Vort

Very true. Going to the example you gave a bit further back, let's examine two possible reactions:
BISHOP: You are showing a total tithing last year of $1,500, which suggests $15,000 of increase. But Brother Smith, you bought a new BMW two months ago, you added a new wing to your house earlier this year, and you took your entire family to Hawaii for three weeks in October. The people I know with $15,000 of increase per year are living on food stamps and struggle to have enough money to afford a telephone or rent a video twice a year. Can you help me understand the apparent discrepancy?
REACTION #1: My finances are private. You are not the tax auditor. I told you I'm a full tithe payer. Now give me my temple recommend and mind your own freaking business.
REACTION #2: Of course, Bishop. As you know, I am on permanent disability, which gives me a very small income. Combined with about $3000 in profits from my investments, that accounts for the totality of my income, which is what I tithed. My father has a lot of money, and he owns "my" house. He's the one who added on the wing -- for my benefit, yes. He also bought me the new car to replace the one I totaled in September, and he took us all to Hawaii. I guess I just picked my father well.
Which of these two reactions strikes you as the most charitable? Which is the most useful? The most likely to promote understanding? Even if you believe (which I don't) that the man has no obligation to explain himself to his bishop when asked, isn't that the way people who want to build Zion would deal with their leaders?
I don't know all the answers. I believe that "trust but verify" is politico-speak for "don't trust". But I cannot find anything amiss when a bishop inquires about an obviously non-standard arrangement of things. That's his duty. And it is our duty to help him in that, to sustain him, including to explain ourselves when asked. That's my belief, anyway.

Religious fanatics come in two stripes:
Anyone who adheres to their religion more strictly than I do Anyone whose religion is too different from mine

Because the men involved in those scenarios, fight back.  With lethal force.

It's not a traffic heavy signal.

Ironhold and I have done this dance before.  I didn't go on a mission, and he and I have had exact mirror opposite experiences as a result.  I have no lifetime of loneliness.  I've regretted not going, and I've had some decent-sized struggles in my life that probably wouldn't have been there if I had gone.  But I have no lifetime of second-guessing myself.  If I've ever been in the presence of a snide remarker, I didn't notice their remarks.  
I suppose Ironhold's cautionary tale is worth noting - if you don't go on a mission, you might end up like him and his lifetime of second-guessing himself.  But that's hardly the only possible outcome.

The irony here is..  this person comes and belittles, attacks, and degrades faithful members of the church while claiming to be one.  And then when the forum members in general do not quietly take it... he casts us as the uncharitable bad guys. 
As if on this site of faithful LDS we should let his highly venomous  attacks on our faith, our church, our leaders, and our membership go uncontested. 

Maybe some explanation is needed.....I put quotations around the word charitable-like because I was referencing his idea of paying his allotted 10% of his income for something other than tithing as not as charitable as it may seem. The idea may seem nice because the words sound pleasant (e.g., organizations that help people who have no water, housing, etc.), but the principle of the matter is simple: we pay 10% of our income to the Lord, and we can donate the rest however we want. If the OP wanted to spend another percentage of his income on other charities and organizations that the Church may not reach, then please do! That's amazing and I commend those who can and are able. But I won't compliment behavior that the OP seems to think is "charitable" when they are putting aside a commandment of the Lord to do so. 
As a Latter-Day Saint, I have a firm belief in the principle of tithing. So I won't compliment behavior or thoughts that go against the principle that I firmly believe in, even if they are in essence "good deeds".

I agree that enforcement is an issue fraught with complications; but I think a "nonya bidness!" approach goes too far.  I think my bishop's "business" entails anything that pertains to my spiritual and temporal welfare.  I think he's fully within his rights to ask pretty much anything that reasonably falls under that umbrella.  
On the other hand--if he uses that info to revoke my temple recommend; then I may want to take things up with the stake president.

Better title: "I'm a woman who didn't serve a full-time mission, and that's OK"

Better title: "I'm a woman who didn't serve a full-time mission, and that's OK"

By definition, it is the bishop's business. This is especially true for endowed members, who have already voluntarily given everything they own and everything they are -- all of "their" time, all of "their" talents, all of "their" money, everything with which they have been blessed -- to the building of the kingdom of God, which is defined as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They have already voluntarily become stewards, not owners, over everything they supposedly own. And guess who the Lord has authorized as the one to check up on their stewardship? That's right: The bishop.

Better title: "I'm a woman who didn't serve a full-time mission, and that's OK"

Perhaps.  But I expect we still disagree with each other.  I agree with @Vort - my income and property are indeed the bishop's business.  Maybe if I thought my bishop was shifty, I'd be worried about that, but I'm just not.  Honestly, I'm not really worried about anyone (except potential thieves) knowing my financial comings and goings.
IMO, you're jumping a mile where an inch was implied.  The implication being, "the bishop might choose not to accept a 'yes' answer without further discussion if he feels there are reasons to doubt it"; and your jump being, "the bishop is going to do an audit of all my financial records".  IMO, there's a pretty wide gap between those two ends, and if the "audit" end of the line concerns you, the opposite extreme ("check a box without thinking about it") isn't the appropriate response.

Also, one thing to keep in mind, you will always learn something new. Sometimes these new things to you may be old news to others. But, we are all in this together. So, if you find that you drink coffee and start to feel guilty and not want to go to church because of that, go anyway. If you find out later that something else you've been doing may not be a good thing to do, it's ok. Chalk it up to you learned something new. Remember, just try a little harder to be better today than yesterday. Little steps. We are all taking little steps, even people who you may think as taking big steps....they are not big ones, but little ones for them. 

As a new convert, I would recommend that you focus on attending all 3 hours at church (Sacrament, Sunday School, and Relief Society (or Priesthood if you are male)), praying daily, reading scriptures daily, and keeping the commandments as best you are able at this time (things like pay tithing, be kind to others, serve other people as you can, no smoking, no drinking alcohol or tea or coffee, etc.). 
If you have never received new member discussions (very similar to the discussions you had with the missionaries before being baptized, but these are given after baptism), then speak to the bishop about having them. It'll likely be done by members of the church rather than missionaries (although they may be done with missionaries). 
Also, I would recommend that you speak to the Relief Society President (if you are female) and ask about having visiting teachers and becoming a visiting teacher. That will not only help you to serve others, but it will also allow you to build some friendships with other people.
Good luck.

Okay, drinking coffee in this case is not the problem.  The problem is the - " don't feel overly guilty about drinking the decaf coffee " and the " I haven't felt the spirit even once since being baptized" which is an explanation of the no guilt feelings.
It seems like you don't need to work on avoiding coffee.  Rather, you need to work on building up your testimony.  The usual answer to this is Pray, Scripture Study, Sabbath Observance, Tithing, Diligence in Callings (HT/VT/etc.), etc.  Are you keeping up on those things?  Are you going through the new member discussions?  Are you seeking God?
Do those things and the rest will follow.  Remember, faith is an ACTION word.

I only wish to point out that the Word of Wisdom prohibition against coffee and tea was not established because of caffeine, so the "decaf" part of this scenario is irrelevant.  Whether you had a cup of caffeinated coffee or decaf, it's the same violation of the Word of Wisdom.  Beyond that, you'll have to figure out how you want to handle this, particularly if you have a worthiness interview wherein keeping the Word of Wisdom is discussed.

@Smallfootsteps, can you please stop using the internet to look things up about the gospel when you have a wonderful set of people here who are members who can answer your questions AND there is a wonderful and VALID website (lds.org) that can answer all of your questions? 

Then why not just have a checkbox in the online tithing payment system wherein you can declare yourself a full tithe payer?  Cuz what you're describing (where the bishop doesn't use discernment, the Spirit, or whatever you want to call it, to decide maybe we need to discuss this further) is the exact same thing (as a checkbox in an online form).

By definition, it is the bishop's business. This is especially true for endowed members, who have already voluntarily given everything they own and everything they are -- all of "their" time, all of "their" talents, all of "their" money, everything with which they have been blessed -- to the building of the kingdom of God, which is defined as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They have already voluntarily become stewards, not owners, over everything they supposedly own. And guess who the Lord has authorized as the one to check up on their stewardship? That's right: The bishop.

Wait a minute. You are making a sarcastic judgment against those who responded to you. Weren't you the one all up in arms in your OP (before anyone had even written anything) about people potentially judging you?
Oh, yeah, here it is.
So now I'm just wondering, danny: Who's the one that needs to repent?

Wait a minute. You are making a sarcastic judgment against those who responded to you. Weren't you the one all up in arms in your OP (before anyone had even written anything) about people potentially judging you?
Oh, yeah, here it is.
So now I'm just wondering, danny: Who's the one that needs to repent?

Wait a minute. You are making a sarcastic judgment against those who responded to you. Weren't you the one all up in arms in your OP (before anyone had even written anything) about people potentially judging you?
Oh, yeah, here it is.
So now I'm just wondering, danny: Who's the one that needs to repent?

You have your opinion, I have mine. I won't compliment behavior that could be done on top of paying 10% in tithing that is asked of us by the Lord. In my opinion, if the OP truly wanted to be "charitable", then there was no reason to come to this forum to ask opinions about not paying tithing, and then expecting to receive complimentary advice from members who have firm beliefs in the commandment of tithing. They could have paid both without the need to come on a forum and talk about it in a nature that seems to exhibit a form of narcissism. 

I don't mean to sound harsh but that seems like a selfish desire to me.  Even so, it's not hard to see the good the church does with it's money if you look for it.