Internet Mormons, Chapel Mormons, Critics, Apologists, and Never-Mo's all welcome!
https://discussmormonism.com/
Water Dog wrote:Being a member of the church is like striving to become a Monk or a Jedi.
I like the Jedi analogy. Star Wars and Mormonism are similar in that they're both fiction, but Star Wars is so much funner.Water Dog wrote:Not missing the point, I answered the question. Yes, they would sign the temple recommend.
Water Dog wrote:Sethbag wrote:Dude, anyone who was raised in or lived as an active member in the Mormon church for more than 15 minutes knows that it is not considered obeying the "word of wisdom" to drink any alcoholic beverage, or any tea made from the tea plant (ie: camellia sinensis, not so-called herbal teas) . Are you really the only Mormon who didn't get the memo?
No, apparently none of the members in Japan or Korea got this memo either. Nor did my American mission president when I served in Japan. Ant not just with regards to tea, but alcohol as well, as Japanese cuisine includes a number of fermented foods, such as Nato, which contain alcohol. Missionaries were openly encouraged to eat Nato because it is healthy, and also because it was a very culturally immersive thing to do. I ate that stuff almost every morning with breakfast.
the Aqua Hound wrote:(ie: camellia sinensis, not so-called herbal teas)
ROFLMAO!! Let's see "camellia sinensis" on lds.org anywhere. I await the link.
[/quote]the insufferable pedant and self-justifying pharisee WaterDog wrote:And such is the same for "alcohol" or "alcoholic beverages". Where is the defining threshold? Are we supposed to have all of our foods tested in a lab? What is the precise % alcohol content that breaks the WOW? In the text of the WOW, in D&C 89, it specifically says that MILD drinks are good. Mild drink = 19th century beer, a.k.a. ale, which Joseph Smith and all the presidents and other leaders of the church drank right up until prohibition.
Show for me the official church revelation which rescinds "mild drinks" from the WOW.
Water Dog wrote: Such an attitude itself is demonstrative of someone not keeping the WOW.
Gordon B. Hinckley wrote:Is observance of the Word of Wisdom necessary? The Brethren have long felt that it certainly must be. Observance of the Word of Wisdom is concerned with the care of one’s body, which, the Lord has assured, is of itself a temple, a tabernacle of the spirit. He has said, “Yea, man is the tabernacle of God, even temples; and whatsoever temple is defiled, God shall destroy that temple.” (D&C 93:35.)
I recall a bishop telling me of a woman who came to get a recommend. When asked if she observed the Word of Wisdom, she said that she occasionally drank a cup of coffee. She said, “Now, bishop, you’re not going to let that keep me from going to the temple, are you?” To which he replied, “Sister, surely you will not let a cup of coffee stand between you and the House of the Lord.”
Water Dog wrote: If this is really how you think, you don't understand what constitutes revelation and official doctrine. Conference talks, pamphlets, sunday school manuals, CES institute manuals, and the like, ARE NOT official doctrine.
Water Dog wrote:Did I say a glass of wine is fine? Nope, said no such thing. And the fermented (not rotten) beans in Japan don't contain a simple few molecules of alcohol. It has a real % which can be measured into the single digits. It plainly smells alcoholic when you open the lid. The longer you let it sit, the more alcoholic it gets.
I'm not going to define wine as being good or bad. What wine? Define wine. To me wine is against the WOW, or at least the more commercialized types which are of a high alcoholic content. I've never drunk anything called wine. The point is that there is no definition. The WOW is a spiritual law which carries a lot more meaning than some letter of the law rules created by a church member back in the 1920s. There is a spirit to the WOW. Do you honestly think that getting wasted on wine is keeping the WOW? No, it's not. It's plainly not. I am not arguing in favor of some kind of loop hole that allows people to keep a TR while doing whatever the heck they want. If that's the childish interpretation perhaps we do need a letter of the law. If you aren't being honest with yourself and aren't capable of determining, for yourself, whether your actions are in keeping with the WOW, well heck, you shouldn't be going to the temple as the concept of eternal progression is way above your head.
Water Dog wrote:I find it intriguing that critics of the church are so hell bent on "the church" being bad or wrong. You guys argue against my thoughts on the WOW more passionately that active LDS members do! I've found members in the church to mostly be receptive of my thoughts on the WOW. They go home and ponder them and come back thanking me later for giving them a new perspective. And this goes back to a comment I made on another thread, that most critics [of the church] are not interested in truth but have ulterior motives. Even if you disagree with the truth of the church, if you were "truth seekers" I would expect you to applaud my take on the WOW. Hey, maybe those Mormons aren't so bad, maybe they're not the lemmings we think they are. Maybe there is hope for them yet. Instead you want to excommunicate me from a church you say you don't even believe in, lol.
Water Dog wrote:Well I'm not sure if the President Monson understands the differences between those questions or not. To be honest, I don't understand the difference between them. They are the same question. The question isn't "Do I, the Bishop, think you are honest in your dealings with your fellow man?" If I'm not being asked to assess myself, then why am I being asked questions? Instead the Bishop should be issuing me his ruling.
I would love to hear any man explain how impregnating a woman he isn't married to is in keeping with the law of chastity. Show me that man. This is what disciplinary councils are for. If something arises which is open to interpretation either in assessing the crime or the penalty, we form a council. As a matter of official policy councils are never formed for WOW issues... gee, I wonder why?
How does John Huntsman keep his TR? Working for the state department he has consumed liquor over in China as part of cultural ceremonies, even on video! Is there an exception in the WOW for ambassadors I'm not aware of?