Guest Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) If it makes you feel better, my daughter's sunbeam teacher had a nose stud for awhile . . . and every time I would see it, all I could think of was . . . OUCH Edited July 26, 2017 by DoctorLemon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 5 minutes ago, anatess2 said: I'd also like to add the question... how does telling/teaching/advising someone against 2 pairs of earrings a condemnation.... Do you believe that a person wearing 2 pairs of earring will loose their salvation because at one time a Prophet counselled members of the church to only wear one pair? If the counsel is good advice and nothing more and doesn't relate at all to a person's salvation, then treating the act as morally wrong is going overboard. But then maybe some people do see wearing 2 pair of earrings as morally wrong, just because a Prophet counselled against it. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 4 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said: If it makes you feel better, my daughter's sunbeam teacher had a nose stud for awhile . . . and every time I would see it, all I could think of was . . . OUCH My thought would have been: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Maureen said: Do you believe that a person wearing 2 pairs of earring will loose their salvation because at one time a Prophet counselled members of the church to only wear one pair? If the counsel is good advice and nothing more and doesn't relate at all to a person's salvation, then treating the act as morally wrong is going overboard. But then maybe some people do see wearing 2 pair of earrings as morally wrong, just because a Prophet counselled against it. M. No. But I don't believe an adulterer will loose their salvation either. I'm not in any position to say even Hitler lost his salvation. I can only say - that's going against what God teaches and if you want to be closer to Christ you need to stop it. Immediately. Both adultery and the earrings. The counsel on 2 pairs of earrings is, of course, not about the earrings. Edited July 26, 2017 by anatess2 zil, SilentOne and a mustard seed 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 3 minutes ago, MormonGator said: Wearing two pairs of earrings is on par with murder. Everyone knows that. Indeed so lets run with this. (Hope you do not mind me using you as an example) @MormonGator sees @estradling75 wearing two pairs of earrings (Its fashionable you know, and I am a Slave to Fashion) and he rips into me for not following the council of the church... So which one of us really not following the council.... Think about it... Ponder it... If you came up with that neither one is following the council you are correct. And yet per some posters on this thread only @MormonGator is violating the councils. Worse then that per some posters he just robbed my of my agency. And I have no idea how that even works. Because of my agency I have a lot of options. I can.. Say yes I am wearing two sets of earrings and I have an extra set for you too.... Or I can Flip him a double bird and unleash a torrent or profanities.... Or I can Ponder what he said and take away anything I find value and ignore the rest... Or I can Go whine on a public forum how mean his and all his associates are... Or I can Stop going anywhere he might be because he offended me... Or I can Do a mix of all the above and possibly even more So again I ask.... How exactly did @MormonGator's comments rob me of my agency? a mustard seed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 Just now, estradling75 said: Indeed so lets run with this. (Hope you do not mind me using you as an example) @MormonGator sees @estradling75 wearing two pairs of earrings (Its fashionable you know, and I am a Slave to Fashion) and he rips into me for not following the council of the church... So which one of us really not following the council.... Think about it... Ponder it... If you came up with that neither one is following the council you are correct. And yet per some posters on this thread only @MormonGator is violating the councils. Worse then that per some posters he just robbed my of my agency. And I have no idea how that even works. Because of my agency I have a lot of options. I can.. Say yes I am wearing two sets of earrings and I have an extra set for you too.... Or I can Flip him a double bird and unleash a torrent or profanities.... Or I can Ponder what he said and take away anything I find value and ignore the rest... Or I can Go whine on a public forum how mean his and all his associates are... Or I can Stop going anywhere he might be because he offended me... Or I can Do a mix of all the above and possibly even more So again I ask.... How exactly did @MormonGator's comments rob me of my agency? Murder bro. On par with murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 Just now, MormonGator said: Murder bro. On par with murder. That is what you say here 2 minutes ago, estradling75 said: @MormonGatorand he rips into me for not following the council of the church... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 Just now, estradling75 said: That is what you say here Charles Manson? Pol Pot? Stalin? Mussolini? Fans of Florida State? @mirkwood? Dudes all got nothing on that 14 year old that sits behind you in church and has more than one piercing on each ear. Sheer evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 8 minutes ago, MormonGator said: Fans of Florida State? I take what I said to Maureen back. These ones can't be saved. zil and askandanswer 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 17 minutes ago, anatess2 said: I see what you're saying here but you're missing the point... maybe dilberately I don't know... the point was, you cherry pick things to take them out of context. You know, like how Fake News is created. I'm not saying you're doing this. I'm simply trying to tell you your answer does not address estradling's point. 50 minutes ago, estradling75 said: I am saying that your "Moral Agency" does not vanish is a puff of smoke just because I tell you what you are about to do is a sin and threatens your salvation. My words do not magically compel you to obey me. The best they do (assuming I judged righteously) is leave you without and excuse when you stand before God and have to explain to him why you saw fit to disobey him. The fact that you (and others like you) seem to think that telling some one that they are doing is wrong, is some how worse then that person doing something wrong is utterly insane. I definitely don't understand this idea, that if a poster doesn't respond to the whole post they are taking things out of context. I hope you realize if you expect this of me, you're going to have to approach threads and posts the same way. I have never suggested that teaching/counselling/advising someone about an action they might make or are making would take away their free or moral agency. But judging someone about a petty action that they are doing like wearing 2 earrings, as if it were threatening their salvation is over the top. Judging and advising people on actual moral frailties, like adultery is something different. One action does not hurt the person or others, while the other one does. It's not about what's worse, the one judging or the one doing the action. It's about a person making a moral decision for themselves and then expecting everyone else to agree with it and follow it like they do. Do these people have stewardship over everyone? M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 5 minutes ago, Maureen said: I have never suggested that teaching/counselling/advising someone about an action they might make or are making would take away their free or moral agency. But judging someone about a petty action that they are doing like wearing 2 earrings, as if it were threatening their salvation is over the top. Judging and advising people on actual moral frailties, like adultery is something different. One action does not hurt the person or others, while the other one does. It's not about what's worse, the one judging or the one doing the action. It's about a person making a moral decision for themselves and then expecting everyone else to agree with it and follow it like they do. Do these people have stewardship over everyone? M. And we get right back to the same point again... Apparently if some one tells someone that they should not drink a coke/watch an R-rated movie/wear two earrings/etc the person giving such opinions is unrighteous judging and hurting others and acting beyond their stewardship. But if someone comes to public forum and rebukes a large group of people they have never met (like the OP did) that they should not be talking about the councils given by the church leaders. Well apparently to some people that person is clearly not making any kind of hurtful or unrighteous judgement, and has the correct stewardship. When in fact both are doing the same thing. Rendering an hurtful and unrighteous judgement. Neither have stewardship. Both are wrong. Those who say only one group is wrong and the other is right are hypocrites. And in both cases everyone still has their agency because someone disagreeing with you can not take it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirkwood Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 1 hour ago, eddified said: This thread has become quite the meandering thread! We've touched on all kinds of fun topics. From Cow Potions to Pizza, Missionaries to Root Beer, and prisons to guns. We've got it all! This is the place to be! Wait til @MormonGator really get started on each other.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Maureen said: I have never suggested that teaching/counselling/advising someone about an action they might make or are making would take away their free or moral agency. But judging someone about a petty action that they are doing like wearing 2 earrings, as if it were threatening their salvation is over the top. Judging and advising people on actual moral frailties, like adultery is something different. One action does not hurt the person or others, while the other one does. It's not about what's worse, the one judging or the one doing the action. It's about a person making a moral decision for themselves and then expecting everyone else to agree with it and follow it like they do. Do these people have stewardship over everyone? A) You will never, ever agree with us because you do not believe our scriptures nor that our prophets are prophets, so what's the point of this? I really, really, really do not comprehend what you're hoping for here. B) No Mormon in this thread (that I can recall), nor that I know in real life, thinks it's anyone's business to judge a person, unless they are called to a position which puts both the person and that kind of judgement in their stewardship (see the Elder Oaks talk mentioned earlier). Judging a person is NOT the same as judging a behavior or action. It would be ridiculous to suggest that every human should go about their life never judging actions - it's a good way to get yourself into a world of hurt and problems. To judge an action is to decide what you think of it, whether it's right or wrong or whatever, based on your beliefs. One cannot help doing this, nor should they. C) Abraham 3:25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; D&C 1:38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same. Quote Wearing two pair of earrings may or may not have eternal consequences for this young woman, but her willingness to obey the prophet will. And if she will obey him now, on something relatively simple, how much easier it will be to follow him when greater issues are at stake. -- "His Word Ye Shall Receive " by M. Russell Ballard, April 2001 see also: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2000/10/your-greatest-challenge-mother?lang=eng Now if you don't believe these are scriptures, and you don't believe prophets and apostles are prophets and apostles, then go do whatever you think is right. But yes, eventually, if you persist in choosing to ignore the counsel of prophets and apostles, then you will indeed lose your salvation because you loved earrings more than the following the prophet of God. This is a terrifying truth, and yet, it is truth as surely as any truth is truth. One day, we either give up all our sins, obey all the commandments, and heed all the word of God, or we have no reward. It is that simple, and that difficult. But you don't believe that, and frankly, unless you're trying to convert Mormons away from their faith, or tempt them into disregarding the counsel of those they believe to be prophets and apostles, why would you argue with them and try to convince them that the counsel of their prophet is foolishness? (Rhetorical question.) Edited July 26, 2017 by zil mirkwood, classylady, Vort and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a mustard seed Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Maureen said: Do you believe that a person wearing 2 pairs of earring will loose their salvation because at one time a Prophet counselled members of the church to only wear one pair? If the counsel is good advice and nothing more and doesn't relate at all to a person's salvation, then treating the act as morally wrong is going overboard. But then maybe some people do see wearing 2 pair of earrings as morally wrong, just because a Prophet counselled against it. M. Yeah! Just because God's mouthpiece here on Earth told you not to, doesn't mean doing it is disobedience! Related to this and not really directed at Maureen anymore: I thought a sin is a sin and all of it will indeed need to be repented of. Whether you only think about pushing your friend down the stairs or you actually do it, it will all need to be wiped clean in order to receive the higher glories. So, yeah, drinking a Coke, especially when you know you shouldn't because it's not being a good steward of your body or double earrings when you know it doesn't make a good representation of Christ and what he stands for, yeah, it all will need to eventually be given up and repented of as we are able. It's not accumulative or like "Hm, I need to do this much good in order to make God ignore those "little" things." Disobedience is disobedience. The good news is, Christ's Atonement will cover it all. SilentOne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) 18 minutes ago, a mustard seed said: Yeah! Just because God's mouthpiece here on Earth told you not to, doesn't mean doing it is disobedience! Related to this and not really directed at Maureen anymore: I thought a sin is a sin and all of it will indeed need to be repented of. Whether you only think about pushing your friend down the stairs or you actually do it, it will all need to be wiped clean in order to receive the higher glories. So, yeah, drinking a Coke, especially when you know you shouldn't because it's not being a good steward of your body or double earrings when you know it doesn't make a good representation of Christ and what he stands for, yeah, it all will need to eventually be given up and repented of as we are able. It's not accumulative or like "Hm, I need to do this much good in order to make God ignore those "little" things." Disobedience is disobedience. The good news is, Christ's Atonement will cover it all. Let's just remember there is a difference here. The prophet has specifically counseled against double earrings as being against gospel standards. Therefore, it will have to be given up and repented of. I agree with you on this one. The prophet has not specifically counseled against drinking coke as being against gospel standards. In fact, quite the opposite has happened. There is no disobedience in drinking Coke. We may well be sitting in the Celestial Kingdom, drinking Coke someday. A far greater danger is adding to the gospel, presenting something as a gospel standard when it is not. Edited July 26, 2017 by DoctorLemon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grunt Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 17 minutes ago, a mustard seed said: Yeah! Just because God's mouthpiece here on Earth told you not to, doesn't mean doing it is disobedience! Related to this and not really directed at Maureen anymore: I thought a sin is a sin and all of it will indeed need to be repented of. Whether you only think about pushing your friend down the stairs or you actually do it, it will all need to be wiped clean in order to receive the higher glories. So, yeah, drinking a Coke, especially when you know you shouldn't because it's not being a good steward of your body or double earrings when you know it doesn't make a good representation of Christ and what he stands for, yeah, it all will need to eventually be given up and repented of as we are able. It's not accumulative or like "Hm, I need to do this much good in order to make God ignore those "little" things." Disobedience is disobedience. The good news is, Christ's Atonement will cover it all. Thanks for this post. Is that why you can't drink Coke? Because it was interpreted as not being a good steward of your body? What about the million other things? Sugar, being overweight, and half the preservatives and growth hormones in our food? Are Mormons required to purchase their food from certain sources, like Jews, to avoid these things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grunt Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 2 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said: Let's just remember there is a difference here. The prophet has specifically counseled against double earrings as being against gospel standards. Therefore, it will have to be given up and repented of. I agree with you on this one. The prophet has not specifically counseled against drinking coke as being against gospel standards. In fact, quite the opposite has happened. There is no disobedience in drinking Coke. We may well be sitting in the Celestial Kingdom, drinking Coke someday. A far greater danger is adding to the gospel, presenting something as a gospel standard when it is not. I guess we can ignore my previous post. THIS makes sense from an outsider's perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 @Grunt, cool avatar. Grunt 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 1 minute ago, DoctorLemon said: The prophet has not specifically counseled against drinking coke as being against gospel standards. In fact, quite the opposite has happened. There is no disobedience in drinking Coke. We may well be sitting in the Celestial Kingdom, drinking Coke someday. A far greater danger is adding to the gospel, presenting something as a gospel standard when it is not. True... but lets also not forget how are people try to void out the counsel given. Just look at this thread and the OP and @zil on R-rated movies. On the subject of the Word of Wisdom with the exception of the Do Nots all the rest is setup for people to study it out and gain their own witness from God on what they should be doing. This makes it quiet possible for an individual to learn that God does not want them consuming something like caffeine or soda or sugar or what ever and it is very much binding on that individual. Therefore it is just as likely that we will be sitting in the Celestial Kingdom not drinking a Coke as it is likely that we would be drinking one.. a mustard seed and zil 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a mustard seed Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 2 minutes ago, Grunt said: Thanks for this post. Is that why you can't drink Coke? Because it was interpreted as not being a good steward of your body? What about the million other things? Sugar, being overweight, and half the preservatives and growth hormones in our food? Are Mormons required to purchase their food from certain sources, like Jews, to avoid these things? No, Doctor Lemon is right, it is not directly disobedience, if you go by the letter of the law. Personally, I take it to be the spirit of the law, that yeah, not taking care of yourself, within your means, opportunities, and ability to do so, is not inviting to the Spirit. The purchasing food thing is a little silly to me; if I had the money to do so, I would buy the best food. I do not think we will be judged for not being able to afford better quality things. But I do personally think I will be held accountable for purchasing a Monster instead of a water/juice, BECAUSE I know it is not treating my body respectfully...and the water was definitely cheaper. *shrugs* Grunt 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) We have so much dedicated here to what you aren't allowed to do (drink coke, watch R rated movies, get your ears pierced twice, listen to music that isn't on American Idol, vote democrat, have facial hair, watch tv, eat meat, be happy) maybe it's time for a long, long thread about what you ARE allowed to do. Edited July 26, 2017 by MormonGator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 (edited) Here is a controversial one for all of you... What do you think of face cards, the kind used in poker, blackjack, etc? (These were discouraged back in the 1800s but I am not sure if they were actually forbidden or not...) Edited July 26, 2017 by DoctorLemon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Karma Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 14 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said: Here is a controversial one for all of you... What do you think of face cards, the kind used in poker, blackjack, etc? I've never really thought about it. We live in the mountains, often when we get a real heavy snow, the power goes out. We light the lanterns and play games, often "Go fish" or blackjack. I've only ever glanced at the faces on the cards and never gave it a second thought. It's been some time since I've played poker, and even then, I've only ever played for simple poker chips bought at Rite Aid. What do you think of face cards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 1 hour ago, zil said: A) You will never, ever agree with us because you do not believe our scriptures nor that our prophets are prophets, so what's the point of this? I really, really, really do not comprehend what you're hoping for here. I do not agree with some of the LDS posters on this thread but I do agree with others. And as been observed on many threads in this forum, not all LDS agree about everything "Mormon" either. M. Bad Karma 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted July 26, 2017 Report Share Posted July 26, 2017 2 minutes ago, Maureen said: I do not agree with some of the LDS posters on this thread but I do agree with others. And as been observed on many threads in this forum, not all LDS agree about everything "Mormon" either. M. The subject of contention is the counsel of prophets. Every Mormon agrees (or should) that we must heed the counsel of prophets. a mustard seed, person0 and zil 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts