LDS culture problem

[a mustard seed]

1 minute ago, Backroads said:

I too have the same thing. I like to think I get them rarely, but I get bouts of insomnia and I work with 8-year-olds. If I don't sleep all night, I find a dose of caffeine to be helpful to get through the day. My Molly Mormon TA is always drinking them, so that may have thrown off my perspective of how many I was getting.

It wasn't until one particularly cute little boy bought me a 4-pack of Rockstars "because he saw that I liked them!) for a present that I thought I needed to be better.

It's been good while I don't have a job currently because no money = no frivolous soda drinks. But I just got a job yesterday so I know I'll be drinking them more to stay awake during shifts.

I somewhat reason it out: I have ADD and caffeine helps. Yeah, it helps me focus but I don't need it like I pretend I do. My point was only that I wouldn't really get upset if someone were to point it out to me because I know. It's hard being accountable to yourself with some things, even with a Prophet telling us what we should be doing.

[Backroads]

I daresay there's a fine line that takes skill and finesse and perhaps more than a little inspiration to cross. Like @Snigmorder so eloquently stated above, we all for the most part should know what's wrong and what's right, or at least have the skills to navigate ourselves to a conclusion.

Yet if we return to the OP, no one likes to be told the conclusion they have reached is wrong--particularly if it isn't so spelled-cut and cleared-out and dried or whatever. And then of course there is human sensitivity and those stubborn streaks and blunt speaking.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I daresay there's a fine line that takes skill and finesse and perhaps more than a little inspiration to cross. Like @Snigmorder so eloquently stated above, we all for the most part should know what's wrong and what's right, or at least have the skills to navigate ourselves to a conclusion.

Yet if we return to the OP, no one likes to be told the conclusion they have reached is wrong--particularly if it isn't so spelled-cut and cleared-out and dried or whatever. And then of course there is human sensitivity and those stubborn streaks and blunt speaking.

Stop wearing bikinis, Backroads.

 

 

[Guest]

On 7/23/2017 at 10:04 PM, Sweety D said:

GOOD STUFF:

We have counsel on Word of Wisdom, modesty, R-rated movies, monthly temple attendance, all great counsel.

We have created this culture that has some people actually believing Mormons shouldn't or can't watch an R-rated movies or drink caffeine or wear a 2 piece bathing suit. -- Yes, this is good.  See below.

 

WHY-DID-YOU-BOTHER-SAYING-THIS-STUFF:

But we need to stop citing things as Thus saith the Lord. 

All of which is nonsense.

There is nothing doctrinal about any of these things (and many more I haven't mentioned).

Adults don't need to be governed so tightly that we have doctrine on such trivial aspects of our life. 

And most everything else.

Then your actual point:

Quote

I wish we all would stop these shameful judgements that are passed on others especially when they are doctrinally incorrect. This post isn't because I feel judged or feel confused or bad about any situation. It's because I see others deeply affected by this culture that exists within our faith. It needs to stop. 

1. The Word of Wisdom: "Not doctrinal"?  Really?
2. It's not that I disagree with the "Why-did-you-bother" section.  I just don't understand what the big deal is.  What is it that is so horrible about creating a culture that DOES abide by all these standards?  Are you saying it is WRONG to abide by these standards?  
3. Are YOU judging those who try to abide by these standards?

The Church Leaders gave "great counsel" and NOT "thus saith the Lord" to the Saints in Missouri.  They needed to leave and get to places of safety because there were going to be in unsafe conditions.  Certain of the Saints there asked "Is this counsel from the Lord or is it just your advice?"  Well, no, they had not received direct revelation on the subject.  But they knew what was going on.  And they knew it was dangerous.  Why did they not listen?

You admit this is "all great advice."  Why NOT obey it?  How about at least trying?  Why is it that when faced with physical danger, we totally understand "great advice" should really be taken to heart.  But when it comes to spiritual dangers, we just think,"meh.  No biggie."

How about hold it up as a standard to aim towards even when we're not perfectly abiding by such counsel?  Why not think of it as a good thing?  The fact that we don't need to be judging people for these things, I get it.  I'm not perfect when it comes to these things.  But I hold it as a standard to strive towards.  

The problem I have here is that you're not just saying "don't judge those who don't abide by them."  You're saying "it is wrong to say we even should abide by them."  

Now that I've pointed that out, I'm going to guess that you'll declare that's not what you MEANT.  I'm certain it isn't.  And I understand.  But that IS what you SAID.  And that is where I have the problem.

Edited July 25, 2017 by Guest

[Guest]

I certainly would never judge a Mormon woman for wearing a bikini, or lecture her for doing so.  One of my best friends in the singles ward, a very righteous sister and RM in fact, did like to wear bikinis to singles ward swim parties.  I certainly would not question her virtue over such a decision, as I believe it is between her and God.

That said, let's be honest with ourselves - no good and much bad can come from such a decision.  That is why one should tread carefully in deciding whether or not to follow this counsel.

Edited July 25, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

I certainly would never judge a Mormon woman for wearing a bikini, or lecture her him for doing so.  

Is this any different?

Edited July 25, 2017 by Guest

[Guest MormonGator]

5 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

I certainly would never judge a Mormon woman for wearing a bikini, or lecture her for doing so.  One of my best friends in the singles ward, a very righteous sister and RM in fact, did like to wear bikinis to singles ward swim parties.  I certainly would not question her virtue over such a decision, as I believe it is between her and God

I think preaching and lecturing  can be (key words, can be) self serving. Like it or not, when you (generic) lecture bikini girl, you are also sort of showing the world how righteous and moral and you think you are.  Like it's your job to preach to everyone about their sins. 

Yes, I know not everyone who lectures bikini girl is like that, but many people will still view you like that. 

 

[Guest]

I was listening to a conversation between my engineering mentor and a business associate ("David").  They were talking about the days when they used to "hit the sauce" (drink like fish) and even do some drugs.  I kinda got the feeling that the David never really gave it up.

My mentor misquoted Abraham Lincoln saying,"Show me a man with no vices, and I'll show you a man with no virtues."

David noticed I was being very quiet throughout all this.  And he took that cue to ask me,"So, Carb, do you have any vices?"

"Well, sort of.  I mean, I have a bunch of them.  But I just don't think you'd consider them vices."

My mentor with a knowing smile explained to him,"That's because his vices are Mormon vices."

David then noticed I have a Pepsi in my hand.  He expressed that somehow he had MORE respect for me for NOT being perfect.  I really didn't understand that.

[Sweety D]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

This is how I read Sweety D's post:  "The prophet counseled such and such, I don't want to follow that counsel.  Stop telling me I should and stop judging me."  - "I" being the people she's speaking for.

@Sweety D, can you clarify this for us?  Because, I can understand how somebody who got a tattoo before they joined the Church can feel uncomfortable around Mormons who looks differently at that tattoo.  Or an LDS who got a tattoo in the military or something.  But, even those who have tattoos in the Church will advice the youth not to get one.

Following the counsel of the "Brethren" is always a good idea. First thing to understand though, avoiding R-rated movies is not their counsel. As I mentioned it was only ever mentioned to the Youth, very clearly. Never once has the church made any other statement out R-rated movies. Getting a tattoo has been much more clearly defined as something we should not do. https://www.lds.org/topics/tattooing?lang=eng 

You seem to think I am advocated for picking and choosing what doctrine (or counsel) to follow. It's quite the opposite. My point is 2 fold, we judge to often and make up our own doctrine (or counsel).

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, Sweety D said:

Following the counsel of the "Brethren" is always a good idea. First thing to understand though, avoiding R-rated movies is not their counsel. As I mentioned it was only ever mentioned to the Youth, very clearly. Never once has the church made any other statement out R-rated movies. Getting a tattoo has been much more clearly defined as something we should not do. https://www.lds.org/topics/tattooing?lang=eng 

You seem to think I am advocated for picking and choosing what doctrine (or counsel) to follow. It's quite the opposite. My point is 2 fold, we judge to often and make up our own doctrine (or counsel).

Part of it might come down to personal pet peeves. We might have "a thing" against tattoos more than we have a thing against R rated movies, so we focus on tattoos instead. 

[estradling75]

43 minutes ago, Backroads said:

It wasn't until one particularly cute little boy bought me a 4-pack of Rockstars "because he saw that I liked them!) for a present that I thought I needed to be better.

Now isn't that a much more effective behavior modification then any lecture or rebuke? 

[Sweety D]

1 hour ago, pam said:

I think one of the things I have a hard time with is why shouldn't adults follow the same counsel or guidelines as set out in For the Strength of Youth?"  Why do those standards no longer apply just because they are adults?  To me it doesn't change

Someone once told me we don't graduate from childhood standards. But we do. Children should not be sexually active. Children should not support families financially... I could go on.  Children are different than adults in maturity, responsibility, development and accountability. 

1 hour ago, pam said:

I seriously don't see what the big deal is if people want to use the counsel they may have learned at some point in their lives to better their lives.

This is not my problem, the problem is (as I have said many times). My point is 2 fold, we judge to often and make up our own doctrine (or counsel). People should not be talking about caffeine as a sin (because it's not) in over the pulpit in sacrament meeting.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Sweety D said:

People should not be talking about caffeine as a sin (because it's not) in over the pulpit in sacrament meeting.

But.. But... But... Pres Hinckley said on 60 minutes...

[Snigmorder]

17 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

David then noticed I have a Pepsi in my hand.

You certainly do have vices. No respectable man would be seen with Pepsi. 

 

[zil]

11 minutes ago, Sweety D said:

First thing to understand though, avoiding R-rated movies is not their counsel. As I mentioned it was only ever mentioned to the Youth, very clearly. Never once has the church made any other statement out R-rated movies.

You don't read General Conference much, do you?  The Ensign magazine?  Call them "advice" if you wish.  Call them "unofficial" if you wish.  But you cannot say that the church has only said one thing, one time, to one group (YM).

[Sweety D]

50 minutes ago, Snigmorder said:

It has nothing to do with R-rated movies, or bikinis. Say these things aren't doctrinal all you want, or that they're great council, that's not the point.

Movies are written and filled by the world and their view of things. They're full of violence, vulgarity, disgusting abuses of sex (showing or talking about it at all really,) ransacking the name of our Lord and our Father, harshness and cruelty. The movies are filled with the character of the devil, he's the one who influences these things in the earth. To tolerate these things for the sake of entertainment is a personal choice, but salvation is a personal choice. 

Two-piece swimsuits are nudity, they are pornographic, they are equal to the moneychangers at the temple. They are absolutely morally untenable.

Caffeine is a neurotoxin and is addicting. Drink it all you want, it's not a commandment. But you shouldn't have to be commanded it all things.

Regardless of whether the church claims doctrine, or whether you approve of their "advice" is irrelevant. 

These things are derived from uncreated truths, the way things really are, which reside in their fullness in the Eternal Civilization. 

Truth cannot be reduced by flustered embarrassment before the Gentiles, or an irreverent delegation of truth into memes. 

"The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. Light and truth forsake that evil one." - D&C 93:36-37

You have some interesting opinions. But they are just that, opinions. Nothing you mentioned is factual or doctrinal. Yet again back to making thing up. The only place you will find your opinion written is in Doctrine and Covenants section 139.

Concerning soda, the sugar in Coke is far worse for your health than caffeine. This is well documented. In fact sugar is more addictive than cocaine, again well documented facts. Do you drink Sprite or sugary fake orange juice? Dare I judge you for this terrible health choice? Of course not. I don't drink caffeine (or any soda), but not because a poorly created subculture has decided to write D&C 139 and define it as a sin.

Maybe we should stop defining what we think standards for others should be.

[Sweety D]

1 minute ago, zil said:

You don't read General Conference much, do you?  The Ensign magazine?  Call them "advice" if you wish.  Call them "unofficial" if you wish.  But you cannot say that the church has only said one thing, one time, to one group (YM).

I have never missed General Conference in my adult life. Please, show me the talk on R-rated movies. Other than the single time I pointed this out, you can't. And this one time was clearly directed to the youth. Pres Benson was very clear about that. 

[a mustard seed]

1 minute ago, Sweety D said:

You have some interesting opinions. But they are just that, opinions. Nothing you mentioned is factual or doctrinal. Yet again back to making thing up. The only place you will find your opinion written is in Doctrine and Covenants section 139.

Concerning soda, the sugar in Coke is far worse for your health than caffeine. This is well documented. In fact sugar is more addictive than cocaine, again well documented facts. Do you drink Sprite or sugary fake orange juice? Dare I judge you for this terrible health choice? Of course not. I don't drink caffeine (or any soda), but not because a poorly created subculture has decided to write D&C 139 and define it as a sin.

Maybe we should stop defining what we think standards for others should be.

Lol!

Alright, I'm out. D&C is not doctrine we should preach? Yeah, ok. Good trolling, haha!

I can see where this is going:

[Sweety D]

3 minutes ago, a mustard seed said:

Lol!

Alright, I'm out. D&C is not doctrine we should preach? Yeah, ok. Good trolling, haha!

I can see where this is going:

I think you missed the joke completely. D&C is certainly doctrine, thus the name of the book. If you are not famialir with section 139, I urge you to look it up ...  https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc?lang=eng

Edited July 25, 2017 by Sweety D

[a mustard seed]

1 minute ago, Sweety D said:

I think missed the joke completely. D&C is certainly doctrine, thus the name of the book. If you are not famialir with section 139, I urge you to look it up ...  https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc?lang=eng

Yeah you did, because by naming your supposedly "fake doctrine" as a D&C section you are actually advocating against your own point. Because if it actually were, then you'd have to follow and preach it, right? Anyway, have fun!

[Guest]

Careful... Community of Christ's D&C goes all the way up to Section 165, including the writings of Joseph Smith III, Frederick M. Smith, Israel A. Smith, W. Wallace Smith, Wallace B. Smith, W. Grant McMurray, and Stephen M. Veazey!

[pam]

19 minutes ago, Sweety D said:

Someone once told me we don't graduate from childhood standards. But we do. Children should not be sexually active. Children should not support families financially... I could go on.  Children are different than adults in maturity, responsibility, development and accountability. 

 

Then again we were talking about what is taught in the For Strength of Youth.  It teaches not to have sex before marriage and to remain faithful to your spouse after marriage.  Nothing has changed for adults.  We are still taught (even as adults) that we are not to have sex before marriage and we need to remain faithful to our spouse.  Again, nothing has changed for adults.  It's not a childhood standard.  It's a standard for adults as well.  Adults should not be sexually active unless it is with someone that they are legally married to.  

[The Folk Prophet]

50 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

I certainly would never judge a Mormon woman for wearing a bikini...

I hate to tell you this but this:

50 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

no good and much bad can come from such a decision. 

...is a judgment.

[Sweety D]

2 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

Careful... Community of Christ's D&C goes all the way up to Section 165, including the writings of Joseph Smith III, Frederick M. Smith, Israel A. Smith, W. Wallace Smith, Wallace B. Smith, W. Grant McMurray, and Stephen M. Veazey!

Good point! I forgot about them. LOL!  

[zil]

Just now, Sweety D said:

I have never missed General Conference in my adult life. Please, show me the talk on R-rated movies. Other than the single time I pointed this out, you can't. And this one time was clearly directed to the youth. Pres Benson was very clear about that. 

13 hits in General Conference on the exact phrase "r-rated", 24 hits in the Ensign.  Normally I'd be polite about it, but I'm wasting my time, since you could easily find these yourself (google is your friend), and therefore you clearly don't want to know.

https://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&query="r-rated"&collection=general-conference

...only 12 of the GC talks come up in this search, going to look for the 13th in the Gospel LIbrary app...

October 1977, "Rated A", by Marvin J. Ashton.

...but there are 13 of them!   What an unfortunate number.  Satan must have inspired them.

I'm gonna let you find the 24 Ensign articles.  Then I'm gonna let you find all the talks, scriptures, articles, books, etc. which clearly teach principles which clearly counsel against partaking of the kinds of things which garner an R rating on movies.  This is not nearly as hard a concept as you seem to want to make it, which is also how I know I'm wasting my time.  @Just_A_Guy put it perfectly in his post.  If you want more light and knowledge, go back and re-read that.