Why can't Mormons have caffinated drinks?

[pismopal]

I also put “social control and strictures that set people apart for the sake of keeping them “in”” in quotes. Do you think that means that I was “mocking you”?

zerinus

What that means to me is a left handed insult of my religion that I find offensive. You are free to mock me all you like that is no problem. What are the social controls and strictures that keep “us” in? Could you be more specific regarding your exact complaints? By the way…my day starts with Starbucks.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Why not? “Catholic priest” was as much a direct quote from you as was “social control and strictures that set people apart for the sake of keeping them “in””. What was the difference?

zerinus

That is pedantic.

Do you mean to tell me you were putting it in quotes because you were quoting those two words?

Why did you put it in quotes?

 

[zerinus]

That is pedantic.

Do you mean to tell me you were putting it in quotes because you were quoting those two words?

Why did you put it in quotes?

For the same reason that I put “social control and strictures that set people apart for the sake of keeping them “in”” in quotes. I think you are being pedantic now.

zerinus

 

[ASimpleSinner]

For the same reason that I put “social control and strictures that set people apart for the sake of keeping them “in”” in quotes. I think you are being pedantic now.

zerinus

You were quoting me?

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Ok, this has nothing to do w/ anything, I’m just curious. “Hot drinks” have been defined as tea and coffee, but caffeinated soda seems, by all but a few, to be allowed, but not encouraged, right? So, what about hot chocolate (chocolate contains caffeine), and iced tea (or iced coffee for that matter)? What about decaffeinated iced tea or coffee?

I know it seems like splitting hairs and being legalistic, but I’ve seen similar dicussions among Catholics over what consitutes “meatless” (for Fridays and Ash Wednesday). From everything official I’ve read and this is how I was raised), it seems that fish and animal “products” (broth, bacon grease, eggs, milk, cheese, etc.) are allowed, just the actual flesh of the animal isn’t. But I’ve heard of some Catholics who insist that broth and fats are no-no’s, as well as some that insist that chicken isn’t meat:shrug: . So, like I said, I’m just curious.

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[zerinus]

You were quoting me?

Okay, let me put the shoe on the other foot, and ask you some questions, and see what answer you will give me. In your original comment (in post #39) you had said: ”… this is just a theory a Catholic priest I know advanced…” Why did you mention that he was a “Catholic priest”? Why didn’t you just say: “someone I know”? Why did you mention that he was a “Catholic priest”? Was that significant somehow? Was it a grammatical requirement of the sentence? Why did you consider it necessary to mention that he was a “Catholic priest”?

zerinus

 

[dolphinlove]

Where in the bible does it say you cant have coffee?

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Okay, let me put the shoe on the other foot, and ask you some questions, and see what answer you will give me. In your original comment (in post #39) you had said: ”… this is just a theory a Catholic priest I know advanced…” Why did you mention that he was a “Catholic priest”? Why didn’t you just say: “someone I know”? Why did you mention that he was a “Catholic priest”? Was that significant somehow? Was it a grammatical requirement of the sentence? Why did you consider it necessary to mention that he was a “Catholic priest”?

zerinus

I mentioned it because he was a Catholic priest. Not a “Catholic priest”. 6+ years of seminary and advanced theological training with special emphasis on comparitive religions.

It was not a grammatical requirement - why would it have to be?

In the context it does not seem at all like you were quoting me, but rather like you were being derisive the same as if someone were to say a “Mormon bishop”.

So can a clear answer be had? Why did you put it in quotes?

 

[zerinus]

I mentioned it because he was a Catholic priest. . . . 6+ years of seminary and advanced theological training with special emphasis on comparitive religions.

Thank you. You have in a way answered your own question. You mentioned his being a “Catholic priest” out of deference to what you considered to be his impressive learning and theological training etc. You thought that that gave his words to you greater authority, and therefore deserving to be taken more seriously. I was trying to do the opposite. I was trying to impress on your mind that his comments to you were in fact rather stupid, and showed his lack of erudition and deep thought rather than great learning.

In the context it does not seem at all like you were quoting me, but rather like you were being derisive the same as if someone were to say a “Mormon bishop”.

Yes, in a sense you are right. I was being a little facetious, thereby trying to demonstrate to you the opposite of what you had assumed—i.e. that his being a “Catholic priest” does not make good the stupidity of his remarks.

zerinus

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Thank you. You have in a way answered your own question. You mentioned his being a “Catholic priest” out of deference to what you considered to be his impressive learning and theological training etc. You thought that that gave his words to you greater authority, and therefore deserving to be taken more seriously. I was trying to do the opposite. I was trying to impress on your mind that his comments to you were in fact rather stupid, and showed his lack of erudition and deep thought rather than great learning.

Yes, in a sense you are right. I was being a little facetious, thereby trying to demonstrate to you the opposite of what you had assumed—i.e. that his being a “Catholic priest” does not make good the stupidity of his remarks.

zerinus

Well then I suppose warping those comments give you an out. I don’t really believe as much forethought went into the reply as offered. At least you admit to being facetious.

In turn you found it useful to use the “stupidity of his remarks” (your words) useful in critiquing Christians. So be it.

 

[RebeccaJ]

At times I have to agree with Zerinus. Anyone on the outside looking in will see exclusion. I do not feel that it is a good course of conversation. I will say, though, that we should ask if those on the inside looking out always feel persicuted or that they should exclude those on the outside. That may be a more telling sign.

In some ways I agree, in others not. Sociologically speaking, we all have our in and out groups.

We’re talking something more important than sociological definitions here. We’re talking the definition of Christianity. Is it a belief in the Book of Mormon? Of men who become gods? And on this holy day of the Immaculate Conception…a belief that God had a physical relationship with Mary, same as a man, in order to conceived Jesus? Mormons seek to take every Christian term and redefine it. Warp it. Turn truth into lie. So yes, mormonism should absolutely be perceived as “them”, because they certainly are not Christian. Not as Christians of the Catholic faith and many other believe.

Mormonism is in fact out, and this thing where they claim Christianity for themselves and claim everyone else is out, should not be accepted. For any reason.

 

[mystified]

Hot drinks prohibited? Mormons I know have no qualms about the volume of hot chocolate they consume. Chocolate also contains the supposedly proscribed stimulant.
And what about Ephedra californica (Mormon Tea)? Or did those traveling the Mormon Trail to the west refrigerate before consuming it? Frankly, I think it tastes like wet cardboard , thus prefer coffee.

 

[dolphinlove]

Where in the bible does it say you cant have coffee?

Can any Mormons answer this easy and simple question please…

 

[zerinus]

Well then I suppose warping those comments give you an out. I don’t really believe as much forethought went into the reply as offered. At least you admit to being facetious.

In turn you found it useful to use the “stupidity of his remarks” (your words) useful in critiquing Christians. So be it.

I was not “critiquing Christians”. I was critiquing his stupid remarks. What makes you think that he speaks for all Christians?

zerinus

 

[ASimpleSinner]

I was not “critiquing Christians”. I was critiquing his stupid remarks. What makes you think that he speaks for all Christians?

zerinus

Where did I write I “think that he speaks for all Christians”???

 

[majick275]

Where in the bible does it say you cant have coffee?

nowhere but that’s irrelevant. Mormons believe they have other scriptures that are more accurate than the Bible. one of those prohibits “hot drinks”. their leaders have interpreted that to mean coffee and tea. caffeine content and temperature are irrelevant. the actual substance of tea leaves and coffee beans may not be used to create drinks for mormon consumption

 

[rmcmullan]

Another prohibition, although it’s fairly common sense, is against what we’d call recreational drugs. This isn’t found in the scriptures but is in the General Handbook of instructions, a guide for the leadership (bishopric, etc.).

A church tries to lay out some guidelines for its membership to follow, for their own benefit. Some of the membership want to follow the guidelines but struggle and they press the definitions so what we have now is fairly specific. Coffee and tea are still forbidden. Mocha ice cream and yoghurt are still borderline and caffeinated soft drinks condoned. How far do you go? Should we prohibit sugar and white flour? Chocolate in excess? I think the tobacco prohibition is sensible but it’s a hard habit to break.

In general, it’s true the less government the better but that requires some education and forbearance on behalf of the people. D&C 89 starts with a bit of a preface and introduces the commandment as protection. It end with the promise:

18 And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones;
19 And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures;
20 And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint.
21 And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen.

 

[zerinus]

Just a few thoughts regarding the previous posts. As many of you know, I am a Mormon bishop converting to Catholicism. I have been a Mormon for 20 odd years (no pun intended).

I am just curious. You keep telling us that you are a Mormon bishop. What ward are you the bishop of? Which stake? Which part of the world are you from?

zerinus