LDS

[dafydd]

lol I was picturing the inner sanctum of a huge church, filled with organ music, uplifting sermons, and lost souls begging for a bathroom pass.

I wouldn't go for anything so boring as religion!

 

[Cat Tale]

• From Randfan
• What's the difference between someone who is sincere, certain and wrong and someone who is sincere, certain and right?

Well now see, that's precisely why I would have NEVER started a thread like this on a skeptics forum because there is no scientific evidence. Trying to base faith on scientific evidence just doesn't work. I remember one time walking into Sunday School class and a group of older ladies were sitting there talking about the lastest news (national evening news, doesn't really matter when or what channel -- meant to mean I don't rememember), but a group of scientists had concluded that even drinking one glass of wine was harmful to the body. Well, the next week (literally, that much I remember) I announced that a new group of scientists had come up with drinking one glass of wine a day might have healthy benefits. I don't think either group of scientists were LDS, but which group do you think the members thought was right, and what was the reaction regarding the other group? That's a silly question now, isn't it. But seriously, what if one day science agrees that drinking a glass of wine a day vs. abstaining from alcohol could add 5-10 years to one's life? Would the church change its stance? I believe hesitantly, yes.

Personally, I don't drink, never did before joining the church either -- just don't have any interest in the stuff, so it's really all a moot point to me anyway religion or not, but... the point should be pretty clear.

The only answer to any question regarding religion is simply, "because that's what I believe."

 

[RandFan]

The only answer to any question regarding religion is simply, "because that's what I believe."

In the past Christians believed that slavery was supported by the Bible. By your logic these individuals were impervious to reason. Religious based slavery is what they believed in. You've hit on one of my biggest pet peeves when I was an active Mormon. When reason and religion clash reason takes a back seat. The trial of Galileo being the greatest example ever.

"To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin." -- trial of Galileo; 1615.

Oddly enough Bellarmine was correct but not for the reason he thought.

 

[Pup]

You are correct. But at the very least I think that my position should rigorously adhere to what is otherwise uncontroversial when it comes to what is.

Yes, I agree. In fact, it's one thing that always puzzled me about religion, and why it never really "took." I was supposed to believe all these things without evidence, like the earth was created in seven days, just to finally work around to providing evidence for things I already knew were true, like one should treat others as you wanted them to treat you. It seemed like going the really long way around conaway's barn for no reason.

 

[Cat Tale]

PLEASE follow forum conventions, and place the quoted material FIRST, then your own words.

The funny thing is, one has to go out of their way to post above the quote. There are so many things that I do not even pretend to know the answers to, this is just one of them.

 

[SezMe]

You've hit on one of my biggest pet peeves when I was an active Mormon. When reason and religion clash reason takes a back seat.

But RandFan, Cat Tale asserted just the opposite in her post immediately preceding yours:

.... Would the church change its stance? I believe hesitantly, yes.

At least she believes this for at least one religion, namely, your former one.

 

[Pup]

In the past Christians believed that slavery was supported by the Bible. By your logic these individuals were impervious to reason. Religious based slavery is what they believed in. You've hit on one of my biggest pet peeves when I was an active Mormon. When reason and religion clash reason takes a back seat. The trial of Galileo being the greatest example ever.

That's why I think that religion is generally an attempt at justifying beliefs which come from elsewhere--"elsewhere" being social pressure, individual genetics and childhood environment, and a whole host of other currently-unidentifiable things in combination.

Slavery is easy to dismiss, because almost everyone in the US is against it today. But let's take, I dunno, killing animals for meat. Whether they're religious or not, people will have an opinion, and in general, they're not going to be swayed with logic. They may use religion to justify it (God gave us animals for our use, or God says we must be vegetarians), or they may use social reasons (we've always hunted this land; don't tell us we can't), or they may use philosophical reasons (less suffering is good, and raising and killing animals for food isn't necessary, so we shouldn't do it), but whether it's directly tied to religion or not, it's a personal belief that's hard to sway people from.

Galileo is a whole 'nuther ballpark, when people deny actual hard evidence, for religious reasons. But again, look at conspiracy theorists, who deny the moon landing, or that Obama was born in the US, or that the planes brought down the twin towers. They generally aren't doing so for classic "the Bible says so" religious reasons. They seem to develop crazy beliefs that just spring up out of nowhere. Also, like people who spend their lives trying to build perpetual motion machines.

So religion certainly fosters such things, but such things seem to be part of human nature even outside of religion. I think that religion may be just co-opting whatever psychological need people have to stick with beliefs even in the face of counter-evidence, and in that sense, there really is a big chunk of human nature that's impervious to reason, with or without religion.

 

[RandFan]

But RandFan, Cat Tale asserted just the opposite in her post immediately preceding yours:

At least she believes this for at least one religion, namely, your former one.

Okay, but that is the church. I do believe the Church can and will change. My point was about individuals. I don't want any church to decide for me what is true. When I was growing up I hated that blacks couldn't hold the priesthood. Some time in high school I decided that it was wrong. I couldn't accept what the Church claimed based simply on faith.

 

[Cat Tale]

You've hit on one of my biggest pet peeves when I was an active Mormon. When reason and religion clash reason takes a back seat.

That does seem to be the tendency, I agree. Just for the record, it's one of my big pet peeves too. I wish members in non-college wards were more open minded. In college towns I find them to be much more agreeable. I actually have a college ward not too far away, I ought to give it a try and see if it's like the old ones I used to attend.

 

[RandFan]

That does seem to be the tendency, I agree. Just for the record, it's one of my big pet peeves too. I wish members in non-college wards were more open minded. In college towns I find them to be much more agreeable. I actually have a college ward not too far away, I ought to give it a try and see if it's like the old ones I used to attend.

I agree. I made the point in another thread that Mormons are not monolithic in their beliefs. I also attended a young-adult ward and most attended college. So we can agree on that.

 

[Janadele]

The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

what if one day science agrees that drinking a glass of wine a day vs. abstaining from alcohol could add 5-10 years to one's life? Would the church change its stance? I believe hesitantly, yes.

 

[Empress]

The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

Plural marriage was a revelation, too. Of course, once it became clear that Utah wouldn't be admitted into Statehood while polygamy was practiced, ol' JC changed him mind on that one. What's to say he won't pull the same thing with the Word of Wisdom?

 

[Janadele]

Plural marriage has been a requirement at various times since the time of Adam, but only for the time period specified by the Lord. Alcohol will always be harmful to the human body, this does not change.

 

[kerikiwi]

Your writing your post then adding the post to which you respond is really, really annoying. It means we have to read from the bottom instead of the top. Please show consideration for others and stop it!

The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

 

[kerikiwi]

Plural marriage has been a requirement at various times since the time of Adam, but only for the time period specified by the Lord. Alcohol will always be harmful to the human body, this does not change.

How do you know?

 

[jsfisher]

The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

Absolutely correct. The Word of Wisdom is perfect and will never change. For example, it quite clearly prohibits hot drinks ("9 And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.") Eternally correct. Only an idiot would would try to reinterpret this word of the Lord to mean, for example, only tea and coffee.

 

[Pup]

The Word of Wisdom, in which we are advised to abstain from alcohol, is revelation from Jesus Christ. He is the greatest Scientist of all, and does not require "new knowledge" from mere mortals.

I agree that it's a perversion of the scientific method, to selectively use evidence to justify what one believes. One should either use the scientific method honestly and follow evidence wherever it leads, or do things simply because one believes them to be true regardless of logic.

But then, why do Mormons still eat meat in the summer when other food is available? And why don't more of them train each other in the skill of using tobacco to treat bruises and sick cattle?

From an earlier post I made in the thread:

Here's an example of how LDS members ignore advice that they believe is direct from God. The Word of Wisdom, the same thing that instructs Mormons not to drink alcohol, instructs them not to eat meat in the summer.

Not one Mormon I know follows that, or even acknowledges that it's part of the Word of Wisdom. The church website even truncates the quote to make it say what Mormons actually do: eat meat year round, like most people.

http://www.lds.org/topics/word-of-wisdom?lang=eng

The flesh “of beasts and of the fowls of the air,” which is “to be used sparingly” (see D&C 89:12-13).

But D&C 89:13 says:

12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;

13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.

So unless it's winter, or there's a famine, or it's cold in the summer--hmm, maybe the Australians get a pass here--God doesn't like people to eat meat. Plain as day. No meat on a warm summer day. But nobody notices or cares, because it's not about following God's advice, it's about doing what others do, like any religion.

The tobacco commandment is verse 8:

8 And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.

The use of water instead of wine at the sacrament is justified by D&C 27:2 "For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament," but I don't know that any other part of the Word of Wisdom has been rescinded.

 

[RandFan]

Plural marriage was a revelation, too. Of course, once it became clear that Utah wouldn't be admitted into Statehood while polygamy was practiced, ol' JC changed him mind on that one. What's to say he won't pull the same thing with the Word of Wisdom?

JC wasn't alive then. Wilford Woodruff was the prophet at the time. Otherwise you are correct. The everlasting covenant was put on hold for awhile.

1. Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—
2. Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.
3. Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive andbobey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.
4. For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can creject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

 

[Empress]

JC wasn't alive then. Wilford Woodruff was the prophet at the time. Otherwise you are correct. The everlasting covenant was put on hold for awhile.

Sorry, I was being flip. She referred to Jesus Christ as the greatest scientist, and I called him JC. Probably not a good idea in a thread where we're talking about Joseph Smith and calling him JS.

 

[RandFan]

Plural marriage has been a requirement at various times since the time of Adam, but only for the time period specified by the Lord. Alcohol will always be harmful to the human body, this does not change.

God did not tell his prophets that plural marriage was only for a short time. In fact it was claimed that one would be damned without plural marriage. It was called an "everlasting covenant".

"From [Joseph Smith] I learned that the doctrine of plural and celestial marriage is the most holy and important doctrine ever revealed to man on the earth, and that without obedience to that principle, no man can ever attain to the fulness of exaltation in celestial glory." -- Historical Record, Vol. 6, pp. 225-227