Political Crossfire Forums

[eynon]

ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body


eating meat, in particular white meats and fish...........is really good for you.

[MJB]

ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

[Angelicus]

MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

Would you tell or teach others though based upon that experience that drinking treated water is a sin?

[MJB]

Angelicus wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

Would you tell or teach others though based upon that experience that drinking treated water is a sin?

Excuse me if I don't respond to such an absurd question.

[eynon]

MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

[MJB]

eynon wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

LDS

[eynon]

MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

LDS

cheers.....my family are jack-mormon(decend from an ole'New York Mormon Family fyi) but I retain much love for my LDS cuzzins :flwr: they took the worst land in North America and made it bloom :)

My faith(evangelical Presbyterian) really remains neutral on much of what we're talking about........

[MJB]

eynon wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

LDS

cheers.....my family are jack-mormon(decend from an ole'New York Mormon Family fyi) but I retain much love for my LDS cuzzins :flwr: they took the worst land in North America and made it bloom :)

My faith(evangelical Presbyterian) really remains neutral on much of what we're talking about........

Cool. 8:)

Then you should have some interesting religious family history to pass down.

My family's religious background was Lutheran and Baptist.

[eynon]

MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

LDS

cheers.....my family are jack-mormon(decend from an ole'New York Mormon Family fyi) but I retain much love for my LDS cuzzins :flwr: they took the worst land in North America and made it bloom :)

My faith(evangelical Presbyterian) really remains neutral on much of what we're talking about........

Cool. 8:)

Then you should have some interesting religious family history to pass down.

My family's religious background was Lutheran and Baptist.

a lot actually.......it's a long story, but my people were there with Brigham Young in the beginning, had a hand in the Mormon War and were among the first people to settle Idaho and Alberta.........then WWI happened, that kinda broke us off from the church......the Bishops told my people to do their duty, those that did not die from German bullets died at the end of a bottle or of gas induced TB while the Bishops sat at home.

Course the church has changed......they were trying to gain acceptance in both American and Canadian culture, they did it, but it cost a lot of young Mormon lives.

[perdidochas]

[deleted]

[perdidochas]

ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

I don't think that's true. If I stop eating meat after having eaten it for a lifetime, the metabolites from it will disappear fairly quickly. The same cannot be said for pot.

That said, I don't think pot is particularly bad, nor would smoking it in a place where it is legal be a sin. (breaking the law is a sin...)

[MJB]

eynon wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

LDS

cheers.....my family are jack-mormon(decend from an ole'New York Mormon Family fyi) but I retain much love for my LDS cuzzins :flwr: they took the worst land in North America and made it bloom :)

My faith(evangelical Presbyterian) really remains neutral on much of what we're talking about........

Cool. 8:)

Then you should have some interesting religious family history to pass down.

My family's religious background was Lutheran and Baptist.

a lot actually.......it's a long story, but my people were there with Brigham Young in the beginning, had a hand in the Mormon War and were among the first people to settle Idaho and Alberta.........then WWI happened, that kinda broke us off from the church......the Bishops told my people to do their duty, those that did not die from German bullets died at the end of a bottle or of gas induced TB while the Bishops sat at home.

Course the church has changed......they were trying to gain acceptance in both American and Canadian culture, they did it, but it cost a lot of young Mormon lives.

That sounds very interesting. I hope you've got as much as possible written down for your posterity.

Now - I can't speak to your specific family's circumstances or experience, of course, and, like anyone else, bishops are just people, and not perfect either. But ah were it so!

However - I would mention generally, in respect to bishops that stayed home while others went to war, especially for anyone who doesn't understand the organization and structure of the LDS Church, and the way ecclesiastical callings work within it, that when a man is called to be a bishop, and accepts that calling, he then has upon his shoulders both the temporal and spiritual welfare of the congregation over which he ministers. If he were to up and leave, it would be like deserting his calling from God and abandoning the congregation he has been called of God to care for.

But - lets say he decided to serve in war, instead of fulfilling his responsibility as bishop. Another bishop would still have to be called in his place, and that bishop would then have to stay home, while still others went to war. It is this need, for the welfare of the members of a congregation, to have a pastor (and I would say an even more dire need in time of war) that the government exempted ministers, of all faiths and denominations, from conscription into military service, in order that its citizens would not be left without pastors to minister to their spiritual needs, as a flock without a shepherd.

I would also say that war must be the single most difficult time for a minister, of any religious faith, to pastor a congregation, for the very reason that counseling members of his congregation in their duties to their country (of which he will invariably be asked) may send them off to die in war, while he remains at home. So I do hope no one assumes that the man of God is not deeply torn between his sense of duty to serve God and the flock in his charge, and his sense of duty to serve his country.

:oops!: Got off topic here didn't we? Interesting subject though. :wink:

[toddytodd]

MJB wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: ieatfood wrote: MJB wrote: #2. It's a pollution to the body.

compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body

That could depend entirely on how much pot one smokes, or how much meat he eats. But my faith teaches that commanding to abstain from meats is sin, while, at the same time, meat should also be used sparingly.

And of course - just about anything can be a pollutant or toxic depending on a person's chemistry.

I once went through a long period of time when I would periodically become deathly ill. The only way I could even describe it was that it felt like I was being poisoned. Turns out I was, and the source ended up being city water. I was being poisoned by the chlorine. It took over two years to discover the cause, and, for several years after, I had to strictly avoid chlorine exposure. What caused such a severe chemical sensitivity is unknown, but I'm glad to say that it is no longer a problem.

what denomination are you again?

LDS

:thrhj:
MJB
I have always been curious. Who are/were the LDSs?
:thrhj: over.

[MJB]

toddytodd wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: what denomination are you again?

LDS

:thrhj:
MJB
I have always been curious. Who are/were the LDSs?
:thrhj: over.

In New Testament times, the members of Jesus Christ's church were called saints.

LDS is an acronym for, "Latter-day Saints," and LDS is used as an abbreviation for, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," or to refer to the members of it.

We're commonly called Mormons, but that's not the name of the church, and was actually a nick-name first used in derision to refer to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[Angelicus]

MJB wrote: toddytodd wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: what denomination are you again?

LDS

:thrhj:
MJB
I have always been curious. Who are/were the LDSs?
:thrhj: over.

In New Testament times, the members of Jesus Christ's church were called saints.

LDS is an acronym for, "Latter-day Saints," and LDS is used as an abbreviation for, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," or to refer to the members of it.

We're commonly called Mormons, but that's not the name of the church, and was actually a nick-name first used in derision to refer to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

If "mormon" is a term of derision, why then is the book the LDS use as their "testament" called the book of mormon?

Isn't it possible that the LDS are called mormons because they follow the book of mormon?

[MJB]

Angelicus wrote: MJB wrote: toddytodd wrote: MJB wrote: eynon wrote: what denomination are you again?

LDS

:thrhj:
MJB
I have always been curious. Who are/were the LDSs?
:thrhj: over.

In New Testament times, the members of Jesus Christ's church were called saints.

LDS is an acronym for, "Latter-day Saints," and LDS is used as an abbreviation for, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," or to refer to the members of it.

We're commonly called Mormons, but that's not the name of the church, and was actually a nick-name first used in derision to refer to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

If "mormon" is a term of derision, why then is the book the LDS use as their "testament" called the book of mormon?

Isn't it possible that the LDS are called mormons because they follow the book of mormon?

Mormon is not a term of derision. It was a nick-name begun and used in derision by our emenies to refer to us. Obviously the Book of Mormon was where they came up with the nick-name.

The Book of Mormon was titled such, by a prophet named Mormon because it was his account of his people, written by his hand, which account includes an abridgment he made of the records of his people, which he had been given charge of. These records were written by the hands of many other prophets.

By the way - the Book of Mormon is only one of the testaments we use. The others are commonly called, "The Old Testament," and, "The New Testament." All of which testify of the Christ, and is their purpose.

We don't mind the name Mormon, of course, knowing the character of Mormon. But, technically speaking, it was no more accurate to call us Mormons and Mormonites, and refer to our theology as Mormonism, as it would have been use such terms as Isaiahism or Matthewism, or Jeremiahites, or Peterites, or Paulines, etc.

We are Christians, which, incidentally, was quite possibly a nick-name begun by enemies of followers of the gospel and teachings of Christ, and used in derision to refer to them.

[John]

eynon wrote: MJB wrote: Zampano wrote: There's a lot in the Bible about drinking wine but I know it can't support drunkenness.
I'd personally say 'yes', and that's part of the reason why I don't nor ever will take these sorts of malevolent drugs.

Extremely wise decision.

With the exception of careful and proper drug use for needed medical treatment, I don't think God wants us to use, or misuse, any potentially harmful and addictive substances, or take them into our bodies wantonly or needlessly.

However - regardless of one's decision to not use such, I would advise that he be a good example to others in this regard, without becoming preachy and judgmental toward them if they don't share those same beliefs on the matter. I'm not suggesting that you, personally, would do that, mind you, but it's not an uncommon thing to happen, so I'm addressing it generally.

Often there is nothing worse for someone who needs to become free of a harmful substance, than to have some self-righteous purist lording it over him and treating him like a sinner because he smokes or drinks or whatever. And anyone can succumb, even the person who thinks he will never partake, so it's important to keep that in mind, or we may end up having to learn that lesson the hard way, first hand.

So - one needs to remember, that while a decision in this regard is admirable, and he should, of course, never put himself at risk by compromising his principles, it's important to remain humble, and compassionate toward others, at the same time.

nice post :-D

if I could add that a person who choses such a lifestyle is speaking for themselves, not for Christ............


btw..........I occasionally smoke pot, is that a sin? :-|

Do you feel convicted by the Holy Spirit about smoking pot?

If something isn't clearly spelled out in the Bible...that's really the way a Christian show be able to tell. For things that are not clearly stated as sin in the Bible...such things like smoking pot could possibly be on a case by case basis. I personally feel convicted about it...so it is prolly a sin for me..for what ever reason, even though I could do it, hold a good job and have no desire what so ever to move on the stronger drugs, I still feel the Spirit telling me not to do it.

I dunno Enyon...what do you think?

[Wayne230]

Quote: ieatfood wrote:
MJB wrote:
#2. It's a pollution to the body.


compared to eating meat, smoking pot is not a pollution to the body


Smoking pot is against the law and eating meat is not. We are told to obey the law in Romans 13. We can't go to jail for eating meat!
I would say smoking is not directly mentioned in the Bible although I detest cigarettes. The Bible has a lot to say about being drunk.[/quote]

[eynon]

John wrote: eynon wrote: MJB wrote: Zampano wrote: There's a lot in the Bible about drinking wine but I know it can't support drunkenness.
I'd personally say 'yes', and that's part of the reason why I don't nor ever will take these sorts of malevolent drugs.

Extremely wise decision.

With the exception of careful and proper drug use for needed medical treatment, I don't think God wants us to use, or misuse, any potentially harmful and addictive substances, or take them into our bodies wantonly or needlessly.

However - regardless of one's decision to not use such, I would advise that he be a good example to others in this regard, without becoming preachy and judgmental toward them if they don't share those same beliefs on the matter. I'm not suggesting that you, personally, would do that, mind you, but it's not an uncommon thing to happen, so I'm addressing it generally.

Often there is nothing worse for someone who needs to become free of a harmful substance, than to have some self-righteous purist lording it over him and treating him like a sinner because he smokes or drinks or whatever. And anyone can succumb, even the person who thinks he will never partake, so it's important to keep that in mind, or we may end up having to learn that lesson the hard way, first hand.

So - one needs to remember, that while a decision in this regard is admirable, and he should, of course, never put himself at risk by compromising his principles, it's important to remain humble, and compassionate toward others, at the same time.

nice post :-D

if I could add that a person who choses such a lifestyle is speaking for themselves, not for Christ............


btw..........I occasionally smoke pot, is that a sin? :-|

Do you feel convicted by the Holy Spirit about smoking pot?

If something isn't clearly spelled out in the Bible...that's really the way a Christian show be able to tell. For things that are not clearly stated as sin in the Bible...such things like smoking pot could possibly be on a case by case basis. I personally feel convicted about it...so it is prolly a sin for me..for what ever reason, even though I could do it, hold a good job and have no desire what so ever to move on the stronger drugs, I still feel the Spirit telling me not to do it.

I dunno Enyon...what do you think?

frankly I've never gotten anything on it......the spirit often nails me when I am sinning or when it moves me to do something(you know what I'm talking about of course :) ).....but on pot, nada. But I use it maybe once or twice a month(often with my parents, also believers) and then only on weekends.

That will all change when I have kids as you do........no pot till they leave for college! :)

[the prophet]

I can clear a little of this up. Jesus said to the pharisees (you hypocrites it is not what you take in which is passed and discarded but what spews from your mouth which convicts you) H e also says that we reap what we sow. I smoked for 23 years and drank heavily for as long. This life style cost me three marriages and harmed my son in the process. Not to mention the years it has taken off of my life. I no longer drink thanks to God who delivered me from substance abuse. I no longer smoke thanks to God as well. The truth is if you smoke a lot it will harm your lungs and eventually kill you. If we Drink in excess it will harm your liver and Brain and eventually kill you. The same can be said of all things consumed in excess but you are not convicted of what you take in but what you say or support. Jesus convicted the Pharisees on the spot for spreading false doctrines. I have friends who are good Christians who smoke and they no full well that should stop because the cigarettes are killing them. Another way for us to weed thru topics not covered in the Bible is to look at its fruit. What does it bear? good fruit or death and destruction? I believe Satan uses both tobacco and alcohol to kill good Christians every day. He also uses candy and fatty meats to kill by heart diseases and drugs to kill as well. Satan is our sworn enemy he wants us dead. SSSOOOO :) IF it builds up and bears good fruit it is of God. If it tears down and destroys it is of Satan. God builds Satan destroys. The Prophet