is being overweight a sin?

[LeSellers]

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

So you stand by the claim that Christ was a poisoner?

Or the Father if you wish to make the claim Christ at that time didn't have the necessary understanding

 

Going to an extreme, as you are doing here, is a logical fallacy.

Lehi

[unixknight]

13 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

In this context, it's "call for references". Typically,. it means the requester doesn't believe what the other has said, and wants proof of the claim.

In this claim, however, it is impossible to prove a negative, and the person holding the opposite idea is the one who has the burden of proof.

Lehi

 

12 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Call For Referance

Thank you both!

[unixknight]

13 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

In this context, it's "call for references". Typically,. it means the requester doesn't believe what the other has said, and wants proof of the claim.

In this claim, however, it is impossible to prove a negative, and the person holding the opposite idea is the one who has the burden of proof.

Lehi

 

12 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Call For Referance

Thank you both!

[omegaseamaster75]

13 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

In this context, it's "call for references". Typically,. it means the requester doesn't believe what the other has said, and wants proof of the claim.

In this claim, however, it is impossible to prove a negative, and the person holding the opposite idea is the one who has the burden of proof.

Lehi

On the contrary you claim that Alcohol is poison and at the basest level it is. However this was not your original claim. You claimed that any amount of alcohol imbibed in drink impaired your judgement and was "poison"

[LeSellers]

9 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Well you're changing your premise.

So you agree that the consumption of alcoholic beverages in moderation is OK in some circumstances?

I have not changed the premise: it's always been the issue that alcohol is a poison, as it is. The further contention, that the alcohol negates (or at least reduces) any medical benefit from the other components in the drink is different (albeit related).

I do not concede that alcoholic drinks confer any useful benefits precisely because the alcohol is a poison.

Lehi

[omegaseamaster75]

13 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

In this context, it's "call for references". Typically,. it means the requester doesn't believe what the other has said, and wants proof of the claim.

In this claim, however, it is impossible to prove a negative, and the person holding the opposite idea is the one who has the burden of proof.

Lehi

On the contrary you claim that Alcohol is poison and at the basest level it is. However this was not your original claim. You claimed that any amount of alcohol imbibed in drink impaired your judgement and was "poison"

[LeSellers]

9 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Well you're changing your premise.

So you agree that the consumption of alcoholic beverages in moderation is OK in some circumstances?

I have not changed the premise: it's always been the issue that alcohol is a poison, as it is. The further contention, that the alcohol negates (or at least reduces) any medical benefit from the other components in the drink is different (albeit related).

I do not concede that alcoholic drinks confer any useful benefits precisely because the alcohol is a poison.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

7 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

On the contrary you claim that Alcohol is poison and at the basest level it is. However this was not your original claim. You claimed that any amount of alcohol imbibed in drink impaired your judgement and was "poison"

Alcohol is a poison, as you agree.

And I backed up that claim with numerous references.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

So you stand by the claim that Christ was a poisoner?

Or the Father if you wish to make the claim Christ at that time didn't have the necessary understanding

 

Going to an extreme, as you are doing here, is a logical fallacy.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Dup

Lehi

Edited March 11, 2016 by LeSellers

[Just_A_Guy]

OK, first off, everyone, as a general housekeeping matter:  As mods dealing with the current software glitches, we appreciate those who try to clean up their own duplicate posts.  But please bear in mind that clearing out your text and replacing it with the single word "dupe", in the context of the current discussion, might create the wrong impression. 

13 hours ago, Maureen said:

I doubt it's that black and white. Alcohol effects everyone differently depending on factors like weight, food intake, time duration, etc. Someone who weighs more will have a different effect than someone who weighs less. Alcohol works differently on a full stomach than an empty one. Drinking a 5 oz glass of wine in 1 hour will effect someone differently than drinking it in 20 minutes. If any amount of alcohol can cause impairment, then do you really think those who take communion in Catholic and some Protestant churches are impaired? Children as young as 7 or 8 can take communion in Catholic churches and I had my first communion when I was 13. I assure you that that small amount of wine will not impair anyone.

M. 

Things never look quite so black-and-white when behaviors that we, particularly, engage in; are being subjected to intense and critical scrutiny (I can give you all kinds of rational-sounding reasons for my overeating.  Very easy to do, when it's my goose in the oven!)

But, yes; there's impairment.  The person may not be able to (or, frankly, want to) detect that impairment.  But chemically, physiologically, sometimes behaviorally--it's there.

[estradling75]

28 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Going to an extreme, as you are doing here, is a logical fallacy.

Lehi

You are the one making sweeping claims...  You claim alcohol is a poison (even in small amounts)... The logical follow through on that is anyone that provides alcohol is a poisoner.  There is no extreme on that follow through.  The extreme is in your initial position.   

 

[LeSellers]

6 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

You are the one making sweeping claims...  You claim alcohol is a poison (even in small amounts)... The logical follow through on that is anyone that provides alcohol is a poisoner.  There is no extreme on that follow through.  The extreme is in your initial position.   

If you say so.

Lehi

[Guest MormonGator]

11 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

If you say so.

It's not "just Estradling". It does seem like you are making sweeping claims. 

Off topic-Why do you state your name after every post? We know it's you. Not an insult, just asking. 

[LeSellers]

6 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

It's not "just Estradling". It does seem like you are making sweeping claims.

There are times when precision is requisite. This is one of those.

7 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Why do you state your name after every post? We know it's you. Not an insult, just asking. 

Did you ask Maureen why she always signs her posts  "M"?

Lehi

[NeedleinA]

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Apply Lehi's claim to the Miracle Christ did converting water to wine.  ... well I have a hard time believing that it is some how harder for God to clean water then it is to change it to wine.

Thinking out loud, purely from a miracle stand point. Apart from any safety aspect of wine vs. water in ancient times...Jesus could have changed the "dirty" water to "clean" water, but how would he have proved it was now "clean" to his audience? Changing clear water to a darker colored wine would seem visually helpful, simply to prove that he just preformed a real miracle. 

Wine or Grape Juice (New Wine):
As to our use of water in place of grape juice ("new wine"—see Isaiah 65:8), it is important to note that initially grape juice was used in the sacrament both in the early church (Matt. 26:28-29) and in the latter-day church (D&C 20:79).^[2] As a precaution against enemies of the Church poisoning or adulterating the grape juice sold to the Saints, a change was authorized by the Lord.^[3] The Lord revealed, "that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory—remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins" (D&C 27:1-2).

[Guest MormonGator]

15 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Did you ask Maureen why she always signs her posts  "M"?

 

Look, it's just a question. That it. I've seen some do it in forums, some don't.  Not everything is an argument. 

I didn't notice she did. Like I said, it wasn't an insult. Don't take it personal. 

If it makes you feel better, I'll ask her too. 

Edited March 11, 2016 by MormonGator

[Guest MormonGator]

13 hours ago, Maureen said:

M.

Maureen why do you put "M" on your signature? Not an insult, just curious. 

[estradling75]

7 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

Thinking out loud, purely from a miracle stand point. Apart from any safety aspect of wine vs. water in ancient times...Jesus could have changed the "dirty" water to "clean" water, but how would he have proved it was now "clean" to his audience? Changing clear water to a darker colored wine would seem visually helpful, simply to prove that he just preformed a real miracle. 

Wine or Grape Juice (New Wine):
As to our use of water in place of grape juice ("new wine"—see Isaiah 65:8), it is important to note that initially grape juice was used in the sacrament both in the early church (Matt. 26:28-29) and in the latter-day church (D&C 20:79).^[2] As a precaution against enemies of the Church poisoning or adulterating the grape juice sold to the Saints, a change was authorized by the Lord.^[3] The Lord revealed, "that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory—remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins" (D&C 27:1-2).

I have no problem with God changing water into wine.... 

I have a problem with God changing water into "Poison" per Lehi's claim for alcohol.

While many people like to claim that bad water was the reason God allowed alcohol in the past(which is guess work) ... but given all the restrictions and dietary changes the Law of Moses entailed it seems like boiling water before use could have been added easily enough if God wanted to.  Whereas in the Word of Wisdom the Lord tells us why he gave it to us. "Due to conspiring men in the last days"  Given that it seems very likely that once the "conspiring men" are gone so will the need for the Word of Wisdom.   And where does that leave all this people who created and believe in the hedges that have been made around this particular law? 

 

[LeSellers]

14 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Look, it's just a question. That it. I've seen some do it in forums, some don't. Stop being so defensive. It's not personal, we are all friends here. Not everything is an argument. 

I didn't notice she did. Like I said, it wasn't an insult. Don't take it personal. 

If it makes you feel better, I'll ask her too. 

There are times when it feels as if everything is personal and that everything is an argument.

It makes me feel better. Nothing more.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Dup

 

Lehi

Edited March 11, 2016 by LeSellers

[Guest MormonGator]

7 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

There are times when it feels as if everything is personal and that everything is an argument.

It makes me feel better. Nothing more.

Lehi

Well, that's the nature of the internet. Maybe it's best if we all remember that not everything is personal and not everything is an argument. People of ALL stripes (including myself) would do well to remember that. 

Great! For the record, I like that name. You parents had a good choice. I like parents who name kids after biblical/Book of Mormon characters. 

There. See? Not an insult at all. 

[Just_A_Guy]

9 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

While many people like to claim that bad water was the reason God allowed alcohol in the past(which is guess work) ... but given all the restrictions and dietary changes the Law of Moses entailed it seems like boiling water before use could have been added easily enough if God wanted to.
 

Perhaps; but I daresay it's quite a trick to boil water in an earthenware vessel over an open flame.

[LeSellers]

Dup

 

Lehi

Edited March 11, 2016 by LeSellers

[unixknight]

9 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

There are times when it feels as if everything is personal and that everything is an argument.

It makes me feel better. Nothing more.

Lehi

I find, when that happens to me, it's a good time to take a couple of days off from forum posting.  I used to be so grumpy sometimes that I'd start to take it out on my family and that's when I realized what it was.  It also helps to think of that Brigham Young quote that used to be my sig:

"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

Not calling you (or anyone here) a fool, of course.  Just a good quote to keep in mind.