Mormon Coffee » Life is Short and Evangelism Should be Urgent

Life is Short and Evangelism Should be Urgent

September 12, 2007

By Aaron Shafovaloff

I’ve been out of town for about ten days. When Stacie and I returned to the Salt Lake City airport on Monday I stood by some newspaper vending machines and rocked little John’s stroller as my wife went to the bathroom. I glanced over and was shocked. The body of BYU student Camille Cleverley had been found dead in Provo. I was then again shocked by the circumstances: she had fallen off a cliff near Bridal Veil Falls the same day my wife and I went there for her birthday celebration.

Life is so precious and so short. God knows what day we will die but we don’t. Every breath is a gift from above and not even our next minute is guaranteed. If the Lord wills, we will live another day (cf. James 4:13-16).

On Tuesday I received an e-mail from Andy Bird, Utah’s most active evangelist and one of my best friends in Utah:

Sunday morning our Pastor started off his fantastic sermon by sharing a story that happened just this week . The message was powerful and I am going to take a shot at summing up the story he shared before he did an exegesis of 2 Corinthians 5 for you…. A few folks were down in our Pastor’s basement having a conversation and fellowshipping (playing pool). One young man (Seth) asked Pastor Hurlbutt some questions regarding the urgency of Evangelism. The Pastor replied with a great answer that included the urgency that you never know when someone will take their last breath. Seth then decided that he would be intentional starting this week to share his faith. He was going to meet his friend Ben for some outdoor recreational activities. Ben brought along a friend of his Christopher, but Seth was determined to share the Gospel with Ben. Seth had been sharing the Gospel for a good part of the evening with Ben before they decided to go up in the canyon to enjoy the view.

As Ben and Seth were sitting on a boulder, Ben had already begun that turn of faith in Christ and asked Seth in their conversation…..How he could get right with God. Seth then shared how Ben could profess that to…God. As they continued they heard the other friend behind them say something about a bear. Before they had much chance to react Ben was struck by Christopher in the head by a metal pole. Christopher then attacked Seth, Seth was struck in the side but managed to run away. Seth made it away to safety. Unfortunately he found out later that Ben was dead. This was a premeditated attack from Christopher. We still do not yet know the motives. The real story here is that Seth shared the Gospel with this young man just moments before his last breath. Seth was asked to speak at Ben’s funeral and share what he and Ben had been talking about on the boulder. It seems like Ben made a good profession of faith just moments if not seconds before he was struck dead by Christopher.

The News Story can be found here.

This story is so striking to me as it reminds me that we must be intentional, persistent and have a sense of urgency when we share our faith. It is a very blunt reminder of the real status of man. The additional light to this story is that Seth got to share the Gospel at the funeral and that Seth has shared the Gospel with a few other friends and in just a few weeks two of them have put their trust in the Lord! Ultimately I am reminded again of the Sovereignty of God as through a conversation, question and a tragedy ….. eternity is now forever changed. To God be the Glory forever!

Comments2007-09-12+12%3A16%3A03Aaron+Shafovaloff

Falcon on September 12th, 2007

Aaron,

I had an interesting experience yesterday along these lines. I was hustling off to teach a class at a local college when I spotted two guys approaching me from quite a distance. I instantly knew they were Mormon missionaries (despite the fact that they were wearing jackets without the tell-tale uniform). As they approached me I smiled and said “How are you men doing today.” They smiled and asked if they could share the gospel of Jesus Christ with me. I said, “Thank you boys, but I know the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” Later I was lamenting that I didn’t take the time to share with them the truth of the Gospel and pray with them that God would give them a revelation of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. There are several points I could make here but the obvious one is that God provided a devine appointment and I was too focused on something else at the time to take advantage of it. In Revelation, when talking to the Church in Ephesus, Jesus says “do the works you did before”. I remember when I was first saved thirty-five years ago during the Jesus Movement, I would shard the Gospel with anyone who moved. I don’t do that any more and I’ve been very aware of it. Thanks for the reminder.
Andy on September 12th, 2007

Aaron thanks for posting the email. I have been reading Desiring God by John Piper, and I am marveling at how God orchestrates and uses all these things for His Glory!
Donna on September 12th, 2007

If you’re not bold in the name of Christ now, pray to Jesus that He would put His words in your mouth. For it is written that if we are ashamed of the Father on earth, He will be ashamed of us in Heaven. Now is the appointed time!!!
Todd Wood on September 12th, 2007

Thanks for the post. I just now prayed for Hewitt.
Rick B on September 12th, 2007

Falcon said I don’t do that any more and I’ve been very aware of it. Thanks for the reminder.

In some respects, you do share the Gospel by replying on this blog. And any other blog or website you happen to post on. I know I was just telling my wife the other day, the only real way I can share Christ with the LDS is on this blog, my blog and a few websites I post on, because they are not beating down my door to talk with me. Rick b
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

“because they are not beating down my door to talk with me”

I don’t know about you, but when they come they’ve always simply knocked on my door.

Come to Utah… they’re everywhere!
Rick B on September 12th, 2007

Aaron, I am black listed by them, so they dont even come and knock on my door. And when I went to Utah for two weeks to share with them, they called serurity on me for asking hard questions like, how can JS be forgiven of murder if murder cannot be forgiven.

And another time I was taking a tour, I started asking hard questions, one lady speaks up and says, great question, stands next to me, then they remove me and my friend from the group, push the tour on and take me and my friend aside to “Quietly” ask our questions apart from the crowd. I notice the LDS are not very open to public honest questions. Rick b
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

I was responding to your “banging” language.

In any case, even after having been blacklisted, there’s always taking the initiative to evangelize strangers.
Geoff J on September 12th, 2007

Wow — what a bizarre murder story with those kids.

As for that poor BYU student — I think she is doing just fine in heaven (specifically, the spirit world). Despite what evangelicals think, Jesus has love and mercy for Mormons too. We know because he clearly tells us we are saved from an eternal hell via the Holy Spirit.

But carry on with your missionary work. If we can do it y’all can too.
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

Geoff, when you say “eternal hell”, do you mean the eternal punishment and suffering in the heavenly Telestial kingdom, the not-so-eternal temporary spirit prison, or outer darkness?
Geoff J on September 12th, 2007

Hehe.

Well Aaron, I mean the evangelical version of eternal hell. You know — the place y’all say Jesus sends most people to be burned and tortured forever after he goes to the trouble of resurrecting them into bodies that can never die. That’s the eternal hell Jesus is merciful and kind enough to save us from.
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

Geoff, can you think of any Biblical passages that would explicitly promote this universalism of yours, specifically passages that address the issue of heaven and hell or at least the afterlife??
Geoff J on September 12th, 2007

Well universalism isn’t really the issue in this particular conversation Aaron. As I mentioned, Jesus clearly tell many/most of us Mormons through his Holy Spirit that we are fully accepted in his eyes. That is what the experience of “getting saved” consists of for evangelicals from my experience so despite y’all assuming that we Mormons are not “right with God” and not “saved” we have God himself telling us otherwise through his Holy Spirit. So I will assume that Ms. Cleverly is most likely just fine and at least figuratively in the embrace of Jesus as we speak (though I admittedly don’t know much about her to verify that right now.)
Rick B on September 12th, 2007

Aaron, I do share Christ with others, and Geoff, you say Jesus loves you to so your saved. Yes he loves you but if you have a different jesus and different gospel then no your not ok and not saved, Remember what Paul said in Gal 1:8-9. Rick b
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

Well apparently Jesus has told you all something in private that he certainly hasn’t said publicly in his written word, Geoff.

It isn’t enough to simply take evangelical language and to put Mormon meaning in it. I can count on my hand how many Mormons I’ve met who believed all their past sins are forgiven. I can’t remember one Christian who didn’t believe all their sins were forgiven. And “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” (Romans 4:7-8)

The urgency of evangelism is there because:

“And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment…” (Hebrews 9:27)

Grace and peace in Christ, who justifies the ungodly by faith (Romans 4:4-6),

Aaron

PS I can’t find any passage in the Bible either that supports your universalism, especially passages that deal with the topic of heaven and hell.
Geoff J on September 12th, 2007

Aaron,

Of course we are saved in private. That’s how the Holy Spirit works. When God told you that you were saved did it come in an audible voice from heaven in a public setting? I thought not.

Now as for the stringent requirements you have on Jesus’s ability to save — I am confident that Jesus is much more merciful and loving, and much less legalistic (and dare I say Pharisaic?) than evangelicals teach he is.
Rick B on September 12th, 2007

Geoff said and much less legalistic

I see Mormonism and the Mormon god as being legalistic. All the laws you must keep and everything you are required to do in order to be saved, grace is not enough. How is grace only being legalistic? Plus the fact Death bed repentance and murder cannot be forgiven in LDS beliefe. Rick b
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

Geoff, this gets to the larger issue of what I believe to be the case: Mormons don’t have a bona fide belief in the inspiration in scripture, the fact that it was and is God-breathed. If I was a soldier in Iraq and received a letter from my wife I would never say, “I guess I haven’t heard from my wife yet. I wonder when she’ll talk to me.” Because the letter was “breathed out” (or to be specific in her case, written out) by her I consider it as coming from her and as being her word. Afterwards I could say, “Stacie told me that she loved me and that little John has learned to say his ABCs.” Likewise, I can say that God told me I am his—that I am adopted, justified, definitively sanctified, and born again—through his promises in his public word. What is the Holy Spirit’s role in this? He not only authors scripture but also opens the eyes of my heart and helps me to see and believe the public promises of God for what they really are. After this he doubly confirms my identify by internal testimony, bearing witness that I am an adopted child of God as I walk in the freedom of the Spirit that only is available to adopted children (cf. Romans 8:14-17).

What Paul spoke of the Jews could also tragically be said of the Mormons:

“What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.” (Romans 9:30-10:4)

Of the Jews I never heard Paul saying, “Well, no matter that they reject justification by faith apart from works. God is much more merciful and loving.” Rather I essentially hear him saying, “God out of his grace and mercy offered them free justification by faith apart from works, and instead of embracing it they rejected it.” They are “accursed” (cf. Romans 9:3).

PS I highly recommend this on the inspiration of scripture.
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

Worth consideration:

“Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus.” (Acts 1:16)
Falcon on September 12th, 2007

I don’t know if I go for this “God told me there is no hell” line. Mormons seem to get a lot of revelations zig zagging here and there and every where. In the Mormon system God seems to change His mind a lot. I left the Catholic Church forty years ago because I wanted to find a religion that didn’t have purgatory. It didn’t appeal to me. Now I find out that Mormons don’t have hell! What a deal!!!
Blake on September 12th, 2007

Aaron: The fact is that salvation is nearly universal. John 17 says: “Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition.” Romans says that those who call on Jesus name will be saved, and Phil. 2:10 states that every tongue will confess that Jesus is the Christ. Ergo, all will be saved.

As for your claim that “Mormons don’t have a bona fide belief in the inspiration in scripture, the fact that it was and is God-breathed,” you know that is false. Unless of course by “bona fide” you mean something like scriptural inerancy which I regard as unsustainable by scripture or reason. I suggest you owe us an apology for bearing false witness.

Here is another doozy by Rick B. “I see Mormonism and the Mormon god as being legalistic. All the laws you must keep and everything you are required to do in order to be saved, grace is not enough. How is grace only being legalistic? Plus the fact Death bed repentance and murder cannot be forgiven in LDS beliefe.”

The truth is that Mormons believe that we are saved (redeemed) by bowing the knee and confessing Christ (and nothing more) and that virtually everyone will do that at some time. It is imperative to distinguish between being saved and being exalted, which you fail to see. Further, true repentance leads to forgiveness regardless of when it occurs; the problem of course is that death bed repentance asks for cheap grace.

Further, let’s get clear here. You all believe that God will judge us and reward us according to our works. We receive what we sew. So y’all accept that works are important.

However, we ought to get this notion of different Jesus off the hook right now. Are you saying that unless we somehow have the same conception and ideas of you about Jesus that for that reason we are not saved? If so, I suggest that a good many Christians writing prior to Chalcedon are going straight to hell … and I cannot think of a view less worthy of the Lord Jesus Christ than that
Geoff J on September 12th, 2007

Aaron: Likewise, I can say that God told me I am his—that I am adopted, justified, definitively sanctified, and born again—through his promises in his public word.

What part of his public word says “Aaron Shafovaloff is saved”? I imagine it must be the same part that says “Geoff J is saved”.

After this he doubly confirms my identify by internal testimony, bearing witness that I am an adopted child of God as I walk in the freedom of the Spirit that only is available to adopted children

Ahhh, so the Holy Spirit is what has confirmed your idea that Jesus accepts you. Great — same here. In fact, the vast majority of Mormons I know have had that same confirmation from Jesus through the Holy Spirit that they are indeed “right with God” (to use evangelical-speak).

Surely you will not be so arrogant as to call God a liar or to claim to speak for him as to who is actually saved and who is not right?…
Falcon on September 12th, 2007

I’m wondering if faith in a counterfit Jesus can save someone. The Mormon Jesus and the Jesus of the Bible are not the same person. Same name, different person. There’s at least three other people in my area with the same first and last name as me. They’re not me. They can’t draw on my bank account or use my resume. If they do it’s called identity theft. Line it up side by side folks. Mormon Jesus…..Christian Jesus….pick the categories for comparison. They’re not the same. Only one can save. I’m going with the original.
Geoff J on September 12th, 2007

I thought this site was supposed to promote dialogue. Where are the administrators editing comments like Falcon’s? Lamely spewing the old line “Mormons don’t believe in the Jesus of the Bible” is the opposite of promoting a productive dialogue. It is a ludicrous thing to say. Mormons believe is Jesus Christ, the Son of God the Father, the person who died on the cross and was resurrected as described in the Bible. Perhaps Falcon does indeed believe is some dude named Jesus from Tijuana or something, I don’t know for sure, but I do know which Jesus we Mormons worship.
Falcon on September 12th, 2007

Geoff,
Hit a nerve huh?
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 12th, 2007

Blake,

Those that the Son has “guarded”—the ones he hasn’t “lost”—are those that were given to the Son by the Father. For John 17:12 to be quasi-universalistic requires that nearly all the world was given to the Son by the Father, but this is a hidden premise of yours that the New Testament doesn’t support, especially the Gospel of John which speaks in very general, pessimistic terms about the world.

“The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God…” (1:9-13)

“And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.” (3:19)

“The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil.” (7:7)

“… now will the ruler of this world be cast out.” (12:31; cf. 14:30)

“… even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.” (14:17)

“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.” (15:18-19)

Jesus speaks of his disciples as not being of the world, as being given to the Son by Father “out of the world” (17:6). Jesus even goes on to pray, “I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.” (17:9)

All things considered (even the fact that “world” is used in different senses in John), not an optimistic picture is painted of the world’s response to the “light”.

Nor does Philippians 2:10 speak of the eventual confession that Jesus Christ is Lord in a necessarily salvific manner for confessors. Rather, it is the ultimate outcome of the supremacy of Christ over all. “God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name…” (2:9) That includes the Judas and the sons of perdition, even though they will be “tormented day and night forever and ever” (Revelation 20:10).

Your response to my assertions about the Mormon lack of true belief in inspiration are just demands. You’ll have to provide something more convincing than, “you know that is false”. I’ve heard too many Mormons tell me that I need to listen to what God says instead of consulting a dead book.

Regarding your response to Rick, you fail to deal with the reality that your institution has taught (and continues to teach) that there are steps to repentance (like paying restitution inasmuch as it is possible, successfully abandoning the sinful habit, and keeping the commandments) which must be completed as a prerequisite for actual forgiveness of sins.[1] The Bible speaks of a justification and complete forgiveness as experienced in this earthly life, not simply as a goal to be achieved by perfected repentance in the afterlife. Your flippant remark, “regardless of when [forgiveness] occurs”, shows that you aren’t using the term “redeemed” and “saved” in a manner that is Biblical. Your comment about death bed repentance being “cheap grace” is loaded and silently assumes perhaps some things like 1. that repentance wouldn’t be followed up by the fruits of obedience and 2. that God isn’t willing to extend immediate and complete forgiveness and security and eternal life to those who with genuine brokenhearted faith and repentance cry out for grace and mercy.

The only works God wants come from a heart freely and fully forgiven by faith in the promises of God, so a final judgment according to evidential works is extremely bad news for Mormons, because they won’t have any of the works God requires. Only those who seek to be justified by faith alone apart from works will have the true evidences of obedience that God wants at final judgment.

Regarding ideas about Jesus: If any man is willing to affirm that Jesus become fully God in the pre-existence he is anathema and hell-bound unless he repents.

[1] “Another type of comforting revelation is the assurance received that a sin has been forgiven. This revelation, which comes when a person has completed all the steps of repentance, gives assurance that the price has been paid, that God has heard the repentant sinner, and that his or her sins are forgiven.” (Dallin H. Oaks, “Eight Reasons for Revelation,” Liahona, Sep 2004)

—

Geoff,

In fact, the vast majority of Mormons I know have had that same confirmation from Jesus through the Holy Spirit that they are indeed “right with God” (to use evangelical-speak).

“Right with God” wouldn’t work here in “evangelical-speak”, because it at the very least entails having all sins permanently forgiven. As I said above, I’ve met under a half-dozen Mormon adults who claim all their past sins are forgiven, and I’ve never met a Christian who believed he had any unforgiven sin. That’s a chasm you can’t smooth over by appealing to “evangelical-speak”.

Any spirit that has told a Mormon he or she is right with God while yet rejecting justification by faith apart from works and worthiness is a spirit of the devil. I’m not interested in what a spirit tells anyone unless it doesn’t contradict scripture.

Where are the administrators editing comments like Falcon’s?

Geoff, I think that both sides are tolerating what are perceived to be outrageous comments. Genuine dialog should persist through this. Your reply that “Mormons believe is Jesus Christ, the Son of God the Father” is just as outrageous to us as Falcon’s comment was to you, and it is certainly open to the criticism of not promoting constructive dialog because it glosses over titanic, tremendous difference of meaning embedded in your usage of Christian terms. There is a “Stacie” out there who is black, blind, and old, but that’s not my Stacie. My Stacie is white, can see, and is 27-years-old. There is a “Jesus” out there who is under a Father who perhaps could have once sinned (according to many traditional Mormons unlike Blake), who had to become fully God, and who cannot create matter out of nothing. This is not my Jesus. My Jesus has a Father who was eternally pure and never sinned (it’s not even a distant possibility that he once sinned and, unlike in Mormonism, anyone who allows for the possibility that God once sinned is anathema), who was always God, and who can create matter out of nothing.

Grace and peace in Christ,

Aaron
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

I’m going to ask (partly for the reason that I won’t be able to field a lot of peripheral discussion tomorrow as I need to get some big things at work done) everyone to stay limited to the specific topic of the shortness of life and the urgency of evangelism.

Gooooooodnight!
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Alright Aaron, well when it comes to this thread I will simply leave it with this idea: Jesus tells me I am saved and evangelicals tell me I am not. I believe Jesus.

As for the administration of this site, here is my frank advice: I think your comments are nearly always well reasoned and well argued. But if you want to have a dialogue around here you really need to muzzle a few to the trolls that regularly roam these parts. Some are dumb as dirt and others are simply not interested in dialogue at all. Feeding such local trolls makes your blog not much different then any old [filtered profanity or slur] rat hole on the Web. If you shoo the trolls away you will find yourself with a lot more Mormons willing to actually come around to dialogue.
Robert on September 13th, 2007

Geoff,
Nice of you to characterize anyone who holds to biblical doctrine as “dumb as dirt”…nicely done.

The truth is…Christians DO worship a different God and Jesus as Mormons do…that’s just a fact.

Christian Jesus:
Eternal
Not created
Not Satan’s brother
Is God

Mormon Jesus:
All beings eternal…so not special
Created exalted being/once a man
Satan’s brother
Is “A” God/one of infinite gods.

Can you see the striking difference? Can you see why we’d say that we are worshiping a different Jesus?

It’s NOT the sincerity of your belief that saves you…you can be “sincerely wrong” but it’s the OBJECT of your belief that will save you.

These truths are sacred to us. They are to be protected and guarded from assualt…that’s why we get so riled up when someone trifles with them. Jesus is precious to me…don’t confuse the Almighty Alpha & Omega, the “I Am” with someone who’s merely an exalted creature…I won’t be silent.

So, while I understand we have different beliefs…please don’t be dishonest and portray them as being “the same beliefs”…ok?
Falcon on September 13th, 2007

I see the theme of this particular topic to be salvation through Christ and sharing the Gospel (of Jesus Christ) with others. Robert established (above) a difference in the doctrine of the Son between orthodox Christianity and Mormonism. So, I ask, can someone be saved believing in the Jesus that Mormons subscribe to. The answer to this question has eternal consequences. It also effects whether or not I would bother to share the Gospel with a Mormon. Having a dialogue is fine, but any idea that such a conversation will bring resolution of the differences between Mormonism and Christianity is naive. They are not different versions of the same religion.
[Comment trimmed by moderator.]
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Geoff - “Where are the administrators editing comments like Falcon’s? Lamely spewing the old line “Mormons don’t believe in the Jesus of the Bible”

I think this is repeated because the majority of the LDS Just don’t seem to get it. Whats funny though is that LDS “spew” the old line below like you just did after your challenged.

Geoff - “Mormons believe is Jesus Christ, the Son of God the Father, the person who died on the cross and was resurrected as described in the Bible.”

Geoff, instead of taking any “evangelist” word for it, why don’t you take your own prophet’s word? I would like you to meet Mr. Hinckley.

The LDS Church News reported: “In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don’t. The traditional CHRIST of whom THEY SPEAK is NOT the CHRIST of whom I SPEAK. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness [sic] of Times’” (June 20, 1998,)

I did caps for emphasis because I don’t know how to bold, lol.

So Geoff, do you side with the Prophet of your church and believe in THAT Jesus? Or do you side with the evangelists on here and believe in the Jesus that Hinckley doesn’t believe in? You can’t have both. If you believe in the traditional Christ of “whom we speak”, then there are some characteristics of Him that you need to learn about.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Robert: Nice of you to characterize anyone who holds to biblical doctrine as “dumb as dirt”

I’m confused… Are you saying that unintelligent people cannot hold to biblical doctrines?

As for this “different Jesus” thing — there is no question that you and I have different theological ideas. So while we read the same Bible we come to different metaphysical/theological conclusions about Jesus Christ.

But the key question is this: When the one true God answers my prayers through his Holy Spirit and tells me that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and the Savior of the World, and further tells me that the Bible is the word of God; is that the same true and living God who answers your prayers? I am willing to say yes, the real God answers your prayers too. (The Mormon take is that you are getting some truth from God and we have more to offer you.) We may disagree on theological details, but until you can demonstrate that it is not the resurrected Jesus who rules in the heavens that answers both of our prayers, you have not demonstrated that it is a different Jesus at all. So far all you are pointing out is that we have theological differences of opinion. Whoop-dee-doo.

Now some exceedingly arrogant evangelicals go as far as to try to speak for God and tell me the God has not really answered my prayers to tell me Jesus is Lord and that the Bible is true. By so doing they exalt themselves to the role of God’s mouthpiece or even trying to be above God and tell him who’s prayers he can or can’t answer. Are you going to try that arrogant move too?
Blake on September 13th, 2007

Aaron: It is pretty clear that you have arrogated to yourself the right to make comments that are much longer than others who post here and give yourself an unfair position in the dialog.

With respect to the universality of salvation apparently you didn’t read what you quoted from the gospel of John: “The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.” That means everyone! I also noted that you ignored the quote from Phil. that says that all, everyone, will bow the knee and confess Christ. Ignoring such things is a no, no — especially when they challenge your view. Your twisted exegesis is wanting in my view.

Of course anything worthy of being called repentance requires us to do something to elicit forgiveness (it isn’t cheap grace either). However, that has nothing to do with justification by faith and confessing Christ. The issue of justification and redemption is something that you misconstrue in Mormon thought (I treat this precise mistake about LDS thought at length in ch. 4 of my 2nd book). D&C 76 clearly states that all those who bow the knee to Christ will be redeemed — just as Philippians says! It is time to knock off the argument that because you’ve heard many Mormons say something, that makes it doctrine and fair game for you. That violates the rule of charity in a grand way. If I took what most evangelicals tell me about their beliefs, we are saved by works and modalism is true. You still owe an apology for bearing false witness.
Blake on September 13th, 2007

Aaron said: “Your reply that “Mormons believe is Jesus Christ, the Son of God the Father” is just as outrageous to us as Falcon’s comment was to you.” That is simply beyond belief to me that you would make such a statement. Of course Mormons believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God. If that claim is outrageous to you then I suggest that you lack charity and good faith to such a degree that good faith dialog with you is impossible. That you would claim to be a Christian and exclude LDS on such a basis in simply beyond the bound of Christianity.
Blake on September 13th, 2007

Aaron: “I’ve never met a Christian who believed he had any unforgiven sin.” Well, unless your definition of “Christian” is someone who believes they cannot commit a sin that needs to be forgiven, I’ve met plenty of them — non-Calvinists like Anglicans, Methodists etc.

Further, what do you do with all of the exhortations to Christians to repent in scripture? Do you believe that you will be rewarded according to works and that sins will be judged even for Christians? What do yo do with 1 John 1:8-9?

8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9: If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10: If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

John is talking to the Christian believers here. I suggest that you listen carefully.
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Geoff - “We may disagree on theological details, but until you can demonstrate that it is not the resurrected Jesus who rules in the heavens that answers both of our prayers, you have not demonstrated that it is a different Jesus at all.”

I guess you DO disagree with Hinckley then. Your saying “I believe in the same Christ as evangelicals”, and then your prophet says “No, I don’t believe in the same Christ as evangelicals”.

Here’s your “demonstration”. I will not say that Jesus doesn’t answer your prayers because I don’t know what goes on inside you. However, I will say that it is QUITE the possibility that your “answers to prayer” aren’t coming from the ONE true God. Your answers can come psychologically i.e. from strong feelings of peace/assurance or from your own conscience, that you misinterpret as God answering your prayer. Or it might be a possibility that your hearing from the “deceiver of all” because you have strayed away from the true Gospel of Christ and Satan is trying his hardest to keep you on that path. Personally though, I think in your case it would be more psychological.

Think about it. There are TONS of other religious faiths out there that claim they receive divine answer to prayer, even to the point where they feel righteous in taking the lives of innocents. The war we are in wouldn’t be half as bad/big if it weren’t for the fact that other religions believed that some sort of God told them to commit their lives to it. I’m sure you would say that God didn’t really answer that prayer and that they aren’t praying to the ONE true God. Funny though, thats what they would say about you.

If people would just follow the Gospel given by Jesus in the Bible, there would be less turmoil. But some people decide they should come up with their own Gospel and claim that it came from God.
Blake on September 13th, 2007

Jeff: We readily admit that we have a different view than you about Christ. We believe he won’t simply leave some that he could save to hell and you do. We don’t believe the being you believe in could consistently be described as loving and somehow unfathomable to us you do. We believe that he continues to speak to prophets and you don’t. You believe the Bible says things we don’t and vice versa. However, that doesn’t entail that we believe in a different Christ in the sense that there is only one Christ and he loves us all and we all seek to worship and adore this Christ.

Do you maintain that God doesn’t answer the prayers of Mormons? If not, then we pray to the same God even though we may have different views about God. Do you believe that God loves Mormons? If so, then it is the same God whose love we feel. Do you believe that a person has to have a totally accurate view of God to have faith and be able to be saved? If so, then no one ever has been or ever could be saved. You arguments with Geoff are therefore absurd in extremis.
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

Of course Mormons believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God.

Blake, your comments ignore that “Son of God” means something in Mormonism that is utterly offensive to traditional Christians. That the Father had to somehow unite with a heavenly Mother to beget Jesus is preposterous. Even the distant possibility of such is preposterous.

That the light in John 1 “enlightens everyone” doesn’t have to mean that all the world favorably responds to the light, especially given the context of the Gospel of John and the other passages I provided. Your rejoinder on Philippians is just a restatement.

The idea that forgiveness “has nothing to do with justification by faith and confessing Christ” is suspect, especially when Paul speaks this way:

“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, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” (Romans 4:4-8)

For Paul, what David said about forgiveness in Psalm 32 was intimately related with the faith counted as righteousness and justification of the ungodly.

It is time to knock off the argument that because you’ve heard many Mormons say something, that makes it doctrine and fair game for you.

You’re playing with elusive categories like Mormon “doctrine” here. This is just silly. What Mormons generally believe—regardless of whether it is “official doctrine” or is at least authoritatively taught from the hierarchy—is certainly fair game and deserves response. But, for example, the view that six-step repentance is prerequisite to forgiveness isn’t merely in the minds of some members, it also is promoted in church correlated literature and other works by leaders deemed trustworthy by Mormon members, including the Miracle of Forgiveness, which still sells extremely well at Deseret Books. I would argue that the system of Mormonism itself fosters a rejection of true belief in inspiration because of its teaching that one must go to God in prayer and receive via private revelation what God says, even at the common expense of not considering what God has already said about the matter in scripture as God-breathed, authoritative, and conclusive. The basis of the First Vision story as told today by Mormonism is that the Bible was insufficient to answer Joseph’s questions.

All things considered, there is what author Douglas James Davies calls an “interplay of regulative influences” in Mormonism, which keep traditional Mormon doctrine going despite neorthodoxy at BYU and out-of-the-mainstream apologists like yourself from having a more thoroughgoing impact. All of that should be considered, and along with ongoing Mormon oral tradition and consistent personal experiences with Mormons, general, reasonable claims can be made about Mormon beliefs that will always frustrate people like you and Robert Millet.

I’m not going to change my entire view of Mormon beliefs because of what a fringe Mormon like you says.

Also, crossing your arms and making petty demands for apologies on this site will not be tolerated.

Regarding forgiveness which is comprehensive, I am specifically referring to a believer having a “not guilty” verdict passed on them, when they go from having been a condemned sinner to an accepted, adopted child of God. Sins no longer need to be forgiven in a manner that would somehow present the need for repeat justification. The legal guilt is totally and completely removed at conversion. The eternal life given remains “eternal”. A Christian doesn’t say, “well, I’m converted, but I’m still trying to complete the repentance process to have past sinful habits forgiven.” Post-conversion “forgiveness” (which comes at simple brokenhearted confession, not after the completion of a repentance process such as described in True to the Faith) for a Christian simply removes Fatherly chastisement and furthers sanctification—a kind a relationship the Christian couldn’t and didn’t enjoy before being adopted and declared “not guilty” at conversion.

I’d delve into issues more with you, but I have to get back to work.

Grace and peace in Christ, who justifies and forgives the ungodly by faith apart form works (Romans 4:4-8),

Aaron

PS MRM is not designed to be a neutral debate ground with equal time for all parties. This is our blog and if you don’t like our rules (and our right to make longer comments) then you can go elsewhere. Excessive comment posting by others will encourage the usage of our delete button. Ironically, limiting the comment-size of non-editors is designed to encourage dialog in light of the tendency of some visitors to bloviate (and I think it’s done a pretty good job).
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Alright, it seems you want to play the “gray line” game here, Geoff and Blake. I’m not going to play a never-ending word game here with you. Tell, you what, I will come into your house, on your playing field, and handle it there. We cant play a game of soccer with each other unless we are on the same field.

Answer this question so I can help “solve the issue” on your own terms and on your own field of play. Either one of you can do this or both, I will play two games of soccer here.

What to you, defines the “Identity of a person”. Feel free to define it however you want, be it physical traits, mental traits, spiritual traits, etc..

Now, if what you say defines the identity of Jesus, FOR YOU, and I can show you how that differs (Is different) from the Identity of whom I call Jesus, then you would HAVE to agree that you and I believe in two different persons. If I’m unable to show a difference, then we have to agree to disagree. This whole exercise is so that we can come to an agreement.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Jeff,

Thanks for your answer. Here is my response about the answers you believe you have received from God to your prayers:

I will not say that Jesus doesn’t answer your prayers because I don’t know what goes on inside you. However, I will say that it is QUITE the possibility that your “answers to prayer” aren’t coming from the ONE true God. Your answers can come psychologically i.e. from strong feelings of peace/assurance or from your own conscience, that you misinterpret as God answering your prayer. Or it might be a possibility that your hearing from the “deceiver of all” because you have strayed away from the true restored Gospel of Christ and Satan is trying his hardest to keep you on that path. Personally though, I think in your case it would be more psychological.

Think about it. There are TONS of other religious faiths out there that claim they receive divine answer to prayer, even to the point where they feel righteous in taking the lives of innocents or in other cases doing something as ridiculous and make being anti-some-other-religion a main hobby in life. The war we are in wouldn’t be half as bad/big if it weren’t for the fact that other religions believed that some sort of God told them to commit their lives to it. I’m sure you would say that God didn’t really answer that prayer and that they aren’t praying to the ONE true God. Funny though, thats what they would say about you.

If people would just follow the Gospel given by Jesus in the Bible, there would be less turmoil. But some people decide they should come up with their own Gospel and their own man-made creeds and claim that it came from God.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Jeff,

Jesus, FOR ME, is part of the Godhead, and the Godhead is the one God of all existence and the one God referred to in the Bible. He answers my prayers through the Holy Spirit. He is the savior of the world and my personal savior.

Who is he for you?
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Geoff, I’m actually relieved that that was your response! Not being sarcastic either. I was hoping that you would agree that it is the possibility. I ran out of room but I was going to add that the same thing could be said about me. I feel God answers my prayers, but if the LDS are correct, then I could just be FEELING those or Satan might be trying to get me to believe harder in a lie. It’s relieving to me that you accept those as a possibility.

Geoff, I appreciate your response on your definition of Jesus, but I asked a different question. Let me re-iterate

What to you, defines the “Identity of a person”? (Not Jesus himself as you did) Feel free to define it however you want, be it physical traits, mental traits, spiritual traits, etc.. Basically, tell me what makes the Identity of Geoff different from the Identity of some other fellow named Geoff.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Jeff: Basically, tell me what makes the Identity of Geoff different from the Identity of some other fellow named Geoff.

There is only one of me. Like all other people, my spirit and core identity are unique. Sure there are other people with my name, but we obviously aren’t the same person.

So with this line of reasoning are you actually implying that there are two different deities in heaven by the name of Jesus?? So when I pray to Jesus they have to look at each other and say, “Hey Jesus, is that Geoff guy talking to you or me? Do you want to answer him or should I?” If you think there are different people named Jesus in heaven hearing and answering prayers that would be (amusing) news to me.

If there is only one Jesus in heaven then it seems to me this track you are moving down is a dead end for you.

And BTW — my mirroring response to you was of course tongue in cheek. My take is that Jesus does hear your prayers but that you aren’t interested in the additional truths he has to offer through his restored church so he honors your free will on that matter.
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Geoff. C’mon now, don’t be silly. Sorry to break your amusement but no, I don’t believe there are two Jesus’ in heaven. I have prayed many times, asking God for confirmation of the truth of the LDS church, and he hasn’t given it to me. I have asked sincerely, and even saying “Please God, take away all my bias from my thoughts, put my belief structure aside, and let me hear your truth in my heart.” So, as far as you thinking I’m not interested in the additional truths he has to offer, you are wrong, I’m sorry.

Geoff - “There is only one of me. Like all other people, my SPIRIT AND CORE IDENTITY are unique. Sure there are other people with my name, but we obviously aren’t the same person.”

Good job, now all you have to do is define your SPIRIT and CORE IDENTITY to me. Heck, just define your CORE IDENTITY. That is the question I asked from the start and its looking like you don’t even want to bother defining it. If you can’t define it, then we cant come to conclusion/agreement. Again brother, I ask-

What to you, defines the “Identity of a person”? Saying your “core identity” defines the identity of a person is like saying the definition of a dog is a dog.

If you don’t want to play soccer, just tell me. I don’t want to stand in the goal if no shots are going to be made.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Jeff,

I can’t reduce “core identity” any smaller than that term. I don’t know of anyone who can. In fact the very term “core” implies that it is at the irreducible root to begin with. How do you define core identity?

(I should note that the subject of personal identity has been debated by philosophers for thousands of years so I am interested to know if you are pushing one particular school of philosophical thought here or if you have come up with a definition of your own…)

I’m happy to play ball with you, but I think the ball is in your court when it comes to defining personal identity at this point.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Jeff,

Now when it comes to the core of our dispute about having prayers answered and coming to different conclusions; it sounds like it boils down to this: You assume that since I think evangelical theology is poppy[filtered profanity or slur] I must be getting answers to my prayers from Satan or from my own delusions. I assume that since you think Mormon theology (such as it is) is poppy[filtered profanity or slur] that you aren’t actually interested in the greater light and knowledge God has to offer you.

I am not surprised we have arrived at this point of course — we always do in these conversations. But I will point out that this “different Jesus” approach is self defeating because it assumes there is such a thing as “a different Jesus” and you just said you don’t really believe that. What you really mean is that you think Satan is answering Mormons prayers or that their own minds are giving those answers.

To that charge I go back to what I said earlier — who are you to tell another person he or she isn’t really saved? Isn’t salvation in God’s hands? By claiming that God isn’t answering my prayers at all you are setting yourself up as a prophet or as someone who thinks he can tell God who to answer and who not to answer. That is the problem you face. You are not the judge of who Christ saves and who he doesn’t so if Jesus tells me I’m saved then who are you to tell me otherwise?

When Mormons preach to evangelicals we don’t face that problem. We readily admit that God has pointed you in the right direction by telling you Jesus is Lord and even filling you with the Holy Spirit at times. We then offer the additional light that Jesus himself has restored to the world and invite you to use it to draw even closer to Jesus Christ. We don’t think Christ is so cruel that he will burn you forever for not being interested in his greater light though.
Rick B on September 13th, 2007

Falcon asked So, I ask, can someone be saved believing in the Jesus that Mormons subscribe to. The answer to this question has eternal consequences. It also effects whether or not I would bother to share the Gospel with a Mormon.

The Answer is simple, Follow a false jesus, go to hell. Please read,

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Now read this, 1Cr 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

Now Paul was saying if you do not Love Jesus your damned, So tell me, if the Mormon jesus is different than the Jesus I worship, them you do not love Jesus that Paul speaks of so guess what, your going to be Anathema Maranatha.

Blake said We believe he won’t simply leave some that he could save to hell and you do.

So Blake, you dont believe people will Go to hell, how do you handle the story of the rich man in flames and torment that Jesus spoke about. How do you handle the verses in the Book of revelation that state Jesus (God) saying depart from me into everlasting fire, other verse that speak of eternal destruction can be added if you need them. Rick b
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Dear me. Geoff, please don’t put words in my mouth.

Geoff - “But I will point out that this “different Jesus” approach is self defeating because it assumes there is such a thing as “a different Jesus” and you just said you don’t really believe that.”

I said I don’t believe there are two Jesus’ up in heaven. What I’m “getting at” is that I believe the LDS believe in a Jesus that doesn’t really exist. They made him up just as one makes up an invisible friend. Sure, there may be similarity’s between the LDS Jesus and Evangelical Jesus that you pointed out, but those are things that could be said about anyone, whether false or not doesn’t matter.

I asked you to define (in your very own words) what makes up the identity of a person. I even tried to help you out and said such as physical/mental/spiritual traits/etc.. All you have to do is list things out, not try to do a little dance about. One thing you could say is DNA. Not two people have the exact same DNA. So that would separate them from the rest of the world. No person is born from two different mothers. Theres another one for you. Is this so hard for you to do? Obviously we don’t have the DNA of Jesus so we cant compare that, but I’m asking you to list things that separate one person from the rest of the world.

Geoff - “You assume that since I think evangelical theology is poppy[filtered profanity or slur] I must be getting answers to my prayers from Satan or from my own delusions.”

Again Geoff, I didn’t say that! I said it was a POSSIBILITY, not that you were DEFINITELY getting answers to your prayers from Satan or your own delusions. It’s like your trying to play a victim card here thinking I’m one of those “know-all” evangelicals calling you wrong. I know I’m not God, I’m only human, so it only could be a possibility.

Anyways, I gave you more than 3 chances to reply back with a list of things that we can use as a standard to separate one individual from another, and your just dancing. I’m done. Ralph, maybe you will do it.
Blake on September 13th, 2007

Aaron, in light of your insistence on having more space and verbosity on this blog, I won’t visit again. You refuse to dialog in good faith with a peer. You choice. Just how you square that with your claim to be Christian I’ll leave to you.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Jeff,

Your last comment is laughable self-contradictory. First you say that Mormon are praying to an imaginary “invisible friend” when we call upon Jesus in prayer. Then you contradict yourself and claim they you never really said that — only that it is a “POSSIBILITY” that we are praying to an imaginary “invisible friend” when we call upon Jesus in prayer.

Which is it? If you claim to know who is answering our prayers then you are indeed playing God. If you are open to the possibility that the real Jesus is telling me I’m saved then you are open to the possibility that major parts of evangelical theology are indeed poppy[filtered profanity or slur] as I believe (at least the hyper-exclusivism part). Which do you prefer?

As for your personal identity thing I finally understand what you mean so here is my answer: I believe we all have a core, irreducible spirit/mind. That is what in the end make up the essential part of our personal identity. So what do you believe on that front? You never answered my questions.
amanda on September 13th, 2007

Aaron, i usually respect some of your insights, but the premise of this one is quite repugnant.

and to all of you that suggest that mormons don’t believe in Jesus’ gospel…just because we understand His gospel differently, does NOT mean we believe in a diff jesus…and i’d be careful to come to any conclusions in that vein. This is precisely what turns most people off from evangelism—it is neither the just OR merciful interpretation that it claims to be.- what about people (past and present) in this world who are incapable of hearing evangelists preach THEIR saving message—are they doomed to hell? i think your interpretation of Jesus’ Gospel is repugnant…Jesus has a plan for ALL of us, not just the RICK B’s of the world who evidently were given all knowledge and have come to know the “real” Jesus. get over yourselves, seriously. you don’t know a damn (pardon the pun) thing about this girl and her personal relationship with the Savior.

Aaron, i’d be very disappointed if you felt the need to “edit” my comments. there is nothing in this statement that could be HALF as offensive as the very premise of your OP-ED piece. and if you do, i’ll take it that you don’t truly wish to be challenged on your interpretation of Jesus and HIS gospel, not mormoncoffee.com’s version of his Gospel.

and i say this with the MOST amount of respect that i can possibly muster at the lot of you.
jeff on September 13th, 2007

Like I said Geoff, I’m done. I’m sure there will be an article posted later on that we will disagree on. Until then, good day to you and your family.
Blake on September 13th, 2007

Rick b. said: “Blake said We believe he won’t simply leave some that he could save to hell and you do.”

“So Blake, you dont believe people will Go to hell, how do you handle the story of the rich man in flames and torment that Jesus spoke about. How do you handle the verses in the Book of revelation that state Jesus (God) saying depart from me into everlasting fire, other verse that speak of eternal destruction can be added if you need them.”

Rick, I’m going to presume that you aren’t incapable of making basic doctrinal distinctions of your own doctrine. The key difference between what I said and you attributed to me is huge. It is this: “some that he could save….” You see, only your view Jesus could unilaterally save everyone. He chooses not to. On my view he cannot save everyone because they are free to say no to him. I don’t believe that it makes any sense to say that a being is loving if he could save everyone and chooses to damn some (double predestination) or leaves some he could save to hell (single predestination). We differ on that view and I’m glad that we do.
Seth R. on September 13th, 2007

I don’t think the debate that has ensued was really the point of the original post, so I’ll not join the fray.

I will say though that it doesn’t bug me in the slightest if Aaron wants to reserve longer posting privileges for administrators.

And neat picture Aaron. It reminds me of home.
Falcon on September 13th, 2007

All I can think of as I read the last ten posts or so is the phrase that I believe Dr. Walter Martin coined, “The Maze of Mormonism”. For some reason everytime I read the posts I get the feeling that I’m not getting the whole story from our Mormon friends. I don’t know if it’s an attempt to sound intellectual and philosophical but the arguments get lost in the verbosity. So what I know about the Mormon concept of Jesus, I’ve had to go find in sources other than the Mormon posters here.
Geoff J on September 13th, 2007

Falcon,

All you need to know is that Jesus answers the prayers of Mormons and assures us that we are indeed “right with God”. If that is disappointing to you because of your evangelical theology preferences all I can say is take your complaint up with Jesus (or change your theology).
Ralph on September 13th, 2007

Gee, blink and you miss a bit. I was too busy yesterday, and look what’s gone on. Yes I agree with the main theme – life is too short (even for those who live >100) and precious. But the afterlife is more important, which is why we should MAKE the opportunities to try and assist all to come unto Christ to be saved by Him – NOT wait for them.

I understand if this next section gets cut out according to the rules of the blog, but to all the LDS on this site that are getting offended/frustrated/etc, this is their site and you are a visitor. You do not have to be here if you do not want. And its fair that the administrators get the ‘run’ of the board because that is what they are there for. It is the same on most, if not all, other blog sites I have contributed to. So quit your whinging as it does not help towards your case. (PS I am LDS so this I not an attack from the outside)

I think we can agree to disagree on whether we are discussing the same or different Jesus. I would like to say, however, that regardless of this, we do believe differently about Him and God. It is this difference that causes our beliefs to be mutually exclusive – only one (or neither) can be true. This follows on that only one of these beliefs will ultimately save. I have said this a number of times while commenting on this site. But this is where the need for evangelising/proselytising comes in. We should all want as many to be saved as possible – and again, as life is short we need to make the opportunities to discuss Jesus with others.
Falcon on September 13th, 2007

Is Jesus the spiritual offspring of a mother and father god?
Ralph on September 13th, 2007

Falcon - I don’t know about “offspring”, but I do know that He is the spiritual child of a Heavenly Mother and Father, and so are you. So I guess I know/believe in a different Falcon. So who am I talking to now?
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

Jesus was a spirit child of two parents but maybe not an “offspring”? Come on now, let’s just be frank, OK? The hedging gets old.
Falcon on September 13th, 2007

Well that would make Jesus a created being. I kind of figured we were talking about a different Jesus. It’s just taken us awhile to get there. It’s amazing how we can wax eloquent about these things, when the point can be gotten to quite quickly.

It would appear that there is a pantheon of gods of which Jesus is higher up in the order because He was created first? If there is anyone out there that can tell me how this works, I would sincerely appreciate it. I’m just looking for accurate, honest information.
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

Falcon, since nothing in Mormonism is truly created, I think you’ll have to qualify “Jesus is a created being”.
Ginger on September 13th, 2007

I can’t believe we’re back to the ol’ “Different Jesus” argument. It comes up once a month or so and no one can just agree to disagree and respect each others’ different opinions.

I love the original topic of this post. It’s true that no one knows when he will die. Death has been a big part of my life lately as my grandfather recently passed away. Religion can be a difficult subject for some people to discuss (not here, obviously) even with cherished family members. It was interesting to me that Grandpa let me know that I was the only person who willingly and openly talked about the afterlife and loved ones who have passed before us. This may have been because others were uncomfortable discussing death with a dying man, but whatever the reason, when he brought it up, we talked.

Grandpa had plenty of time to prepare for the end of this life. He was 94 and fighting cancer–he knew it wouldn’t be long. As for his large family, any one or more of us could have been killed travelling to the funeral. From my great aunts on down to the youngest of my cousins, our lives are at risk every day.

I’ve had plenty of time to reflect on the sharing of the Gospel and here’s what I’ve decided: My relationship with God is VERY personal. I’ve never been comfortable sharing my deepest religious feelings with others. However, I have shared a lot on occasion. I believe that if one keeps a prayer in his heart always, that the Holy Ghost will let him know with that warm, peaceful feeling when it’s time to open up. Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ opens a wellspring of love inside one–love for the person one is sharing with, love for God and Jesus Christ, and love for the whole world! God’s word should never be delivered with a mean spirit, belligerence, or confrontational attutude. It’s a message of love, after all.
Ralph on September 13th, 2007

Aaron, The reason I objected to the word offspring is that for some people means that the mother was pregnant and the child was born. The things I have read about this from church material say that the spirit children were formed from intelligences by our Heavenly Parents, but do not say how. So although some church members (both past and present and ‘high ranking’ ones) have made comments about pregnancy and birth when it comes to how spirit children are formed - that is their opinion - it is not LDS doctrine becuase none of the Prophets have stated it. The fact is we do not know - it just says that they are formed. But if you want to use offspring in relateion to we are Their children then yes I will agree to that.

Falcon, if you are wanting some honest information, and are not going to try and tread it into the ground (I do realise you do not believe in what I will have to say), ask the mediators for my email address and you and I can discuss it. If we do it here on the open board others will interject and argue and it will get confusing - as well as it is slightly off topic. But I don’t mind the mediators giving you my personal email address for a private conversation (no bashing as you said you wanted information, not an argument.)
amanda on September 13th, 2007

Ralph, i think its interesting that you feel the need to correct me, but somehow i should take it to heart because you’re mormon? that’s ridiculous
my complaint was with the premise of the article…and for a site that encourages even debate, and accuracy, and all perspectives both mormon and [filtered profanity or slur]…then it’s ridiculous to expect me to bow down to the premise. my anti-[filtered profanity or slur] comments keep these guys busy looking through their bibles, and passing their free time trying to convert me. as far as i’m concerned, i’m providing a service here.

ON THE ISSUES THAT HAVE RECENTLY BEEN POSTED:

there is a common mistake that many of us are making– we are getting soooo far down the “i think” road that we are discussing the mysteries of God…quite casually, i might add. there is MUCH we do not know, or will EVER know in this life…so to discuss or expect others to give detailed and sure comments about those mysteries is going beyond the mark. If it was important to our heavenly father for us, as his children, to know all of these very spiritual matters, he would teach us…but it is very possible that we wouldn’t understand it anyway- He has apparently found it expedient to give us the bible, book of mormon, and a modern day prophet to lead and guide our paths in a sufficient manner to bring us back to Him…we can learn or realize the details later. it’s not important or possible to answer those questions, not only because we don’t have the answers, but the answers would blow us away. it would be like trying to explain quantum physics to a liberal arts major (trust me, i know first hand that it doesn’t work)
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

Ralph, your point seems moot, since whether you use the language of begotten, conceived, sired, offspring, or child, you still have a problem: Mormonism teaches that Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother are of the human species and are embodied with flesh and bones. So no matter how much haze exists around what is official or not, the LDS worldview itself implicitly suggests that the uniting of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother(s) and the siring of spirit children is at the very least similar to how humans on here earth do it (indeed, it makes much less sense to think about the Father and Mother merely shaking hands and then watching a spirit baby drop from the sky in a blanket from a stork). And to consider that, my friend, even a remote possibility is pagan and offensive to God. At the flick of his proverbial finger or the breath of his proverbial mouth, God can create entire universes—with intelligent people in them—from nothing. God has always been God (Psalm 90:2), and, to put it bluntly, never needed to go to a Single’s Ward to find a wife for temple marriage and eventual deification.

That the LDS hierarchy doesn’t have an official position on things like whether God the Father had sexual intercourse with Mary to conceive Jesus doesn’t make the issue go away. It rather exasperates it. It shows that the very issue isn’t important enough to the Mormon Church to have a position on, and it still leaves open the possibility that the infamous scene in The God Makers where God the Father knocks on Mary’s door for a sexual tryst just might have some truth to it.
amanda on September 13th, 2007

sorry, i know this is off topic, but i must give props to aaron and his poetry skills…BRAVO, i read one, and was quite impressed…if you ever need someone to put it to lyric/music, let me know- i’m serious- email me, i’ll send you some of my songs.

sorry everyone, but you should all check it out.
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

Thanks Amanda!
Ginger on September 13th, 2007

Falcon, under the Nicean Creed post, you commented: “I was reading through Ephesians one time and decided to highlight in blue the pronouns that referred to the Father and in Red the pronouns that referred to the Son. It was a very interesting exercise. It had me scratching my head in a few places, but it helped point out to me the unique work of each.”

Wow! I’m impressed that ANYONE in today’s world would think that was a worthwhile way to spend precious time. I’m putting a note in my Bible now to try it one day. Thanks for the idea!
Ralph on September 13th, 2007

So Aaron, how do you then explain Acts 17:28-29 when it says that we are God’s offspring?
Aaron Shafovaloff on September 13th, 2007

Ralph, good question. I hope you won’t mind if I borrow the words of a friend, Rob Sivulka:

Doesn’t Acts 17:28-9 teach that humans are in the nature of God since the passage says we are His “offspring”?

LDS often use this passage to make humans out to be the same species as God. After all, like begets like. But as usual, LDS fail to take into account the context. The Apostle Paul already claimed that God is the maker of the world, the Lord of heaven and earth, who does not dwell in a temple made with hands, because He doesn’t need anything; we exist because of Him (vss. 24-8). Contrary to what LDS believe, He’s the originator of all things outside of Himself (LDS don’t think God created matter or even us as intelligences, for example). This is why He does not resemble the vain idols that the Greek pagans made.

LDS also fail to take into account that the Bible clearly teaches that there is only One who is truly begotten of God (i.e., has the same nature as God). The Greek term “only begotten” that is used of Jesus in such passages like John 1:18 or 3:16 is the term “monogenes”. “Mono” means “one” and “genes” means “of a genus or kind”. Since God is not a man by nature (Hosea 11:9) and we are, we are not literal begotten children of God. As C. S. Lewis pointed out, we are children by creation, and not by begetting. We are in His spiritual image, but certainly we are not in His nature.

So the term “offspring” is simply a symbolic way of saying that we originated from God. It is as figurative as the “hand” (Acts 7:56), the “eye” (Psalm 32:8), or the “feathers” (Ps. 91:4) of the Lord. (>>)
amanda on September 13th, 2007

what context aaron, do we fail to take into account? the evangelical paradigm???

see, these differences make it even MORE necessary to have a mouthpiece on this earth today, to bring His sheep into His fold…ONE church. it’s a matter of context isn’t it? whose context is superior? God’s! i think we can both agree…so then how is man to be sure where to find that context…well, through His prophets. consider the bible you love so much, there is a purpose for modern revelation, just as there was in the beginning. Prophets do not replace Christ, in fact, on the contrary, they are an instrument in His hands for the gathering of Israel…consider the role of ancient prophets…their role today is the same….gather Israel. how can the Lord gather his sheep if we are all gone off to “his or her own way”—with our OWN context–left to figure it out on our own, or take our pastors word for it, even though he HAS to concede that he does not have anymore authority than you do. i’d like to believe, and DO believe that the Lord does not leave us comfort-less in these times. He has a mouthpiece on this earth that gives us His context. it’s WONDERFUL!
Ralph on September 14th, 2007

Which is why Aaron, I pointed out that we are children of Heavenly parents and objected to the use of the word ‘offspring’. We do not know how the spirit children come about. Yes we teach that our Heavenly Parents have physical bodies, but wouldn’t that mean that a physical parent has a physical child - not spiritual? But if offspring was only to mean what you are pointing to for our beliefs, then you cannot accept what your friend has said. You cannot go both ways.
Robert on September 14th, 2007

And now once again…we see why Mormons get such a bad rap about how they “spin” things.

We cannot even agree that we worship different God’s let alone anything else!

God is not all things to everyone in a contradictory way…He’s either “flesh and bone” or “spirit only”…not both…

Jesus is either created or He’s not…

Very simple…not my opinion…just what the bible says…not “my belief”…the bible…

Let’s quit spinning this stuff. We don’t worship the same God’s….one of us is in serious trouble…

This is no different than those in the bible worshipping Baal, or Diana, or Ra…different gods than YHWH…

bob
Falcon on September 14th, 2007

Robert,
Several years ago some Jehovah Witnesses came to my door and wanted to engage me in a religious discussion. I told them I wasn’t interested but I would like to pray with them. Their eyes got as big as saucers (I thought they were going to go into cardiac arrest) and the woman says “We don’t worship the same god you do.” I replied, “Well then, I guess we don’t have a basis for discussion.” They left, but I learned a great deal from that little encounter. One thing that impressed me with the JWs was that they recognized that their god was different from my God. The second thing that impressed me was that they freely admitted it. Is it proper and correct to talk about their god and my God? Is it just a matter of semantics? Same God, different description or different God. One thing I do know, we’re talking about sharing our faith here and about salvation. Only one God can save.
Robert on September 14th, 2007

Falcon,
I think it’s just honesty to admit we are worshiping different Gods, because we are.
And I do agree…only the true God can save, that’s why I said, one of us is in trouble…

I’m perplexed at Mormons who insist that the God as described in the bible is the same god that they worship? Mormonism used to be very direct about this but now, the current climate of Mormonism is that they would like to be considered just “another sect of Christianity.”
Seth R. on September 14th, 2007

Remember that Mormonism doesn’t have a professional clergy or magisterium enforcing the doctrine. In fact, Mormonism isn’t half so interested in orthodoxy (right belief) as in orthopraxy (right practice).

This is why you see a great deal of continuity in the ethical side of Mormonism, but on the doctrinal side… well it looks like a moving target. We aren’t really enforcing our orthodoxy, so it tends to shift as generations come and go.

That’s why you’ve got apostle Orson Pratt way back when asserting that God conceived Jesus with Mary “in the usual way” (or was that Jo