*** NO DM'S*** Just another person dealing with the daily grind, and seeking faith and comfort where it can be found. Proud LDS - Think Celestial!
United States
Joined November 2018
- Tweets1.2K
- Following1.8K
- Followers1.4K
- Likes751
Pinned Tweet
Hey guys. I have a friend who is desperately in need right now. She's just left her abuser, and any help you could give is appreciated.
I am a good friend of hers and I swear this is true. I had permission to post this.
Please share this to help out.
givesendgo.com/help-out-a-do…
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
Scientists at the Library of Congress recently looked under a microscope at Thomas Jefferson’s original draft of the Declaration of Independence.
Using spectral imaging, they found what was originally written underneath: "our fellow subjects."
Jefferson literally scraped that word away and wrote "citizens" right on top of it.
This is the exact moment the American mindset shifted.
A subject is ruled by a government or a king. A subject is subservient.
A citizen is a free individual with inherent rights, answering to no one.
Today I believe our government thinks we are once again subjects. It’s time to rewrite that once again. 🇺🇸
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
A female friend once told me something that stuck with me.
She said she had dated a guy who was objectively perfect.
Tall.
Handsome.
Successful.
Always paid.
Always planned dates.
On paper he was everything.
But one day they went out for dinner and she accidentally spilled water on herself.
Before she could react, the guy laughed and said,
“Wow, you’re really clumsy.”
Nothing terrible.
Nothing cruel.
But she said she suddenly felt embarrassed instead of safe.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
My son was reading a Nathan Hale graphic novel about the revolution, and he slammed it shut with alarm.
“What’s wrong???” I asked, thinking he had come across something inappropriate.
“This says the British are about to take over Boston, and I haven’t gotten to this part in Liberty’s Kids yet!!” he said. “I think I should stop reading.”
😳 Phew! Can’t have any 250 year old spoilers sneaking up like that. 😂🥹🇺🇸
(But, yes, please clap. The eight-year-old is America-maxxing!!)
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
This is actually a great point.
There is no official LDS equivalent of “How to respond to Evangelicals/Catholics,” because the Church is not primarily an apologetics ministry.
That makes sense if you understand the LDS claim.
The claim is not:
“We have the cleverest interpretation of the Bible.”
The claim is:
“Jesus Christ restored His Church, priesthood authority, covenants, ordinances, apostles, prophets, and additional scripture.”
Those are very different things.
Many Evangelical arguments depend on the assumption that Christianity is ultimately a contest over who can interpret a biblical passage most persuasively.
But Latter-day Saints are not saying, “We won the debate, therefore the Church is true.”
We are saying God acted.
He revealed.
He restored.
He called prophets.
He gave authority.
He brought forth scripture.
So when someone says, “Mormons don’t understand the Bible,” that criticism lands with far less force than they think it does.
We love the Bible. We quote the Bible. We teach from the Bible. We believe the Bible.
But our ultimate claim is not that we defeated Protestantism in a Bible debate.
Our claim is that Jesus Christ still speaks, still calls prophets, still gives authority, and still directs His Church.
And if that claim is true, then the endless “but my pastor says this verse means…” arguments are not the foundation of the conversation.
The real question is much bigger:
Did God restore His Church or not?
lol
I notice there is no @Ch_JesusChrist publication or website about how to respond to Evangs or Catholics. I guess how to argue is a low priority for the Bretheren.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
Evangelical: Mormons believe they’re saved by works.
Latter-day Saint: We believe we’re saved by grace through Jesus Christ.
Evangelical: What about “after all we can do”?
Latter-day Saint: The verse says, “It is by grace that we are saved.”
Evangelical: Right. After all you can do.
Latter-day Saint: Who is doing the saving in the verse?
Evangelical: Grace.
Latter-day Saint: And who does grace come from?
Evangelical: Jesus.
Latter-day Saint: So Jesus saves?
Evangelical: Yes.
Latter-day Saint: Then why do you keep saying we believe works save us?
Evangelical: Because it says “after all we can do.”
Latter-day Saint: Does it say we are saved by all we can do?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Does it say we are saved by grace?
Evangelical: Yes.
Latter-day Saint: Then why are you changing the subject?
Evangelical: Because Mormons obey commandments.
Latter-day Saint: Did Jesus tell people to obey commandments?
Evangelical: Yes.
Latter-day Saint: Did Jesus tell people to repent?
Evangelical: Yes.
Latter-day Saint: Did Jesus tell people to love their neighbors, forgive others, feed the poor, and follow Him?
Evangelical: Yes.
Latter-day Saint: So obeying Jesus means you’re trying to earn salvation?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Then why does it only become “works-based salvation” when Mormons do it?
awkward silence
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
Evangelical: Mormons believe in a different Jesus.
Latter-day Saint: What makes Him a different Jesus?
Evangelical: You believe things about Him that aren’t true.
Latter-day Saint: So if someone believes something false about Jesus, they believe in a different Jesus?
Evangelical: Yes.
Latter-day Saint: Okay. Do Calvinists and Arminians believe exactly the same things about Jesus?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Then do they worship different Jesuses?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Do Baptists and Presbyterians agree on everything Jesus taught?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Different Jesus?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Do Pentecostals and Lutherans agree on spiritual gifts, baptism, salvation, and church authority?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Different Jesus?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Do Catholics and Protestants agree on every doctrine concerning Christ, grace, authority, sacraments, and salvation?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Different Jesus?
Evangelical: No.
Latter-day Saint: Then where is the line?
Because if every doctrinal disagreement creates a different Jesus, Christianity shatters into thousands of different Jesuses.
But if doctrinal disagreement does not automatically create a different Jesus, then merely finding a disagreement with Latter-day Saints doesn’t prove we worship a different Jesus.
There has to be some principle that distinguishes:
* disagreement about Jesus
from
* belief in an entirely different Jesus.
Otherwise the phrase “different Jesus” becomes nothing more than a label we apply to groups we disagree with.
The irony is that most Christians instinctively understand this when talking about other Christians.
They recognize that sincere believers can disagree on many things while still worshipping the same Lord.
The question is why that principle suddenly disappears when the conversation turns to Latter-day Saints.
If Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God, the Savior of the world, who died for our sins and rose again, then we are talking about the same historical person.
After that, the debate is not whether we believe in Jesus.
The debate is which teachings about Jesus are true.
Those are two very different conversations.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
I’ve been learning Spanish on Duolingo for months. MONTHS.. and I have realized I’ve been scammed.
Spanish commentator: 400 words in 5 seconds
Me: elefante
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
“The Saints spent five years building the Nauvoo Temple, and persecution from their neighbors forced them to dedicate it in sections so they could put parts of it to use even before it was finished.
Once that temple was completed, they were privileged to use it for just four months before mobs forced them in 1846 to evacuate the city they’d built up from swampland.
An arsonist burned that temple a few years later.
The Saints would not have access to another completed, fully functioning temple again for thirty-one years, when, in 1877, Brigham Young dedicated a house of the Lord in St. George, Utah.
I point out this bit of history for a reason.
With so many temples available to most of the Latter-day Saints in the world, I worry that we may not fully appreciate their eternal worth.
It’s human nature that we lose sight of the value of things that cost us nothing to acquire or use. I became painfully aware of that tendency in myself in recent years.
Living in Northern Virginia, I would attend the Washington D.C. Temple a few times each year, but I could be dissuaded from making the trip if traffic were heavy or some other inconvenience arose.
Then the Church closed the temple for a multiyear renovation. Suddenly, the closest temple to me was in Philadelphia, a three-hour drive by car. Attending the house of the Lord became an all-day affair.
In the back of my mind I was aware that, compared to traveling the same distance on foot or in a horse-drawn wagon, three hours in a climate-controlled car posed no great inconvenience.
Brigham Young would not have been sympathetic to complaints about having to spend a few hours in freeway traffic.
Early Saints were driven, hounded, arrested, attacked, jailed, and sometimes killed for their beliefs. If the hardest trial we endure to attend the temple is sitting in a car for a few hours, we have no cause to complain.”
“Forty Years” by Mark Henshaw
Preface
We are truly blessed to have access to so many temples around the world! (And for most people, a comfortable way to get there.) All too often we do take this for granted!
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
"Oh you guys think Jesus came to America!? HA! So stupid! What evidence is there for that!?!?"
North America:
Various Indigenous tribes (e.g., some Algonquian, Iroquois, or Pacific Northwest groups) have oral traditions of a "Great White God," pale prophet, or bearded teacher who visited, taught ethics and skills, and departed.
Mesoamerica (Mexico/Central America):
Quetzalcoatl (Aztec/Nahua) or Kukulkan (Maya). Described in later accounts as a tall, white/pale, bearded man in a long robe who brought knowledge (calendar, agriculture, laws), performed miracles, opposed sacrifice in some versions, and departed eastward promising return. Spanish chroniclers and some native post-contact sources emphasize this. He is linked to Venus and resurrection motifs.
Andes/South America:
Viracocha (Inca and earlier Andean cultures). Portrayed as a creator god, white or bearded in Spanish chronicler accounts (e.g., Pedro Cieza de León, Juan de Betanzos), who taught civilization, healed people, and left with a promise to return. Similar figures include Bochica (Chibcha/Muisca in Colombia) and others like Sumé in Brazil.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
David’s reaction to the Ark is one of the funniest moments in scripture.
At first, David is thrilled. He’s finally king over all Israel, yay! Jerusalem is his, and now he’s bringing the Ark of the Covenant into the city. Everything is going according to plan.
Then Uzzah reaches out to steady the Ark.
Dead. ☠️
Immediately. 🪦
David: “Oh, hell no.”
The entire operation comes to a screeching halt!!
The Ark is no longer coming to Jerusalem.
Nope.
The Ark is no longer David’s problem.
The Ark is now Obed-edom’s problem! (Maybe ol’ Obed looked at him funny…)
So they park the Ark at Obed’s house and leave it there while David rethinks every life decision that led to this moment.
Three months later word reaches David:
“Obed is being blessed.” 😅
“His household is prospering.” 💰
“Everything’s going great.” 🎉
David:
“…Wait, what? You mean, it’s bringing good fortune now!”
Suddenly David’s interest returns.
“Alright. Bring it back.”
But this time he’s taking absolutely no chances.
The Ark moves.
One step.
Two steps.
…
Six steps.
Nobody dies. Phew. 😮💨
David:
“STOP! Sacrifice the oxen. Thank the Lord. We made it six whole steps.”
Only after proving that nobody was going to be struck dead does the celebration begin. And then it’s PARTY TIME!
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I applied for my HAM radio license in 2021 (WH6GNA). I did this to support my local ward’s emergency preparedness efforts. A group of us would get on the net once a week to test out our radios, local repeaters, and keep our skills sharp.
Before I got my license I didn’t really think about all the things that have to happen in the background for effective radio communications. I just assumed you could turn the radio on, hit the push-to-talk button, and broadcast. Super simple. I quickly found out my assumption was wrong.
To successfully operate, you need to take lots of things into consideration; transmit and receive frequencies, frequency offset, distance, weather, terrain, repeater type, power input/output, radio type, encryption, proper use of language, line of sight, antenna configurations, sources of signal interference, the list goes on.
And then, only when everything lines up, can you successfully translate your voice into 1’s and 0’s, translate those 1’s and 0’s into particle wave forms, send them to the correct recipient wirelessly, and have the intended recipient receive your message and then respond. All done at close to the speed of light.
This process taught me a lot about prayer and communicating with God. We expect God to answer our prayers. And sometimes we assume that it’s as simple as speaking the words into existence and waiting for a response.
Sometimes it is that simple. And sometimes, we need to look at all the background processes to ensure we’re effectively broadcasting. Are we tuned into the right frequency? Do we have good line of sight? Are we experiencing interference from other sources? Are we broadcasting on the right repeaters? Are we listening or only broadcasting? Do we have enough power output to overcome interference?
God hears and answers prayers. He’s out there, listening to us as we communicate with Him. And sometimes we receive a response, crystal clear and direct. Other times, we’ve got to adjust our setup in order to receive those responses clear and reliably. Because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ we can make those necessary adjustments, and continue to receive clear communication with our Father in Heaven.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
My 4-year-old daughter accidentally explained parenting better than most adults.
The other day we were out for a walk when she suddenly bent down, picked something up off the sidewalk, and started moving it toward her mouth.
Dad instincts kicked in immediately.
Me: "Whoa, nope."
I grabbed it before she could eat whatever mystery object she'd just discovered.
She looked offended.
Daughter: "Why?"
Me: "Because it was on the ground."
Daughter: "So?"
Me: "You don't know where it's been. It's dirty. It probably has germs."
She stared at me for a second like I'd just revealed the secrets of the universe.
Then her eyes got huge.
Daughter: "Daddy..."
Me: "Yeah?"
Daughter: "How do you know all this stuff?"
I won't lie, I enjoyed that question way more than I should have.
Daughter: "You're so smart."
Now, instead of giving a responsible answer, I decided to have a little fun.
Me: "Well, all parents know this stuff."
Daughter: "They do?"
Me: "Yep. It's on the Parent Test."
Daughter: "The Parent Test?"
Me: "Of course. Before they let you become a parent, you have to pass a test. They ask questions about germs, vegetables, bedtime, all that stuff."
She nodded very seriously.
The kind of nod that says this information is being permanently filed away.
We kept walking for a few minutes in silence.
Then suddenly she stopped.
Daughter: "OH!"
Me: "What?"
Daughter: "I get it now!"
Me: "Get what?"
She smiled like she'd just solved a difficult math problem.
Daughter: "If you don't pass the test..."
A dramatic pause.
Daughter: "...you have to be the kid."
I laughed so hard I nearly dropped my keys.
Apparently in her mind there are only two categories of people:
Those who passed the Parent Test...
...and everyone else. 😂
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
On this day in 1943, FDR signed a law that permanently changed your relationship with your own paycheck. You just never noticed, which was entirely the point.
Before the Current Tax Payment Act of 1943, Americans paid their income taxes in one lump sum. Every year, you calculated what you owed and wrote a single check to the government. You felt every dollar. You knew exactly how much the government was taking.
The 1942 wartime revenue act suddenly expanded the income tax to cover millions of working-class Americans who had never paid it before. The government desperately needed revenue. But they had a problem: how do you get people to pay a new, much larger tax without causing a revolt?
A Macy's executive named Beardsley Ruml came up with the answer. Withhold it before workers ever see it. Take it out of the paycheck automatically. Make the number on the check the only number that feels real.
It worked. The psychology was perfect. People don't grieve money they never held. The government went from collecting taxes from 7 million Americans to 60 million, almost overnight, with barely any public resistance.
They also quietly canceled 75% of what was owed from the prior year to smooth the transition. A one-time tax amnesty that almost no one remembers happened.
Economists and historians have noted for decades that withholding is a primary reason Americans never developed the visceral anti-tax anger common in countries where people write the check themselves.
You were supposed to notice. They made sure you wouldn't.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
“Every faithful Methodist that has lived up to, and faithfully fulfilled the requirements of his religion, according to the best light he had, doing good to all, and evil to none; injuring no person upon the earth, honoring his God as far as he knows, will have as great a heaven as he ever anticipated in the flesh, and far greater. Every Presbyterian, and every Quaker, and every Baptist, and every Roman Catholic member, every reformer of whatever class or grade, that lives according to the best light they have, and never have had an opportunity of receiving a greater light than the one in their possession, will have and enjoy all they live for.” - Brigham Young
God loves ALL His children. God is fair. God is good.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
my mom called on friday night and asked if she could take my 5-year-old daughter to the park on saturday morning at 10 a.m. just for a "quick swing session."
she explicitly told me, "make sure you stay home and relax, you look so tired."
i didn't sleep at all that night because the baby was teething, so i was literally crying tears of gratitude.
my husband and i spent the morning sleeping in, eating cold pizza in bed, and completely resetting our sanity.
around 2:00 p.m., i realized they’d been gone for four hours. there wasn't a set return time, but the park is five minutes away.
i called my mom to ask if i should come pick her up.
the phone rings, and all i hear in the background is massive cinematic bass, popcorn crunching, and loud music.
my mom whispers: "we aren't at the park. we're at the movie theater watching the new Disney release.
she wanted a large Icee so we got one. don't call me again, we're going to the toy store after this. go watch a show or something. bye."
she literally didn't even ask permission.
turns out she had a full-day itinerary planned since wednesday and deliberately lied about the park just so i wouldn't "interfere with their girl's day."
i’m currently sitting on the couch while my kid is getting completely hyped up on sugar and plastic by a woman who used to ground me for breathing too loud.
grandparents are a completely different breed of criminal.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
I've waited a few days to say anything about the recent Department of War (DoW) decision to not list The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a Christian religion. I wanted to make sure my opinion wasn't being driven by an emotional response.
I think it's a good thing. Initially, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was listed as a Protestant Christian religion when it was recognized by the US Military. The way that religions are listed have a few second and third order of effects, specifically manning requirements for Chaplains and Chaplain assistants across the force.
When The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was listed as a Protestant Christian religion then, from the DoW standpoint, any Protestant Chaplain can meet the religious needs of LDS Service members. When it comes to manning requirements, an LDS Chaplain and a Protestant Chaplain become interchangeable, meaning that if an LDS service member is in an area that has the required number of Protestant Chaplains then there is no need and potentially no positions for LDS Chaplains at that location. Even if the majority of Christian-affiliated service members are LDS, as far as the DoW is concerned, their religious needs are being met by the Chaplains already assigned to that location.
Listing the LDS Church as a non-Christian religion means that the DoW now needs to ensure that they have a minimum number of LDS Chaplains among their ranks to meet specific religious needs. This opens up opportunities for promotion and advancement for LDS Chaplains currently serving, as well as a potential increased need for LDS Chaplains across the force.
Plus, and this is my opinion, Church leadership probably also had a say in how the LDS Church was listed by the DoW. The Government would have consulted Salt Lake, just like they would have consulted the Vatican and major Protestant associations, in ensuring their religion was accurately listed with the DoW. Otherwise it opens the government and DoW to lawsuits related to religious freedoms.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
The problem with your argument is that you simply assume the very thing you're trying to prove.
You define "Christian" as "someone who accepts the Nicene Creed, post-apostolic tradition, and your particular understanding of the Trinity." Then you point out that Latter-day Saints don't accept those things and conclude they aren't Christian.
That's not an argument. That's circular reasoning.
The apostles never recited the Nicene Creed. Peter never taught *homoousios*. Paul never told converts they had to affirm fourth-century metaphysical definitions before they could be called Christians.
What did they preach? Faith in Jesus Christ as the divine Son of God, His atoning death, His resurrection, repentance, baptism, and discipleship.
Latter-day Saints affirm every one of those things.
You say Christianity is the faith of the "One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church." Fine. Now demonstrate from Scripture that this institution could never fall into apostasy, corruption, doctrinal confusion, or loss of authority. Because the New Testament repeatedly warns about exactly those dangers.
You appeal to tradition. Latter-day Saints appeal to prophets and revelation. The real question is whether God still speaks. If He does, your argument collapses.
You say LDS theology teaches a "different God." Yet the New Testament consistently depicts the Father and Son as distinct persons. Jesus prays to the Father. The Father speaks to the Son. Stephen sees Jesus standing at the right hand of God. The text says what it says.
What's actually happening here is that you've elevated later creedal interpretations above the plain biblical text and then declared anyone who disagrees "not Christian."
And let's be honest: if acceptance of fourth-century councils is what makes someone Christian, then Christianity isn't being defined by Christ and His apostles. It's being defined by bishops centuries later.
Latter-day Saints worship Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. We pray in His name. We trust in His atonement. We follow His teachings. We covenant to take His name upon us.
You are free to argue that our theology is wrong.
What you are not free to do is redefine Christianity so narrowly that devotion to Jesus Christ suddenly becomes irrelevant while allegiance to post-biblical creeds becomes the determining factor.
Samantha Gillenson retweeted
Around 1,950 years ago in Pompeii, a weaver named Successus fell in love with a barmaid named Iris.
She did not love him back.
We know this because his rival, a man named Severus, decided to humiliate him publicly. He grabbed something sharp and carved this into a wall for the whole city to read:
"Successus the weaver loves the innkeeper's slave girl named Iris. She does not care about him at all. But he begs her to have pity on him. His rival wrote this. Goodbye."
Imagine walking to work and seeing that with your name on it.
Successus found it. And instead of letting it go, he carved his reply directly underneath:
"Envious one, why do you get in the way? Yield to a man who is better looking and being treated very unfairly."
Severus came back one more time to end it:
"I have spoken. I have written. You love Iris, but she does not love you."
Then, in 79 AD, Vesuvius erupted and buried the wall, the tavern, and the entire argument under 20 feet of ash. The thread was frozen mid-beef for almost two millennia until archaeologists dug it up and translated it.
We will never know who got the girl. We do not even know if any of the three survived.
Pompeii has over 11,000 of these inscriptions. Bar reviews. Bragging. Bad poetry. A bakery wall that says "Welcome, hungry people." Two guys fighting over a girl in the comments.
The technology changes. We do not.
