Filthy Lucre

[Ironhold]

Back on the "what was the last movie you watched" thread, someone pitched an absolute fit about the fact that I'd just seen an R-rated movie, claiming that my having done so was grave enough a sin to call my salvation into question. 

As I had to explain to this person, I perform many different duties for the newspaper I'm with. I'm the de facto head courier. I'm a stringer. I write a weekly column. 

And I'm also the movie reviewer. 

By virtue of my job description, I occasionally have to see R-rated movies. As you can imagine, this person was absolutely beside themselves at this revelation and practically condemned me to the abyss. 

Thing is, my branch presidency understand that I'm basically playing "canary in the coal mine" every time I step into the theater. It's my job to watch the movie of the week and sound the alert in case the film is just that bad. Thus, if something is awful, then I'll have watched it so others won't. I've actually had people tell me that they prefer my reviews ahead of the reviews from bigger names in the industry because they know I'll be straightforward about such things; I'm not beholden to the Hollywood system, and so I have nothing to lose by being honest. As a result, I have been in a position to expose some of Hollywood's darlings for the trash they were (such as "Gone Girl") while also giving a fair shake to films that Hollywood has written off as inconvenient (such as "Ender's Game"). 

In that sense, I'd say I earn my money quite honestly. 

[Vort]

2 hours ago, Ironhold said:

Back on the "what was the last movie you watched" thread, someone pitched an absolute fit about the fact that I'd just seen an R-rated movie, claiming that my having done so was grave enough a sin to call my salvation into question...this person was absolutely beside themselves at this revelation [of having to watch an occasional R-rated movie] and practically condemned me to the abyss.

I understand hyperbole, but if I recall the thread correctly -- and it's entirely possible I do not -- you are going a great deal beyond mere exaggeration for effect. As I remember things, this is not even close to what happened.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

I remember the conversation Ironhold is referring to.  For those who don't:

On February 14, 2016 at 8:58 PM, Ironhold said:

Saw "Deadpool" earlier. 

The film well and truly earned its "R" rating due to content, but given the kind of character Deadpool is the film wouldn't have been the same if it had been censored. 

 

On February 14, 2016 at 6:50 AM, The Folk Prophet said:

Well...That's one way to try and make one's calling and election sure I suppose.

 

On February 14, 2016 at 7:00 AM, LeSellers said:

What's "one way to try [to] make one's calling and election sure"?

Context is everything.

Lehi

 

On February 14, 2016 at 0:06 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

Watching raunchy, exceedingly violent, sex and nudity filled R-rated cuss fests.

 

[theSQUIDSTER]

I think I get some of what Gator is trying to say about us being presumptuous in feeling like we know what Jesus would do in every circumstance.  That being said, I still think it's our duty to try our best at what we honestly believe He would do.  But we will be wrong sometimes.  

Consider this:
Matt. 22:17-21
 17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not?
 18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
 19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
 20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
 21 They say unto him, Cæsar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s; and unto God the things that are God's.

What does it mean to render unto Ceasar the things that are his?

I see a multiplicity of meanings in this, that could apply to many of the things we're discussing.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

28 minutes ago, theSQUIDSTER said:

I think I get some of what Gator is trying to say about us being presumptuous in feeling like we know what Jesus would do in every circumstance.  That being said, I still think it's our duty to try our best at what we honestly believe He would do.  But we will be wrong sometimes.

I'm with Gator.  He lived in such a different culture, and had such a different mission, it's really hard for us to know.  I prefer to ask myself, "What would Jesus want me to do?"  That is something I can definitely get guidance on from the Holy Ghost.

But as long as we are asking what would Jesus do, I think we should consider His love first...two great commandments and all that.   

[Guest MormonGator]

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

 

. As you can imagine, this person was absolutely beside themselves at this revelation and practically condemned me to the abyss. 

 

I don't believe you. That never happens here. 

(kidding, kidding) 

Edited February 27, 2016 by MormonGator

[The Folk Prophet]

 

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

someone

As if you aren't perfectly aware of who that "someone" was.

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

an R-rated movie

Deadpool is hardly "an" R-rated movie.

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

claiming that my having done so was grave enough a sin to call my salvation into question. 

This isn't true.

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

As I had to explain to this person, I perform many different duties for the newspaper I'm with. I'm the de facto head courier. I'm a stringer. I write a weekly column. 

As if having a relationship with a newspaper has anything to do with what is or is not proper, moral behavior.

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

As you can imagine, this person was absolutely beside themselves at this revelation and practically condemned me to the abyss. 

Also not true.

10 hours ago, Ironhold said:

Thing is, my branch presidency understand that I'm basically playing "canary in the coal mine" every time I step into the theater.

This is such a rubbish concept. First, as if the members really need you or others like you to tell them they ought not see Deadpool...give me a break. And second, in case you forgot, the canary in the coal mine dies -- so even if true, you're analogy self-admits a serious problem with the danger one who acts as said "canary in the coal mine" is putting themselves in.

[The Folk Prophet]

36 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I'm with Gator.  He lived in such a different culture, and had such a different mission, it's really hard for us to know.  I prefer to ask myself, "What would Jesus want me to do?"  That is something I can definitely get guidance on from the Holy Ghost.

Isn't getting guidance from the Holy Ghost the means whereby we should know what Jesus would do? And isn't that really the point that makes it not presumptuous or arrogant to believe one can know what Jesus would do?

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, theSQUIDSTER said:

I think I get some of what Gator is trying to say about us being presumptuous in feeling like we know what Jesus would do in every circumstance.  That being said, I still think it's our duty to try our best at what we honestly believe He would do.  But we will be wrong sometimes.  

 

Thank you, and I appreciate the understanding! 

My concern is that people who claim to know what Jesus would do in every situation will start sliding into the "I am a better/more moral person than you because of it". It's a slippery slope. While I agree that some things should be condemned, a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. A person who is really fussy and likes to control others will begin to think everything is sinful. 

[The Folk Prophet]

So the premise is that in the consideration of whether one should sell alcohol or not, if one uses the "What would Jesus do?" idea as a factor in the decision, they are on the slippery slope to thinking they're better than other people?

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

@The Folk Prophet my point about different culture/different mission...is this can you imagine the Savior:

Pretending he was drunk?  No way.

But Joseph Smith did.

Or taking a sword and killing someone?  No.  He restored the soldier's ear when Peter cut it off in the Savior's defense.

But Moroni took up the sword and killed a lot of people.

Or how about choosing a career as an attorney...you know all those lawyer jokes we make.  Besides isn't that a contentious field?  So no, I can't imagine the Savior as an attorney.

But @Just_A_Guy and Elder Oaks is/was an attorney . . .

On the other hand if we ask ourselves would Jesus approve of someone doing those things above...well, it depends on the circumstances, but for Joseph Smith, Moroni, JAG, and Elder Oaks, He approved/approves.  

[Vort]

So the takeaway:

• We cannot use the question "Would Jesus do this thing?" as any kind of reliable guide to our actions.
• There are types of actions that Jesus would never, ever do himself, but that he nevertheless justifies us in doing.
• Jesus would never kill anyone. (Corollary: All those Old Testament accounts of Jesus killing people or commanding their deaths don't count. Ananias and Sapphira don't count, either.)
• Jesus would never pretend to be drunk. We know this because, well, duh.
• If Jesus lived today, he would not be a lawyer.
• We are justified in saying that Jesus would never kill anyone in self-defense or choose a certain occupation like law, but we are unjustified in supposing that he would refuse to sell beverages that he has specifically commanded us to avoid. (Though as the second bullet point above demonstrates, even if he wouldn't sell alcohol, that doesn't in any sense mean that we shouldn't sell alcohol. There is absolutely no correlation between the two.)

If people like Vort and The Folk Prophet were just more open-minded, we would recognize these important and obvious truths. Get with the program, folks.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Here's my take away....

If you disagree with Vort or Folk Prophet, simply realize that you are wrong and get with the program. Got it.

Look it boils down to semantics. I prefer to ask what would the Savior want me to do. If you choose to ask what would Jesus do, go for it.  It's not a big deal to me.

Do you think Jesus would tell me to "get with the program"? I can't think of a time when he or of his prophets were rude or sarcastic to someone who was sincerely trying to follow him.

Yes, I remember what he said to the Pharisees, but MormonGator, theSquidster, and I are not Pharisees.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

34 minutes ago, Vort said:

 

If people like Vort and The Folk Prophet were just more open-minded, we would recognize these important and obvious truths. 

For clarification, I did not say, or even think any of this. C'mon. I thought we were just having a friendly discussion.

[Vort]

24 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Look it boils down to semantics. I prefer to ask what would the Savior want me to do. If you choose to ask what would Jesus do, go for it.  It's not a big deal to me.

Then why this?

1 hour ago, LiterateParakeet said:

@The Folk Prophet my point about different culture/different mission...is this can you imagine the Savior:

Pretending he was drunk?  No way.

But Joseph Smith did.

Or taking a sword and killing someone?  No.  He restored the soldier's ear when Peter cut it off in the Savior's defense.

But Moroni took up the sword and killed a lot of people.

Or how about choosing a career as an attorney...you know all those lawyer jokes we make.  Besides isn't that a contentious field?  So no, I can't imagine the Savior as an attorney.

But @Just_A_Guy and Elder Oaks is/was an attorney . . .

On the other hand if we ask ourselves would Jesus approve of someone doing those things above...well, it depends on the circumstances, but for Joseph Smith, Moroni, JAG, and Elder Oaks, He approved/approves.  

 

Edited February 27, 2016 by Vort

[Guest MormonGator]

25 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

 

Yes, I remember what he said to the Pharisees, but MormonGator, theSquidster, and I are not Pharisees.

We aren't, so true Lit. We certainly have our faults (speaking only for myself, not the amazing LitParakeet) but legalism is not one of them.  

Most of the Pharisees in the bible are legalistic and focus on their contempt of sinners. They are also self-righteous and ignore the compassion that Christ showed. To be clear, while I disagree with some people here I would not call them Pharisees. That's a very harsh insult in my view.  

Edited February 27, 2016 by MormonGator

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Isn't getting guidance from the Holy Ghost the means whereby we should know what Jesus would do? And isn't that really the point that makes it not presumptuous or arrogant to believe one can know what Jesus would do?

 

10 minutes ago, Vort said:

Then why this?

I did not merely invent meaning out of whole cloth and attribute it to you, as you did to me. I based my understanding on what you actually wrote. Unsurprisingly, you refuse to clarify any meaning or discuss your own words. You write whatever you want to write, then refuse to engage on meaning. I believe this is what is known in pop psychology circles as passive aggression.

I was responding to the post above by FP (wherein he questioned me.)

Invent meaning out of whole cloth? What part of this conversation are you referring to? As I said my post was responding to FP.

Then you accuse me of refusing to clarify my meaning...and yet that is precisely what I was doing in the post that you quoted. So again what do you mean?

If you want to talk about passive agresivo why don't we start with why you insist on turning what I thought was just a friendly discussion into an argument? 

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Vort, one last thought before I fold laundry....I'm still trying to understand how our conversation went sideways...maybe this will help...

It was not my intention to condemn either you or FP or judge either of you. I simply thought I was offering a different perspective. I can see how our past interactions may have made you think otherwise. 

I'm sorry you were offended by me, that was not my intention.

Now...what else can I write to postpone folding laundry?

[Vort]

1 hour ago, LiterateParakeet said:

For clarification, I did not say, or even think any of this. C'mon. I thought we were just having a friendly discussion.

That is what I thought, until the piling on of TFP began. Perhaps I should have stayed out of it, but it rankles to see misrepresentation and attacks on someone who doesn't merit it. (Not to criticize Ironhold: I can overlook his nose being out of joint. I think he mischaracterized TFP's posts, but they obviously offended him and hurt his feelings, and I think his hyperbole just got a little out of control. We have all been there, and Ironhold certainly has not made a habit of taking offense or mischaracterizing the words of others.)

52 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Invent meaning out of whole cloth? What part of this conversation are you referring to? As I said my post was responding to FP.

I regretted writing that ending part of my post, which was unfriendly and antagonistic. So I deleted it about a minute before you posted your response. If you like, I will explain in great detail exactly what I meant, but it might be better to drop it.

29 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

It was not my intention to condemn either you or FP or judge either of you. I simply thought I was offering a different perspective. I can see how our past interactions may have made you think otherwise.

I appreciate different perspectives, even from people who don't like me. Sometimes especially from them; no one points out my weaknesses and targets my flaws like those who hate me But when you claim that someone is wrong for suggesting that we follow the Savior by trying to do what we think he would do, that strikes me as more than merely another perspective.

But maybe I'm wrong. It happens often enough.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Vort

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Once again, I responded to FP because he responded to me. Would you prefer that I ignore him? My response to him was simply intended as an explanation of where I was coming from---which you then criticized me for not doing later. Confusing.

As far as FP and Iron hold...all I did was share the quotes. Good grief, for those who agree with you that could be taken as doing him a favor...showing that Iron hold was exaggerating. Or it could be taken to support  Ironhold. I was intentionally neutral.

About "friendly"...I meant that I thought generally speaking this was a friendly conversation and not a debate. This conversation NOW is a good example of why I prefer not to engage you. I don't hate you. Actually, I think  you are very intelligent and have a lot to offer, but sometimes your words are sharp and cutting and I prefer not to be on the receiving end of that. Since I disagree with you on many issues that puts me in your cross hairs if I'm not careful.

Finally, I didn't say anyone was wrong for disagreeing with me. I was sharing my opinions and thoughts just like everyone else in this thread. 

 

 

[theSQUIDSTER]

 

I'm sorry.. But it feels like we're drawing lines in the sand.  If I've contributed to that then I'm sorry but that wasn't my intent. I'm actually agreeing with mostly things that both Vort, TFP said, but I agree with Gator's sentiment perhaps more than his specifics.  

I've gotten good take-away from all of you.  Let me see I can expand a little on what I'm thinking... It is NOT presumptuous to do all we can to know the mind and will of the Lord.  It is a commandment.  My point was: which of us KEEPS that commandment 100% of the time?  

Also, sometimes the Lord's answers to specific things are surprising to me.  For example, why did Nephi have to kill Laban and be deceitful to Zoram in order to get the plates?  Why couldn't Nephi have just found Laban dead from a heart attack with the plates already on his person?  Didn't the Lord give commandments not to kill and not to lie?  Why would He, the giver of the law, command someone to break those laws?  Was Nephi really being told by the Spirit to do that, or was he acting on his own? ... 

I believe Nephi was indeed prompted by the Lord to kill Laban.  Because he did so he was blessed.  BUT.. it still surprises me that the Lord required this of him.

Ok.. So how does this all shake down to whether to sell alcohol or not in your business.. Whether to allow guests to smoke and drink in your home.. Or maybe just let them drink coffee in the morning to wake up...?  The simple answer is:  I don't know.  But I do know that the Lord knows.  What about what constitutes clean vs. dirty money and if Jojo should give up his job because he's moving liquor around a warehouse and that's tainting his income...?  I don't know what the right answer to that is either.. But I do know the Lord knows.  Yes, I do have personal opinions on that.. Jojo, I think you may be looking beyond the mark.  I don't think you're earning filthy lucre just because your job requires you to move booze around for your employer.  But can I know the mind of the Lord on this question?  Maybe I could if I were you or your bishop ... But I'm not.  Also, the  individual answers on that type of question are not a one-size-fits-all answer.  For one person the right answer may well be to quit the job.  For another it may be just the opposite.  .. Again.. The Lord knows.  Anybody He chooses to tell, He will.  I'm just saying, sometimes we may be surprised by the answer.  If not, what would really be the point of receiving revelation.. If we already knew what would Jesus have US do...  

One last thing...  What would Jesus do?  Simple answer: probably all sorts of amazing things we are not yet ready or even ABLE to do.. because we're still just trying to become LIKE him... So perhaps LP is right when she redirects us to ---> what would Jesus have ME do.

[Guest MormonGator]

11 minutes ago, theSQUIDSTER said:

 

I'm sorry.. But it feels like we're drawing lines in the sand.

I

Welcome to the internet, where EVERYONE draws lines in the sand. 

[theSQUIDSTER]

13 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Welcome to the internet, where EVERYONE draws lines in the sand. 

Yes, but would JESUS draw lines in the sand...  

 

 

Oh wait, maybe He would!

[Guest MormonGator]

7 minutes ago, theSQUIDSTER said:

Yes, but would JESUS draw lines in the sand...  

 

 

Oh wait, maybe He would!

:-) 

I know where Vort is coming from too. I think he makes some good points. It's tough to find a balancing act between rightfully condemning sinful behavior-and not coming across as "holier than thou" (For the fourth time, not calling anyone that). IE-I would correctly tell a drug addict to change their ways-but I'd be very careful and think "There but for the grace of God go I." I'm no better than they are. I sin differently than they do. 

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

32 minutes ago, theSQUIDSTER said:

One last thing...  What would Jesus do?  Simple answer: probably all sorts of amazing things we are not yet ready or even ABLE to do.. because we're still just trying to become LIKE him... So perhaps LP is right when she redirects us to ---> what would Jesus have ME do.

I really appreciated your whole post, but it was this last part that really got me thinking. Yes..of course He can do amazing things that are beyond our capabilities...(I love that!).  

And you brought to my mind, what He expects of ME today is likely more than he expected of me when I was younger. And He will likely expect even more of me later in life...because after all, where much is given much is required.  The more He teaches me about His expectations, the more He will expect. I love it, thanks!

BTW, I don't draw lines in the sand, I just make sand castles.