Aaron Shafovaloff's Comments

Mormon Coffee : One argument that I no longer use against the âroyal line of sinless saviorsâ

Thu, 31 Mar 2011 05:37:19 +0000

Thanks, sister.

Mormon Coffee : One argument that I no longer use against the âroyal line of sinless saviorsâ

Tue, 29 Mar 2011 06:08:52 +0000

Mike, thanks for the comment. The standard (although not uniform) evangelical position is that children who die go to heaven. Also, notice that I made zero appeal in my original post to the idea of something being "official" doctrine. I don't buy the idea that evangelical engagement of Mormonism has to be limited to that which is considered "official." I have a forthcoming blog post on my reasoning for this. For now you can read my related article on the matter: http://mrm.org/official-doctrine Grace and peace, Aaron

Mormon Coffee : The Christ of Mormonism vs. the Christ of the Bible

Mon, 14 Mar 2011 23:33:41 +0000

Violet, perhaps you're thinking about what Mormons have said about the Father. Very, very rarely do I ever hear a Mormon say they believe Jesus perhaps sinned. That Jesus has never sinned (in both pre-mortality and mortality, etc.) is standard belief in Mormonism.

Mormon Coffee : Do you want to know the truth more than you want Mormonism to be true?

Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:09:14 +0000

f_melo, God has been so good to you. That you wanted to be free from the lies, such a miracle of the Spirit. My post obviously has more relevance to those who don't have the kind of resolve that you had. "I asked a family member once - if the church is false, would you want to know? He answered only after i die." That is chilling. Love you brother, in Jesus, Aaron

Mormon Coffee : Do you want to know the truth more than you want Mormonism to be true?

Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:05:36 +0000

"speaking with ultimacy", I meant

Mormon Coffee : Do you want to know the truth more than you want Mormonism to be true?

Tue, 15 Feb 2011 07:10:27 +0000

In the end, f_melo, you're right that there is no hope in Mormonism. It will only bring deathly sorrow and disappointment. But when I wrote,

"Mormonism has a lot of truth in it, and it has some beautiful and moral things about it that reflect many attributes of Jesus. It provides a lot of meaning and structure, hope and direction."

... I was not spending with ultimacy. Rather, for Mormons this is still the common way they experience and know their religion. And when standing on the precipice of uncertainty, not convinced that they should be so committed to pursuing truth when it might mean having to reject Mormonism, the good they see in their religion feels real to them. I want them to consider the good they have in their religion, and yet ask themselves frankly if they think such good (as they know it) is enough to justify turning down a high-stakes search for truth. To ask themselves if they find Jesus more precious than all the preciousness they have known in Mormonism. When a person finds Jesus, everything else becomes as rubbish. The precious half-truths, known once as full-truths, become better known as filthy lies. Or even in some cases, are rightly seen as shadowy stepping stones that God ordained for the way to help a person along. But I think it's important for us to look Mormons in the eye and acknowledge that they really have known good in their religion. I think that kind of honest admission puts us on a much better ground to more directly and starkly address the lies and evil Mormonism plagues people with. Knowing how precious a person's treasure is to them puts us on a better ground to essentially say, "Even so, there is greater treasure in Jesus." Ultimately, for hope and direction and meaning and structure and beauty and morality and comprehensive truth and Truth himself, one must come to the real Jesus.

Mormon Coffee : God Never Sinned Feature Video Launched on YouTube

Fri, 4 Feb 2011 19:57:10 +0000

One minute after achieving full exaltation and Godhood, do you think it would be appropriate to say of yourself, "I have been the Almighty God, the Holy of Holies, the Most High, unchangeably so from all eternity to all eternity"? That'd be like winning the Super Bowl, and then in your after-game speech saying, "I have always been a Super Bowl champion, from all eternity to all eternity... And now I'm going to Disney Land."

Mormon Coffee : Whoops.

Mon, 24 Jan 2011 02:30:31 +0000

Sharon, sorry, that might have been my fault. I often schedule ready posts at random future dates, assuming they'll be re-scheduled.

Mormon Coffee : I Agree With Moroni 8:18 -- Do Mormons?

Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:39:03 +0000

I just added Keith Walker's video and quote to the post: “The only way to reconcile the 1844 Joseph Smith with the 1830 Joseph Smith is if the definition of ‘unchangeable’ has changed.” (Keith Walker)

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Sun, 26 Dec 2010 02:56:24 +0000

On a related note, even the entry for "virgin" at LDS.org's "Guide to the Scriptures" says, "A man or woman of marriageable age who has never had sexual intercourse. In the scriptures, a virgin may represent someone who is morally clean (Rev. 14:4)." Mormons in general seem to already understand that the New Testament concept of "virgin" usually entails someone not yet having had sexual intercourse. Even Pratt & McConkie's attempt at redefinition (not having had sex with a mortal man) betrays this underlying assumption.

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Sun, 26 Dec 2010 02:52:20 +0000

I should qualify: all the main quotes by leaders concerning the not-so-virgin birth were before actual human artificial insemination was developed. But Mike's point is well taken: leaders already had access to a generic knowledge of artificial insemination, and could have by analogy appealed to this as a mechanism. But instead they made painstaking appeals to the process as "literal", non-figurative, requiring "immediate presence", "natural processes of procreation", etc. And then they went out of their way to argue for how this wasn't "degrading" to God or Mary, mentioning how this process is otherwise abused and made a "harp of pleasure" by the wicked. Below in the thread, Mike (not Reed) argues that it requires "intellectual wiggle room" to conclude speakers like McConkie were speaking of sexual intercourse, which leaves me dumbfounded.

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Sun, 26 Dec 2010 02:44:03 +0000

"But is it really necessary to call people to repentance over it?" Mike, I'm not calling Mormons to repentance for ignorance over the exact mechanics that God used. I believe the New Testament teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin (and the flow of the narrative makes it clear that this was done without intercourse; Mary wasn't merely a "young woman"). Mormon leaders have denied this and naturalized it. It is blasphemous to speak of (explicitly or implicitly) God having sex with a human, not because sex is inherently evil (it's not), but because of the nature of deity. This is something Christians have believed for thousands of years. Overall this seems like something the common Mormon conscience is aware of, however overridden by other beliefs. Usually Mormons spend their time in denial over whether it was even taught, or over whether non-officiality solves the problem. So to be honest, I don't feel a big burden to prove that it's wrong to think that God the Father had sexual intercourse with Mary, although I will address it in the series. People generally already have a strong sense of that. It's much like the issue of whether God the Father was once perhaps a horrific sinner. I strongly believe that Mormons already know in their conscience that this is wrong. I'm not so much arguing for their conscience as I am directly appealing to it. Merrrrrrry Christmas.

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Sun, 26 Dec 2010 02:38:48 +0000

Thanks for the link, I haven't read it but will put it on my will-read list of virgin birth material. You might be interested in Michael Hesier's lecture on the issue. Merry Christmas!

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Sun, 26 Dec 2010 02:14:36 +0000

Mike, given McConkie's cumulative history of remarks on the issue, as well as the Mormon tradition he was perpetuating (wherein we have Brigham and Orson, etc., explicitly saying that the Father "came down" [Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 238] and was in Mary's "immediate presence" [The Seer, pp. 158-9]), the most natural conclusion is that he was referring to the common method of conception / method of begetting--sexual intercourse. But lest you think it is merely critics who have come to this conclusion, remember that many Mormons have come to this same conclusion too. PS A related quote for you by Melvin J. Ballard, contemporary of Talmage, Mormon apostle, and grandfather of M. Russell Ballard: "No man or woman can live in mortality and survive the presence of the Highest except by the sustaining power of the Holy Ghost. So it came upon her to prepare her for admittance into the divine presence, and the power of the Highest, who is the Father, was present, and overshadowed her, and the holy Child that was born of her was called the Son of God. "Men who deny this, or who think that it degrades our Father, have no true conception of the sacredness of the most marvelous power with which God has endowed mortal men---the power of creation. Even though that power may be abused and may become a mere harp of pleasure to the wicked, nevertheless it is the most sacred and holy and divine function with which God has endowed man. Made holy, it is retained by the Father of us all, and in his exercise of that great and marvelous creative power and function, he did not debase himself, degrade himself, nor debauch his daughter. Thus Christ became the literal Son of a divine Father, and no one else was worthy to be his father." (Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard, p. 167) This is like the First Vision but kicked up a notch. Mary not only needed the sustaining power of the Holy Ghost to withstand the presence of Heavenly Father, but also to participate in the sexual act of begetting.

Mormon Coffee : "Mormonism and the Virgin Birth" Presentation (Saturday, Dec. 18)

Thu, 23 Dec 2010 20:48:26 +0000

Not yet, I decided against posting the loooong and bumbling presentation and instead post segments of more polished versions of the presentation. First one up will be a simple video going over the material from McConkie on the subject.

Mormon Coffee : The Comfort of Knowing God Was a Sinner

Wed, 8 Dec 2010 18:36:38 +0000

Thanks for your candor, Ralph. If both the Father and the Son never sinned, then another problem exists in Mormon theology: it becomes very difficult to appeal to the Father as an example of a man just like us becoming a God. In other words, the whole plan of salvation is devoid of any specific examples of sinners who fully became Gods---just an assumption that potentially billions of such once-sinful Gods exist out there in the heavenly realms. It also begs the question of why there is such a special strain of sinless savior Gods, and why some are in this strain, and some are not. It makes the plan of salvation for us mortals seem like a Plan B, for the mediocre in pre-mortality. Of course, the fundamental principle that I am promoting throughout all the GodNeverSinned.com material is that it is just wrong for any once-sinful God to be worshiped and to call himself the Holy of Holies. The only kind of God worthy of worship is a God who never sinned. Grace and peace, Aaron

Mormon Coffee : Gospel Principles 2009 as a Significant Perpetuation of Traditional Mormon Theology

Mon, 6 Dec 2010 03:43:46 +0000

Thanks, brother

Mormon Coffee : Gospel Principles 2009 as a Significant Perpetuation of Traditional Mormon Theology

Thu, 2 Dec 2010 18:00:31 +0000

I wrote this blog post awhile back but it was put in a queue since it wasn't necessarily time-sensitive. No biggie.

Mormon Coffee : Quit pestering us, church leaders tell membership in letter

Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:24:27 +0000

This isn't the first time the Mormon Church leadership felt pestered by doctrinal questions from members. At the April 1916 General Conference Charles W. Penrose said: "There still remains, I can tell by the letters I have alluded to, an idea among some of the people that Adam was and is the Almighty and Eternal God. He is the father of his race, of course, the great patriarch over the human family, and being begotten unto him, he is the father of us in our earthly condition, in our mortality, and stands as the primal patriarch. But God says He put him there... [T]he notion has taken hold of some of our brethren that Adam is the being that we should worship. This has been explained, I think, from this stand several times, but notwithstanding that, peculiar ideas get into people's minds, not always because they are stubborn and willful and wicked or that they desire anything that is wrong, but because it gets into their heads and it is a very hard job to get it out of their heads, like the Scotchman who asked the Lord to keep him in the right path so that he might not go 'wrong, for the Lord knew that if he once got anything into his head, it would be a mighty hard job to get it out of him.' That is the way it is with lots of our folks, not because they are all Scotchmen, however, the idea has obtained in the minds of some of the brethren and we ought to get right concerning it. I am sorry that has not been rectified long ago, because plain answers have been given to brethren and sisters who write and desire to know about it, and yet it still lingers, and contentions arise in regard to it, and there should be no contentions among the Latter-day Saints. It is all right for people to have their own views and express them, if they will do it in a proper spirit; it is all right for people to stand up for what they really believe to be true, but when this spirit of contention comes, then, as we are told in the Book of Mormon, it is of the devil. Now, if Adam, as claimed by some of our brethren, is the being that we should worship, to whom we should pray, who was that person that put Adam at the head of his race? ... I want to draw a clear distinction between these individuals that we may stop this discussion that is going on to no purpose. Who is Adam? Adam is our father, certainly. He is the great father of the race, but we have had fathers that corrected us at home and we gave them reverence. Yes, that is right, but do we worship them and pray to them? Oh, no. Then why should we want to pray to Adam, who away back in the remote centuries was at the head of his race and in that sense is our father? ... God help us to see and understand the truth and to avoid error! And don't let us be too strong in our feelings in regard to our opinions of matters." (Charles W. Penrose, Conference Report, April 1916, p.15. Read)

Mormon Coffee : Elizabeth Smart a Victim of Mormonism?

Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:25:02 +0000

This sounds like a rumor. I doubt Mr. Smart would publicly speak ill of other members of his church, especially at a time when he is trying to show the role the LDS faith has in the healing process. I also doubt someone could hear voices like that outside a restroom in a ward.

Aaron Shafovaloff's Comments

Mormon Coffee : One argument that I no longer use against the âroyal line of sinless saviorsâ

Mormon Coffee : One argument that I no longer use against the âroyal line of sinless saviorsâ

Mormon Coffee : The Christ of Mormonism vs. the Christ of the Bible

Mormon Coffee : Do you want to know the truth more than you want Mormonism to be true?

Mormon Coffee : Do you want to know the truth more than you want Mormonism to be true?

Mormon Coffee : Do you want to know the truth more than you want Mormonism to be true?

Mormon Coffee : God Never Sinned Feature Video Launched on YouTube

Mormon Coffee : Whoops.

Mormon Coffee : I Agree With Moroni 8:18 -- Do Mormons?

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Mormon Coffee : Mormonism's Grinch and a Response to James of Lehi's Library

Mormon Coffee : "Mormonism and the Virgin Birth" Presentation (Saturday, Dec. 18)

Mormon Coffee : The Comfort of Knowing God Was a Sinner

Mormon Coffee : Gospel Principles 2009 as a Significant Perpetuation of Traditional Mormon Theology

Mormon Coffee : Gospel Principles 2009 as a Significant Perpetuation of Traditional Mormon Theology

Mormon Coffee : Quit pestering us, church leaders tell membership in letter

Mormon Coffee : Elizabeth Smart a Victim of Mormonism?

Mormon Coffee : One argument that I no longer use against the âroyal line of sinless saviorsâ

Mormon Coffee : One argument that I no longer use against the âroyal line of sinless saviorsâ