Share This Episode
Viewpoint on Mormonism Bill McKeever  Logo

Aaron vs. Kwaku: The Debate Part 1

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever
The Truth Network Radio
March 29, 2020 8:04 pm

Aaron vs. Kwaku: The Debate Part 1

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 662 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

March 29, 2020 8:04 pm

MRM’s Aaron Shafovaloff talks with MRM founder Bill McKeever about his debate with LDS apologist Kwaku El and provides some commentary. To watch the debate, go to


Is it one-on-one for teams is a valuable resource for anyone wanting a simplified view of the Mormon religion from a Christian perspective.

Mormonism 101 for teens is available at the Utah lighthouse bookstore in Salt Lake City or .1 examines the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a biblical perspective viewpoint when Mormonism is sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect. And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism welcome to this edition of viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry with me today is Erin shuffle wall of my colleague it MRM good to have you with me and today we want to discuss an event that you were a participant in and that was a date with a latter-day St. It was held on March 6 at Utah Valley University and there was quite a bit of people that are put out a lot more chairs 370 I would say there was a good turnout.

You were debating quake who L and quickly spell KW a K you. His last name is EL. He's kind of unique, wouldn't you say in the whole grand picture of Mormonism. He's a young man, he's he's pretty articulate. He knows how to handle himself but tell me why you felt that this would've been a positive thing to do.

So we did a prior debate and that was more moderately toned if you will, and sometimes passed and quickly has continued to oppose the gospel oppose the biblical gospel of grace and he is a YouTube influencer so I'm I would argue that he has more front and center influence on BYU students. For example, are those his age and his community than Mormon apologists that you and I might think of and interact with terms of literature. He is a social influencer. He is also part of projects where he is paid by Mormon apologetics groups to do YouTube videos and so I've seen people even my own church X Mormon Christians who used to look up to him who used to be influenced by him and follow his videos. And so it would be to set a pastoral level, a matter of encouragement to have someone take a month and another thing that cannot just tip the scales for me in terms of the tone that I decided with the aggression that I decided to use you in this debate was about two things. One is he came down to man tie and he went to the streets were always wonderful Christians who out of evangelical fervor and sweet motivating grace to evangelize Martin's heat.

He went down there and he was a part of a small group of guys that held up very condescending mocking contemptuous signs like this was all a big joke and it looked like he was going on. Therefore a kind of YouTube stent and he produced a video out of that that was just really snide and mocking toward Christians contemptuous and ending it is pretty nasty for Christians.

So basically what he's doing is everything that we as individuals and MRM as a ministry.

Try to encourage Christians not to do from our side of the fence trying to address the latter-day St., yet were trying to promote the gospel, try not to mock the people and we are trying to have constructive conversations that are substantive and were not doing this for show and uniting us to ridicule the common morning person so the other thing was that he posted a video on YouTube mocking the Christian motto is Jesus enough and he mocked the evangelical doctrine of grace, arguing that it basically enables people to go out and be unrepentant sinners, without any consequence. So I thought you know if he's willing to go after this motto is Jesus enough.

Why don't we turn that into a debate and why don't we figure out some subtopics and why don't we make them applicable to the motto and I did and I told him upfront going into the debate.

I am going to be more aggressive in this debate I'm going to punch hard. I'm not going to be sweet and nice in this debate, and I wanted him to know that beforehand because I did not want to be surprised by that. I was functioning my own mind as a believer who was fighting in the corner, as it were of evangelical Christians back against his contempt for the gospel is public mockery of the gospel and his condescension toward evangelical Christian believers and so I prayed that I would not be nice. I prayed that I would be bold and unapologetic in the sense of being confident and straightforward. I still wanted to maintain a professional sense of courtesy and respect, and interaction. But I wanted to be hard-hitting and I think you accomplish that I was there and I remember you telling me because we had to speak together at a church north of Salt Lake City and as we were driving up there you are. Explain to me what you your game plan. What is your strategy for the debate and we had a real good discussion on this. I can understand what you were trying to accomplish. I fully agree with it and I wouldn't say that you misbehaved it all. I mean your your passionate guy to begin with and I think sometimes people might misunderstand your passion once they get to know you.

Certainly it makes complete sense, but I didn't think that you were mean that all I thought that you were bold. I thought you were firm and sometimes I think that word is lost when it comes to why we do what we do we want to be firm but compassionate is that the same time, but now in the debate format that's a little bit different.

It's been a long time since I was in a formal debate and I've explained to you why I'm I shy away from a lot of those, because many times you're talking with people in the LDS church, you have no authority whatsoever, and I noticed this as the debate went on with quake you he was making some comments that no Latter Day Saints would feel obligated to agree with him on those positions. Because let's be quite honest folks in the grand scheme of things of Mormonism. He's a nobody.

He has no authority to speak for the church and so it's merely just his opinion, which is always, I found to be the problem when you're discussing matters in a formal setting like that. I do appreciate the fact that he seems on the hole with exceptions here to try to represent traditional mainstream Mormonism, so he doesn't seem to be like a Robert Millet or Stephen Robinson or Blake Ostler who live on the very edges of Mormonism of its theology and so he doesn't seem to try on some core issues to hedge. He tries instead to use his wit and his charisma to double down on that as some of the core theology of Mormonism and that there are huge exceptions that will be asking a question here because you you explain that one of the reasons why you wanted to engage quake you in this debate was because of his apparent dislike or contempt for the. The idea is Jesus enough but yet in the debate. There were times when he seemed to try and argue for that very premise so heat key in the video.

For example, YouTube and the original video he ends up affirming that he thinks there's a sense in which he can say Jesus is enough.

He just doesn't like what we mean by it, he thinks it's a it's a it's a thin motto that were abusing at so he'll try to own it. In the end, but will help you pervert it what it says in the debate is Jesus is enough to save us from those ugly Protestant beliefs is that we construed it that he he started off with a lot of ad hominem. In fact, that I was noticing the first 10 seconds just from the first 10 seconds and it was amazing all the logical fallacies that I was noticing him using in order to try and make his point. That's why ask you about this phrase is Jesus enough because it almost sounds like there was a lot of equivocation going on.

One minute that freezes okay the next minute didn't seem like it was okay and it probably was confusing to some that were listening and naturally in a debate. It's very easy when you have things going back and forth in a rapidfire moment, I should say to maybe miss some of the things I was trying very hard to catch everything that was being said. So it all made complete sense. There is so much to that debate. I think it'll require hours debriefing if people really want to benefit from the content. There are reasons why I asked what I asked that I don't think that the common person would understand why use the wording that I did because it's so particular to the context of indicating the gospel to martins and when we say is Jesus enough or only say Jesus is enough explain before we go off there today. What that means to us in the debate. I took the position that Jesus is our proxy we receive him by empty-handed faith and he accomplishes he has accomplished celestial law on our behalf, and he's given us a backstage pass into the celestial kingdom to be with Christ seated with Christ forever that Jesus is enough to establish a kingdom that will not be shaken. That will not be uprooted. A church that will not be prevailed against others.

No second growing season required as it were.

He is the final head of the McCullough dispensation.

He's the one who who rooted the kingdom in a final, definitive way and then lastly our satisfaction in Christ is enough such that were not worried about being married in the afterlife. We we know that heart being with Christ.

Knowing Christ, being alongside his people knowing Christ is more than enough. We don't need to carry over all of the earthly marital institutions to have a happy and joyful fool eternal life that I think we should explain some things to some of her listeners were used the phrase celestial law now in Mormonism. Each level of kingdom, the celestial, terrestrial and celestial kingdom has its own set of laws and whatever law, an individual lives during this mortality.

This mortal probation as they call it will determine where they end up in the next life. And when you use the word celestial kingdom were not talking about a place like in Mormonism where we get our own worlds and analogy, we become gods and we started to create through out eternity and that our offspring will then worship us as God of this world as we worship were supposed to worship as Mormons are supposed to worship.

Elohim is there God who is overall this world so definitely, there are some differences in the terminology that's always important if you're going to fully understand were a latter-day St. is coming from and I hope that the Mormons that were there and I I would imagine they probably did understand clearly your position because you came out of the gate, making it very obvious that there was a strong disagreement between what we believe is New Testament Christians and what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believes now this is online yes this is online if you just search on YouTube for quake you and Erin debate you find another way to value did another one earlier yes so this will be published in 2020. Okay, so look for the 2020 debate between quake you and Aaron shall fall if and tomorrow show organ talk some more about what took place in this debate that was held on March 6, 2020 Utah Valley University. Thank you for listening. If you would like more information regarding his research ministry. We encourage you to visit our website at you can request a free newsletter Mormonism research. We hope you will join us again as we look at another viewpoint is as with most Christian organizations is a research ministry depends on the generous financial support of friends like you. If you like what we do and how we do it, would you consider helping MRA meet its financial obligations really go to my website the right you'll see a building click there and follow the instructions. MRM is a Christian nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization and your gifts are tax-deductible, only that they are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support of this ministry

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime