,Jim, in the past, historically?

SPEAKER_01 (05:09):
I have been a part of several surveys.
They've always been targetedsurveys in that I wasn't able to
forward them on to anyone else.
I was the only one who was ableto answer them.
I'm not quite sure what thetechnology is that does that,
but these were targeted surveys.

(05:31):
And one of them I remember beingvery interesting because it was
talking about teachings aboutgrace, which is a subject we
don't hear a lot about in thechurch, subject that we're a
little bit afraid to talk aboutin the church.
And the questions, I thought,were really thoughtful, and I

(05:51):
was really interested in thefact that the church was
considering, or the suggestionwas, the implication was, that
the church was consideringteaching grace in a way that I
would have really liked, andwhich is not consistent with how

(06:11):
they taught grace.
And since the survey, I haven'tseen any real change.
So I don't know what kind ofimpact the survey had, what the
purposes were.
But the thing that wasinteresting about all these
surveys, of course, is thatthey're targeted, that they're
given to a limited audience.
And I don't know why I waschosen to participate in them,

(06:32):
but a number of other people arechosen to participate in them.
And I remember talking to aresearcher who will go unnamed,
But who said, next time you getone of these, could you please
screenshot them?
Because not everybody can seewhat they are.
So it was last week, I think,where you sent me a copy of this

(06:55):
survey.
And I was surprised to learnthat I could take it.
I mean, it wasn't aimed at mebecause you had forwarded it to
me.
But I took it and Iscreenshotted it.
And then I said, you need totake it.
And by the time you tried totake it, It was by invitation
only.
And a number of other peoplehave talked about this

(07:17):
particular survey becauseapparently somebody made a
mistake and sent the survey outand anybody could respond to it
for a while.
And so a lot of people took it.
But I'm the only one that I'veseen online who actually
captured the screenshot.
So I think that we can talkabout them in detail because we

(07:39):
know what the questions were.
So, yeah, I've taken a survey isthe short answer, but that leads
us to where we are today.

SPEAKER_00 (07:48):
Yeah, so thank you for that.
So you've been involved in anumber of surveys.
You've given us some, you know,your experience on the more
recent one.
Yes, I did say to the link, Idid try answer a couple of the
first questions and they workedfor me.
I was surprised because I'm notin the church anymore.
And I thought...
It was interesting getting myopinion.
And then to your point, I didn'tsend you the link.

(08:08):
You then did the questionnaires.
Did you do the entirequestionnaire?
Did you?
I did the entire questionnaire,yes.
That's fantastic.
And then the link...
stop for me i i went back to thelink and i couldn't access it
and you can't get onto it nowthe um i think the the holy
ghost told them out i'm anapostate and that ian is not
worthy i'm not worthy enough toto take the questionnaire but

(08:31):
jim's worthy which is greatbecause you you've always been
worthier than me so worthy justthe worthy is all crap because
of your geniusness, that's aword, you did the screenshots.
So we have proof that itexisted, otherwise people might
think we're making it all up.
And I've got the screenshots,and we'd like to go through them

(08:54):
together, and hopefully ourlisteners will find this
absolutely interesting.
I also want to say, before weget into this, we said earlier,
why would the church feel theneed to do the survey?
considering the extraordinarysource of inspiration
information.
And it's said in the past often,God's ways are not man's ways.

(09:14):
God operates differently.
The church operates to a higherlaw.
We obey the laws of the land,but the church operates to a
much higher law.
The prophet, President Nelson,has said that not long ago.
God's ways are his ways.
We operate to a higher law.
etc.
And the other point I kind ofhighlighted in our back and

(09:36):
forward messaging, why would thechurch feel the need to obtain
or gather the opinions orcanvass the opinions of men?
In the temple, pre-1990, theytalked about, I think in the
ceremony, the temple ceremony,about the opinions of men.
I think it was some kind ofreference in the temple that the

(09:57):
church really doesn't canvassthe opinions of men or doesn't
so much consider the opinion ofmen.
It's the view of God that thechurch considers.
So why on earth do a survey?
I think it's good to do asurvey.
It's good to canvass theopinions of the members.
But anyway, without further ado,let's get into some of the
questions here.

(10:18):
So the first question that comesup is as follows.
And maybe you and I could takeit in turns on each of the
different screenshots.
Sure.
If you're okay with that.

SPEAKER_01 (10:32):
Well, very quickly, I want to jump back.
I want to tell a quick story.
Sure.
Because in the age of theinternet, these surveys are
something that are simple to do.
But back in the 1980s, beforeour missions, my father and my
uncle, who was the stakepresident in Los Angeles, were

(10:53):
commissioned by...
by...
Elder M.
Russell Ballard to figure outways to use the media and
conducted a number of surveysback then and figured out ways
to use the media to teach thegospel.

(11:13):
And what they came back with waspersonal testimonials on
cassettes would be reallyeffective.
And that sort of morphed intoThe plans that we had when we
were on our mission, you know,the Together Forever cassettes
that we gave out, our HeavenlyFather's plan cassettes that
gave out.
And my father was really kind offrustrated with the fact that

(11:36):
they didn't do what their surveyresults had told them they ought
to do.
That's neither here nor there,but it points out that this is
not a new approach.
This is something the churchcontinues to do.
And the way my father wouldjustify it, he said, look, God
knows how to cure every disease.
He can cure hematomas.

(11:58):
He can cure aneurysms.
He can do all of that, and yethe still expects us to seek
medical technology.
And so he says, so he alsoexpects us to exercise every
tool at our disposal tounderstand the best ways to
teach the gospel.
He was focused primarily onmissionary work, but he never

(12:21):
saw a problem with surveys beingused and these kinds of research
being used in order to tailorthe gospel message.
And so that has kind oftempered...
I think you have looked at thisand said, well, why on earth
would the church, the only truechurch that's directed by God,

(12:42):
have to take surveys?
And I don't really have thatstrong a reaction to it
because...
I think God expects us to doeverything within our power to
find the answers using our ownabilities, using our own
judgment, and then maybe takethose answers to God for

(13:05):
confirmation, but not have thoseanswers handed to us at the
outset.
So that's kind of my perspectivehere at the beginning of this is
that I think I'm not quite as Idon't want to use the term
frustrated, but I don't seeanything inherently wrong with

(13:27):
the only true church on the faceof the earth taking surveys of
its members.

SPEAKER_00 (13:31):
Does that make sense?
It does make sense, and Iappreciate that.
I should have been clearer in mycomments earlier, and I wasn't.
Forgive me.
Your explanation there is myposition too.
I was being, you know,figuratively speaking, I was
being devil's advocate, and Iwas also citing comments and

(13:51):
feedback I've had on thissubject of surveys from people
who do, who are not happy withthis survey.
They would say that, you know,why do a survey?
So I don't necessarily sharethat view.
I'm with you that I thinkinformation helps inspiration.
If you look at the Book ofMormon example with the brother

(14:12):
of Jared, where he's buildingthe barges.
He couldn't have any windows inthe barges and traveled across
those vast, turbulent waters.
They needed light.
And instead of God giving theanswer, Brother Jared, he said,
what do you want me to do,essentially?
And then Brother Jared thoughtabout it.

(14:32):
He had these 16 stones, and heasked God if he touched these
stones with his finger, thestones would illuminate.
And he could then take thosestones into the barge that was
completely sealed in the dark.
Because it had to be like thatbecause it would be dashed, I
think, by the rocks.
And of course, these 16 stoneswould illuminate and provide
light inside the dark barges.

(14:55):
And so that was God putting itback on Brother Jarrah saying,
look, what do you want me to do?
Brother Jarrah came up with asolution.
thinking for himself.
And that's where I've alwaysbeen with the church.
However, there are those peoplein the church that, and I've met
them, even met them in mycalling as bishop and state
presidency, where they don't putany value at all in the surveys.

(15:15):
Who cares what people think?
It's ultimately what God thinks,right?
What God says will follow.
These are very strong, orthodox,unquestioning, you know,
non-doubting believers in thechurch who are really not into
critical thinking.
So I just want to qualify that.
So let's, we'll get into thequestions here.
The first question is, or thefirst statement is, personal

(15:40):
inspiration from the Lord willnever contradict the revelation
God gives through his prophets.
And you have the option of, I donot believe this statement.
I'm not sure whether I believethis statement.
I believe this statement.
And that's interesting becauseyou're going to get different
answers to that, right?

(16:00):
I think if you look at thecomposition of the member, you
know, the rank and file members,you get people who are from one
spectrum who don't believe blackshould have the priesthood, for
example, even now.
And we've met some of thosepeople, right?
People, yeah, we've got someoneon the podcast who holds...

(16:24):
I think at least some extremeviews on certain things.
But those people exist in thechurch.
That's an element of the church.
And they will probably say, youknow, they'll answer that
question according to theirstrength, if you like, in their

(16:45):
beliefs, you know, in thechurch.
And the other one is, I'm notsure whether I believe this
statement or I believe thisstatement.
So personal revelation from theLord will never contradict the
revelation of God, God givesthrough his prophets.
Do you have an answer to that,Jim?
Or can you share an answer tothat?
Do you agree with that?
I've

SPEAKER_01 (17:04):
been a little nervous about this in terms of
sharing my own answers becausethere are a lot of Desnat types
who very much want to trap meinto answering questions that uh
will label me as an apostateparticularly as we get to the

(17:27):
questions later on about lgbtqissues there's even one question
that says same-sex marriagesshould be performed in the
temple and i am well aware thatif i were to publicly say yes or
publicly advocate for that kindof change uh that could get me

(17:47):
into trouble and so it's reallyinteresting so I am going to
reserve the right not to answersome of these questions.
I did answer all of them in thesurvey, although I was a little
nervous too, because not so muchon this one, because I don't
think they even knew who I was,but in all the targeted surveys,

(18:08):
some of the answers might beconsidered apostate.
And I thought, well, geez, if Itell the church that I, I think
this when in fact, um, that'snot something that the church
looks kindly on, am I going toget in trouble?
And I never did.
That's because my answers wereperfectly faithful and

(18:28):
wonderful.
So I'm just a little reluctant.
I want to reserve the right tobe able to not answer some of
these publicly.
I'm fairly comfortable answeringpublicly, even though I think my
answer probably is considered alittle bit heretical.

(18:49):
in that I absolutely think thatpersonal revelation can
contradict counsel from churchleaders.
If that were not the case, theneverybody who was praying and
hoping for the 1978 revelationto extend priesthood and temple
blessings to people of Africandescent, every single one of

(19:14):
them that got an assurance thatthat was going to happen was
clearly out of step.
Anybody that disagreed with thatpolicy and got inspiration that
told them that, yes, this is agood thing, you should believe

(19:35):
that all people are equal, thatcontradicted the teachings of
the church at the time, and yetthose people were later proven
right.
So I think you can point to allkinds of different examples of
when the church has mademistakes, that there are people
in the church that have got aninspiration that shows that they

(19:58):
were right and the church wasmistaken or an error.
So I can...
Bet that I know what your answerto that question is.
I'm assuming you agree with thatstatement.

SPEAKER_00 (20:11):
Totally, I am.
And I really appreciate youhighlighting the sensitivities
around your own opinion on thesequestions.
And I understand and respectthat.
You know, you're active in thechurch and you've got your own
thoughts, personal thoughts andfeelings.
On the survey, it doesn't askyou for your name, right?

(20:31):
So it's an anonymousquestionnaire and blind in
respect to that.
But I think it's interesting.
The answers that the church willget, I think, will be quite
fascinating.
Yeah, I don't believe thatstatement.
I've had personal experiencewhere my personal inspirations
differed quite significantlywith the church.

(20:52):
Like the...
What ended up being the reversalpolicy on the LGBTQ children,
you know, gay parent issue thathappened.
And the church was very fixed onits policy announcement in 2015,
I think it was.
Was it 2016, 2015?
And then reversed it again.

(21:13):
not long after.
So, and went into great detailabout the revelry process when
the church introduced thatpolicy.
President Nelson walked usthrough that revelry process.
And to me, it's like, you know,it was absolutely fixed and
assured that that policy wasfrom God.
People saw that.
I never felt comfortable withthat at all.
And, you know, I've got friendswho are gay and it caused a lot

(21:38):
of hurt and harm and the churchthankfully reversed that.
So, Yeah, no, I don't believethat statement.
The other thing as well that youhighlight, the church will get a
snapshot of where members'opinions are on the apostasy
line, right?
You talked about some of thequestions that you may answer

(21:59):
may be closer to that line thanother questions, and that's what
the church will get.
It will get an interestingperspective on where...
a sample of the churchmembership where they are in
respect to what that apostasyline is, which is quite gray and

(22:21):
confusing and tends to move.
That causes a lot of concern forpeople.
Are they in apostasy if theydon't accept or agree certain
things?
So the church will get thisfascinating insight into the
thinking of the members throughthe survey.
The next question, Jim, if youcan see that, do you want to

(22:43):
read that?
Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 (22:47):
The words we use to express doctrine can change
without the doctrine itselfchanging.
That seems a really weird sortof purposeless question to me.
What are they trying to find outwith that question?

SPEAKER_00 (23:01):
I said, yeah, what's the intent behind that?
I don't know.
That's interesting.
You know, when we hear adoctrine or a spoken, we have
interpretation, right?
You know, we interpret it in acertain way.
We understand it a certain way.
It means different things todifferent people.
And we can explain and describeit in different words.
You know, we're not robots.

(23:22):
You know, we have our owncultures, our own biases, our
own beliefs.
perspectives and opinions onlife and our own experiences.
And we see things differently,but still not less important in
terms of what the doctrine is.
So, yeah, we can use language toexpress doctrine, and that can

(23:48):
vary, but the doctrine doesn'tchange,

SPEAKER_01 (23:51):
yeah.
Well, there are later questions,I think, that get into the idea
of doctrine changing.
Because I think one of the bigerrors that people have is this
idea that doctrine can neverchange, when in fact we have all
kinds of examples of doctrinechanging.
And then we explain it away bysaying, well, it was never
really doctrine, it was only apolicy, which I just think is

(24:14):
ridiculous.
I think that's very silly.
But this question doesn't evenget to that.
Of course the language we use toexpress doctrine can change.
It always does change.
Every person uses different—so Idon't really understand that
question.
The next question, though, is—

SPEAKER_00 (24:32):
I want to make a comment.
Sorry, before your nextquestion, I'm listening to what
you're saying, and it's aquestion that I've never thought
about before.
You know when a doctrine comesout and there's an intent by the
church to have a certainunderstanding of the
doctrine—and I'm trying to thinkof an example— And then it's
spoken in conference or it's insome lesson material.

(24:55):
And then people have their ownperspective, their own
experiences.
The question I have in my mindis if those experiences become
quite common across the church,those perspectives, those
interpretations are quitecommon, which could vary from
the original doctrine.
Do those interpretations changethe doctrine and become the
doctrine?

(25:16):
If that's the intent to find outfrom the church that where a
doctrine was this, and then overyears where the church
membership generally has aunderstanding or a perspective
on it that might be better thanthe original doctrine, has that
doctrine changed or morphed toalign it with the more common

(25:37):
interpretations of the members?
Am I making sense here?
No, I

SPEAKER_01 (25:40):
think it's making sense.
Well, I think so.
Maybe that helps to understand,helps to inform us as to what
the intent here is.
Because I think the church islooking for ways to look like
doctrine isn't changing.

SPEAKER_00 (25:56):
Yes.

SPEAKER_01 (25:57):
And so this could be an excuse.
It's like, oh, we're just usingdifferent language.
The doctrine hasn't changed,even though The doctrine has
changed.

SPEAKER_00 (26:08):
It's very clever.
If that's the intent of theapproach, it's very clever.
Because if you teach a doctrine,right, and 80% have this
understanding or interpretationof the doctrine, it's not quite
what the church was hoping oranticipating or even expecting.
But nevertheless, most memberstake this understanding from it.
And that could be a betterunderstanding.

(26:29):
And then the church kind of...
moves in that direction with theopinions of the majority of the
members, if that's the intent,it's very smart because it keeps
the church aligned with thegeneral current of opinion and
positions and thoughts of thevast majority or the majority of

(26:52):
the church members.
Maybe that's the strategy.

SPEAKER_01 (26:57):
Maybe that's the strategy.
I'm not quite sure what they'retrying to do, but...

SPEAKER_00 (27:02):
Yeah,

SPEAKER_01 (27:03):
yeah.
You want to read the next one?

SPEAKER_00 (27:05):
Sure.
The words we use to express...
Oh, sorry.
The Scriptures are the onlyinfallible authority for what to
believe and do.
Well, my answer to that is no.
Our first episode was onproblematic Scriptures, if you
remember.
That's right.

(27:25):
Going back quite a bit, thereare scriptures, verses in the
Bible and the Book of Mormonwhich I have a problem with.
You know, Blacks in thePriesthood, Mormon 9-9, I think
it is about virtue of youngwomen.
I can't remember all the detailsof that first episode, but there
are a number of scriptures andverses in the Bible, certainly

(27:47):
the Old Testament and the Bookof Mormon, which I have a
problem with.

SPEAKER_01 (27:53):
No, well, I have a problem with the assumption
behind the...
I don't believe scriptures arean infallible authority.
We don't believe in scripturalinfallibility.
The Book of Mormon says on itstitle page that there are the
mistakes of men, or at leastthere's the possibility of the
mistakes of men within thescriptures.

(28:14):
So to frame this as scripturesare the only infallible
authority for what to believeand do...
is to assume there is such athing as an infallible authority
for what the believers do.
I don't believe there is.
So I answered this oneabsolutely no.
But I would also answerscriptures aren't infallible

(28:35):
either.
And

SPEAKER_00 (28:38):
you'll get members who say, yeah, the scriptures,
the canon of works, the works ofGod are absolutely fixed and
are...
and perfect and not, you know,they're not infallible.
So, yeah, again, you'll getdifferent response from

(28:59):
different people.
Next question.
Go ahead.
Next question.
You want to go with this nextone?
Sure.
God's love is unconditional.
I do not believe the statement.
I'm not sure whether I believethe statement.
I believe the statement.
And I believe God's love isunconditional.

SPEAKER_01 (29:21):
And it's a very interesting question to be
asking because there are anumber of sermons by President
Nelson, particularly.
Most of them, I think all ofthem from before he became
president of the church, butthey suggest that God's love is
conditional.
And a lot of people have a lotof problems with that, including

(29:43):
me.
I don't think he's said anythingthat explicit since he's become
president of the church.
I do think there have beenteachings from General
Conference by other generalauthorities that could be
interpreted as the idea thatGod's love is conditional.
But it's very interesting thatthey're asking that question

(30:05):
because I think they recognizethat there's a certain amount of
controversy among the membershipover statements that are
interpreted as God havingconditional love.
And it's really, the thing thatthe survey makes clear to me, at

(30:29):
least, is the fact that thebrethren know what the problems
are.
The brethren are aware of thedivisions within the church
among people who say God's loveis conditional.
No, God's love is unconditional.
And so I think this survey is,isn't necessarily an attempt to

(30:54):
alter whatever it is theBrethren believe, but rather to
gauge where the membership is.
Because I think very often theBrethren are nervous about doing
something that they know isgoing to be largely rejected by
the membership at large.
I think they learned that lessonto some degree during COVID.

(31:17):
when they pushed vaccines andthey pushed masking and saw a
big contingent of the churchpush back hard.
And these are supposedly themembers of the church that are
the most faithful and the mostconservative and the most
zealous.
And yet when President Nelson'scouncil contradicted their
political opinions, all of asudden President Nelson was only

(31:40):
speaking as a man and PresidentNelson was a fallen prophet and
the church was going woke.
and every other nonsenseargument you can think of.
So I think part of this is themtrying to gauge just how well
their messages are resonatingand also warn them against

(32:02):
pushing messages that don'tresonate.
Do you think

SPEAKER_00 (32:06):
that's part of it?
I think that's part of it.
I've got pretty strong feelingsand views on this.
I'm quite disturbed by thisquestion.
And I do remember that talk thatPresident Nelson gave and others
gave, which brought intoquestion the conditions for
God's love, right?
And I think behind it, oneelement behind it was the

(32:28):
concept or the notion that asindividuals, we're fallen,
individuals fallen from God, andthat we're imperfect.
And the notion that We can say,look, all my faults and
failings, just accept it.
God will accept me.
This is who I am.
I think President Holland talkedabout this at some point.

(32:50):
I can't remember who the Johnthought it was that talked about
it.
Just accept me as I am with allmy faults and failings.
God loves me anyhow.
Don't expect too much from meand do the best I can.
And I think the church had aproblem with that.
And to bring that up as aquestion is concerning and
ridiculous, frankly, absurd.
And a false statement andposition by whoever speaks about

(33:15):
that in the church leadership,including President Nelson.
I believe that God's love isunconditional.
He doesn't accept or agree witha lot of our actions and
behaviors, but the opportunityto repent and seek forgiveness
and to change, notwithstandingour many faults and failings, et

(33:37):
cetera, is always there anddriven, I believe, and still
believe and motivated by thelove of God that we ultimately,
the thing that motivates us tochange and improve and put off
the natural man is the love thatwe have for God and Christ and
the love that we have for ourfellow men.
And that love is the ultimatepower and motivating power to

(34:00):
make the changes.
It's the very center of thegospel.
It's the very fulcrum of thegospel.
You know, the charity, the purelove of Christ, unconditional,
notwithstanding our problems.
And to even suggest, which wassuggested, that God's love may
be conditional is offensive,insulting, cowardly to even

(34:24):
suggest that if you don't meet acertain standard or live a
certain live with exactness,like we were taught on the
missions, then it couldcompromise your relationship
with God and actually compromisethe love that God has for you.
I think it's anti-Christ.
I know that's a very strongthing to say, but I feel strong

(34:45):
about it.
I mean, the very heart of thegospel is love, isn't it?
What's the ultimate...
experience is to love and to beloved and and and to have that
loving relationship with theheavenly father and to know that
he loves you unconditionallywe've always taught that yeah

(35:06):
i've always felt that so i thinkthat's one of the more uh
interesting primarily questionsuh and any general authority
prophet um who holds those viewsthat god's love is is
conditional is I don't acceptthat.
I think it's false.
It's absurd.
It's a stupid thing to believein my opinion.
So go ahead.

SPEAKER_01 (35:28):
Well, the next one very simply says Jesus is God.
Do you

SPEAKER_00 (35:33):
agree?
Disagree?
Not in the theology of thechurch.
Jesus is a God.
You know, Heavenly Father, JesusChrist, and the Holy Ghost are
gods.
The Holy Ghost is a God inspirit.
We achieve Godhood status, ifyou like.
But God is the Father, JesusChrist is the Son, Holy Ghost is

(35:55):
the brother of Christ, is myunderstanding.
But Jesus is not the God, he's aGod.
What's that?
The Holy Ghost is the brother ofChrist?

SPEAKER_01 (36:09):
That's been my understanding.
Is that another podcast?
Well, we could do a wholepodcast on the fact that
nobody's been able to define whoor what the Holy Ghost is.
My understanding is that theHoly Ghost is the Son of God,
the Father.
There are those who argue thatthe Holy Ghost is Heavenly
Mother.
Oh, wow.

(36:29):
Okay.
I've heard that.
That actually got Fiona Givensinto trouble.
She was a scholar with theMaxwell Institute.
Wow.
She wrote a paper where she saidthat she speculated that the
Holy Ghost is Heavenly Mother.
Interesting.
Yeah.

(36:50):
So anyway,

SPEAKER_00 (36:51):
well...
I've heard the Holy Ghost isMichael the Archangel and Adam,
or Adam.

SPEAKER_01 (36:57):
Or Adam, or I've heard that the Holy Ghost is,
it's a rotating calling.
That Joseph Smith has served asthe Holy Ghost since he died.
Oh my goodness.
Wow.
So yeah, it's a whole otherpodcast.
But the whole idea of Jesus isGod, you know, if you read the
title page again of the Book ofMormon, it says the...

(37:19):
It's unto the convincing of theJew and Gentile that Jesus is
the Christ, the eternal God,manifesting himself unto all
nations.
You know, we try very hard notto sound Trinitarian, and yet
the Book of Mormon sounds moreTrinitarian than a lot of Bible
scriptures in talking about howJesus is the Father and the Son.

(37:43):
And you read the statement ofthe three witnesses, it talks
about It's essentially aTrinitarian sort of statement.
So it's very interesting to seewhat they're trying to gauge
here, because I know thatthere's a lot of sensitivity
around the idea of us beingTrinitarian.

(38:05):
And I personally just don'tthink it's relevant anymore.
It doesn't make any differenceto me.
whether we're Trinitarian ornot.
Is that terrible to say?
It's just not even...
I mean, you have the Father, youhave the Son, you have the Holy
Ghost.
Trinitarians believe you haveall three.
We believe we have all three.

(38:26):
But they also believe that theyare sort of one in substance,
and we believe they are one inpurpose.
And yet, the distinction justdoesn't...
I just don't care.
Did I care?
Is there a reason I should care?

SPEAKER_00 (38:43):
Kachosmi says we should care.
You know, when he discusses thenature of God, right?
You know, the nature of God, ourunderstanding of the Godhead is
fundamental to our theology andour doctrine.
You know, God the Father, Godthe Son, God the Holy Ghost.
You know, God the Father Elohimis an individual and looks

(39:06):
exactly the same, according toTruman Madsen, looks exactly the
same as his son Jesus Christ.
And only the Holy Ghost canseparate them.
If you look at the images, thefirst vision, God looks exactly
like Jesus Christ.
But they're two distinct,separate personages, end quote.

(39:29):
So God the Father Elohim is theFather of Christ, who is also a
God.
Jesus Christ is his name.
And then the Holy Ghost, who Ithought was Adam or Michael, the
archangel, or a brother and theson of God comprises the
Godhead.
And Christ created this earthunder the direction of God the

(39:52):
Father, which is taught in theendowment in the temple.
So Jesus is God?
No, if we're being strict, atleast in my thinking, if I'm
being strict in terms of what Iunderstand the doctrine to be,
Jesus is a God, is part of theGodhead.

SPEAKER_01 (40:16):
Well, then he's God.
If he's a God, then why isn't heGod?

SPEAKER_00 (40:23):
I don't know.

SPEAKER_01 (40:23):
My answer is, I just don't think this is a salient
issue in the 20th centurychurch.
Why is the church asking it?
I think they're trying to see ifit's still a salient issue, if
there's concern about it orwhere they are.
You want to read the next one?

SPEAKER_00 (40:45):
Yeah.
Maybe the church has done thisquestionnaire specifically for
the Inside Out podcast.

SPEAKER_01 (40:50):
I think they have.

SPEAKER_00 (40:50):
Because they're listening to the Inside Out
podcast, and that's where theyget a lot of their inspiration
from.
Yeah.
Is that being too presumptuous?
No, not at all.
I'm having fun here.
God's primary role is to acceptme the way I am.
Hey, what did I say earlier?
Okay.
You agree with it.

(41:14):
Yeah.
It's love.
Yeah.
Accept me who I am in a lovingway.
Yes.
But also wants to encouragechange and improvement.
Will he accept me the way I am?
That's my response.
Loves us.
for who we are as we are, but ofcourse, wants us to change and

(41:37):
improve.

SPEAKER_01 (41:39):
Well, so I think I answered no to this, that I
disagree with this.
To say God's primary role is toaccept me the way I am is, in my
mind, sort of a rejection of theatonement.
God's primary role is to save usand to make us like him.

(42:03):
And I think there's an elementwhere he has to accept us where
we are and who we are, but atthe same time, the whole
experience of mortality is forus to grow and to improve.
So I wouldn't say that hisprimary role is to just be
static and let me be whatever Iam, although I do think that you

(42:28):
can reconcile the idea that Godwants us to grow and improve
with the idea that he still hasunconditional love for us where
we are.
So anyway, that's

SPEAKER_00 (42:43):
an interesting one to me.
Yeah, no, that's a fascinatingone.
If you change, remove the wordout, switch the word accept to
love, and I'm changing it here,but God's prime rule is to love
me who I am.
I would agree with that as aprimary role.
You know, love, in myexperience, my understanding, is

(43:06):
the primary goal in life and inthe universe and in everything
to do with God is love, right?
To be loved, to love.
If the word accept could beinterpreted as love, then yeah,
I see that as being his primaryrole is to love us.

(43:28):
I kind of cheated there bychanging it, but that's my take
on that.

SPEAKER_01 (43:34):
Interesting, because it says God's primary role is to
do what I ask.
And I said no to that.
I'm

SPEAKER_00 (43:42):
with you on that one, no.

SPEAKER_01 (43:47):
Just the last two on this page, because I think
they're very simple and easy togo through.
God loves each of his children,and also God's primary role is
to punish me if I do somethingwrong.
I think those are verystraightforward.
Yes, God loves each of hischildren.
No, his primary role is not topunish me or to punish anybody.

(44:07):
Would you agree with that?
I would agree with that, yes.
All right.
So that is the first page, andwe've taken quite a bit of time,
so we probably need to zipthrough some of these because
there are quite a few pageshere.
Or we could do it across acouple of podcasts.
We might do it across a coupleof podcasts.
But the next

SPEAKER_00 (44:26):
one, I'm going to bring it up here.
God will answer my questionsimmediately when I ask them.
No, I don't believe thatstatement.
He gives the option of saying

SPEAKER_01 (44:35):
no.
Yeah.
Just from experience, I've askedGod many questions that I have
not gotten immediate answers to.
So I don't know anybody whowould answer that yes, unless
they're a little bit strange.
A God who would cannot allowsuffering to exist.
And that's the question oftheodicy, right?
We've talked about thatextensively.

(44:58):
Uh, and I think you have tofigure, you have to figure out a
way to say, you don't believethat if you're going to maintain
any kind of faith, because ifyou believe suffering exists.
So if you want to believe thatthere is a God who is good, um,

(45:20):
you have to figure out some wayto reconcile a good God with the
existence of suffering.
Would you agree with that?

SPEAKER_00 (45:28):
Yeah, this is the question of the ages, isn't it,
for people who have a faith orhave belief or want to believe
in God.
You know, we make decisions.
We bring, or other people makedecisions, and that impacts our
lives for the good or for thebad.
You know, bad stuff happens toeverybody.
We suffer often through our owndecisions.

(45:51):
But then there are other eventslike earthquakes and tsunamis
and other natural occurrencesand events which...
and not the choice of man, whichcauses untold destruction on
mankind and extreme suffering,famine, etc.
It's an interesting and adifficult question, for sure.
Why would God, it's that age-oldquestion, why does God allow so

(46:14):
much unnecessary suffering ofthe innocent that didn't bring
that upon themselves?
And I don't have any answer tothat.
I don't know anyone who does.
I hold to the belief that Godcan intervene, and he does at
times.
Does he intervene as much as Iwould like?

(46:35):
No.
I'm confused, puzzled,bewildered, frankly, to
understand why a God who is gooddoesn't intervene more often.
I mean, look at the world rightnow, Jim.
Look at what's going on, right?
And I don't see things gettingbetter, and we need help.
We lost, in many ways, as a, youknow, race, as a species, we

(47:01):
are, we're lost.
We're making very poordecisions.
We need help.
Clearly, a lot of it, not all ofit, we're making good decisions
often, but a lot of it is reallya lot of screw-ups on our part.
And we've forgotten some of thebasics and some of the
fundamentals.
What tends to happen, evenwhat's happening with the fires
in Los Angeles, which isterrible right now.
Right.
And I know you've got peoplethat you know down there, and my

(47:23):
heart breaks for what is a verysignificant event impact on
human life right now in LosAngeles.
These awful experiences, peoplelosing their lives, people have
lost their homes, lost theirlivelihoods, etc.
The other side to that, and I'velistened to some interviews
where people are, communitiesand people are rallying

(47:45):
together.
They're helping each other andsaying, hey, come and stay at my
place.
We'll put you up, we'll feedyou, we'll clothe you, we'll
look after you.
And so these events can bringout the best in us where we can
work together and throughmilitary and love and

(48:06):
unconditional love, we can helpothers.
And sometimes, and probablyoften, those calamitous events
that are happening like thatbrings people together.
So good can actually come fromsuffering.
I don't begin to understand allof the elements of this question
maybe some of them that I try toreconcile with a loving God.

(48:28):
But the things that happen, likein Auschwitz, for example, I do
plan to go to Auschwitz at somepoint where extraordinary
suffering was experienced byinnocent individuals and there
was no respite and they werenot, well, they lost their lives
through extreme circumstances inthose awful, awful conditions.

(48:51):
Why God would allow that isbeyond me.
There's an understanding therethat I just don't have.
But it's a really interestingquestion, and I think a very
pertinent question as well.
Go ahead.
All right.

SPEAKER_01 (49:06):
The next two, we kind of had that discussion when
we talk about Jesus as God.
They're asking, the Holy Ghostis God, Heavenly Father is God.
Your answer to this question?
is, the Holy Ghost is a God, butnot the God, but that Heavenly
Father is the God.
Would that be your answer?
That would be my answer,

SPEAKER_00 (49:26):
yes.

SPEAKER_01 (49:28):
Okay.
Again, this is the sort ofTrinitarian thing that I just
don't know that it matters.
But, next one.
Okay, now we're getting into thecontroversial stuff.
You want to read that?

SPEAKER_00 (49:41):
Yeah, interesting stuff here.
So the church should ordainwomen to preach in offices.
My answer, historically, no.
Now, absolutely.
Women, why can't they be asequal to a man in terms of
authority in preaching?

(50:02):
Why?
I can't think of any reason whythey wouldn't make excellent
priesthood leaders.

SPEAKER_01 (50:07):
You know, again, and this is one where I'm going to
be a little cautious.
I don't want women to beordained to the priesthood if
God doesn't want women to beordained to the priesthood.
That makes sense.
I mean, I don't think that wecan ordain women to the
priesthood without a revelationsaying that women should be

(50:29):
ordained to the priesthood.
That said, point me to therevelation that says women can't
have the priesthood becausethere isn't one.
I don't know of any scripture, Idon't know of anything that
explicitly says the priesthoodis for men only.
And whenever this question comesup, there's always an appeal to

(50:55):
tradition.
Well, Jesus only called 12apostles who were men, although
there are some records thatsuggest that's not necessarily
true.
There are some gospels thatsuggest that Mary Magdalene may
have been an apostle.
Paul refers to someone namedJunia, which is a female name,

(51:15):
and Junia is referred to as anapostle in the New Testament.
So I think you can make anargument that there were female
apostles in the early church,and you can't point me to a
scripture that explicitly deniesthe priesthood to women.

(51:38):
So whenever...
The ordination of women comesup.
It's always controversial, andpeople get excommunicated when
they push it too hard.
Kate Kelly, who created theOrdain Women movement and the
organization, was excommunicatedwhen she organized a huge march

(52:04):
on the priesthood session.
She got a bunch of women thatwanted to go and attend the
general priesthood session.
in general conference and theywere turned away and there was a
huge embarrassing news storyabout that.
So I think that's when you getinto trouble is when you start
demanding this.
But my reaction to it is I wantto do it if the Lord wants to do

(52:28):
it and I don't see any clearindication that the Lord forbids
it.
Am I missing something?
Is there one that I don't knowabout?

SPEAKER_00 (52:38):
Well, maybe.
It's an interesting perspective.
I would add to that, maybe thisis the thing that we should be
thinking about as well, to whatyou're saying.
Your response there in terms of,yes, if God wants this, speaks
to the nature of God and hisrelationship with women.

(53:01):
Is God equal?
If the Holy Ghost is HeavenlyMother, and a God equal in every
way to Heavenly Father, Elohim,does that not make a woman
entirely and completely andfully equal to a man, to a male
God?
I would argue now, yes, men andwomen are equal in value,

(53:26):
different biologically,different physically, but in
terms of spiritually andemotionally, we're the same.
We feel the same things.
We think the same things.
There are variations in howfemales think versus males.

(53:48):
I understand some of that, notall of that.
But the principle of equality,the fundamental principle of
equality and value of a man anda woman in my new thinking now,
didn't use anything like this,are the same.
a woman is equal to a man invalue.

(54:08):
So why can't a woman holdauthority?
Women hold authority inbusinesses and politics all the
time.
Why can't we modify and changethat to include women?
Why don't they call women aSunday school presidency?
There's no ecclesiasticalrequirement there in state
courts towards Sunday school.

(54:30):
That's a really good steppingstone, I think, to listen to
this.
I would do that.
I would make...
If you want to change in thisdirection, I'd make a strategic
move and allow women to becalled into stake and ward
Sunday school.
That, I repeat, doesn't requirethe preacher's authority.
I have no problem going to awoman bishop.
As long as they keep it inconfidence and give me the best

(54:53):
counsel like a man would.
What's the difference?
I think the church is living inthe...
in the dark on this.
And I think it needs to moveforward a lot quicker and open
up more opportunities for women.
And yes, ultimately, allowwomen, allow is an interesting

(55:13):
word, isn't it?
But ordain women to thepriesthood.
I have no problem with that.
In the past, I would.
I had that very traditionalthinking and, you know, one is a
woman and a man is a man and wehave our own different roles and
responsibilities.
I can't think of one calling inthe church that a woman couldn't
perform equally as well as aman.
Could you?

SPEAKER_01 (55:33):
No.
I remember being in a gospeldoctrine class where somebody
said, you have to understandthat the brethren are operating
on such a high spiritual planethat we can barely comprehend
it.
And I said, no, I think thereare 15 people in this room, men

(55:54):
and women, who are just asrighteous and just as spiritual
and just as capable as the 15men who stand in the highest
offices of this church.
So,

SPEAKER_00 (56:05):
all right.
Women, by the way, women,studies have shown that women
are better communicators thanmen and often more emotionally
intelligent than men.
So, you know, there arestrengths and weaknesses, if you
like, but in terms of value andequality of that human spirit

(56:28):
That's equal in my book.

SPEAKER_01 (56:30):
Whenever this comes up, there is always this sort of
pedestalization of women.
Very often people will say, oh,well, jeez, women don't need the
priesthood because they're sorighteous and they're already so

(56:51):
spiritual that only men need thepriesthood because we're just so
weak and...
And the older I get, the more Ihear those arguments, the more
I'm disgusted by them.
Because I don't think anybodywho was making that argument
genuinely believes it.

(57:13):
I think there is a lot ofrationalization attached to that
argument.
And it's, I mean, men and women,I mean, yes, there are,
fundamental differences betweenmen and women, biological
differences.
And I think there are, in fact,inner differences between
masculine and feminine.
But at the same time, it'snot...

(57:36):
There isn't a clear line interms...
I mean, there are women who are,you know, that have traits that
would be described as masculineand men that have traits that
would be described as feminine.
And I think just saying, well,women...
all women are more emotionallyintelligent even.

(57:57):
It's like, well, no, that's nottrue.
There are men with greatemotional intelligence and there
are women with...
I mean, I just think drawing anykind of strict general line in
terms of a man or a woman'scapacity just based on their
gender, it's a fraught exercise.

(58:18):
I think that men and womenindividually...
are vastly different, not justin terms of men and women, but
from man to man and woman towoman.
We're all different.
We all have strengths andweaknesses, some which would be
considered masculine, some whichcould be considered feminine.
But the reality is that on thewhole, we've seen in the world

(58:44):
that women can be great leaders.
Women can fulfill all the roles.
I don't know that women can begreat Football players, because
of the biological differences.
I don't think the reason whywomen aren't playing in the NFL
is strictly because the NFL issexist.
You know, so it's a little bitdifficult just to say absolutely

(59:07):
their entire, because they'renot the same, but they are
equal.
But then that gets to theseparate but equal thing that
was struck down by the SupremeCourt decades ago.
Anyway, that's a long, messyanswer to this.

SPEAKER_00 (59:22):
Well, yeah, it's interesting.
I agree with a lot of that.
There's some of it I do notagree with.
And the studies show that verytypically, fairly extensive
studies show that men are, interms of numbers, volume, and
not as well as...
Of course, there are men who aregreat communicators and

(59:44):
incredibly intelligentemotionally, of course.
But the studies show that womengenerally are...
stronger by numbers in thatarea.
And men are more physical.
And that comes from thehunter-gatherer experience,
right?
Where the men went out andhunted and gathered and tended
to communicate differently.

(01:00:05):
Men communicate differently.
That's been my experience aswell, outside of the studies.
And women can often typicallycommunicate differently,
understand things differently.
Doesn't mean they're not equal.
So I don't agree completely.
One of the couple things thatyou said, I don't agree with
that we can't draw someassumptions or some lines along
those differences.

(01:00:26):
And, you know, without gettinginto the studies, that's another
conversation.
There are differences in the waymen and women communicate.
And again, I can speak fromexperience.
There are also men who areintimidated by women being
leaders, right?
They don't like reporting to awoman, right?

(01:00:46):
I've worked with people thatdon't like, I've even been told
that, oh, she's a woman.
He didn't know what she's doing.
She can't lead that group, etcetera.
And it turns out she did afantastic job.
I think you can call a woman toa bishop and she could do a
lousy job or do a great job.
Yeah.
But I think that opportunity toserve in those callings should

(01:01:10):
be extended to women.
And instead of, you know, notcalling someone because they're
a man or a woman, but just callthem because of you feel through
inspiration they're the rightperson to do the job.
That's how I think it should be.
So let's consider women forthese leadership callings and

(01:01:31):
priesthood, extending thepriesthood authority to them.
And let's give them the equalopportunity to serve in these
callings.
And then when a bishop's prayingabout an individual, let's,
through inspiration, select theright person, not just because
of, you know, based on qualitiesand inspiration and the value

(01:01:56):
that they would bring and thepositive experience that they
would bring to that particularcalling.
So, yeah, so I agree on a lot ofthings, but some things that we
have a different opinion on.
What's the next question, Jim?

SPEAKER_01 (01:02:09):
A priesthood holder gets blessings simply by holding
the priesthood.
I don't even know what thatmeans.

SPEAKER_00 (01:02:18):
Hmm.

SPEAKER_01 (01:02:20):
I think I said I didn't agree with it.
I don't think just holding thepriesthood is enough.
I think you have to actuallyserve.
Yeah,

SPEAKER_00 (01:02:29):
that's my position.
I don't agree with that.

SPEAKER_01 (01:02:33):
The next one I think was an easy one.
A priesthood leader has theright to make other people do
things his way.
That's absolutely againstSection 121.
That's the idea of unrighteousdominion.

SPEAKER_00 (01:02:48):
There's another interpretation of that.
It could be unrighteousdominion, but if the priesthood
leader, state president, bishop,presidency, and the president,
especially keyholder, statepresident, keyholder for the
state, bishop's a keyholder forthe royal priesthood, state
president for the royalpriesthood.
Ultimately, the council'scouncil, as you know, ultimately

(01:03:10):
it's the president that makesthe decision.
And then you have to get behindthe president.
That's it.
You've got to be united.
So a prescient leader has theright to make other people do
the things their way.
So ultimately, yes, is the otherside to that coin.
I can think of many experienceswhere that's happened, where the

(01:03:34):
president makes a final decisionand that's it.
That's the deal.

SPEAKER_01 (01:03:37):
Well, okay.
Yeah.
Section 121, though, in talkingabout unrights, I guess it's the
word make that I'm focusing on.

SPEAKER_00 (01:03:48):
I don't like the word make.
I mean, our initiative, ourfocus as a state presidency in
this state was finding the one,right?
Now, as a council, I came upwith something similar.
The other council came up withsomething similar.
The president, I think it was,came up with finding the one, if
I'm not mistaken.
And we had some debate,discussion around that.

(01:04:08):
We all, I think the statepresident deciding then that's
what it would be.
That was the main focus of thepresidency.
I think that came from thepresident and we got behind the
president.
That was it.
That wasn't unrighteousdominion.
That was him, us sustaining him,supporting him.
Yeah, we had variations.
I can think of calling him whenwe're looking at people for

(01:04:30):
callings where we have differentopinions on people, different
understanding and et cetera.
We come with different names.
Ultimately, the state presidentor the bishop makes the final
choice.
That doesn't mean it'sunrighteous dominion, just that
he's the key holder, you know,and they ultimately make the
final decision.
That's the structure andorganization of the church.

(01:04:51):
Someone has to make a decision.
The bishop makes the decision.
I say, all right, counselors getbehind it.
It doesn't mean it's unrighteousnecessarily.
It could be, but it doesn'tnecessarily automatically mean
it's an unrighteous dominion.

SPEAKER_01 (01:05:06):
All right.
All men should be respected andobeyed because only men can hold
the priesthood.
I think that's nonsense.
That's nonsense, isn't it?
So that's pretty easy.
A priesthood blessing from achurch leader is better than a
priesthood blessing from aregular elder.

SPEAKER_00 (01:05:24):
Technically, no, but there are people in the church
that would come to us as a statepresidency— Or a bishop is one.
A blessing from a bishop is morespecial from a blessing from the
elder's quorum counselor.
Oh, he's the bishop, right?
He's more in tune because he'sthe bishop.
Yeah.

(01:05:44):
That's just not correct.

SPEAKER_01 (01:05:45):
I think there are a lot of people who believe that,
though.

SPEAKER_00 (01:05:48):
Yes, they do believe that.

SPEAKER_01 (01:05:50):
So...
Yeah.
All right.
Well, okay.
We're about an hour and 10minutes.

SPEAKER_00 (01:05:57):
We should split this into two podcasts.

SPEAKER_01 (01:06:00):
Well, so I want to give the rest of these questions
the time they deserve.
So I think we're deciding herethat this is the first of a
two-part podcast.
So all of you listenerslistening right now, we haven't
even gotten halfway through thesurvey, but we're going to get
through the rest of the surveyin the next installment.

(01:06:23):
But we're going to leave thisone right now and And I'm
excited because I'm reallylooking forward to discussing
the rest of it with you.
I think this is going to be alot of fun.
I

SPEAKER_00 (01:06:35):
agree.
I'm fascinated by thesequestions.
I'm interested in the intentbehind the questions.
What's the church trying to do?
I think there's so many layersto these questions.
Some are easy to answer.
Some are kind of odd.
Some are extraordinary.
It's quite a mix of questions,and they deserve enough time and
discussion to get through them.
So I think breaking it up intotwo podcasts is a good idea.

SPEAKER_01 (01:06:56):
All right.
Well, then that concludes partone.
And we thank you very much, Ian,for your thoughtful answers.
And thank you all to listening.
And we look forward to havingyou join us next week for part
two of survey questions onInside Out.

(01:07:20):
So thank you very much, Ian.

SPEAKER_00 (01:07:21):
Thank you, Jim.