[Rix]

Yeah, I think I can see where you are coming from, DA. I might generalize even further and say that when it comes to mass slaughtering, there seems to be a common theme of classifying “your” type of people as being better, or chosen, more than the others…ala Hitler, “whites” over the “Indians,” etc….

Fortunately, as the world has become smaller, and we become more educated, we understand that none of us is uniquely superior to another. A needed evolution of attitude!

[Rix]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Rix wrote:

…And maybe the suicide bombers that are also totally convinced that they have been inspired by God to strap bombs to themselves, run into a building and kill those infidels along with taking their own life, are also hearing God’s voice…Can anybody really know exactly what another’s witness is?…I don’t see Paul’s writings as any more or less “inspired” than hundreds of other enlightened spiritual leaders.

I don’t think Christianity really has much of anything to do with Islamic Jihadists. In principle, Christianity is a non-violent and peaceful religion that teaches forgiveness, loving your enemies, turning the other cheek, etc., so I don’t really see the comparison to Islam.

I wasn’t trying to claim that everything Paul ever said is inspired; my point is that I take his story and opinions more seriously than many others because I don’t believe that he was just making things up in a casual or haphazard way. It wasn’t just talk, he walked the walk and we can’t necessarily say the same thing about many other authors of so-called scriptures.

I think we have vastly different perceptions of history, DA. Yes, Jihadists are a uniquely terroristic small faction of a much larger Islam — one that is by definition very peaceful and loving of all people. I guess you haven’t heard of the Crusades in Christian history? Millions slaughtered for not professing allegiance to Jesus…quite violent, IMO.

Of course Christianity has thrived in our western world — partially due to the slaughtering of those who didn’t comply over the centuries. And each major world religion has its violent past…and most claim to have a peaceful, love your enemies sort of foundation. But even the Mormons have quite an unsavory past including the Mountain Meadows Massacre, the Danites, and even the Blackhawk war where they were a part of murdering thousands of innocent Natives here in Sanpete County. I could go on, but I think you get my point.

So what I see is very equally violent pasts “under the Banner of Heaven” by most religions, and hopefully an evolution to a much more tolerant, respectful attitude towards others that believe differently today. I’m glad to see that Mormonism has transitioned to a more peaceful people today. I see good and bad, inspired and uninspired leaders throughout history of each religion…and hope each can continue evolving to a place of love in their doctrines. Heaven knows we have room to grow in that direction!

[Rix]

Brian Johnston wrote:

The spiritual implications of this are profound. It means you must really become responsible for your self, your decisions and your actions. It is the essence of truly freeing “free agency.” If we explore this long enough, we will eventually see that we must not, and can not, depend upon anyone but God. Can we even lay our excuse and blame at God’s feet? Perhaps in the end, we can not even do that.

LOVE this! And maybe when we come to understand the true nature of God, it will become clear why we must learn self-reliance in this life.

[Rix]

Brian Johnston wrote:

Just to be clear, for the sake of the culture of our little community, a believing perspective is completely acceptable. If someone sees the letters of Paul, for example, as very close to what happened. That is fine. It may have been that way. It is possible. Even if it is not possible, it may still be important and valuable.

The ability to be comfortable with and even celebrate other perspectives is an important attribute to being at peace as a doubter (on some level) within the larger population of the orthodox within Mormonism.

Absolutely! I see it all as “story” anyway, and we all need our stories or else we go crazy! Each person’s story is different than anybody else’s, so if we spend so much time and energy selling ours, we’ll never have time to live our own!

😆

[Rix]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

No one really knows for sure what exactly he was thinking and why but if nothing else I still think Paul was inspired to popularize a superior belief system that in its most basic form really is “good news” compared to anything else people have come up with before or since

I have no doubt that Paul was very committed to his story. And like so many other religious leaders throughout history, he may have been completely convinced his inspiration was from God. And maybe it was?

And maybe the suicide bombers that are also totally convinced that they have been inspired by God to strap bombs to themselves, run into a building and kill those infidels along with taking their own life, are also hearing God’s voice.

Can anybody really know exactly what another’s witness is?

When I read a few books regarding the Constantinian selection of Paul’s version of the Jesus story, it was clear to me that it was very politically motivated. Then when the prior Pagan traditions of virgin birth, half-God/half human deity, atonement of mankind’s sins, resurrection, etc. etc, were adopted (there is no real evidence of any of these things actually happening in Jesus’ life — just the hearsay stories to Paul’s disciples…Bart Ehrlman is quite thorough on this point), along with studying Joseph Campbell’s great work of comparitive mythologies…, I’m quite resolved in my position.

I don’t see Paul’s writings as any more or less “inspired” than hundreds of other enlightened spiritual leaders. Many have sacrificed much, including their lives for their beliefs and causes. So my approach is to incorporate what touches me, is “good” for me in my life, and not feel guilty or obligated to accept what doesn’t resonate as “true” for me.

[Rix]

Brian Johnston wrote:

I am a little less cynical. I think scriptures and religious leaders, for the most part, are sincere in their efforts.

Oh don’t get me wrong…I agree that today’s leaders are very sincere and diligent in what they do. And I think they DO believe they are receiving and teaching God’s will. I respect each of them for what they know, and their efforts to help others. Really.

I’m not much of a scripture fan. I’ve just spent so much research into the basis of them that I am skeptical of their “truths.” Like any story, I love the power of the myth, and consider them no better nor worse than other great stories. But I’m really okay that they give great hope and guidance to many people.

But that’s just me….and I could be wrong.

[Rix]

Cadence wrote:

I am not sure God commands anything, or holds us accountable for all the myriad of infractions that most religions say he does. I am afraid I believe most of the commandments are made up of men to control behavior in society. They may be good ideas to live by, but what if there are not commandments as we think of them other than to just do your best.

I personally am not looking to have a visit from God. There was a time that I thought it important but now I truely believe if God needs to come to me for some reason he will. Other than that I just will live my live the best I can. Cause no harm and help where I can.

Yup, that is also about where I stand too. I find most religious teachings (including scriptures) to be self-serving to the men who wrote them…and I don’t feel most to be “inspired” by God. Even the whole “earth-life is a test to determine our quality of life hereafter”…is just a controlling way for those “in charge” to get their ego boosts.

(hmm, was I blunt enough there? 😳 )

I believe in morality…but I find it comes most authentically from within, not outside ourselves.

[Rix]

GBSmith wrote:

Basically religion helps people explain the world and give a reason for why things are the way they are. In the form of churches it enables people to join together for support and the common good.

Yup…that about says it all! I would only add that it doesn’t need to be “true,” just believable.

[Rix]

HiJolly wrote:

Yep. Just like my dad isn’t superman. But he *is* my dad.

Love that!

[Rix]

Brian Johnston wrote:

Thank you everyone for all your great observations! I am always impressed and learn new things. Just as a reminder to keep this on topic, let’s avoid debates about the Word of Wisdom in this thread.

I need to focus specifically on recommendations for counselling people who are questioning their faith — to help them make the most responsible decisions until they settle in and are comfortable making decisions about the pros and cons.

Focus on what to tell people and how to say it, keeping in mind we are talking most likely to people fresh in the stages of doubt and crisis, and that we do not want to encourage anyone to make poor life decisions (regardless of the truthfullness, validity or sound science of the WofW).

Oops, sorry about participating in the thread-jack, Brian 😳

From a recovering drug addict turned drug counselor, I would say “If a person chooses to begin partaking of some substances previously forbidden, it should be done with moderation and careful consideration. Experience shows us that many disaffected mormons quickly swing with the pendulum to the opposite extreme after “discovering” troubling issues with church claims. The excessive intake of drugs and alcohol almost always makes the “spiritual transition” more difficult than it ever helps…and often leads to addiction and alcoholism — further complicating family relationships, and can lead to fatal decisions and overdoses.”

There, my oblique input….

😆

[Rix]

SamBee wrote:

Do I have to spell it out Rix? I have sent you a private message on this subject, about exactly why I’m happy to give up tea and coffee.

Sorry SB…been busy today. Yes, I’m sure there are many substances that can be harmful in many ways — and different for each person. And I think your quoted study may be accurate. No argument there.

Here is a quick CDC report on the leading causes of death: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm

Four of the top five are directly, or indirectly, the result of over-eating and obesity. So my only point is that IF (and that’s a big IF) the purpose of the WoW is to encourage good health, it is barking up the wrong tree…at least how it is emphasized today in the church.

BTW, I don’t read anywhere in the WoW anything about caffeine. There’s a saying I’ve heard, “how do you tell a good mormon from a bad mormon?

.

.

.

.

.

the temperature of his caffeine! (Utah Couty has the highest per capita intake of diet colas in the world, btw.)

[Rix]

SamBee wrote:

Rix wrote:

Again, big picture — caffeine, wine, tea…combined have only killed a negligible number of people compared to the diseases from overeating and obesity.

I’ve got to disagree here very strongly.

Of course that is your prerogative. I try to go by scientific studies, not a person’s personal exposure. The CDC has loads of reports about the dangers of obesity and overeating. Yes, it is more specific to this country where starvation is not as much a concern as in others…and of course, as I said, any addiction can be fatal. But by the sheer numbers of deaths from heart disease, strokes, diabetes — the majority of which are preventable, there is no comparison.

Again, the spirit of my post is that any over-consumption of anything is bad…and I believe there is a better way to address the issue than to simply say “don’t do it.” I think education and more effective guidelines of “moderation” would accomplish the goal of improving health better than absolute abstinence demands. Kinda reminds me of that whole plan from Lucifer!

😆

[Rix]

SamBee wrote:

But as I wrote somewhere, that love of self must paradoxically not be selfish, egotistical, or proud.

Noy paradoxical at all, IMO. True self-love simply positions one no higher or lower than any other — it allows the individual to see himself as equal to all, and as one universal whole. Pride and ego show up when a person doesn’t understand this equality and projects this insufficiency outward in the form of superiority — when it and inferiority are flip sides of the same coin.

(sorry to get all new age psychobabble there… 😆 )

[Rix]

Boy Orson, I can hear you bearing your testimony; “I don’t know the church is true, I don’t know that Joseph was a prophet…” 😆

(of course I’m ribbing you…considering my sig line re certainty — I’m right there witcha!)

[Rix]

SamBee wrote:

Rix wrote:

So, taking a step back, looking at where we are today, we can see so many differences than in previous times — even in the last 20 years! In medical science, we now know that excessive eating leads to obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, strokes, heart disease…all of which are obviously not “healthy.” This is so much more urgent than the petty little details of tea, coffee, wine, etc.,

Rix, I disagree that these are “petty little details”. A lot of people take heart attacks due to too much caffeine, and wine has killed many people too.

Again, big picture — caffeine, wine, tea…combined have only killed a negligible number of people compared to the diseases from overeating and obesity. Of course, any addiction is harmful, but I’m a firm believer in moderation in all things, and I (personally) feel that the current emphasis of the WoW is not consistent with that principle. Frankly, with what we know today about what is good and not good for the body, the more appropriate emphasis would be on the “eat meat sparingly” part, (and I would also strongly advise against tobacco — too much evidence about that killing people too…) and certainly not on the “never drink tea, coffee, or alcohol” concept.

Another point I should make is the psychological aspect of the WoW. There is significant addiction to substances within the church membership. As a physician and former drug and alcohol counselor, my experience is that when you tell a person they cannot partake of “one drop” of anything, there arises a curiousity/rebellious streak in many…and the risk of over-doing the substance you are trying to restrict increases. There are studies showing this…so if the true purpose of the WoW is for health (rather than obedience…which I think is probably the greater purpose today…), it seems to be failing in that purpose. I’m not saying that obedience to a principle is not a good goal, it’s just that when it is promoted to be a health guideline, it should be consistent with the facts of medical science. The inconsistency gives the organization a bit of a black eye, IMO.

[Author]

Posts