Romans 14

[eVa]

Romans chapter 14 offers up some very interesting guidelines on how we should discuss the Word with our peers.  However, at the same time a lot of it is confusing where it talks about meat in v. 15 and eating in v. 23.  Does anyone have any insight or wisdom they would like to pass along?!  Thanks!

[Just_A_Guy]

My understanding is that Paul was addressing the problem of whether it was acceptable to buy and eat meat that had been killed as part of a ritual sacrifice to a Roman god.  Jews would have said “heck, no!”  Paul is saying “look, as recipients to the new covenant, it really doesn’t matter what we eat.  But, if being seen eating such meat is going to cause a Jewish convert to Christianity to stumble in his faith—don’t let him see you eating that meat; because part of being Christian is being willing to bear the burdens of the weakest members of our faith.”

[eVa]

4 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

My understanding is that Paul was addressing the problem of whether it was acceptable to buy and eat meat that had been killed as part of a ritual sacrifice to a Roman god.  Jews would have said “heck, no!”  Paul is saying “look, as recipients to the new covenant, it really doesn’t matter what we eat.  But, if being seen eating such meat is going to cause a Jewish convert to Christianity to stumble in his faith—don’t let him see you eating that meat; because part of being Christian is being willing to bear the burdens of the weakest members of our faith.”

I really like the  way explained this.  It seemed like it was right there, but was just out of my grasp.  Very much appreciated.  How do you think this relates to modern day.  Does it relate to all denominations or only on one?

[Jane_Doe]

1 hour ago, eVa said:

I really like the  way explained this.  It seemed like it was right there, but was just out of my grasp.  Very much appreciated.  How do you think this relates to modern day.  Does it relate to all denominations or only on one?

I think it's one of those "listen to the Spirit and apply when directed by Him" things.  

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, eVa said:

I really like the  way explained this.  It seemed like it was right there, but was just out of my grasp.  Very much appreciated.  How do you think this relates to modern day.  Does it relate to all denominations or only on one?

I think there are underlying “avoid the appearance of evil” and “be willing to stretch a little for the benefit of your community” themes that I imagine would have cross-denominational appeal.  

In a uniquely LDS context, I’ve heard it applied to the does-caffeine-violate-the-Word-of-Wisdom? debate to suggest that if a Mormon is going to indulge in a Coke, (s)he should at least be discreet about it.

[eVa]

15 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I think there are underlying “avoid the appearance of evil” and “be willing to stretch a little for the benefit of your community” themes that I imagine would have cross-denominational appeal.  

In a uniquely LDS context, I’ve heard it applied to the does-caffeine-violate-the-Word-of-Wisdom? debate to suggest that if a Mormon is going to indulge in a Coke, (s)he should at least be discreet about it.

That makes sense.  I suppose as long as any form of contention is non-existent and the parties involved benefit in some way; win-win.  

Does what violates the Word-of-Wisdom for one person apply to another?  Is that the debate?  I think that is a good example and shows where one's heart is when being discreet.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, eVa said:

Does what violates the Word-of-Wisdom for one person apply to another?  Is that the debate?  I think that is a good example and shows where one's heart is when being discreet.

Probably the biggest point of debate about the WoW is caffeine and green tea.  We have caffeinated soft drinks which are not coffee and tea (which are specifically itemized in the WoW).  And we have green tea with a very low amount of caffeine.

An official statement from the Church said: The Word of Wisdom says nothing concerning caffeinated soft drinks.  (paraphrased).

Well, the debate still rages for a number of reasons.  I won't go into all the points of debate on that topic because it would be a TOME.

But what I figure is that no matter what is said or not said about the WoW, there will always be some point where there is debate.  You simply cannot itemize EVERYTHING that is acceptable and not acceptable under such code.  And there is even reason to believe that health is only a small portion of that code.

My position is that since there is always going to be some thin gray line or even gray area, we just need to ask two questions:

1) Where is a good place to draw that gray line?
2) What side of that line do we want to be on?

I really don't want to be part of a society (or religion) that debates whether crystal meth is good or bad.  Caffeine?  Ok, let's have that be the gray area.

We live in a society today that debates whether cigarettes, alcohol, or even marijuana is bad.  We're nowhere near that line.  Having higher standards for certain things is what separates us from the rest of the world.  We are a "peculiar people."

[eVa]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

I really don't want to be part of a society (or religion) that debates whether crystal meth is good or bad.  Caffeine?  Ok, let's have that be the gray area.

It sure seems like our society is going toward that avenue.  "I was born that way."  ...however, that is a different topic, but I know what you mean.  When 50 shades came out, I really had some internal discussion about "gray" and came to the conclusion there isn't any.  I mean when reading the scriptures, it either lifts up the name of Jesus or it does not.  So instead of good/bad, I look at it from that aspect.  

[zlarry123]

On 12/15/2017 at 7:13 AM, Carborendum said:

Probably the biggest point of debate about the WoW is caffeine and green tea.  We have caffeinated soft drinks which are not coffee and tea (which are specifically itemized in the WoW).  And we have green tea with a very low amount of caffeine.

An official statement from the Church said: The Word of Wisdom says nothing concerning caffeinated soft drinks.  (paraphrased).

Well, the debate still rages for a number of reasons.  I won't go into all the points of debate on that topic because it would be a TOME.

But what I figure is that no matter what is said or not said about the WoW, there will always be some point where there is debate.  You simply cannot itemize EVERYTHING that is acceptable and not acceptable under such code.  And there is even reason to believe that health is only a small portion of that code.

My position is that since there is always going to be some thin gray line or even gray area, we just need to ask two questions:

1) Where is a good place to draw that gray line?
2) What side of that line do we want to be on?

I really don't want to be part of a society (or religion) that debates whether crystal meth is good or bad.  Caffeine?  Ok, let's have that be the gray area.

We live in a society today that debates whether cigarettes, alcohol, or even marijuana is bad.  We're nowhere near that line.  Having higher standards for certain things is what separates us from the rest of the world.  We are a "peculiar people."

The rule of Romans 14 is a universal application. In all cases, if a man does a thing which he does not "believe" to be right, it is a sin, and his conscience will condemn him for it.

The point of the object should always be to promote peace, and to build him, the weak one, in the holy faith.

If a man doesn't have peace in his heart, he cannot be happy inwardly, perhaps he can look outwardly in high spirits, since no man can have peace who sins against his own conscience. And that one's peace should always be peace with God through Christ. Romans 5:1

Larry

[Shath]

On the word of wisdom.  My view is a lot of Mormons are hypocrites.  Many are not hypocrites.  You have Mormons that try to do their best and those who do not.  Word of Wisdom was first just a word of wisdom.  It was not a command.  Later it became a commandment. 

It is a word that even the most weak are supposed to keep.  It is the minimum.  What they tell you to do (no coffee, no tea, no tobacco smoking, no alcohol drinking) is the minimum you should do.  You can do more (run, exercise, eat wheat, eat meat sparingly, don't drink hot drinks, and things like that).  A Lot Mormons if they keep the word of wisdom, only want to do the minimum they can.  They don't want to try to do more than that.

It's like that a lot with a lot Mormons in what I see. 

I see some that also have a lot more things they don't do (no caffeine, no e-cigs, no drugs, exercise).  They take the Word of Wisdom as a minimum and I think are trying to do better than just the minimum.  Sometimes they are a little too much into it, but they probably are not hypocrites.

[Jane_Doe]

3 hours ago, Shath said:

On the word of wisdom.  My view is a lot of Mormons are hypocrites.  Many are not hypocrites.  You have Mormons that try to do their best and those who do not.  Word of Wisdom was first just a word of wisdom.  It was not a command.  Later it became a commandment. 

It is a word that even the most weak are supposed to keep.  It is the minimum.  What they tell you to do (no coffee, no tea, no tobacco smoking, no alcohol drinking) is the minimum you should do.  You can do more (run, exercise, eat wheat, eat meat sparingly, don't drink hot drinks, and things like that).  A Lot Mormons if they keep the word of wisdom, only want to do the minimum they can.  They don't want to try to do more than that.

It's like that a lot with a lot Mormons in what I see. 

I see some that also have a lot more things they don't do (no caffeine, no e-cigs, no drugs, exercise).  They take the Word of Wisdom as a minimum and I think are trying to do better than just the minimum.  Sometimes they are a little too much into it, but they probably are not hypocrites.

Alas, yes us Mormons are still human and we do sin.  Some people's sins are indeed by hypocritical in the Word of Wisdom, or being lazy and only doing the bare minimum.  Some are really good about not being hypocritical, keep the Word of Wisdom in the fullest, taking really good care of their physical bodies, and instead fall short in other areas.   

[zil]

Ever since President Uchtdorf's talk, "Come, Join with Us", I have viewed hypocrisy as potentially being a good thing (instead of always a bad thing).  The talk does a good job of explaining the difference, I think.  But really, if you don't believe in doing things better than you are currently doing them, you'll never improve, and that's a far worse state than failing to live up to the standards you espouse.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Shath said:

On the word of wisdom.  My view is a lot of Mormons are hypocrites.  Many are not hypocrites.  You have Mormons that try to do their best and those who do not.  Word of Wisdom was first just a word of wisdom.  It was not a command.  Later it became a commandment. 

It is a word that even the most weak are supposed to keep.  It is the minimum.  What they tell you to do (no coffee, no tea, no tobacco smoking, no alcohol drinking) is the minimum you should do.  You can do more (run, exercise, eat wheat, eat meat sparingly, don't drink hot drinks, and things like that).  A Lot Mormons if they keep the word of wisdom, only want to do the minimum they can.  They don't want to try to do more than that.

It's like that a lot with a lot Mormons in what I see. 

I see some that also have a lot more things they don't do (no caffeine, no e-cigs, no drugs, exercise).  They take the Word of Wisdom as a minimum and I think are trying to do better than just the minimum.  Sometimes they are a little too much into it, but they probably are not hypocrites.

Please clarify this for me.  From what I'm reading, what I got out of this post is that because we do the minimum, we're hypocrites?  I've never heard that before.  And I don't necessarily agree that most Mormons ONLY do the minimum.

One thing to consider about this is that the minimum requirements of Mormons are a lot higher than the high standards of other faiths.  In fact, many other faiths don't seem to have standards at all.  They simply say "live a good life."  That doesn't really set any standards at all.

Could we do better?  Of course.  All of us could in just about every endeavor.  But the fact that we fall short in some areas doesn't automatically make us hypocrites.

What is your definition of a hypocrite anyway?

Quote

1.a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

2.a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

Do we "pretend" to have virtues, morals, or religious beliefs?  By the very fact that we are doing the minimum says we're not pretending.  We're doing things.

Do we feign something while having different private lives?  How would you know?  There are always weak individuals in all walks of life.  Heck, we're all weak as human beings.  But the fact that we TRY is what separates us from the hypocrite.

Where is our beam?  When do we criticize the mote?  That is hypocrisy.  Having standards and meeting the bear minimum is not hypocrisy.

[zlarry123]

15 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Please clarify this for me.  From what I'm reading, what I got out of this post is that because we do the minimum, we're hypocrites?  I've never heard that before.  And I don't necessarily agree that most Mormons ONLY do the minimum.

One thing to consider about this is that the minimum requirements of Mormons are a lot higher than the high standards of other faiths.  In fact, many other faiths don't seem to have standards at all.  They simply say "live a good life."  That doesn't really set any standards at all.

Could we do better?  Of course.  All of us could in just about every endeavor.  But the fact that we fall short in some areas doesn't automatically make us hypocrites.

What is your definition of a hypocrite anyway?

Do we "pretend" to have virtues, morals, or religious beliefs?  By the very fact that we are doing the minimum says we're not pretending.  We're doing things.

Do we feign something while having different private lives?  How would you know?  There are always weak individuals in all walks of life.  Heck, we're all weak as human beings.  But the fact that we TRY is what separates us from the hypocrite.

Where is our beam?  When do we criticize the mote?  That is hypocrisy.  Having standards and meeting the bear minimum is not hypocrisy.

Quote

What is your definition of a hypocrite anyway?

I'll give it a shot!

It seem to me how inconsequential all of this is when compared to the words of Apostle Paul,, "Fix your thoughts on what is true and good and good things in others. Think about all you can praise God for and be glad about. Keep putting into practice all you learned from me and saw me doing, and the God of peace will be with you."

Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out.

Larry

[Traveler]

5 hours ago, Shath said:

On the word of wisdom.  My view is a lot of Mormons are hypocrites.  Many are not hypocrites.  You have Mormons that try to do their best and those who do not.  Word of Wisdom was first just a word of wisdom.  It was not a command.  Later it became a commandment. 

It is a word that even the most weak are supposed to keep.  It is the minimum.  What they tell you to do (no coffee, no tea, no tobacco smoking, no alcohol drinking) is the minimum you should do.  You can do more (run, exercise, eat wheat, eat meat sparingly, don't drink hot drinks, and things like that).  A Lot Mormons if they keep the word of wisdom, only want to do the minimum they can.  They don't want to try to do more than that.

It's like that a lot with a lot Mormons in what I see. 

I see some that also have a lot more things they don't do (no caffeine, no e-cigs, no drugs, exercise).  They take the Word of Wisdom as a minimum and I think are trying to do better than just the minimum.  Sometimes they are a little too much into it, but they probably are not hypocrites.

 

We are currently lost Travelers on a journey through eternity.  We barely understand the landscape of mortality (though some think they figured out just about everything) let alone much of anything before our birth or after our death.   I have had much difficulty on my personal journey trying to figure out how to navigate what seems to be mostly the self-inflecting problems of humanity.  Foremost is separating human brilliance from the common mundane of divine enlightenment.  

Jesus called his followers, “disciples”.  For someone that does not understand the rigors of discipleship the whole thought of a Journey is lost and confusing.  With some similarities to a compass, divine commandments (revelation) are tools we can use for guidance for our (endless?) journey.  But first we need to clearly understand that there is absolutely no difference between divine revelation and G-d given commandments.  If we think we know a difference it is one of those human brilliances verses divine enlightenment conundrums.

The next problem is figuring out how to use revelation and commandments.  I used to think such things were to make us smart – most certainly smarter that most others (especially those we can easily see as fools).  However, I have concluded that such thinking is not so smart.  The key to unlock the divine toolbox in order to access any divine gift is covenant and the first step in the journey to making a covenant is discipline.  Discipline starts with a resolve to create boundaries and limits to behavior – it defines in advance what we do.   Science defines intelligence as the ability to learn and change behavior (what we do or determine to do).  When we covenant with G-d each step is like a new beginning or being born again in that we learn and change.  The scientific term for learning and changing is called evolution.  The Christian term for changing is “being born again”.

The importance of the word of wisdom cannot be found in the failures of others to embrace the revelation.  The only way to determine if it is of G-d or man is to incorporate the revelation as part of your personal will (discipline).  Thus, if you apply such to modify your behavior – you will know what is of G-d and what is just more human brilliance – by doing such – one will discover “hidden truths” and should you attempt to share such “hidden truths” with others seeing things with human brilliance, they will boldly declare that divine scripture (revelation) do not say or imply any such things.

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

24 minutes ago, zlarry123 said:

I'll give it a shot!

It seem to me how inconsequential all of this is when compared to the words of Apostle Paul,, "Fix your thoughts on what is true and good and good things in others. Think about all you can praise God for and be glad about. Keep putting into practice all you learned from me and saw me doing, and the God of peace will be with you."

Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out.

Larry

 

It seems to me that many confuse the destination with the journey.  I think you may be a little confused with words of human brilliance.  Love is not words – love is what a person that has made a covenant with G-d to be patient and kind is learning to do and thus is an example for others – especially others seeking divine guidance for their personal covenants with G-d.

 

The Traveler

[zlarry123]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

 

It seems to me that many confuse the destination with the journey.  I think you may be a little confused with words of human brilliance.  Love is not words – love is what a person that has made a covenant with G-d to be patient and kind is learning to do and thus is an example for others – especially others seeking divine guidance for their personal covenants with G-d.

 

The Traveler

You may have missed a post I presented at one time Traveler, that the only peace that counts is with God through Christ, Romans 5:1 who inaugurated the covenant we are suppose to live under by grace.

And it is through that grace of God which will produce those qualities in the heart, void of regulation, that Apostle Paul speaks of. Regulation that bring about a crises of conscience and division. Isn't this what this post is about.

Unless one claims they have a righteousness, which he considered a loss, of their own. Wouldn't you say! Shouldn't  we remember it is not how man views us but God. Without a play on words to avoid the simple truths from the bible.

"If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James