Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Katspur,
Although I don't agree with much of Mormonism, I want to thank you for posting and sharing and explaining a bit. Christians are often intolerant of "other" beliefs, and you have certainly been tried here.
Thank you, Brian! Believe me, your kind words couldn't have come at a better time or be more welcome.
It always makes me feel so bad when this issue arises. I never know what to say, particularly because I am personally so opposed to prejudice of any kind, be it racial, sexual or religious. I would never try to excuse racist comments, regardless of who made them. I would just ask that you consider the following facts, as you consider everything else that has been written:
Prior to the June, 1978 (when the ban against Blacks holding the priesthood was lifted)...
Church doctrine never held that blacks were less than human or without souls, as some denominations did.
Joseph Smith taught that any mental or economic weakness suffered by blacks was not due to any in-born defect, but simply due to not having ample opportunity to advance and receive the same education as whites.
Church members were overwhelmingly abolitionist and were even persecuted and driven out because of their anti-slavery leanings.
The Church never had segregated congregations; all members worshipped together.
The Church supported equal civil rights for many years before the 1978 revelation: to the Church, the issue of priesthood was not one of civil rights.
Sociologic studies demonstrated that pre-1978 Mormons were no more or less racist than their contemporaries
Finally, in 1988, ten years after the ban was lifted, Dallin H. Oaks, one of the Church's Apostles, gave an interview to the Associated press, in which he said:
“…It’s not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reasons to commandments. When do so, we are on our own. Some people put reason to [the ban] and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong. There is a lesson in that...
I’m referring to reasons given by General Authorities and elaborated upon by others. The whole set of reasons seemed to be unnecessary risk taking... Let’s [not] make the mistake that’s been made in the past, here and in other areas, trying to put reasons to revelation. The reasons turn out to be man-made to a great extent.”
Why have both National Geographic and the Smithsonian Institute rejected the Book of Mormon as being archaeologically reliable?
I think this is because the Book of Mormon was never intended as an archeological source. Interestingly enough, a number of years ago, the Smithsonian, when responding to letters from people who were specifically asking for its evaluation of the Book of Mormon, used to send out a lengthy letter pointing out all of the supposed flaws and anachronisms in the Book of Mormon. In more recent years, though, as archeologists have discovered many previously held "facts" as to what did and did not exist on the American continent prior to the Spanish Conquest to be in error, the Smithsonian has toned down its form-letter response to people. If you were to write to the Smithsonian today about the Book of Mormon, here's what the letter you got in return would say:
"Your inquiry of February 7 concerning the Smithsonian Institution's alleged use of the Book of Mormon as a scientific guide has been received in this office for response. The Book of Mormon us a religious document and not a scientific guide. The Smithsonian Institution has never used it in archeological research, and any information that you have received to the contrary is incorrect. Your interest in the Smithsonian Institution is appreciated."
Can you drink decaf coffee? If it's not about the caffeine than is iced coffee ok?
When the "Word of Wisdom" was revealed to Joseph Smith in 1838, it said, "hot drinks are not for the body." I guess the question must have come up quite early on as to what was meant by "hot drinks" because almost from the beginning the Church leadership interpreted this as specifically referring to tea and coffee. There has never been any actual explanation given as to why tea and coffee were to be avoided, but most people have assumed that it was because they both contained caffeine. As time went by, iced tea became popular, but practicing Mormons avoided it because tea was tea and the Word of Wisdom had been clearly interpreted by the Church leadership as prohibiting tea and coffee. Caffeinated soda came upon the scene much later, and since it was neither tea nor coffee, it was easy enough for people to rationalize and say it's not against the Word of Wisdom.
Today, the only time it becomes a real issue is when someone goes in to see his bishop to get a temple recommend. At that time, his bishop asks him a series of ten or twelve questions to determine his worthiness to go to the temple. One of those questions is "Do you live the Word of Wisdom?" That's it. Not "Do you abstain from tea and coffee?" or "What about decaffeinated coffee?" "Do you avoid caffeinated sodas?" or "Do you avoid chocolate?" It is left up to the individual's own conscience as to how to answer the question. If the individual were to say, "Well, I do drink Diet Coke? Is that okay?" his bishop would more than likely say, "Diet Coke probably isn't all that good for you, wouldn't you agree?" and then sign his temple recommend anyway. I know that some people do drink decaffeinated coffee and may probably have had a similar conversation with their bishops about it. I don't think most bishops would deny a person a temple recommend over decaffeinated coffee, but some probably would.
Remember that the Word of Wisdom is a health code. It specifically prohibits "hot drinks," "strong drinks" and "tobacco." On the other hand, it doesn't make mention of methamphetamines or cocaine, but I can guarantee you that no member of the Church who admitted to using these substances would get a temple recommend, and it would be because he did not abide by the Word of Wisdom. It's really pretty much a matter of common sense, and recognizing that the whole point of the commandment is to help us maintain good health.
Can you drink decaf coffee? If it's not about the caffeine than is iced coffee ok?
When the "Word of Wisdom" was revealed to Joseph Smith in 1838, it said, "hot drinks are not for the body." I guess the question must have come up quite early on as to what was meant by "hot drinks" because almost from the beginning the Church leadership interpreted this as specifically referring to tea and coffee. There has never been any actual explanation given as to why tea and coffee were to be avoided, but most people have assumed that it was because they both contained caffeine. As time went by, iced tea became popular, but practicing Mormons avoided it because tea was tea and the Word of Wisdom had been clearly interpreted by the Church leadership as prohibiting tea and coffee. Caffeinated soda came upon the scene much later, and since it was neither tea nor coffee, it was easy enough for people to rationalize and say it's not against the Word of Wisdom.
Today, the only time it becomes a real issue is when someone goes in to see his bishop to get a temple recommend. At that time, his bishop asks him a series of ten or twelve questions to determine his worthiness to go to the temple. One of those questions is "Do you live the Word of Wisdom?" That's it. Not "Do you abstain from tea and coffee?" or "What about decaffeinated coffee?" "Do you avoid caffeinated sodas?" or "Do you avoid chocolate?" It is left up to the individual's own conscience as to how to answer the question. If the individual were to say, "Well, I do drink Diet Coke? Is that okay?" his bishop would more than likely say, "Diet Coke probably isn't all that good for you, wouldn't you agree?" and then sign his temple recommend anyway. I know that some people do drink decaffeinated coffee and may probably have had a similar conversation with their bishops about it. I don't think most bishops would deny a person a temple recommend over decaffeinated coffee, but some probably would.
Remember that the Word of Wisdom is a health code. It specifically prohibits "hot drinks," "strong drinks" and "tobacco." On the other hand, it doesn't make mention of methamphetamines or cocaine, but I can guarantee you that no member of the Church who admitted to using these substances would get a temple recommend, and it would be because he did not abide by the Word of Wisdom. It's really pretty much a matter of common sense, and recognizing that the whole point of the commandment is to help us maintain good health.
Why diet coke though? All my neighbors drink it, why not caffince free regular coke? I have akso had hot chocolate at friends houses, isn't that a caffinated hot drink?
Why diet coke though? All my neighbors drink it, why not caffince free regular coke? I have akso had hot chocolate at friends houses, isn't that a caffinated hot drink?
I seriously don't know, hilgi. I really don't think there's any definite ruling on it. I occasionally buy caffeine free Diet Coke, but if you go to a restaurant, you'd seldom be able to find anything but the caffeinated variety. All I really know for sure is that "hot drinks" has always been defined as "tea and coffee." Like I said, I'm pretty sure a lot of bishops would let decaffeinated coffee slide. A few might have a major problem with Diet Coke. (I hope not mine! )
Why diet coke though? All my neighbors drink it, why not caffince free regular coke? I have akso had hot chocolate at friends houses, isn't that a caffinated hot drink?
Its a judgement call. Those items were not around much then and have not been addressed since. You only need to look at the intention of the word of wisdom and not the exact text. A cup of coffee has far more caffeine than a can of coke.
I am amazed at Katzpur's knowledge of the Gospel. I wish I knew everything she does.
For me my testimony of the Gospel and its truthfulness has come about through much prayer, scripture reading, and experiences that have testified so much and made my faith grow.
I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE that NO ONE can convince me of anything. It is only Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ through the Holy Ghost, that will let me know what is true or what is not.
Because I have gained these witnesses, I KNOW w/out a doubt in my being that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was restored to this earth.
I wish I could debate or explain as well as Katzpur does, but my belief, my faith is not something I can put into words. I just know that I am a daughter of my Heavenly Father, and that Jesus Christ has paid the price for me to go back into the arms of my Father in heaven. Christ has also given me the example on how I should live while on earth. And I am so, so grateful that while here on earth I am not alone but can have the companionship of the Holy Ghost to guide me and help me to be on the path that leads to Jesus Christ.
I do not look to convert anyone. I just want to share a little of what I know through faith. It is mine. And even if someone were to ask me to deny it, I could not, I would not. Once the Holy Ghost has touched my heart, it is there forever. I've tried to ignore it, choosing instead to follow the world. But I have to say, that I found no peace and happiness when I left the church.
My heart is full of joy and I hope everyone who is looking for something greater will find it.
Sorry Katz . . . the idea that our Almighty God would give a rat's about the intricacies of our individual drinking, eating or any other trivialities of this physical life is simply unimaginable to me. All things physical are to obtain the energy to sustain our existence, propagate and convert as much of our individual life energy into high quality soul energy (consciousness) through "love of God and each other." All this petty nonsense not only seems silly but actually trivializes the spiritual task we have been set . . . to mature righteously into reborn Spirits upon our physical deaths.
Sorry Katz . . . the idea that our Almighty God would give a rat's about the intricacies of our individual drinking, eating or any other trivialities of this physical life is simply unimaginable to me. All things physical are to obtain the energy to sustain our existence, propagate and convert as much of our individual life energy into high quality soul energy (consciousness) through "love of God and each other." All this petty nonsense not only seems silly but actually trivializes the spiritual task we have been set . . . to mature righteously into reborn Spirits upon our physical deaths.
I know you have little use for the physical, Mystic. We believe differently. We believe that God wants us to take care of the bodies He gave us. After all, He created our bodies. Why wouldn't He care about how we treated them? In the Doctrine & Covenants, we read, "For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy."
At any rate, there's no need for debate. I'm not trying to convince people that I'm right and they're wrong, so if you can't imagine why God cares about what we believe He cares about, that's fine. This thread is strictly to educate people as to what Mormons believe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
