Agency and Stewardship

The other day a coworker tried to explain to another coworker that I did not drink Coffee, Tea, ans Coke.

"What?" I interjected. "I drink Coke all the time."

He then started to look somewhat shocked and judgemental. He then claimed he had a friend who did not drink Coke. Now, it wasn't clear whether this friend claimed it was Church policy or if it was just my coworker's interpretation.

I tried to explain that it is not a clear cut "ruling" like that on coffee or tea, but I felt I was back pedaling. I wanted to smack him for his judgemental stare, but I knew his judgement is about as worthless as a two legged stool.

Anyway, later I thought of a good argument. And here is some of it.

There are two things wrong with this conversation. First of all, I believe I know my religion better than you. In this case, it seems your understanding comes from a second hand source. This would be considered hear-say and inadmissible in Court. For all intensive purposes, I dare say it is inadmissible in this conversation.

Second, we are talking about a point from the Word of Wisdom - which is a law of health. Which is a small part of Church doctrine. Why are we hung up on that?

I did mention that you could go to [heck] for worse offenses. Assuming drinking Coke is in fact an offense.

I thought about going off from there about supporting arguments: eating meet sparingly, insane New Testament rules to keep the Law of Moses, being compelled in all things, feasibility to define everything you can and can't do and passing off personal interpretations as Church doctrine/policy on others... but it would be overkill.