IMPOSSIBLE Gospel

Fireflies will come back to the other brightness podcasts. In this episode, I am the other sons of light will be discussing an article by an aspiring LDS scholar Jackson Washburn is here to discuss his article titled Merle nice theology of grace, perfection and sanctification. Jackson welcomed the other brightness podcasts almost as great were glad to hear. Thank you. Before we jump in the article wanted to tell us a bit about what you're up to these days are still that Arizona State University will yield to the summer so most of us cope with 19 heads she can apply for little bit on. So, although I was originally scheduled to have a study abroad program in Armenia this summer.

There they would be doing an intensive language course print beliefs you know with the travel no prohibitions any safety rules in place.

That program got canceled and so instead I am happily doing an internship that I just started here in Salt Lake City with the Joseph Smith papers Project, which is the LDS church is foremost historical department in an organization devoted to the preservation and publication, and research of Joseph Smith's papers and documents in no basically all their major complications are texts that are relevant to him. Throughout the course of his life so I believe that organization is just wrapping up were getting the tail end of publishing.

I shouldn't say we just an unpaid intern but the Joseph Smith papers is no beginning to wrap up the published close to 2000 volume scale about that are reprints of his revelations or scriptures or letters or legal papers anything like that so they're almost done without a start. In the early 2000's and so yeah I mean it's it's a great organization. They do very good work.

And as far as the qualities of transparency and academic rigor on things like that go. They are top-notch in the field of Mormon studies so I feel I'm grateful to intern them. I just started this week. So that's what I'm doing the summer side relocated to Provo Utah for the summer so have you doing there is an intern. So right now it's virtual right because there still some social distancing measures in place so because I just started this week. I just mainly preliminary stuff getting familiar with the various research sites and resources, and doing a bit of an I guess I preparatory work. So for instance this week I was given an article by Richard bushman are that he published in the 1970s in the unsigned magazine, which is the LDS church is mainstream magazine for its members. It was about the life and character of Joseph Smith that I was told okay read and critique it. You know, and for those who are familiar with Richard bushman.

He is the author of rough Stone rolling which is the foremost biography by Joseph Smith and so Richard bushman is a preeminent historian of Mormon history in the United States and you know so there's a bit of imposter syndrome going on on my end. Eric told to critique his work but yet you know just kinda stuff like that. Throw them into the waters getting me familiar with the texts and so I can't exactly how the internship will develop as I continue because I don't know what my future assignments or things like that will look like, especially with the social distancing met measures in place, but you know I'm just looking forward to the professional development, networking and better research opportunities that it won't let me get up to. So back to Drs. Jos� involving no no not not online I will be in person they gave us some guidelines today about what probably think that a look. So you know wearing masks will be mandatory and they'll be no various resources available through campus but yet this this upcoming semester will be back at Arizona State. I live on campus in Tempe and so I'm getting 2� theremin in my undergrad sum getting a degree in religious studies and history, and I must again be doing my undergraduate honors thesis this upcoming semester where I can be studying the Armenian Arizonan community that a lot of them are immigrants & get to be doing my research project on how they understand and conceptualize their Armenian identity outside of Armenia and so I look forward to that and I must again be applying to grad school next semester so you know, basically just to be a pretty busy semester for me but I'm heading into my senior year of college service as a real interesting conversation so I jumped on my mission. I served a mission in Armenia and II joked that over there. I would be teaching Armenian Arminians are Armenian Armenian. The I unfortunately kinda went over the heads of all the missionaries there, but I get on. I like that when I prove to be young for these dead jokes, though it makes sense for me and Paul to be using them. He was thrown in with me now as you wish you were in my coworker bring something like that mean that's passed them. I'm over it now rather lose 20 more years anyway so you really get into your article, Jackson alright so so he wrote this article and see was called Merle is nice theology and grace. Perfection. Signification really enjoyed reading it in the opening paragraph of the article you see that you first found grace singing the popular Christian praises, amazing grace, and forever rain would what you mean by that.

What specifically did you find singing the songs in your mother's Christian church so low for those that might not be familiar with the article. Overall, it was all kind of my own exegetical treatment tomorrow night 1032 and 33 pitches at the tail end of the book of Mormon and so II just wanted to talk about what moral nice ideas about grace and perfection and sanctification, and various subjects were according to these common passages that are often cited by Latter Day Saints but also various evangelicals you know who are commenting on Mormonism. So I began this article by opening up a bit about my own back story being raised in a interfaith family where I had a mom who was an evangelical Christian bill for my Mormon and my dad was a Mormon, Latter Day Saints, and so my mom left the LDS church and is 12. She converted to nondenominational Christianity and so during my teenage years. During high school and and whatnot.

I actively attended both faith communities that my local Mormon ward and my mother's nondenominational Christian church and so you know I was ignored. The religion I still am obviously so I enjoy going to pull church services every Sunday at beyond just those churches I would try to attend other churches. When I kicked her and I would do Mormon Boy Scouts on Wednesday and no questions, no high school small groups Bible study on Tuesdays. I would do scout camp in the summer for the LDS church, and I would do Jesus camp. No I a couple times during the summer as well for my mom's church so I kinda got full exposure to both worlds.

I was actively involved in both. That was a conscious decision on my part. My parents didn't really foresee one where the other, but I know I was just really interested and attending experiencing golden figuring stuff out for myself so like you mentioned.

I know as I described my experience attending my mom's church. One thing that I brought up was how my understanding of grace has changed throughout my life I would see the first time in my life. The grace really. I would say took hold and became important to me wasn't attending my mom's church. Not that it was entirely absent in my previous experience of the LDS church, but just that in terms of five something that felt personal felt real felt meaningful though the first talks about.

I believe really I experienced my mom's church so yeah you know I mentioned in the songs. In particular, during the worship. My mom's church that was when I first came to sincerely recognize God's grace is an active sanctifying redeeming and empowering force in my life I mentioned amazing grace and forever rain. Those are just two examples. They were the only songs which produce this effect. There were others, but hopefully really centered my focus on Jesus on what he did for me and who I needed to be because of him as if I need the presence of another faith in my life to see the contrast between Mormonism and evangelical Christianity brain. I was able to better come to appreciate the differences between those two traditions by attending both so that experience brought different things into focus for me. It also brought familiar things to focus for me, but through a different lens so for instance the setting of nondenominational churches tend to be very individualized. I would say in the sense that altar calls. Or, you know, like that of the worship services or the moments of the sermon you know where the pastor might say, you know, if you're dedicating your life to Jesus. If you know feel called. You know if you can feel Christ you know our in your heart or you know various various lines like that, you know, he might invite members of the audience to come up to the front and to join and praise their unity, enjoying some of the heavy ushers in prayer or something like that. So those are very powerful moments for me that was very individualized and back setting. I think I just for me but brothers invoked a very personal response from those in attendance so you know this was a intentionally constructed environment of the pastors asking like striking rhetorical questions the audience he's asking them to reflect on the state of their sin on salvation and their relationship with Christ and you know is in moments like that where really felt compelled to give my heart and get my life to Jesus. That was know as far as moments of my life were you know someone was asking me you note. Do you accept Christ into your heart. Do you accept him as your Savior. Do you get your sins to him. You know, like, do you rely on him for your salvation. It was in those moments where I first felt the personal conviction that I can say yes yes I do. So while this kind of awakening this get some some Christians might might call it, you know, being born again even though that was initiated at my mom's church. I didn't feel as though it just like shut off when I was attending my local LDS war.

So even though there is like differences and like the style, the worship and the practice in on some significant doctrinal differences there still moments comparable, such as in partaking of the sacrament where in like quiet reflection. I was able to you know also experience these immensely powerful and meaningful moments of communion with Christ as well. So in this setting. The songs were more somber and rather than reflecting you know may be of more excited or joyous style with praise that I experienced often at my mom's church that the hymns in the sacrament during the sacrament service policy to capture you know that the drama over the Pecos of what what Christ suffering in my stead what it felt like he knows just. It was a bit more.

I don't say reverent in a disrespectful way, but it was certainly more reserved, more.

I mentioned somber before. So in terms of focusing on how living like Christ and Paul falling after him. When you die, I still felt like the music at my dad's church, as well as the Mormon church while singing hymns like come follow me coming to Jesus. I know that my Redeemer lives. Jesus once of humble birth. Many of these songs were immensely meaningful to me as well and they testified to me the same kind of message about you know Jesus's role as my Redeemer. My personal Redeemer and my Savior, my utmost reliance on him based off my belief and my desire to know. Strive to be like him, and especially the sacrifice that he brought on my behalf so you know I definitely I definitely look with gratitude and fondness on my experience of my mom's church because those moments were real to me.

They were meaningful to me and I sincerely do feel like my life was impacted for the better because of my experience there.

I felt like I was able to then appreciate and experience Christ's atonement or overgrown my relationship with Christ even more while attending LDS service services because a first experience that so that's kind of what a nun in terms of what I wrote in my article: you first is Christ in you and your mom's Christian church and he mentions some of the altar calls or organizations from the pastor to enter into prayer with the ushers over the elders, do you did you ever go forward and one of those experiences are was what you experience more just individual to you within your pew question. I was most the time it was more individual. Often I might've felt uncomfortable going forward, myself, especially in settings where often those individuals were then no asked like you know will you be baptized or something like that. So you know I still had some some reservations. I would say because at this point I had Artie been baptized at Latter Day Saints, but there were times in which I did join you know that the worship and the fellowship which was taking place at the front know I can always feel compelled to go up there but another word document moments when I went up there and an engaged in communal prayer with others that were gathered there and ask follow-up questions as well because it sounded like there is some synergy going between the two worship services.

The other maybe you felt the same feelings, and in both places.

We also mentioned that there is a contrast that they can help you out as well. Do you feel like it was more beneficial as a is a contrast or or the more synergetic in your opinion, yeah. It's a good question. At first, I would say that the benefit was in the synergism because the continuity of the commonalities or something that you know early on because it can be confusing tenant entering into a new religious taste and that you know, especially if you're going to both services each day. I mean I was now beginning the beginning of this process. I was 12 years old right so this is what I'm just beginning to have the ability to think for myself to really consider more the weighty questions of the soul and of eternity. I'm starting to know question my own personal identity (it's right that are two different shapes and even though they were very respectful and you know they can put undue pressure on me either direction right II still by participating in both these worlds on to an extent almost felt torn one where the other on the question. Was you know ultimately do I know follow-up my mom thought follow-up to my dad do I do something different right so these are the questions that are going through my mind so I did. I did appreciate the commonalities to begin with, and the synergy because it I think it made the that the whole process a bit easier to experience.

As I matured as I grew my understanding as a grew in my own personal comfort and participating different places of worship than the one that I was racing the differences started to become more important to write like one site what I felt like I have more the foundation. I understood what was going on.

I had friends in both places. You know that I felt like I was more able to put my focus on paying attention in closer detail to the differences between the different that the two faith traditions and pay closer attention to their their messages and what my experience there was so tenable and question just depended on what stage of my life. I reason, let me just add something to that. I think the reason that wise is because originally the that the differences sometimes were bit shocking were a bit uncomfortable or something like that. But by that I mean like my mom search. For instance, there would be occasionally. Maybe you know once once a semester once 1/4 or something like that on a sermon about Mormonism right and so is someone that you know was raised LDS and was now attending another church that was talking about the community. I was raised in.

I didn't have the capacity quite yet to not take things personally say right so you know, for instance, the pastor word or an elder. Someone might be getting a sermon and talking about how you don't respectfully like. In retrospect, I feel like the word no completely respectful and I have no issue with it now but you know then hearing terms like Mormons worship a different Jesus or the believe the gospel works for you know very things like that. Like there. Jesus cannot save. I think it was easier for me to take that personally because I was like my my nascent friend right so you know, kind of.

As I matured I developed more. I became less less personally sensitive to that and I became more understanding that Mike, no offense was intended that this is coming from a sincere place of religious difference that I know I felt like I was able to appreciate those differences more and and not let potential offense get on the way.

So that's good. I actually yet to hear a sermon mentioning Mormonism would almost be more of a family thing of Utah or something. Or or Arizona like right so pretty high LDS population are young, then he would know what Latter Day Saints are out here and entices slick teaching from my faith tradition, not really, but it only goes I want to jump like ended all these tangents and as you like a million questions honestly about about all that experience but one thing he mentioned in your article that you often struggled to really feel the love of God is you. Instead put greater emphasis on establishing your own righteousness refining the exactness of your own obedience and lamenting over your personal failure to keep God's commandments. Time and time again, why do you think that was your experience and doesn't give you pause that many ex-Mormons have similar experiences to the question, so I want to say that I believe that my my faith community.

The Latter Day Saints were and still are no majority of the time filled with genuine practitioners who are seeking to love God, love their neighbor on the blood price ID believe that you know fundamentally, most members of the LDS church are sincere in their devotion, their conviction, the practice, but certainly not perfect right and so you know, even though there is these ideals which I would say are present and taught with an LDS church and its members regularly fall short, about not just in the sense that you know we all sin were all in perfect but in the sense that I think often the faith tradition fall short of its own potential that even though there sincere people seeking to do their best know we don't have Latter Day Saints don't have trained clergy.

They have lady local leaders know it, largely volunteer positions know we don't have professionalized seminaries, such as in Protestantism and so you know in order to be a bishop in order to be a state president ordered to serve in these various influential positions of leadership. You know, you don't have to have a divinity degree.

You don't have to you don't have a theology degree or degree in apologetics or or pastoral counseling or anything like that rate. So I think you know in that sense, often pastors that I witnessed within evangelical Christianity are often better prepared and better equipped to administer to their congregation members of the congregation and to kind of accurately represent their theology within within Mormonism there is official curriculum that use that's produced out of Salt Lake City at church headquarters and so this this curriculum becomes very influential in determining the widespread beliefs of membership right and this curriculum didn't develop an up and vacuum one is able to go through past publications through the history of the LDS church and in countries the emergence of certain teachings for the development of different doctrines, the wind certainly theological beliefs began to be first emphasized or you know when the counting became out of style or or sometimes even disavowed growth so it does depend at what time in history we are talking about the official views of the LDS church because those change as its leadership changes and is it you know maybe new revelations are received or as the general community itself begins to understand the Scriptures in a new way right. So for me, you know, when I was talking about how early on, I had some difficulties tenable with my own relationship with God feeling feeling confident in my salvation feeling truly forgiven. I think it was because various forms of rhetoric and even teachings at times, which is become standardized within the LDS tradition, which at times lend themselves to unhealthy interpretations or practices so you know this comes in the form of rhetoric at church passages over the pulpit lesson is in the curriculum itself. All these like really are impacted by LDS Church history and their influence by a legacy of former church leaders who try to set the standard for various interpretations of Scripture. So you take that and then you combine it with certain present theological teachings popular cultural standards and other variables. These all can come together to produce some help unhealthy mindsets such as perfectionism, hyper legalism scrupulously all these things where members of the church can develop anxiety or develop depression or develop various insecurities about their own standing within the community but their own standing before God, right, and that can take a toll on mental, emotional health, not all members deal with this, but I would say it is a struggle of the LDS church of its membership. At times you know it's not uncommon by any means so yeah II don't blame either current members for their struggles or former numbers for their struggles. In that respect because I think it is a real challenge that the faith community faces and no on the other hand, I do believe that in this it has come through my observation of other religious traditions that a lot of the struggles are unique to Mormonism that they can be found in other faith traditions as well, to varying degrees. So, for instance, my exposure and participation in nondenominational Christianity, I was able to observe, to an extent some similar some similarities there and not not just among more current evangelical Christians, but these these kinds of either accusations or laments or retellings of personal histories, personal experiences by conviction for them as ex-evangelicals, former evangelical Christians who have gone through religious deconstruction from their former Protestant face often.

You know there's commenting about various forms of perfectionism of scrupulously emotional health problems caused by their over fixation on their personal standard inherent depravity, unworthiness, perhaps struggling or engagement in prohibited moral behavior.

So you know I I am not at all trying to draw a false equivalency here, I would say that the that the teachings evangelical Christianity likely lend themselves in ways to members of that tradition. Having a more natural or know what what what time I would like to use here.

Basically, you know there's there's challenges and there are some similarities between the two person unique ways that those challenges manifest themselves within Mormonism, but I don't believe that the problems are inherent to Mormonism and they're certainly not just shared by evangelical Christianity, either. Often this is just problems faced by high demand religions, you know, certainly various forms of Judaism you don't also struggle with this so I think it does depend on the tradition.

I think it depends on how members of that tradition understand her teachings how they live their teachings so you know that that's kind of how I've come to understand my experience there. That was one that I was eventually able to overcome. You know that those feelings are not being loved by God, or not being fully forgiven or not being good enough for things like that.

I I was able to grow out of those. As I studied more as a no panic question.

The predominant either assumptions are cultural teachings of things like that and I'm in a much more confident and comfortable place now.

Also, I want to say don't feel pretty cut me off. You know how to jump on something I don't want to rent too much I can I can talk a lot as the, quick follow-up on the response that last question would you say the duty as possible for Latter Day Saints to do the answer is probably yes. Good for you personally feel like you've reached that point but do think that the overall the teachings of the LDS church lead to members being able to have blessed assurance that you define what you mean by that valid confidence that they are saved. Ultimately will live with God in the end I believe so and I especially see that coming more naturally to younger members of the church. I think it's because internally there's been shifts in our rhetoric in our approach to various scriptural passages over the course of the last several decades, where it seems the trajectory that were on right now is to really beginning know calling out unhealthy mindsets such as perfectionism, such as hyper legalism or you know, various things like that where religion becomes a a checklist right on an especially sometimes in Mormonism by various members see it as an unending checklist right there is always something to be doing. There's always something you could be doing better right and this can cause them to think less of themselves and to don't worry, even that they might be outside of saving it know these challenges have to do with certain sins. So yeah III do believe that these mindsets are possible with Mormon frameworks and within the boundaries of orthodoxy of the LDS church but I think they can be very much influenced or made no more difficult to obtain through various manifestations of cultural expectations or rhetoric or things like that and I think rhetoric like that was especially prominent throughout the middle 20th century. So I I have seen some older Latter Day Saints struggle in particular, at times with with that kind of competence when we discuss Matthew to get attacked by squirrel spoke very client may have suffers at issues applicable just randomly cut out the CEU school issues.

The school saloon is that I can chew on wires and somehow I'm out attacking seamen so usually to Jackson Lake. If you need more information out of everyone. She questions back.

You're welcome to do that to have the opposite issues you like. I never might want to say anything so it's like pulling teeth getting more information on the I will be sure to target you, especially during this conversation, the essence goes, because come expecting that anyways. How could you be so dumb. My goal will so do you have any other questions about it. He said so far no one but you well. I thought this this. It's all really interesting your your background intended to read article 1. Knowing the word from lattice a background you know so we'll have will have kind of similar experiences so you know we wanted to come be comfortable so we can all share.

Not enough to let you know were trying to you know for sure the corner anything so but I think I said I think we can see over the past 10 years or even further that we see that the LDS church and the leaders are trying to address the idea, the elephant in the room of dealing with, you know, feelings of inadequacy, feelings of not being able to live up to this high standard and I think it's happened for decades may not one, but when my favorite books to read was Spencer W. Kimball's radical forgiveness even though a lot of people you know they don't like it enough for a lot of reasons, but but I think what he was trying to do is show us. Here's his high holy standard that God expects us to live but for lots of the brought people down.

So do you think you think the conversation is changed a little bit recently in terms of addressing these issues is coming out topic. Yeah, absolutely. And not just these question issues but just issues. I think of mental emotional health in general. I think there's been some massive internal cultural shifts about our willingness to talk openly about a difficult subject, so the thing. For instance, that impressed me when I was attending my mom's church was in my small groups and whatnot. You know, for instance, one thing that was pretty common in these Bible study groups among you was for people to get together and talk pretty openly about their struggles about their sins about you know what they were having some real challenges with great and that the culture that I experienced at the LDS church. On the other hand, kind of prohibited or you don't look down on the public expression of your own sincere struggles or challenges.

I think you know were moving away for that from that for sure. But you know in my childhood, my upbringing, and certainly decades beyond that right if you were to get up and talk about for an example that you were struggling with the compulsive use of pornography or you may be engaged in self harm or you know any kind of like personal, mental, emotional illness or addiction or challenge the standard for questions of morality, right.

It was like whoa you know you're going to drive the spirit out if you talk about God or you know we don't want to tempt other people to center. I know I don't really know what the rationale was there. I just know that the it.

It wasn't the most common thing to do and because of that stigma right was placed around the same where we you know II do believe everyone recognized that were imperfect and that we are sinful, great, but the willingness to actually talk about that. I didn't really find growing up. Although I did start to experience that changing later on in high school in LDS circles, but my mom's church at a young age. Like I mentioned that you send and youth leaders and whatnot members the congregation would actively ask hey guys, you know, I've been struggling looking at pornography to sleep when you pray for me in our you know can I use an accountability partner or can I just really things like that that was powerful that was kind of vulnerability I really determined that I use a lot when I observed different religions and really appreciate that and benefit from what they have to offer is one point by Christer Sandahl who was a Lutheran Bishop he's he's popular amongst Latter Day Saints.

But yes you three rules of religious understanding and the third one is he calls it holy. Envy where you know you can look with appreciation to other faith traditions and say bye like I really respect. I really look up that was something that I looked up to as well with my mom. Surgeons are a kind of vulnerability I can begin to see that kind of vulnerability brought him until later in high school in LDS circles and now I believe that the community is really starting to embrace it more. There's prominent writers and Latter Day Saints thinkers to our publishing about the need for vulnerability about the need to address mental, emotional health was starting to see that more general conference. For instance, one thing that was significant. Recently, I wasn't this last general conference that one of the ones right before that one of the sisters in the relief Society general credit presidency talked about her dad dying by suicide you know and to talk about suicide lay over the pulpit. That's a huge deal to bring issues like depression and eating disorders and all these things to the forefront and be comfortable talking about the church settings I seen a lot more now with an LDS church. I think those are positive improvements. I think it's helping members deal with those problems. More on the breakdown stigma attached to them.

So you know I'm pleased to see those changes but I would agree with you that I think the there's been major shifts in rhetoric and primary things that are determining the scene is acceptable amongst members that I think are positive changes in place and I was growing up as a young Latter Day Saints that talk about another episode was the kind of limited to four for a while when I was an adult. Is Latter Day Saints really really feel like I was going to church with the mass on your hiding things. I was struggling with knows you talked about.

And when I came out of the LDS church and started attending a Christian church going to men's group men's Bible study on Wednesday nights and another man as you as you described was your experience as well talk about things they were struggling with, and an absolute beauty, accountability partner for them. It was a like a breath of fresh air for me to see what kind of authenticity in some no invulnerability, and so happy to hear you say that the nursing that change some of the obvious truth, but it definitely was not my experience from another.

So only validate that you know and even I was only becoming more that part of my life.

It certainly you know your experience is likely very similar to my moms as well and and other people that I know so when I was in the MTC visual membership must serve in Hungary from 1997 to 99 and I remember working through with the time was the missionary guy.

Now you know to use what you preach my gospel fingers was called working through that you diluted your lesson on you know that that we all fall short of the glory of God, right, and they will very explicit warning in their do not share your personal sins with investigators right so it was like a warning not to be authentic. You know what I can understand to an extent like using discernment about the time and place right when it comes to disclosing personal matters, or perhaps talking about in an appropriate way.

But I certainly disagree with the blanket prohibitions that you know it. There is no appropriate time to talk about these things with people other than maybe your parents are priesthood leaders or something like that. You know why I deftly believe that there's power in an brotherhood fraternity and discipling fellowship late so I do believe though that increase my gospel that that that stuff is still here, and if not increase my gospel that settling the white handbook so yes I think in back because I was preach my gospel missionary are striving back that's in there, but you I dread Olson updated a couple times since then to so maybe it's words differently. I'm not sure you have my knitting ward to check the last of the last move. Okay, so Jackson you mentioned in your article that you desire to know whether the gospel you'd come to love and swim deeply and will attending your mother's evangelical church could be found in your father's Mormonism.

You stated that you came to view. Second, we find the book of Mormon as akin to Romans and the Bible. Can you comment further on that. What specifically in second Nephi leads you to believe that that analogy holds so note 1st. I just want to say that no by describing second Nephi as the Romans of the book of Mormon. By that I mean that for me it might be the most the most powerful book of Scripture within the book of Mormon on the subject of grace for me the most clearly expounded. So I found references to integration to the merits of Christ is atonement and saving power to be very persuasive, and at least as far as reading goes akin to the experience that I would have when reading problems. So that's why Kennelly to achieve their so you no grander are pull up my notes are okay so some of the reasons why described second Nephi. That way, even others, have a plethora of examples or similarities are systematically the most major commonalities between second Nephi and Romans would be the relationship of the law with respect to salvation in Christ. So in this case, the law of Moses, the nature of grace. Questions of race and ethnic background with respect to salvation and discussion about the tribes of Israel. So there's also some differences as well between the book of Mormon and Romans at not just remedies but also like Pauline thought that the book of Mormon doesn't really use the Pauline specific calling terms of justification by faith or justification by grace and it has its own terminology that it uses but I do believe that the concepts are comparable and compatible so yeah for me second Nephi was the most direct and explicit exposition on the nature grace in the text. The book of Mormon. There's various passages I could turn to this is just pull up the foremost one that comes to mind. This is been my favorite for a while this is in second Nephi chapter 2 verses five through eight quota located Michael's point out is book of Mormon nice sign when you say this one second he thought they second Nephi to verses five through eight, and this is what reads it says.

And many are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil and the law is given on Simone and by the law no flesh is justified or by the law men are cut off gay by the temple law, they were cut off, and also by the spiritual law they perished from that which is good and become miserable forever. Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the holy Messiah pretty is full of grace and truth. Behold, he offered himself a sacrifice for sin to answer the ends of the law, until all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit and none else in the ends of the lobby answered wherefore how great the importance to make these things known as the inhabitants of your that they may know that there is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God save it be through the merits and mercy and grace of the holy Messiah who lay it down his life. According to the flesh and take it again. By the power of the spirit that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead being the first that would rise to read this passage has was significant, among others, and talking about how the law relates to our sin how the log relates to salvation, and so for me when I read this I read that you know the laws given unto men. We know good and evil from the law, but ultimately were cut off by the law no flesh is justified by the Mark no one is found righteous because of the law redemption. However, comes through the holy Messiah, and there's no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God save it be through the merits and mercy and grace of the holy Messiah. So this is one of multiple passages in second Nephi, especially which depicts our need to rely on the merits and mercy and grace of Christ that that differentiates between what we can accomplish and what Christ accomplishes on our behalf through sacrifice.

When I read the book of Mormon.

I find a pretty consistent message that you know of our own.

We cannot earn our salvation.

We cannot be justified by works, we cannot follow the laws so perfectly that we can save ourselves. Rather, you know, we need to accept the free grace the free gift of grace by from Jesus Christ, which is what leads to salvation. So the other Bruce quite a few other passages as well.

But that's the primary one becomes mine.

I don't know if any of you want to comment on that or or anything else happy to take it in different directions to one of these adjustable sucks because it is open up my book of Mormon here. A lot of this verse highlighted. For instance, in the inverse for good ends by saying, salvation is free and an inverse three it says wherefore I know that that were redeemed because of the righteousness of my Redeemer and and all of the post very closely what I believe is an evangelical Christian that I am righteous because of the righteousness of Christ that it is imputed to me so I just emailed reading reading these passages really comes to mind. I will well throughout their use and what what do you think the difference is between Protestant the Protestant view grace of what is being said in the book of Mormon, or is there a difference so yes no call. So I believe that you know upon kind of an honest or a fair reading your word on open reading but say that many Christians will find the language used in the book of Mormon to be very similar, very compatible very comparable to things that they might themselves espouse and believe. So often I do know various Christians to my take certain passages in the book of Mormon and say you know this is this is against what I believe this is contrary to what I believe common passages that I've seen commented on include second Nephi chapter 25 verse 23, which is by grace you are saved up and all you can do audits very calmly ticker cited another one is the one that I expounded on my blog post monotonic 32 there's some other ones as well. So II do I do often find that my interpretation of these verses in light or when compared to how they are interpreted by many evangelicals can defer and you know they might feel like there's these huge differences between the book of Mormon's gospel in the gospel that they derive from the New Testament know I often disagree with how to interpret those verses. Although no disrespect in the gelcoat because there's plenty of latter-day Saints to interpret those verses in very similar ways. I disagree with them as well but I guess in a in a broad sense Protestantism is very much influenced by both Augustine and Calvin John Calvin granted you know so backing up just a bit, often constant thought is divided between Calvinism and Arminianism on the on. I'm assuming gay listers.

You know might know some the differences between the two, but in terms of what the book of Mormon presents and how it differs from Augustinian thought and/or Calvinist thought I would save the main differences are. This the book of Mormon skis in the state of humanity. Before the fall is being unable to choose either good or evil. So there innocent, whereas Augustinian or Calvinist thought views the state before the fall.

As humans were able to choose both good and evil. This is prior to Original Sin and so that had not yet taken place.

So after the fall, but before regeneration before the justification under the presence of seating grace in an individual the book of Mormon depicts that the atonement automatically delivers all persons from captivity to evil at what I mean by that is, the book of Mormon depicts a a concept of accountability where individuals are there certain states in which one doesn't actually commit sin because you know that Cindy required knowledge and understanding of right and wrong are depicted as being necessary for sin to have occurred. Sin is depicted as an act rather than a state of being, and I wear is in Augustinian or Calvinist thought human nature is seen as inherently unable to not sin. This is one of the effects of Original Sin where you don't humans do possess free will.

But humans are only able to freely choose sin. Another difference I did see your hand or call. Just a note get to two more these so after the fall.

After regeneration, the book of Mormon depicts all all persons are able to choose good people. Where is Augustine or Calvinist thought views. People who are regenerated as delivered from evil nature by God's pre-baby and grace.

And so, after free choice. The book of Mormon depicts of those who choose evil returns are naturally evil status. Those who choose good receive eternal life. So essentially the yellow we continue to have the capacity to choose good or evil.

Where is Augustinian or Calvinist thought views humans is still inherently sinful, but redeemed by grace those who are not regenerated, those were not redeemed are damned based on God's predestination coordination so those are just some differences between the book of Mormon and major meetings Protestant thought, it will bury you know if we were talking Arminian Arminianism because I see the book more intense to be a rather hyper Arminian taxes.

Same with Mormonism that places a very strong emphasis on synergism other than Mark monetarism. The idea that salvation occurs through the cooperation or the joint action of both God's grace God's seating grace with the act of acceptance on the part of the human and there choosing to know believe and follow after God by following the commandments were his monitors would be to salvation is contingent on God alone that humans are themselves cannot be saved that they cannot chew salvation for themselves. They are fully reliant upon God for there's salvation so I you know that was a lot. Again, I hope I didn't misrepresent anything you know you disagree or if there's anything that you want to clarify or anything like that. We all feel feel free to push back on that restless my reading of the book of Mormon.

Those are some differences that I've observed push back on anything related to television but you ask, obviously says so you measure the Mormon view this as innocent freefall) and three of us are fairly well-versed in the Mormon teachings on the difference between sin and transgression. What I wanted to ask about that is, from where he also touched on. Note a little bit on you alluded to the idea that you know before the age of accountability people before someone would receive this knowledge of the of the law righted that that there not accountable for sin. And so my question, I guess would be from where does knowledge of sin, like in a general sense or I would say that the the understanding within Mormon thought is that following the fall that God handles across history imparted his his truth or his commandments in various forms. Now these are I would save found most completely within the gospel of Jesus Christ. But certainly morning still believe that there God has inspired other individuals, whether they're religious or not to have a certain understanding of morality to have certain understandings of right and wrong. This is often seen as coming through the light of Christ. So you know inherently humans would know that on motor is wrong for stealing things like others, there's various common moral standards, which are pretty consistently held throughout cultures throughout history so yeah I think are no Mormonism you know if were not assuming that the commandments are explicitly taught to an individual that you know that's how an individual receives their knowledge that there is an inherent level of understanding group which we all possess about you know basic standards of right and wrong which is explicit to Jews would come through Scripture through prophets, etc. I think so. Talk about more particular matters so I just question I would have been if Adam and Eve are in an innocent state freefall and then God gives them a direct command not to the fruit that does nothing like them and put them in a state of having knowledge not to do all so you know that that certainly wasn't the only commandment that they were given often in LDS thought depicted the situation prior to the fall depicted as they were given to commandment to multiply and replenish the earth, or to not partake of the fruit.

Following one would mean breaking the other and so by choosing the one you know which would bring them direct knowledge of good and evil thoughts.

When that accountability came just pull up my notes are deposited to address this product yes search second of August to June. Could you repeat the question one more time just so I may trim at answering correctly so I am pressing on and turn the corner you just enjoy.

Think about these things, and things like when I was on my mission. I used to think through this a lot with regard to Lehi's unanimous sermon who just two sons that the touches on this but you know if this is knowledge of sin comes through direct commandment from God. Read like this. This is something you should do this is something you should not do. And Adam and Eve are in the garden and God gives him commandments. Doesn't that put them in a state where there are no longer innocent right they did they have the direct command from God how to act and they willfully disobeyed one of the commands and kind of the way I see my guess is like biblical text doesn't is the book of Mormon does presented that they do could not keep one or the other. When so I just wanted to do thoughts on on the idea that the direct command from God, but some of the state with no longer acting in essence, because they have a direct command from God, yeah, yeah, okay, I think it's more with your soul. Now all think you put on an important part of the polls because this command from God is given they are now accountable to call it or not, and so you know, even though it is often referred to as as Adam's transgression of Mrs. before this is before sin entered the world, technically before they were removed from the from the garden and from the immediate presence of God that prior to prior to this.

Prior to this decision just didn't really have the means to to send or to act righteously because of the audit vein had not yet received commandments will follow him commandments right so II do believe that by receiving commandments to put them in all document one way or the other because interaction broke the. The other commandment and you know frankly any action. I believe one of the women but a broken nose commandments as well. I don't believe the girl is saying a cop out choices either to give more thought to it specifically and how your question relates to comedy LDS understandings of transgression versus versus standing but yeah I actually think I had a companion once said that assets in question. We had to get out out the door right after she asked it so it wasn't able to rack my brain as much as the later on, but the other person will ask you with regards to what he said about 75 2523 you know you did allude to did mention that there are LDS people who have interpreted it in the same way that evangelicals tend to interpret it right that you have to do everything that you can do and then grace can extend right and I mixed up the difference right will I guess my question is that punitive is not distilled his people live there been LDS leaders who have interpreted them that way. It includes did not way and so have a question there like there's a Evangelical Christianity. If there's a preacher who is preaching the word and and a Christian can go to the Bible and say hey this is when printing isn't lining up with the word of God is not lining up with with no scholarly understandings of the original languages within Mormon as we can have the supporting structure right where you because one of the truth claims for four Mormonism says you have prophets and apostles right called by God to lead the church so no prophet or apostle teaching and interpretation of the passage in the book of Mormon and what recourse do you have, you can go to original languages to argue that the Nephi meant something else right literally out on the yes so with respect to this verse. I absolutely agree with you. I have various interpretations across this history, most recently, and commonly I would say for the past century or so has been an understanding of after all we can do is meeting you know once we have done everything we can then grace comes and takes and you know Carrie's arrest or something like that right and I also agree about the often it's been very very common to defer to these ecclesiastical interpretation, stable by the various prophets and apostles to have comments interpreted on these verses personally.

You know II do believe that you know though I do look to leaders in the church as spiritual teachers and profiteers and red regulators.

I certainly don't believe that they have the market cornered. When it comes to scriptural interpretation, you know II believe that they have the authority to define what official doctrine is for the church know that's one thing but you know there's a recent statement by by one of them. Elder Ballard where he says he will just because I am a general authority does not mean I'm authority in general. There is you know and even though Latter Day Saints tend to place great stock in teachings and interpretations of the leaders. My I do believe that there is a legitimate role for scholarship, and in the case, the book of Mormon, you rightly commented that you know we can't really go back to the original language, but in this case I think recent scholarship has been able to go back to the vernacular of the 19th century to help exegete this text in particular, there's two main reasons why I disagree with both Latter Day Saints and evangelical readings of this passage, which views grace as only kicking in.

After all that one can can do in terms of their own religious works.

The first reason is narrative based on the context of second Nephi is with respect to the law of Moses. So in second Nephi 25.

It's the chapter is majorly focusing on the relation of the law of Moses to looking forward in anticipation with the coming Messiah will save so in the book of Mormon.

This would've taken place. You know that they around. Oh no you select five 3080 or something like that. You know a handful of centuries before the coming of Christ. And so the narrative at least presents the people as essentially doing messianic Jews practicing the law of Moses in anticipation of Christ will come second Nephi 25 talks about how the law is ultimately a symbol or teacher which points these individuals to Christ and ultimate reliance need for him so narratively.

I don't believe that it fits to interpret the verse as meaning that only after all one can do in a lost sense then grace kicks in. That contradicts many other passages of the book of Mormon, such as the do want to second Nephi previously shared as well as others that depicts grace as being a free gift of salvation. Being a free gift which is contingent on belief. Do you know that the presence of such grace, which is what men transform the individual to produce good works that the way that once fruits are demonstrated are through keeping the commandments of God and the ultimately good fruits, good works are a an expression of grace in the life of the believer. So that's the first part the second part has to do with the specific wording recent scholarship by LDS scholar Daniel McClellan who is actually one of the head translators who works for the church. He just got his PhD in the Hebrew Bible and not sure that that yet he did just as successfully defined his dissertation which was on the Hebrew Bible. Basically, he had a paper that actually can be recently published in you. Are you studies on the stem. Various making things work is meticulously gone to various examples of literature in the 19th century looking for the specific phrase.

After all we can do it after all asked to do okay in all of these instances. All of these cases, this phrase means essentially despite all that one can do a number depicts the chronological moment in time where you know there's one thing and then after that another thing happens. This phrase at least within the context of the 19th century which is the context in which Joseph Smith dictated the extent types of the book of Mormon meant and was on understood by early believers of the of the LDS church as meaning no, we are saved by grace, despite all we can do or in spite of all we can do like essentially nothing we can do ultimately is what saves us. We are saved by grace, regardless of what we do we know it was a synonymous term and so he breaks down the linguistic history of this passage how it was interpreted by early members how it fit into the larger context about the literature at the time, there's dozens dozens of examples are that he draws from that consistently reinforce this idea that after all we can do at least as it would've been understood by readers in the 19th century meant in spite of all we can do now. His research is just beginning to take more prominence within the LDS community. But you know to your point. I do believe that the there are various forms of scholarship which can be helpful. And there's moments in LDS Church history where the work of historians, scholars and other experts have been able to influence the way ways in which the leaders of the church themselves interpret an approach various passages so you know that that's basically how wise you got passage over the lens of the book of Mormon and what's going on in the narrative, but also through the vernacular of the 19th century. Daniel McClellan also traces how eventually you know we we all know that languages change right to keep that language of the King James Bible.

For instance, is not the same English that we speak today. It was even the same English that people in Joseph Smith's day spoke and so the meanings of words can shift the meanings of certain phrases can shift certain things can fall out of popularity and this is one which you know at essentially after the Saints arrived in Utah around the turn of the 20th century, especially this passage started to be understood as meaning you know we are saved by grace. After all we can do workplace counsel for those various reasons. I find that difficult interpretation, but I do want to recognize that it is one that has been taught over the pulpit and in published writings the church by leaders of the church and all the prophets and apostles and because of that I've been a very popular interpretation among the members. Yeah, I mean I very similar conclusions as this is what you're saying Jackson of when I was kinda going through my faith crisis.

I guess right beforehand where I realized you know my 1032, especially when it's paired with verse 33 right afterwards does seem to promote the concept grace a lot more than you know legalism or perfection.

And I feel the same way about you know second Nephi 2523. Also maybe just look at the. The contexts fill you with the rest of this verse is saying it says for we live we labor diligently to write, to persuade her children and also our brethren to believe in Christ and to be reconciled to God that that flows 100% with with what I believe will and in that phrase just by itself. You take out your after the, after we can do just as by grace we are saved and that's something that I disagree with at all. Also, does it does feel very contradictory to suddenly throw that phrase in and say after all we can do it just nullifies everything that was said before that but I think what I kinda struggled with this verse is because the only thing Paul was saying there is an authority structure, and I was I was kind of sidetracked looking at that. You know what the Bible dictionary.

For instance, if you look under the heading grace that she references this verse sure you're familiar with it, but it basically says the grace you know cannot suffice until you expend in our best efforts. Thus, we are saved by grace. After all we can do which luckily you know the way can you justify that is like well it's the Bible dictionary is not called white Scripture like they still put this in here as part of the hand, and though for me. You know I look at the Bible to charge for instance on the major author or person responsible for the Bible dictionary was Bruce R. McConkie.

He was one of the pivotal most foremost, no influencers, church leaders in the 20th century continues to have an impact and influence today. Although I might argue that the church is now beginning to move into a different kindof rhetoric and theological interpretation that was strictly espoused by McConkie but he was known he was a very important things bigger and from essentially technology to the 50s to the early 2000's. Even the late 2000 pains. His influence was very happy with nothing right for me. It is been through studying the history studying the ways that various leaders have interpreted interpretation or or influenced interpretation that I'd been able to understand know exactly how representative is this within the larger scope of Mormon thought for one how necessary is this interpretation and you know how how strictly rooted in Scripture. Is this but you know I certainly do not blame anyone who recently church, you know, put great stock in the teachings of Bruce R. McConkie and you know others who shared you know his his similar views. Or, you know, especially how like the view that the book of Mormon doctrine in high esteem because again the influence cursor McConkie had on the church in the 20th century cannot be overstated.

In my opinion, I do want to go back to all verse 23, though, because like I said Morgan's and by implication evangelicals to work on the following. After more prominent Mormon interpretations know that Mormons are the worst of proof texting. I mean Christians do it too.

But you know it it hurts me when my own people do it anyways. Not just like context. Please let that's a jiggly but so like Aubrey from verse 3023, and a little bit onward.

I need labor diligently to write, to persuade our children and are also our brother to believe in Christ and to be reconciled to God. We know that it is by grace that we are saved.

After all we can do and notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses and look forward with steadfastness onto Christ until the law shall be fulfilled for this and was the law given.

Wherefore the law have become dead unto us. We are made alive in Christ because of our faith, yet we keep a log because of the commandments and we talk of Christ, we preach, we rejoice in Christ, we preach a question prophesy Christ we write according to our prophecies that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins wherefore received concerning the law that our children may know the dampness of the law and day by knowing the deadness of the law may look forward onto the life which is in Christ, and also one and the law was given and after the law is fulfilled in Christ, but they need not harden your hearts against him. When the law ought to be done away right so it's stuff like this right when you put it in context.

I believe those verses is often significantly any potentially super legalist interpretation of that passage. And so it does irk me when I feel like not only is that has the popular interpretation of that passage by Latter Day Saints been kind of a very unfortunate group texting, but it has kind of been brought in Warren with the other theological views which, in my opinion can lead to unhealthy mindsets and religious paradise.

So one of the things it just thinking about you know that a different way of interpreting second Nephi 25, 23, mean.

I look at that is not just being an unfortunate no gas. As far as like okay this is a mistake in reading but to me it's ultimately a different gospel when you look at you. Note being saved. After you can do as opposed to being saved despite all you can do because one of those is a gospel of amputation. You gotta amputate all the sin from your life before you can get that grace, but the other reading the one that you're talking about is a gospel of amputation that we receive Christ's righteousness and were saved justify that grace, regardless of whether we are perfect, and I guess he was sent D. Do you see it that way as well that you other people in the church you have this this other reading or actually believing in a different gospel or yeah you know, so I will say that that that the gospel at least theologically speaking, that you know if an individual is consistent in the application about interpretation. I think it does.

It is an incorrect are understandable are the gospel of Christ, and I believe it can become a significant barrier to our legitimate experiences.

Christ's atonement in 1/now personally I don't actually know anyone that takes it to the full logical on by that I mean anyone that actually says you know who understands that verse to such an extent, but you're saved by grace. After all you can do right and they understand all you can do to make every single time you have the opportunity to do something you need to take that you don't like you need to do the right thing right that essentially becomes. You know, advocating for perfectionism, which you know I believe pretty consistently. The Latter Day Saints of always understood perfection to be only attainable by Jesus Christ in this life. Everyone is afflicted with sin, and so you know, theoretically, like if we're taking a passage that interpretation to its logical conclusion, I don't know anyone that could actually follow that. But I don't know any letters Latter Day Saints that would understand it, to such an extreme way that would render basically everyone in the church. He redeemable no outside the grace of Christ. So I typically for those who do interpret it is not in that way though they do heavily emphasize commandment keeping obedience, moral righteousness and upstanding before God as fundamental in order to receive Christ's grace and there's various other universes that they might protect or draw from in Latter Day Saints Scripture is well in order to to take this view, you know it.

I've never really spoken to any individuals that that advocate for that kind of you know, occasionally, Midler talking to a stake president, where you know they might have an understanding that in order to truly repent from certain standards. You need to absolutely stop you know committing them. The problem is like, you know, I would agree to certain sins that like you know none of us are counted likely commit in a like most of us are not murderers, you know like actual murderers. And, you know, in the case that someone does murder or commit like some type really egregious and like that. I would say it would be the most difficult to never do that again.

You know like basically are some sins that are pretty rare and their occurrence.

But you know if they were to consistently apply that something like pride to something like you know last or you know any of these sins that are far more abstract that are a natural part of the human condition. I don't know how anyone would be able to 100% always forgo the sins and therefore receive legitimate forgiveness of the sins if those verses are interpreted in that way consistently. Yeah, I mean I agree. I think if you have to take it at that kind of face value. It really does become an impossible gospel that I would agree with you think it's just a follow-up question to you.

You read that verse where they talk about how the laws dad but they're keeping it real just kind of is is pointing to Christ, so my question is, since it was a dead law. Does that mean if they had broken the commandments. I think he may have kind answered it, but just specifically if they had broken it didn't have the power to condemn them at all. At that point, I think what they mean by dead law is that it is not a law which is salvation. I think that the book of Mormon depicts the law as important as commandment keeping as important, but you know for certain reasons. You know, for individuals who follow the law or obey it or keep the commandments in order to bring it to pass their own righteousness, for in order to bring to pass their own salvation that lot that it cannot actually save them but I don't believe that that means the law is.

You know that they hold the law to either be unimportant or ineffective for teaching morality or or things like that because earlier in second Nephi five through 82528 that I shared with you. It says that your men are cut off by the law that no man is justified by the moderate so similar to yell things you might find in the New Testament. The law is the means by which we understand how dead we actually are in our sin, how condemned we actually are before God. We understand the nature person. So in that sense, yes, the law has the power to condemn but only in the sense that we act in a way that breaks the law. It it's our actions are simple actions.

According to the book of Mormon which condemn us. It's not an inherent state of sin, but rather it said you know how we choose between good and evil that determines whether or not we are condemned, but another book Mormon teaching is that all of us.

None of us can actually follow the law perfectly by the all of us will feel break it to some degree or another, known therefore we all have the natural man. We all sin not. We don't begin inherently sinful. As a part of her nature, but her nature is one in which nobody will inevitably sin and not follow the law and therefore we need Christ did you know that Moses break all 10 of the commandments are.

I'm sure he did literally drink them all, gosh of data and this guy had a self is back because of the follow-ups there and then a really bad joke, but image has nothing to do one or when asked of them before we can get back on track. What I had a lot of thoughts and what I want to talk about probably just lead us down in rabbit hole but I just wanted to make an observation that to me, even with the interpretations we talked about the different interpretations where the second Nephi passage. It doesn't necessarily mean that grace applies only after a works but it could mean it's in spite of our works in spite of Reppert efforts.

I still see those very strict interpretations and just all of this theology is a holder so teleology the doctrine of salvation ice. I've always kind of seen it very similar to Roman Catholic so teleology in the sense that Protestantism is, as Michaels explained, we know we we talk about imputed righteousness.

We talk about justification as a forensic declaration and external declaration by God that you are righteous, not because of anything you've done or very good, and you inherently, but because of the declaration and mercy of God, whereas in Roman Catholic theology you receive ordinances which which convey grace to the person they receive grace and it's kind of up to you to continue in faithfulness to maintain that state of grace and if you send there's this mortal versus venial sins.

Mortal sins are so grave that they kind of kick you out of that state of grace can like how you said that there are certain sins in LDS theology are so serious that they kick you out of.

He noted that they could do because you're standing in the church to be in in question, so I would just want to make that observation that that's kinda what I've seen in my personal experience and from the book of Mormon that even if you accept that okay it's not saying they have to work for your salvation I see of it more as a is more understanding of salvation in terms of not something that's declared or given as a free gift.

You know, declared by God but is something that is something is infused in you and it's in his kinda wrapped up in your sanctification that that the that your standing with God is kind of escape is conflated with this idea with signification is a make sense throughout the concepts.

Yet when I actually agree with you there, and I believe that you know I do agree that there are similarities between LDS theology Roman Catholicism, but I would actually find greater similarities between LDS theology here and Eastern Christianity also a major difference that I observed between Eastern and Western Christianity Western Christianity having goal of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism that are both impacted by Augustine. Is this understanding of sin in grace and/or salvation, justification, sanctification on it since depicts these things as as states right so human from a state of sin like original inherent sin to one of justification before God.

Where is in Eastern orthodoxy are various Eastern Christianity ought rather than states is understood to be more of a process right where were grace is something that is experienced continually through sanctification. The process of sanctification where salvation is more process oriented than state oriented, and I tend to see latter-day St. theology is also you know espousing one that is more process oriented than strictly state oriented and on the sense that Latter Day Saints don't just believe that the you know you have to have faith in Jesus Christ and repent and be baptized or whatever and your saved you don't. They also have a conception of enduring to the end� Salvation could potentially be lost that an individual can know continue to choose evil. Prior to that they had chosen grace and so you know this this I rightly observed, it is more combined with an understanding of sanctification as well. Throughout the course of an individual's lifetime which depicts more process, rather than you know I I can go one day and be saved to the next day or I can go and not be saved. One day, to be fully centered. The next day I and I'm not commenting on whether or not Western or Eastern Christianity are elastic. But in terms of how various Christian theologians amongst the history of Christianity have concededly sparked the subject's business In a major trend observed that the Western Christianity deals with states Eastern Christianity tends to emphasize more the process. Yeah, that's really good inside so I try to follow up really quickly when her talk. My second Nephi 2523 after grace your saved. After all you can do and and all this discussion is even talking about. I wanted to kinda bring it back to passage is often quoted when Protestants say that salvation is a gift that were justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

There were declared righteous at the moment of conversion instead of growing in righteousness in terms of our standing before God is going back to Elmo 11. This is this is a passage where Amalek is the is room thing is they pronounce. It's been a while since I've you know I would have been an elders quorum for a while so BSO there can have this disputation about whether you can be saved in your sins verses from your sins. Hunting is also reference later Moron I so like an inverse 34 and Elmo 11 zeros and set again Shelley save his people in their sins and emulate answered incidents MIC into he shall not, for it is impossible for him to deny his word and then not skipping it.

I mean basically going to verse 36 and we talked about not reading things out of context but but I don't think there's anything really.

Mr. Theiss is not Amalek say beginning to behold has lied for the assets that I speak as I had authority to command God because he shall not save his people in their sins. So and I sent you again that he cannot see them in their sins, for I cannot deny his word and he has said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven.

Therefore, how can you be saved except inherit the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, you cannot be saved in your sense, so it seems like what you're talking about I come agree that in LDS theology. They see they see this group.

This is more of a growing process growing in holy growing in signification and not having a state in your mortal life or you can say okay I know that God looks at me as righteous.

You know it's it's more like your your attempting to continually grow and certainly Christians believe in signification where you grow but looking at this, he says you cannot save, hold on, I'll go back to verse four. How can you be saved except inherit the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, you cannot be saved in your sins. Just analyzing this verse, it seems to me like you cannot really have a true assurance of your salvation until you are somehow completely taken out of your sins you your claims from your sins do not mean I'm not trying to misrepresent them trying to understand how you would understand this passage because it sounds like you can't inherit heaven unless your clean okay that's what you can't be saved in your sins.

But what is that means I mean you have to be completely purified. Now in this life is a something happens in the next life.

So how how would you interpret the passage and and can reconcile those position passage in particular public helical more time to look into the distant face value.

You know how I might address Scott is the understanding that Christ is not able to say nice first save us in our sins, meaning that in our our state of uncleanliness.

You know, we cannot actually be saved that that state of cleanliness is brought about by relying and accepting Christ's grace through our repentance. That's that's personally how I understand you know how how one might be rendered unclean by it is by not repenting of their sins because you know various other passages of the book of Mormon talk about how reliance and acceptance of Christ saving grace or his his sacrifice on our behalf washes our sins away with his blood rightly. Essentially, you know there the imagery that you know we we are made clean. We are purified through the blood of Christ.

I don't think that means that the other 20 people in the book of Mormon. For instance, that are depicted as being saved in this one, for example, see this would've been. This is a realm of the younger realm of the younger in particular has a very popular conversion narrative within the book of Mormon, where he begins as a kind of rebel child or I never actually comment on his age so we don't know how old or young, he was when he was fighting against the church. Sometimes on the younger is a misnomer.

But you know, essentially it depicts him as an individual who his father was a prominent leader in the church. And yet, his son rebelled against the church, rebelled against God, committed, great sins, persecuted the saints in a basically really engaged in in the lot of wickedness is then abruptly confronted by an angel of God falls into a state of him sleep over several days and in the sleep experiences in vision of now, we would call an alum of the millennial nice it in in this ego state of after being no kind of dry shop by the angel he he has a genuine conversion experience where he comes to acknowledge a full understanding of his sins understands his wretchedness, his wickedness before God and you know turns to Christ for salvation turns to Christ for redemption pencil all by himself, you know, I don't think, at least as far as the narrative goes would've advocated for any idea that one needs to be perfect or morally, completely clean or sinless before salvation can calm how my himself in the course of his life. You know his his personal moment of redemption and salvation comes when he repents of his sins when he turns to Christ and so what I what I what I believe with that. There's also another passage I think it's a, 36 I wish I knew my scriptures better know this is why it's important to study religion essentially in one of the, give several conversion narratives throughout his life. Several accounts of his men received yet 36 talks about his conversion thing is weary.

I okay here we go.

So like verse 1136. This is the angel speaking to them. He says if that will be destroyed of thyself, seek no more to destroy the church of God. Essentially, you know alum is then presented with his sins and iniquities. He tormented with the pains of hell etc. etc. he sees in vision or he remembers being taught about Jesus Christ and its when in verse 18 of the climax of this chapter he says oh Jesus, the son of God have mercy on women.

The gall of bitterness and encircled about by the everlasting chains of death. He says now behold I thought this I could remember my pains no more yet I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more so I simply like you, himself through his process of repentance order or coming to God be saved. He was not saved when he was in his state of sin, but as soon as he repented he was able to access Christ's atonement in such a way that he was no longer in the same state of sin as he was before he was now forgiven of his sins. He was now able to access that that that redemptive power of Christ atonement as I I think that's what Alma means in.

In the passage you brought up in element 11 because you know it. If this is understood to mean that one needs to be part perfect before they can be saved. Given that no one can be saved in their sins that that's what data being saved in their sins is understood to mean that Elma himself would be disqualified by that but I can certainly understand at face value. How that can be a tricky passage to maybe wrestle with but you know I also think that there are additional contacts in light of other book Warren passages or even you know how my himself can help clarify what might be intended. There so I got I don't know if that was satisfactory or anything like that that's that's really good. The only really think conflict that the kingdom of mine is are talking about. It is this does sound like a very you know Protestant view of born again and we can compare to other passages like second Nephi 31 in verse 17 it says for the gate by which he should enter his repentance and baptism by water and then, the remission of your sins by fire, by the Holy Ghost which which seemed to me like baptism by water and the Holy Ghost is a prerequisite for remission of sins. Just you and me, so it seemed almost like it would come into conflict with that with that that the version from almond talking about how he was converted but by just crying out to Christ and asking him to save him rather than than real estate. Baptism: not just Elma but also the story enough who prays in the book of Venus for remission of his sins.

And you know received through not necessarily vision but divine revelation.

Let's say God directly for giving him for his sins in our I certainly believe that forgiveness can come in various forms outside of baptism and I believe that baptism is important it's it's an outward expression of an inward covenant, the book of Mormon places great emphasis on baptism, but there are instances in which I baptism is not a part of one's no conversion error repentance or forgiveness experience and I think that's probably safe to say as well. As far as the New Testament goes one verse two is asking about real quick just come in light of what a mess. He was asking and was I had chapter 12 Bennett eyes talking to Tina was priests. This is in verse 31 PS them you know you said the people of Moses and and what do you know concerning the law of Moses does salvation come by the law of Moses would see in verse 32. The answer and said that salvation did come by the law of Moses in a minute. I had had the chance to kinda say you know what you're saying.

The rest of the book of Mormon says what he says this is no Bennett I said under them. I know if you keep the commandments of God, we shall be saved. Yay if you keep the commandments, which the Lord delivered on the Moses and the Mount Sinai so it really seems to imply that keeping the premises is a prerequisite for salvation. Here that's probably good segue to the kind of his back on track so I will try to consolidate the next two questions.

Jackson and before I knew I just want to thank you for spending the time with us. I know it's not easy to have questions put to know you put on the spot with with the digital divide weren't in our notes but I you guys are very gracious.

I think you know you can all appreciate and understand that you know on the spot answers are by no means perfect, and so I just appreciate thatan venue to be able to think through these these things together as we both approached the tax for sure and thank you for coming on and doing this with also the next two questions kind of task is to ask you to look at LDS teachings and specifically all the scriptural teachings from a holistic standpoint I refocus a lot on the book of Mormon and note, Michael mentioned the Bible dictionary and you you referenced Bruce R. McConkie one of the things about him and then why he was so important in LDS histories because she she was sort of a systematic guy right look to things holistically and try to put it all together and help Mormon doctrine, well it's not a systematic theology is approached, kinda from the standpoint to take all yeah probably the closest thing that we've seen in Mormonism less exactly, exactly, and so so for their soup mix two questions Williams can asking you to tackle a couple of passages from the document covenants and use bounce that off the ideas you're presenting in your article. So the first one is document covenants 131 and 32 which says for I the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. Nevertheless, few the repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven which led Matthew's point seems to place a commandment tubing is a prerequisite to be forgiven right in the second one is document covenants 82, six through 10 verse 10 was a scooter mastery Scripture back in my day.

Verse six starts and the anger of God. Conflict against the inhabitants of the earth, and Nandu is good for all gone out of the way. And now, verily, I sent you. I the Lord will not lay since you charge your ways, and sin no more, but unto the soul who sin a fellow former sins return, saith the Lord your God, and again I sent you I given to new commandment you may understand my will concerning you, or in other words, I given to directions how you may act before me that it may turn to you for your salvation, I the Lord and bound when you do what I say when you do, not what I say you have no promise. So the question is how how would you understand the difference between the gospel you find in the book of Mormon and these teachings in the document covenants which seem to say that no forgiving forgiveness comes by way of obedience to the commandments.

And if you continue to stoop to continue to sin, which switches you stated you know all people do even even those who are saved Christians right still struggle with the sin nature so into 10 seems to say if you stand, the former sins that maybe were forgiven. You know for baptism and relevant under the obvious view will come back to you so the question is conflict enough to see Bruce R.

McConkie approached you he was. He received his his views on grace and and and that thing on and he and he was really one who spoke out against the evangelical evangelical group dear Grace and Hennessey and was receiving the honestly from the audio Scripture. Specifically, the document, so can you comment on the yeah I want to agree with you that I think not just Broussard but also other throughout time have often felt were behaved in ways that are almost reactionary to the larger Christian world, you know, especially when it comes to I think you know it's largely unavoidable because not only did Mormonism come out a Protestant religious environment, but it was that Protestants to you know Mormons primarily interacted with during their early years and then moving west to Utah.

No Arab Protestant Christianity and Mormonism have often butted heads in different ways.

Often the I do not espouse different theological views that that run counter to each other and site. I do believe that at times Mormonism has both attempted to almost secret ties from Protestant beliefs in order to gain you know perhaps a more popular acceptance among the larger American society, but at other times retrench itself happily against Protestant ideas to in order to differentiate itself in an often Grace has been a battlefield or in a contested subject between Mormons and Protestant Christians. So yes, when it comes to Broussard.

I think you know he was no exception to that. In fact I think he perpetuated it to a large extent, and I also want to say that I think there's been various misunderstandings on the behalf of Latter Day Saints. Throughout history towards Protestant Christianity. You know Grace has been a convenient subject to miss represent at times you don't. Don't get me wrong there are Christians or have been Christians that don't accurately represent Protestant teachings themselves when it comes to grace right that you note to Paul they might've said oh well you know we have grace, you know, so maybe you know can sin abounds right you know, can we can we send all the more and write possible likely would've said God for bid to them as well.

But you know I understand that Protestants, at least in terms of be the mainline beliefs. Grace is not an excuse for individuals to sin. Grace is not an email just a free pass.

You know you can just say amen I believe in Jesus and your good. There is there is a greater significance that so unfortunately Bruce are sometimes engaged in in the stereotypes to but yes, so when it comes to those passages in the doctrine and covenants and how they relate to the book of Mormon I do I do leave space and my own personal faith or contradictions and differences to exist between books of Scripture, not just on a metalevel between what's in the book of Mormon and the doctrine covenants or the doctrine covenants. The Bible, but also internally within these texts you know III believe that Scripture is the product of Revelation. It's inspired by God. But as with other Latter Day Saints. I do not view Scripture as an errant or infallible. And so Mormonism tends to emphasize the human element in Scripture as well, in which you know it is ultimately inspired by there can be internal contradictions there can be errors or mistakes that can be human paradigms mixed in as well and I don't think it's necessarily always property you try to separate which parts are forgotten which particular man because you know sometimes they're so intimately linked that that that kind of extraction. I don't think is possible, but in the case of verses like he's you know it's not that I would toss them out completely. You know it's not that I know in my present understanding Grace would say oh you know that I just that's just wrong, like other passages of Scripture. These can be interpreted and so for instance, and Dr. covenants 131 through 32 special 32. Nevertheless, he that repents and does the demand of the Lord shall be forgiven. You know I I do personally believe that that commandment keeping is an important part of the forgiveness process again were talking about processes here, you know, rather than than states and so you and I do believe that one can sin you know, feel remorse repents a bit, you know received.

Maybe we can call it a preliminary forgiveness, but I think God's expectations rest. Don't just end their that that the that the value and meaning of forgiveness in our lives grows as we keep the commandments right and so on. You know there are people who misunderstand, for instance, the atonement of Jesus Christ where they see oh you know I have a means by which I can sin I can act how I want, I can hurt other people. Perhaps I can engage in this or that behavior. I can say sorry God you know and then go on my merry way in and be forgiven. And it doesn't count against me. II think verses like these.

Both of them work against these, perhaps misrepresentations or incorrect applications of the Scriptures or or Scriptures that have to do with grace and forgiveness by email. Also saying that an individual needs to know engaging in keeping the commandments in order for that forgiveness, that forgiveness for God if it's genuine to really mean something in her life because I also believe that forgiveness when we access the atonement of Jesus Christ and we received that forgiveness it it changes us and transforms us, I think it's it's in line with the, the understanding of repentance as turning away from sin requires a conscious turning away from sin where you note.

Yes, our I don't think it's possible for an individual to say you know I repents of stealing in the process of the active stealing only to steal, you know, several minutes later something like that right. I don't believe it's just act action oriented.

I believe it's also like an internal disposition. And so the fruits of genuine repentance of forgiveness working in an individual's life are know that keeping the commandments I think you will be on then to chapter 2082 verses six through 10, you asked the question of on icons that sold the Senate, shall the former sins returns to the Lord your God. I think that's a difficult passage.

I think that's that's when the berries Latter Day Saints have wrestled with. I myself, you know, have gone into a state president or like a bishops interview Ray and asked the question right like hey you know I've repented of let's say pride.

I've repented of XYZ in my life. I keep you know I keep committing it. You know I keep falling into the same temptations are making the same mistakes that mean I'm not forgiven, does that mean I'm not well that number sins from before actually come back to haunt me or only count against me and you know I can't say that I have a good I have a good answer for that for that passage I think is a difficult one at face value my blog post.

For instance, did it, you know, after quite a bit of of study and contemplation. You know it worked. It was an attempt to work through the passage of Moron I 32 or 1032 through 33.

This is a Scripture which is kind of on my list of of other passages that I would like to try to do the hard work of of working through because right now we all just be frank with you, I think. I think it's it's problematic. I think at face value, it it's it's hard for me to reconcile with other things that I'm talking the faith. If one understands it in a certain way and so I would like to further explore it to see if perhaps there something that I'm missing on my end, you know, perhaps a contextual insight or you know other purposes, which might illuminate its meaning because similar to Protestants. I do believe that Scripture you know interpret Scripture or can be used to interpret Scripture.

Iron sharpens iron and so I like to believe that you know that this is a passage with values well but yeah II agree with you that let that burst that freezing particular, I get hung up on that and I don't I don't have the immediate exact answers for, and I still don't do do same. I know that there is a test passage and I think it's one that can lead Latter Day Saints into the kind of hyper legalism that talked about earlier � and her feelings of of of having a lack of assurance of salvation because it kinda makes you feel like. Note if you try to understand it in conjunction with like Mosiah 319, right, you end up asking the question of when is someone not an enemy to God, then you know as is the former sins can return to you if you continue to sin and we will continue to struggle with sin throughout our lives. When you reach a point where you're not no longer an enemy. And I think I really struggle with that is letter to say I know my mom did as well of talk about that another episode and I think that's totally valid to sell the what one of the things that for me when I was coming out of the LDS church was was reading Romans and seeing how Paul rhetorically deals with the arguments of his critics in the for example, Romans 61 resizing the what shall we say then shall we continue in sin, the grace may abound, which you allude to earlier Yellowknife. I read Chuck Swindoll's book the great awakening shortly after leaving in the new, something he said there really crystallized Paul's teaching for me, especially in the in light of some of things. Bruce R said about you easy salvation and grace the kind of thing Chuck Swindoll said the true preaching of the gospel of salvation by grace alone always leads to the possibility of discharge and we know what shall we send all we want. So, as was the possibility that charges being brought against it. There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel of salvation than this, that some people might misunderstand and miss interpreted to mean that it really amounts to this that because you are saved by grace alone. It does not matter at all what you do, you can go on sinning is much as you like, because it will rebound rebound all the more to glory, to the glory of grace, that is a very good test of gospel preaching my preaching and presentation of the gospel does not expose it to. That misunderstanding, but it is not the gospel. So my question for you out of that is, do you think the obvious plan of salvation taken as a whole. Looking at LDS Scriptures as a whole is liable to new to be misinterpreted my way misinterpreted through the belief that grace allows us to commit sin, you know it in kind of a free reign type tech extent you know III mentioned previously that I've often observed LDS church leaders as being no light overzealously defensive against that line of thinking and often critiquing Protestantism for espousing at times, or at least you know some of its practitioners that might practice in such a way so I don't often see that as the view and Mormonism or or something that you know is is a genuine rest because I often see be the opposite occurring like we've spoken about previously where you know the text. We can take that is extreme of one side of the spectrum, the other side of the spectrum. The other extreme, being hyper, legalism, perfectionism scrupulously. Basically nothing I do is ever good enough. You know incentive be saved by grace, therefore I can do whatever I want. It's I can never do enough to be saved by grace.

Right.

That's the extreme that I see in various Latter Day Saints that at times and Mormonism is is that kind of line of thinking, which III do think is always ultimately mistaken, and I think is is harmful. I people both both of those mindsets are harmful and dangerous because one eyes and she turns into moral relativism, more or less, that you know anything goes, because I'm saved by grace, and the other one that graces on unattainable reality that I can never actually participate in and uniting both of them misunderstand and/or pervert.

The actual gospel of Christ. Now don't get me wrong, I have a son Latter Day Saints to you know maybe there like stupid teenagers or something like that.

There like a man.

I got the atonement you know that's let's party it up great, but I often see that pretty heavily condemned in LDS scripture and especially so from from the pulpit saying that attitudes like that make a mockery of Christ's atonement that day.

Essentially, the preemptive planning to send like you know I'll send now. Repent later that kind of mentality mocks Christ atonement and actually is, there is a danger sin unto itself that can elect preemptive sinning skipper say because you touched on her check question it because you touched on how to ask questions okay alright so I got some beef with what you said about Calvinism earlier. Let's dig non-just kidding. Now in the vehicle discussion for another time, but am Logan also point out to that our Lutheran friends would be feel left out because we mention Arminianism and Calvinism, but Lutherans like to point out that they're not there different family K were right over here okay so we went with this whole discussion is kind of been around the topic of grace.

We kind of gone around that we've we've kind of talked a little bit tangentially, no absurd passages by grace, so it's really dive into it. So how would you view the nature of grace and does. Does God's grace impart forgiveness freely or does grace enable a person to do something in order to receive forgiveness. So the first thing I would say is that within LDS thought, and even within the New Testament as well that I view grace as ultimately indicating or being expression.

God's desire to be in a loving relationship with us and so what I mean by that is that grace is what he extends to us you know on the condition that we enter into a saving relationship with him now, you know, I won't say that graces I always consistently portrayed or defined across Scripture. I think there are various ways in which grace can be talked about you know throughout the LDS standard works sometimes graces is synonymous with the needle. Perhaps like blessing or something like that we all receive blessings from God, but often times, grace plays a very specific role and so teary elegy, and how one is saved to the official Latter Day Saints understanding of grace would be graces the enabling power that God extends to us through which we are able to accomplish more than 03 which we are able to accomplish something that we would not of been able to do when limited to our own efforts.

So in the case of salvation. Grace is what makes salvation possible for us mankind.

Humanity cannot be saved of their own accord. We cannot choose to be perfect. We all of us saying all this fall short of the glory of God.

And so God's grace is what allows us to enter into such a relationship that with him that redemption and salvation become possible That Something so We Talked Earlier about Forgiveness and How There It Seems like There Are Multiple Paths in the Book of Mormon to Receive Forgiveness. Whether It's Crying out to to God or to Christ to Save You As As Was Shown with Elma and Eunice, or Entering This Covenantal Relationship through Baptism Which Is How I Understood Typical You Know a Traditional LDS Theology to Be. That's How You Enter into This Relationship As You Are Explaining to You Enter into This Covenantal Relationship with God.

And That's a Receive Forgiveness so That He Would Understand It and Who Initiates This This This Covenant Is a God That Offers It Provides It for Everyone Equally and Then It's up to Us of Our Own Free Choice to Accept and to Enter into This Covenant or Is It Something That You Know It or Is This Grace Something That Is off so Entrance As Is Is Grace Offered Conditionally upon Entering to This Covenant, or Is This Grace Offered Unilaterally to Everyone Equally. And Then It's Kind of up to Us to Accept His Eco-Distinction Going to Make Your Lesson and I Would Say That God Extends His Grace Equally to All of Us in the Sense That Salvation. It Is Extended to All of the Book Mormon Talked about How All Are like Them to God. All Are Commanded to Come unto Him, Black and White Bond and Free, Male and Female Jew and Gentile.Do You Know All of Us.

Ultimately Will Have the Choice to Be Saved or Not to Enter into This Covenantal Relationship with God so since I Do Believe That the Grace God's Loving Relationship God's Love for Us Is Freely Extended to All of Us. It Is Something That All of Us Have the Opportunity to Accept or Reject. And He Extends That Grace to Us Initially Apart from Anything That We Ourselves Do Nothing We Do Merit I Am Extending That Grace to Us.

We Did Not Burn. We Did Not Do Something First and Then God's like. You Know, You Know, Let Me Extend This to You on the Graces Always Extended and I Believe That We Have the Opportunity to Freely Accept or Reject. We Will Okay and so in Terms of How the Ordinances Going There Back to the Questions and Had Ordinances All Fit in There. Do You See That Is Just Beginning Asked Greater Access to the Atonement of Jesus or Greater Blessings of Eternal Life. Because If We Can Enter This Relationship through God Just to Repentance and Faith in Christ. What Need Is There of the Ordinances and Others. All This Emphasis Placed on Ordinances in Your District.

So How Does That Fit in Well It's a Good Question. So I Want to Go to Paul's Teachings in the New Testament so There's Multiple Modern Schools of Thought or How to Understand All in the Various Terms That He Used Such As Justification by Filter Justification by Grace or Whatever and Dad Wanted a More Recent Schools of Thought Has Come about since I Want to Say but Maybe the 70s or so Popularized by Dilution by the Last Name of I Believe It's Done JP Don or Something like That on This. It's the Idea Now Is Called the New Perspective on Paul and without Basically Argues That Christianity through the Reformation Are Yes James Deep DG Done.

Thank You. Basically That Augustine This Understanding of Grace That Is Prolific for Protestantism Came about Recently Grew, Augustine Was Carried over to the Reformation. No Commented on and Expanded upon by Reaganomics Account Manner Reiterated by Calvin, but That That Paul and His Original Contacts You Know Where It Was Not so Much Talking about a Dichotomy or a Binary of Grace and Works in Which One Saves You, but Rather Talk about a Concept Called Covenantal, No Mizzen, Which Is Essentially That through Christ We Are Able We Are Able to Enter into a Kind of Covenantal Status Where You Know His Grace Is Freely Extended to Us, but Are Active Participation in This Grace Are Our Place in This Covenantal Community Are Status Is Not Merited but Express through Our Are Various Works within Catholicism with Their Understanding the Sacrament You Mentioned Earlier That Day. The Sacraments Themselves Become Vehicles through Which God's Grace Is Able to Be Expressed in Greater Capacity. That's Probably a Similar View That I Would Take with Respect LDS Ordinances That You Know I Don't Look to Baptism Himself in and of Itself, As What Saves Me, You Know, Because Otherwise, like It's It's Really Nothing Not Much Different Than a Bath.

You Know, Unless Unless Your Presbyterian Maybe Meet and Absorb Historical Fact. You Know I Don't Look at These Religious Acts Themselves As Having Power in and of Themselves to Save Me or to Extend Me Grace or to Redeem Me Etc. Etc. Rather, These Are Ways in Which I Express My Covenantal Status As a Participant in Christ's Grace. So Rather Than Be Sources of God's Grace They Become Neat Vehicles to Which I Am Able to Express My Devotion My Covenantal Status or or Relationship with God and in Return You Know There's There's Companies on His and Covenant Promises on His End Are That He Makes As Well so There's This Concept in the Doctrine Covenants Were. Each Line upon Line, Precept upon Precept, but There's Also Language Is Used of Grace upon Grace, Where in Essentially We Exchange Gifts with One Another Week. Same Gifts with God, and That's Indicative of a of a Loving Covenantal Relationship and I Actually Do Agree with the New Perspective on Paul School That Views of Paul When Talking about Grace or Karis in the Ancient Greek As Referring to This Tiny Relationship in the Ancient World Where There Is Essentially like. It's like a Patron Donor Relationship Where Individual Be the Patron Receives a Gift Unmerited Know by Someone It's Interested in Supporting Them, and in Return You Know There's Just There's a New Relationship That's Formed between the Two of Them That Is Expressed through the Continual Exchange of Gift Giving or Veto Various Other Forms of Moderation. Anyways, I Wish I Could Articulate All That More Clearly, but Latter Day Saints At Least Those in the Academic Community Are Theologians. I Tend to Be Very Inclined Towards the New Perspective on Paul and Find It Very Compatible or Resonating with with LDS Thought Because It Is a Couple Things. It Talks A Lot about Covenant and Whatnot but It Does Purport to Strike at an Earlier Understanding of Grace. Justification and Sanctification.

All These Things That That Paul Taught That Eventually Were Misunderstood or Corrected or Forgotten. Through the Course of Christian History and Especially the Reformation Anyways Yeah I Just Recommend to Individuals Listen to It All Look into the New Perspective and Call Yourself Because It Is One of the Various Debated Schools out There but That Said That's Kind of How I See It, so Long so You Might Bring Us up to Us from Producing Our Stations. As You and I Have Had One.

One Thing I Wanted to Mention Is That View of Covenantal No Mizzen. The That Was Kind of Popularized by Sanders in the Later Lack of Pi by James Donovan and NT Wright.

This Is by No Means a Set in Stone. Understanding That That Was How to Use in the Second Temple Period and Understood Its Materiality Right Is so There's an Article by Douglas Moo and He Says Sometimes Sometime in the Early 80s Exact Is Lost in the Fog of Time. I Foolishly Agreed to Debate Centers on These Issues. At One Point in the Debate Sanders Asked Me Dr. Lou, Have You Read the Entire Mission in Hebrew Know I Replied Too Embarrassed to Admit Just How Much of It I Had Read. Have I Have Said and I Don't Really Think That You Have Much Standing in This Debate. He Was Right. Early Reactions to Sanders Covenant Covenantal Nomadism Were Hindered by a Lack of Expertise in the Jewish Literature.

This Was Gradually Corrected As a Number of the Number of Scholars Conversant with These Jewish Works Were Able to Confirm the Covenantal Nomadism Was Not Quite the Monolithic Sociology, the Sanders Claimed Was Also Unaware of of the Book by LDS Scholar Brent Schmidt, Relational Grace, Not Much of You Read That Particular Book That Touches on What You Were Talking of the Patron Client Relationship and Looking at That I Typed. I Have Some I Do Some Critiques of the Way He's Approaching That What One Is That She Seems to Want to Load the Terms Karis and Persist with Solely Greco-Roman Meanings).

Of Course the Greek Terms by Us As You like Is Almost Ignoring the Fact That Paul While He Was Educated Greco-Roman and a Greco-Roman World. She Was a Jewish Pharisee. All Right. And so Any Usage of the Greek Word You Have To Probably Understand He's Translating Terms That He Already Understands in the Jewish Context into Another Language.

All Right. And so He's He's Going to Bring Jewish Concept Contexts Are Concepts into Creek.

For Example, You Know, Karis, and Could Be Understood As a Translation of the Vision Returned Tested Right Old Testament Right so You Think It's Almost Too Much of a Corrected like I Think in and Been Too Much of a Look outside of of the Bible to Try to Understand Those Terms in Purely in the Patron Client Contacts and and and and on Reading Schmidt Mike, My First Thought Was I Wonder How He Handles.

Romans 445 Right Because That Seems to Cause up a Problem for That View on Reserve from the New American Standard Bible, Which Is a Pretty Wooden Translation of the Greek Must Come More Word For Word Than Similar Translations of Verse Four Says Now to the One Who Works, His Wages Are Not Counted As a Gift but As His Due and to the One Who Does Not Work but Believes in Him Who Justifies the Ungodly, His Faith Is Counted As Righteousness.

Schmidt Translates the Passage before the Speculator Commercial Gain Comes through Taking on Debt, Not through Making Reciprocal Covenants, but for Someone Who Is at Leisure Who Trusts the One Jesus Making the Ungodly. Just His Faith Counts As Righteousness Is What Is Done There Is Taken. His Understanding of Karis and Pestis As This Patron Client Relationship Right and That Is Loaded up. Romans 445 with with More of a Paraphrase, Forcing His Understanding of Karis and Pestis into It, Rather Than Being Faithful to the Text in Greek As It Reads, in a Completely Changes the Meaning of What Paul Is Saying There Were from Paul's Argument There Is That Grace Doesn't Come to Sinners As Payment That Is Due, but As a Gift That's Freely Giving Given and Know What the Illustration, the Paul Uses Their Romans for to Make That Point Is Not a Greco-Roman One Goes Back to David Wright and Is That in the Blessing of of the One to Whom God Counts Righteousness Apart from Works so Do Not and NT Wright Who Is One of the Foremost Proponents of the New Perspective on Paul Translates Romans 445 Is Schmidt Does.

So I See What LDS Scholars Are Trying to Do There and in Trying to Make Use of the New Perspective, but I Think It's a Think There's Something a Little Bit Too Far Out Of the, the, the Principle That That You Mentioned Earlier Were Scripture Interprets Scripture Single Scope Law. I Don't Believe Perspective on Paul Is Completely Compatible with Contemporary LDS Theology.

I Have Seen Various LDS Epidemics Are Theologians Argue or At Least Align Themselves with the New Perspective on Paul. With Respect to the New Testament and Then He'll Perhaps Talk about How That Might Inform or Relate to the Book of Morning or How You Know, We Might Be Able to Adopt Some of Those Metaphors or Paradigms at the State of Grace, but I Certainly Don't Want to, You Know Claim That Either the New Perspective on Paul and Frankly Pauline Theology Is As Presented in the New Testament Is Going to Be Consistently Present or Even Compatible with Other Verses of of LDS Scripture Will Because I Do Believe That There Are Differences There so You Know I'm Certainly Open to You.

Note Various Verses on It Being Challenged. I Haven't Read Directional Actually, I Well I Did Read an Article of His Earlier Today but It Was Only with Respect to Grace in the Book of Mormon. I Haven't Read His Book Relational Grace.

But You Know I'm Certainly I Read A Few Criticisms of the New Perspective on Paul. So It Does Seem That the Wall There May Be Merit in Certain Circumstances. It's Not Uncontroversial or Not without Its Share of Challenges Order Challengers Right Some.

I'm Certainly Open to Changing My Mind on the Subject Is a Love Reading and to Write A Lot from Him Memorable. Many of His Books. You Definitely Always a Proponent of the Light As to Which He Returned with a Fresh Perspective on Paul. Rather Than New Perspective but Definitely Holds to Know That That Salvation Comes through through Grace Alone through Faith Alone so Typical of Reformist Reformer Reformation Principles so You Know I Just Think Some of the Ways That I've Seen LDS Scholars in an Apology. Someone Try to Use of the New Perspective I Fingered As You Mentioned, Probably Inconsistent Both with Biblical Thought and Traditional Letters. I Thought so and I Think There Certainly Open to Critique Their Because You Know I Mainstream Christianity Is by No Means the Native Language of Mormonism W Similar Terms What so, for Instance, I Often Disappointed Are Not Fully in Agreement with Popular LDS Usage of like Patristic Ratings. For Example, You Know, Sometimes I Think They Might Be a Bit Too Quick to Adopt Certain Arguments That Actually Misused Certain Materials or Misrepresents or I Know There Is, It Certainly Not without Its Problems so I Appreciate You Pointing out Where You Might Take Issue Order for Difference with You. I Want to Ask You Something to the Mentioned the See A Lot Of Your LDS Counterparts, Trying to Fit the New Perspective on Paul into the Book of Mormon and I Was Wondering That in Your Opinion, You Think That Neophyte Culture like They Would've Understood That at All. In That Way.

So Only We Assume That the New Perspective on Paul Is Either Something That Can Be Historically Traced to Preexilic Israel, Which Is You Know Where the Neophytes Descend from, or Unless Someone Seems That That Same Theology Is Later Replicated over or Revealed through Divine Revelation or Something like That. Throughout the Book of Mormon. Otherwise, You Know, Historically, I Don't Believe That It's It Would Be Realistic.

Assuming That Someone Holds to a Historical Book of Mormon. You Know That in Utah throughout the Thousand Years of the Book of Mormon's Narrative That the Neophytes Are Going to Replicate Greco-Roman Plans Understanding Is of Karis Right so You Know Again That's That's Where I Would Want LDS Scholars to Be Careful about How They Portray the Usage of It so More Comfortable about Talking with Parallels in Making Claims That There Is a One-To-One Equivalence. Okay I Appreciate That That's That's Kind of How I Was Viewing It As Well, That Didn't Really Make Sense.

You Know Some of the Passages in the Book of Mormon Do Have A Lot Of Love Parallel to What You Read in the New Testament, and I Think We Talked about Some of Those Tonight but Yeah Just Doesn't Make Sense to Me to Apply Those Same Note That Same Perspective to Become More and Has To Be Viewed As Is Completely Different.

Yes RA so I Think Really Talked about, Your View of Grace in the Previous Question, so I Think We Could Skip Number Was Attend so We Could Just Go to 11 If That Works for You. Yes, so Romans Chapter 3 Verse 24 Says That Believers Have Been Justified Freely by His Grace.

So How Would You Understand the Teaching That Justification Comes Freely, so the Translation That I'm Using Is the New Revised Standard Version of the HarperCollins Bible Study Bible Says They Are Now Justified by His Grace As a Gift through the Redemption That Is in Christ Jesus, so Freely As a Grid As a Gift.

I Think Those Are Probably Pretty Pretty Parallel or Compatible Here and in Many but in Terms of in Terms of Justification I Would Understand That I Would Probably Have To Look at What Paul Is Saying Here and the Rest the Context. So Let's Just Backtrack a Little Bit Also Started Verse 21 but Now Apart from the Law the Righteousness of God Has Been Disclosed and Is Attested by the Law and the Prophets, the Righteousness of God through Faith in Jesus Christ for All Who Believe.

There Is No Distinction, since All Have Sinned and Fall Short of the Glory of God There Now Justified by His Grace As a Gift through the Redemption That Is in Christ Jesus, Whom God Put Forward As a Sacrifice of Atonement by His Blood Affected through Faith.

Yeah, I Think This Raises a Good Question.

That Certainly Has Influence within No Plays a Big Role within Reformed Thought Question of Evil When He Saw the Justification Occurred and Is Justification Contingent on Anything on Our Part. You Know I Certainly Know Various Protestants to Would You Justification As You Essentially Know God Chooses to Justify You and You Know You Are Justified and Then You Are Regenerated, Sanctified, Redeemed, Bergen Forgiven Etc. Etc. We Have To Take More More Time to Think about That Passage Because I Think at Face Value, It Certainly Lends Itself to the Idea That Justification Is Not Merited on Anything on Our Part. You Know If I'm Looking at It for the Perspective of the Perspective on Paul. You Know, This Idea of Gift Giving Alert or Exchanges That I Tend to Feel More Comfortable with Their but Going outside of It Going outside That Perspective, It II Would Say at Face Value, It Probably Lends Itself More Easily to Brooklyn's Thought Particularly in calvinist Thought, Which Views Justification and Salvation Is Something That Occurs to Us through the Will of God, but Not As a Result of Our Own Will or Our Own Actions. I Do Know You Guys and When Asked Hello How You Interpret Better How You Understand Not Sure First Christian Justification. Yeah, I Think One Night When I Think about Justification. I Think of When Martin Luther Was Going through. You Know He Was Roman Catholic and He and I Can See a Little Bit of You and Him Are Able to Him and You Have Legos Because He Knew He Would. His Whole Idea Was at Fontes Back to the Sources He Went Back to Scriptures on ICU with You When You Disagree with Certain Things in LDS Theology You Want to Go Back to the Book of Mormon Right You Want to. Can I Go Back to the Sources and Figure out the Algae from There We Can to Get past A Lot Of the Traditions so When Paul Went to Scripture You Know to Basically Back Then the Standard Was the Latin Vulgate so in When Then He Read That Passage in Latin, Which Should Become the Standard Text. It Was Just Difficult RA Which Is a Way to Translate That Is Is down at Him Is Where We Get Justification Basically Medical but but It Wasn't Something That Was a Dark Declaration. So When He Went to the Original Greek. He Think It's Stuck. I Was Singing I Believe Is That Is There Agree, I'm Not a Greek Scholar and IPad Is Great but It Is This Idea That It's Something That's Declared It As Very Judicial Declaration of Very, Very Likely, like You've Been Talking about You Know That Has Us Very Litigious Kind of Terminology Where It's Something That the Judge Declares upon Somebody You Declared Them to Be Righteous so We See That As Happening at the Point of When You Exercise Faith, Repentance You Trust the Lord Jesus Alone to Save You at That Point, God Freely Justifies You. He Declares He Was Righteous. This Is an External Declaration. The Person Still Remains a Sinner. They're Not Completely Wash Their Sins Because That's the Nature of Renal Go Back to Roman Seven Paul He Laments No Wretched Man That I Am Who Can Save Me from This This Body of Sin or Body of Death.

We Still Have That with Us but God Changes Us the Give Us a New Nature in Your Heart, and He Declares Us Righteous Than in Their but It Doesn't Mean That We and Ourselves Apart from Christ Our Righteous so Really That's That's the Point at Which God Justifies Us. Maybe the Other to His the Other Two Michael Polly Can Fill the Gaps Right Might've Messed up on the Proponent of Forensic Justification. This Is Matthew Was Referring to Process Is an External Judgment of God Is Is Not Guilty for the Center Because of the Blood of Christ and and What Paul Says about That Is That We We Have Peace with God Now Right and I See Heaven Is in Conflict with Some of the Passages from, Say, like the Doctrine and Covenants We Covered Earlier Right Where Former Sins Could Return to You or Were You or Your Your Ultimate Forgiveness Is Based on Your Keeping of the Commandments Which Which We All, I Think All Four of Us into Agree This Is Impossible, Perfectly so Jack, That's How I Understand It, Yeah. And I Agree with Paul in Matthew As You Know, Jackson, I Came to Believe in Forensic Righteousness from the Book of Mormon First. The Other Point I Think You and I Really Can't Believe That Christ's Righteousness Is Imputed Lesson. There Are Several Verses There That Help Me to to See That and I Found Parallels in the in the New Testament and One of the Big Ones You Probably This to Be a Surprise. The Night You Know Me Using the of the Book of Mormon Here. The First Nephi, Three, and for the Just the Story of Laban.

For Instance, the Other Trying to Get the Plates from Him and Their Best Efforts Fall Short Right They Bring All of Their Gold. All of the Riches and It Doesn't Have Any Effect You Know and Then Nephi Goes Hand in and Laban Is Lying There Unconscious on the Street and Is Telling Laban's a Type of Christ, Almost Because He Has To Die in Order for This Goal to Be Achieved If Anyone Says It's Better That One Man Should Perish. Not a Whole Nation Should Dwindle in Parish and Unbelief Is a Nephi Dons His Clothes. He Puts Them on and Then Laban Servant Magically Believes That He Is Laban and I Think Many Any Protestant Would Read This and Say That Is Imputed Righteousness. The Symbolism Is so so Start on That a Minute. It's so Obvious Because It's What We Say All the Time. You Know Christ Puts His Righteousness on Us like a Cloak to Cover Our Sins, and Then We Go to Judgment Day, God Looks at Us, but We Really Seizes Christ's Righteousness and in That Story Just Seems to Really Really Show That but That's That's Exactly What I've Come to Believe at This Point That Christ's Entire Life. I Had to Come Put It in in the Language of of a Latter-Day St. Right That Christ's Entire Life Was Actually a Vicarious Ordinance on Our Behalf, so Christ Was Perfectly Obedient and Then on the Cross That Was Given to Us Vicariously and All We Have To Do Is Accept It. So That's That's How I View Justification at This Point, You Know That Once We Accept Christ's Righteousness Really Is No Need for Us to Do Anything Else in the Same Sense That You Know If You Go and Get Baptized for Somebody in the Temple. All They Have To Do Is Accept It and That's It. They Don't Have To Go and Get Baptized Later or Anything Because They've Already Received It Vicariously through Somebody Else Who Was Righteous on Their Behalf and so I Do See A Lot Of Those Parallels and That's with Initiated My My Embracing of of Imputation and Evangelical Doctrine. I Appreciate You Sharing That You Brought up How Legal Functions and Maybe Is like a Type of Christ, or Something like That When You Mentioned the Passage That Is Better That One Man Should Person One Rancher Died in the Patient Care Should Dwindle in Unbelief or Whatever You Have Seen This before, but That's Actually Paralleling John 1150 Were Caiaphas Says regarding Jesus, You Do Not Understand That It Is Better for You to Have One Man Die for the People That Tap the Whole Nation Destroyed so It Seems like the Book of Mormon As Far As Intertextuality Goes Does Make Some Kind of Connection As Well. I Just Thought That Was Interesting but Should Not, but I Appreciate All of You Clarifying Your Views on That.

I Just a Follow-Up Question That I Have Great Just to Make Sure That I'm Understanding You Correctly Sent from Your Perspective, the Moment of Justification Does Not Occur before or after the Individual Repenting of Their Sins like like This One Is One Justifying and I Met Justification Causes Them to Recognize the State of Their Sin and Their Need to Repent and Be Forgiven, so I Depends a Little Bit on How Your Defining Repentance Because I Know That Can Be Different, but I Would Say the Coming to Faith and in the Trusting Christ with Your Salvation Is Repentance and That Moment You Know It Says in Romans Four, You Know That We Then Righteousness Will Be Imputed Us When We Believe in the One Who Raised Jesus from the Dead, and Is Associated with Belief in James Chapter 2 As Well with the Way Puts the Scripture from Genesis Saying That Abraham Believed God, and It Was Counted to Him As Righteousness. So Again, Imputation Is Is Associated with Belief in These Verses, so I Believe That We Are Saved While We Were Still Sinners Feel Christ Died for Us Will We Were yet Sinners, but after That There Is a Process of Sanctification That Takes Hold and Then We Become, We Begin to Come Closer to Christ, but They Were Ever Going to Stop Being Sinners. You Know, but There Is Going to Be an Outward Change in Our Life and That's What James Chapter 2 Is All about You Noticing the There Are Going to Be Works That Should Follow You If You Believe He Says You Know, Show Me Your Faith without Works Right, It's a Pretty Strong Challenges. This Will Show You My Faith by My Works Such As the Works of the Frugal True Believer Absolutely Get a Minute I Was Gonna Say Well It Just Is with Faith.

There Must Come Good Works of Follow. You Can Really Have Faith without Repentance.

So If There There so Inextricably Linked. There's A Lot Of Debate As Well. Which Comes First, Repentance or Faith or Notice Are They Logically Ordered or Is It Temporally Ordered but I Think I Think We Try to Make Things Too Complicated Sometimes It's When You Turn to Christ after Turn Away from Your Sins so You You Can't Try to Cling to Christ As Your Savior While Still Grasping on Your Sins. And I Think That's Kinda What You're Explaining Earlier about Study Can Be Saved in Your Sins Going in Your Send It to Be Saved from Your Sins and in Your View, Your Expanding the after Repent, You Can't Come to Christ without Repentance. Suddenly, I Think I Think That's What A Lot Of Christians See That As Some Try to Tie Repentance into Works. You Know like I've Got a Really Just Don't Knuckle down and I Can Stop Sinning All the Time. That's Repentance Is but I Think That Is That's That's the Biblical View of Technically Aware of What Were Talking about. Upon Conversion Is When an Identical Quick Thinking Yes I Guess I Was Is Kind of like a Typical Theological Three-Step Process Renders Regeneration Where Were God Gives Us Enter a New Heart Right That Leads to a Desire to Love God and Follow God and Come to Him and so You That Follows.

What Follows from That New Heart Is You Know Repentance the Changing of Mind Right and Then Following from As Justification. The Forensic Declaration That the Sinner Is Not Guilty Because of the Blood of Christ Is Applied to Him or Her Right and Then Following from That Sanctification. Write a Lifelong Process of the Power of God Changing the Center into the Mind and Will and and an Image of Christ). Current so Did We Want to Do This Last Question Are Actually Just Wrap It up I Probably Wrapping It up As This One Seems like It Would Take to Unpacking What You Know about This Soul You Know I Really Enjoyed This Conversation.

I Really Enjoyed the Candor with Respect and Just Open a Second Able to Have a Meeting You Know I Think We Can All Agree That This Totally Beats Any Online Conversation, You Know, Statements like I Don't Know. I Don't Know Why We All Insist on the Training to the Back and Forth through Stuff like That. While I Do Enjoy Questions. But Yeah, I Really Appreciate That the Space That You Guys a Greater Knowledge to Welcome Me into You Die. I like the Questions You Gave Me Good Things to Think about so I I'd Love to Know Return. If You Guys Are Interested in You Know Talk about Some Other Staff Just to That. I Just Appreciate the Opportunity on the Fact That the Difficult to Answer Questions Just Come on the Fly and Ends Will Also Cushion the Fact That He Put Some Costs.

Turnabout Is Fair Play. So Appreciate That. And You As You As You Come to Think about Those Passages from Dr. Come and See the Steam Engine Specifically Wanted to Dig into the Tough Passage of Document from City to 6010. This Would Encourage You to Think about, You Know What Paul Says in Romans 81 Know There Is Now the Therefore No Condemnation for Those Who Are in Christ Jesus and Try to Try to Wrestle with That and Reconcile How That Can Fit with the Idea of the Former since Returning to the End of Next Time You Come on Here Will Make Sure That You Have Some Some Tough Questions Prepared for Us As Well and That I'm Looking for to the Royal Rumble Reviewed Team up against Me. The Calvinist Analogy Forward and That It's Going to Be Invested in Matthew Know This Stuff Would Be Pretty Matched.

I Got It Yesterday. Romans Nine and I Got Kidnapped You Wins and It Was Decreed, Is Doing Well.

Well I Will Say That You Know Even Though Times, No Exchange, No Messages or Were Engaged Each Other Online and Conversation. Sometimes I Think and Maybe Some Good Listeners to Cesium Facebook Groups to, You Know, Forget Kind of What What Were Ideally Therefore You Know Ideally I Would Hope That All of Us Are Sincerely Trying to Work through These Questions, You Know, Wrestle with the Honest Challenges of Faith and and Seek after God, to the Best of Our Abilities, and All I Can Say That the That's That's Something That I'm Interested in Doing throughout My Life. Even Though I Was Raised in Both an Evangelical and Mormon Context and Have since You Know Kind of Become More Comfortable with the Latter Day St. Identity. I'll Type It by No Means Decided to, You Know, Can I Stop Searching Her Stop Trying to Figure These Things out. You Know I Don't Attend My Mom's Church Anymore but I Still Engage Christians Very Often Been Attending Reformed Bible Study for the past Two Semesters and I Do Know Just Various Things like That Because You Know I Don't I Don't Think by No Means I'm Done with My Journey of Us Are so I Think the Best We Can Do the Days to Just Try to Remain Open. Try to Remain Not Just Drawn Towards What We Find to Be True You Know and Really See So You Know I Appreciate That the Venue I Best Where We Can Explore These Things Together. You Know Where I Don't Necessarily Feel Pressured or like Attacked Anything like That Because You Know I Think We Can All Agree That at the End of the Day It's All in God's Hands Now That He Has Journeys for All of Us. And so I I like It When We Can Support Each Other, You Know, through.through That Common Journey Rather Than No Feeling like We Have To Be Opposed to One Another or or Anything like That so Because Your Good Group of Dudes, I Appreciate It. So This Will Be Will We Aim to Do with Our Podcasts Is to Provide a Respectful Space Conversation. Again, Thank You for Coming on Your Genuineness and Your Openness to Seek and to Your Dedication to Respectful Dialogue Has Always Stood out to Me. So Thank You for the Welcome Effinger, Appreciate It Alright Well Let Me Just Add One Last Thing, I Think That If Michael's Done Anything Today at with His Jokes. This Was a Certain Book of Audits.

Too Bad Michael Convinced Me of the Reality of Total Depravity by His Jokes Just on This One. He's Really Rumble for Appreciate Guys Talking on the Crime, and Good Night Good Night