Chad Olsen Isom

@LdstoCatholic @RykerJackson97 FYI "Jesus the Christ" By Talmage is not exactly a new book (1915: good read), and Ryker's brief summary is in alignment with it. Reiterations in conference also align.

This is the current LDS framing, yes, and I agree it is the stronger and more defensible version. The issue is historical and that the previous generations didn’t focus on the cross as much as the current one does, but rather far too much on Gethsemane. That’s shifting hard and for good reason. Earlier LDS leaders often placed the actual sin bearing and penalty paying language in Gethsemane, so the current statement needs that context for non LDS folks to understand the full picture. Joseph Fielding Smith said many people think the cross was Christ’s great suffering, then said, “That was not when he was on the cross; that was in the garden.” Ezra Taft Benson said, “It was in Gethsemane that Jesus took on Himself the sins of the world.” Bruce R. McConkie said Gethsemane was where Christ “took upon himself the sins of all men” and that His suffering there “satisfied the demands of justice.” M. Russell Ballard said that in Gethsemane the Savior “took upon Himself the sins of the world” and “paid the ultimate penalty for sin.” I am not saying the current LDS church denies Calvary. They do not deny it and you will see many members wearing a cross necklace which was culturally a no no since the early 1900’s. Good progress. The current Gospel Topic on the Cross clearly includes Gethsemane, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection. I am saying the older LDS emphasis was not just the historic Christian Passion. It often located the decisive sin bearing language in Gethsemane, while the cross was treated mainly as His death and physical suffering. That is why this current framing reads like a correction or at least a clarification IMO.

The actual Latter-day Saint position is that the atonement of Jesus Christ began in the garden of Gethsemane where He suffered spiritually, continued on the cross where He died physically, and was culminated at the garden tomb where He was resurrected gloriously.

@BasedMikeLee Envy and Greed wearing a cloak of Self-Righteousness.

It’s Elon’s money He can use it as he pleases It’s not yours It’s not the government’s Socialist impulses kill innovation and economic growth

It couldn't even fund this year's budget to the point of removing the deficit. Check this out;Over a decade old, so the numbers are different, but the point seems ever green, when there always seems to be someone willing to sell you something with someone else's money, and your liberty: youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6…

Musk is worth more than South Africa’s GDP. @BernieSanders and I proposed a 5% tax on people like him. In one year, it could fund: - free public college & trade school -$10/day childcare - Special-needs education nationwide Wealth inequality is the moral failure of our time.

Fighting back is a material aspect of the hypothetical, so the "scuffle", works just the same. And yes, "shootout", absent more information, confuses rather than enlightens. The willful misunderstanding is profound. Go, declare victory, which you shall regardless, though I do not assent. Good luck. Any more conversation with you in this thread is meaningless. May the love of wisdom strike you.

"Scuffle" is not analogous to "shootout" in the two events being compared." A scuffle is a brief, disorganized struggle at close quarters. If someone said a woman "died in a scuffle" where she in fact died while fighting back during a rape attempt, "scuffle" would not accurately describe any material part of the encounter, and it would indeed be misleading to say that the scuffle was material to her death. In your hypothetical, death would have to be occasioned by some other act altogether that you have not identified, such as suffocation or blunt force trauma, which was not a "scuffle." "Scuffle" in your hypothetical thus adds nothing to the description of the material events. The same cannot be said of the circumstances of Smith's death. The exchange of gunfire, i.e., the "shootout," is a material fact in those circumstances leading directly to his cause of death. For the hundredth time, that doesn't denote fault, it merely describes a factual reality that was directly material to the events causing his death.

Glad to see some Catholics be honest and call out those saying Joseph died in a “shootout”

@BowieTheus @ThoughtfulSaint I gave you one. "Scuffle" is neutral. There are probably half a dozen synonyms that most English speakers would know.

@ChadOlsenIsom @ThoughtfulSaint As exemplified in my police officer example, "shootout" is commonly used in English without attribution of fault. There is no similar word in English that applies to your hypothetical. If there were one, we could use it.

Anything said with the intent to deceive is a Lie. You didn't address my post, you repeated your previous argument. You are aware that people are using the "shootout" term to confuse the unfamiliar, and you are running interference with "Well, technically". So, our hypothetical rape victim died in a "scuffle"? Say she drew a knife and still died? "She escalated, she might have lived, we'll never know!" That would be "truthful", because "technically" ...? I doubt we have much else of value to exchange, at the moment, though, life surprises you.

I didn't use the term "shootout" to "to confuse the issue." You're reading something into it. My post acknowledged the factual circumstances. I used the word according to its proper meaning, which isn't sophistry. Again, "shootout" doesn't ascribe blame. If a police officer is killed in the course of a shootout with a school shooter, it doesn't mean the police officer was the bad guy. It means they exchanged gunfire and the officer was killed. Although perhaps unlikely, it's possible that Hyrum's murder might have given the mob pause to proceed with another one. Although unlikely, it's possible they might have stopped short of murdering Smith at all. We will never know because Smith was armed with a gun smuggled into the jail and he shot three people, which sealed his fate.

This sort of "Well, technically..." is a good gauge as to if you are being a sophist. This is like saying a woman who died while fighting back during a rape attempt, died during a "scuffle". The term "shootout" is intentionally used to confuse the issue, not elucidated. Is there a universe in which the mob would not have slain at least Joseph if no defensive efforts were made?

But Smith did die in a shootout. People exchanging gunfire is a shootout. Smith was in jail. A mob was coming for him. Smith's buddy smuggled a gun into jail for him. Smith's brother also was armed. They armed themselves to fight off the mob. A member of the mob shot his brother. Smith fired several shots and wounded three men, shooting one in the face, one in the arm, and one in the shoulder. The mob shot back at him and he jumped out a window to escape the gunfire, whereupon he was shot and killed. If you want to qualify it by saying he died in a shootout while defending himself against a mob that came for him in jail, that's fine. But once Smith exchanged gunfire and shot three men, though in self-defense, it became a shootout. That word doesn't connote who was to blame. It just means the parties involved exchanged gunfire.

@huge_nibley I have a buddy that does the same thing. Treats it as part of his personal scripture study.

I have a talk written... and was never asked to speak. I enjoy writing talks as a way to learn and think about gospel topics. Is it weird to tell my bishop that if he ever needs someone to speak last minute, I'm ready to go? Seems weird.

@SenWarren Just a reminder from the wayback machine that this sort of thing does not math. youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6… Brought to you by: @iowahawkblog @BillWhittle

Just a 2-cent wealth tax on the ultra-wealthy could: Lift millions of kids out of poverty Fund universal child care Make community college free And we would still have money left over.

@allie__voss Can I somehow double-like this?

I'm not here to critique the Latter Day Saints. They are lovely people and twitter is a poor place to talk about theology But I do 100% believe they were ground zero for all the crazy baby names we have today and there needs to be SOME accountability

Welcome! We'll take you, for sure. As long as you are convinced (you are welcome to come, regardless, as you know). I'd (mortal little me) rather you didn't just "awe, shucks" your way in though. Good lines, solid thresholds to cross, firm convictions. You have definitely done your homework, though.

I might as well just be Mormon at this point

@ChrisGalanek Mark the date, and check in with an LDS friend next year. Ask them if they feel cooked, or something along those lines.

Mormons, sorry but I think you’re cooked.

@justin_hart Where in the county?

Absolute heroes on the ground and in the sky protecting our homes here in San Diego.

Seriously, sister, we use the standard KJV. Stop the next pair of missionaries you see, say, you aren't interested in their message, but ask to see their Holy Bible. Bring your KJV with you. Pick *any* random scripture. It is going to read the same. Chapter and verse, the same. Or, dig up an LDS acquaintance, and ask them to look something up on the Church Library App on their phone. Holy Bible, any chapter, any verse. Simple experiment. Please return and report.

You can study the LDS KJV version all you want. 75% of y’all have studied an entirely wrong book. So, all of these people don’t even count for studying the real Bible. If you wanna play the stats game, that means 0% of you have studied actual scripture and instead of studied your cultic book, as good as the Quran

Today I learned the Mormons GENUINELY think they know Scripture better than us.

@realDrTT I like depictions of Him crushing the Serpents head, as well. A continually fulfilled promise, until its ultimate completion.

Also, I would like to point out in this image, the demon crushed under the door, makes me giggle every time I see it. Just imagine — you're just standing there doing your job guarding the door and then Jesus just plows the thing over turning you into a pancake.

Don't try to gatekeep Christ. He ripped the Gates of hell, off their hinges. You better bet he can get through you.

Considering you say you were an intel officer, and your lack of charity toward our faith recently, and lack of understanding of our beliefs, I'm left to conclude you were a very terrible intel officer (can't do essential research to understand the topic/group/motivations at hand), or you know precisely what you are doing (agent provocateur, bringing the wedge). If the later, I doubt your commitment to the Cause of Christ, or the preservation of the Republic. Perhaps I am mistaken. May you be blessed in all your righteous endeavors.

For the LDS folks… Franklin Graham and Erika Kirk believe Mormonism is a cult - but yet you align yourself with their organizations. How do you reconcile that?

@JackIdaho57 Went over that one at church on Sunday, and a hymn that uses it from the Scottish Pslater(?). Good Stuff.

Psalm 23:4 Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. 🙏

@busy_bee_me @BradWitbeck @plasmarob Or that Israel turned away from God and Samuel in their pursuit of a King. He allowed it, and told them it was stupid.

@BradWitbeck @plasmarob Reading about Saul is a great reminder that it is biblical for God to change track as needed. Not a failure of God that Saul turned away from Him. But a reminder that God replaces those He calls when they do not follow Him.

It's impressive to me that there are so many who seem to know everything about my religion, but they don't even know what a primary program is 🤣

@justin_hart Don't say stuff like that; then some might pray for your house to burn down.

My family just got evacuated. Fire nearby. Pray for safety and that I don't have to run for mayor in two years.

@KirscheVerstahl @manya3084 Mine did that for first time for me this morning; the end is nigh, I guess.

@manya3084 I use my mobile phones until they shit the bed my sign with Samsung has usually been if I restart or turn on from dead and I get the "OneUI" loading screen I know I got about 1~2yrs left before the phone won't work and I've been in that window for about 10months now

my Samsung s20+ has been yelling at me for months that the built in text messaging app is going away soon and I need to get Google Messanger why do I need my text messages tied to my email