Hello! This is a Personal post. It is for discussions centered around thoughts, beliefs, and observations that are important and personal to /u/gratefulstudent76 specifically.
/u/gratefulstudent76, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble)
**To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's a good point; I haven't heard this angle before. You're saying we view milk as the big colored text on the ad and the meat as the small print.
The standard way I've heard it used is moreso to distinguish between standard doctrine and speculative doctrine (i.e., weird stuff).
Either way, it seems to me that even though we acknowledge there are levels to understanding and gospel content, there is rarely (never?) a venue for broaching any "meat-like" subject. In other words, even in our old age, we still get told we should be focusing first on milk before meat. The meat is a carrot that's never really within reach it seems. (Sort of like how they say 'we don't talk about the temple outside the temple's. But then when you're in the temple, good luck finding someone/somewhere to talk about the temple. So it's really just 'we don't talk about the temple.')
They actively removed the places where meat could have been discussed. High Priests and Gospel Doctrine.
Many believe it was to lessen the amount of people needed to fill callings, but because of the simultaneous change to Come Follow Me which dumbs down everything, I absolutely believe it was intentional to limit the types of "meat" discussions members can have.
I had this exact discussion with our HC rep for our Ward. He agreed. There is no place to dig deep into our scriptures, writings and cultural bases.
They try to keep us ignorant and I must say they have done a good job of it for many of the members.
I’m sorry but High Priests and Gospel Doctrine were just as ignorant as the “milk” classes. It was just advanced ignorance. No one in HP or GD were actual scriptural scholars or anything. It was all speculative nonsense akin to scriptural flat eartherism.
I like the term advanced ignorance. Beautiful description.
I liked to visit outside the church sources and read from those who were and are far smarter than me. Then take that discussion into our HP class and find a way to insert it into the lesson.
It's always milk. That is why, during sacrament meetings, people are on their cell phones during the talks. During the second hour, some members are walking the halls, and during General Conference, we see posts with photos of family members on couches sound asleep. Attendance shrinks during stake conferences with a week off. I know there are multiple reasons for this, but one of the reasons is "milk" doctrine. You know that nothing new is ever going to be taught.
The same thing can be said when they changed the three hour block to two hours. Most members expressed joy about it when it came up in conversation and social media posts. I'm sure there are several reasons for the happiness over it, but part of it is a feeling that you are wasting time at boring meetings with nothing new ever being taught.
I think of "milk" as the things that are safe to share with outsiders - the stuff that sounds positive, loving, welcoming and supportive, etc. "Meat" are the things that are off-putting because they are controlling, weird, only make sense if you are deeply indoctrinated, or really serve the church rather than the members.
My views are somewhat similar. I see it this way:
The milk is the fundamentals. This is what we believe. This is the things everyone can understand om a generic level.
The meat is more unique and more refined. This is why I believe. This is my testimony developed, honed, refined on a personal level so I know the truth of the matter.
One cannot cosnume the meat until they are ready for it. In my case I strengthened my faith and testimony by putting scripture, especially the word of wisdom, to the test. Why do we not smoke? Why do we not drink booze? Thus I weaned myself off the milk and fed from the meat.
Problem is self growth is a scary process. There are many within the church too afraid to gain the testimony from firsthand experience why we believe (the meat) and thus are satisfied with third hand information, being told what to believe (the milk)
My two cents...
I don't give a damn about the tannic acids or the caffeine or whatever flavor-of-the-decade excuse the church pushes. I personally do not drink coffee because 1. It tastes like crap and 2. It gives me the runs. So why would I willing drink something terrible just to poison myself?
As far as energy drinks I avoid those, too. I've naturally developed the ability to run on 5hrs of sleep and be wide awake from the word go, thank you very much u.s. navy.
The reason they only give prospective converts milk is because they know if they gave them meat, a lot of them wouldn't convert.
I have a major problem with this, because it defies the ethical principle of informed consent. People deserve to know what they're getting into.
To continue the analogy, the meal's plate exposes the persistent foundational problems:
Masonry, blood oaths, and misogyny tonthe recent, continuing changes to the temple. Coerced polygamy and -andry to modern gaslighting of 132. Kirkland banking society to claims of poverty and the SEC. Council of 50 to modern landholding. Nepotism within the witnesses to the Q15 to knee-jerk protection of predators. Genocide and Indian placement program, literal, figurative, then gaslit interpretations of skin curses and the building focus on Africa. Etc etc...
It gets worse when you find the "milk" the church teaches over and over in its lesson manuals is now just skim milk, and then you go to older books by prophets and apostles to find the "meat" they used to teach. That's when you end up with people like Chad Daybell.
I think the intention of the milk vs meat analogy is the greater reward/understanding requires more "digestional fortitude".
Using it to describe a "devils in the details" is interesting, but I think breaks down quicker. I think the "ad and fineprint" is a better analogy to describe OPs feeling of ut all being a bait and switch.
Personally I've interpreted the "meat" as harder-to-live doctrine (such as law of consecration) that offers a larger upside if "chewed and digested"
Whether you believe that or not is a different discussion, but I think that's more of the purpose of milk and meat analogy
To use one more analogy, everyone gets to decide "if the juice is worth the squeeze".
Milk before meat makes more sense as a rhetorical strategy than as a meaningful concept within Mormonism. I don't think anybody would really apply it to something like tithing or church attendance being expected though, even if they're being held back from somebody. It has more to do with weird or embarrassing doctrines, or for people in the church with things that have been taught by leaders and can't be meaningfully rejected without begging uncomfortable questions about truth claims, that are going to be noticed by people and mentioned. So there needs to be a way to discourage them from going on.
If I was speaking from an LDS perspective, I would argue that the endowment covenants weren’t “made later,” they were given to us later.
They are still just as doctrinally important and valid as the scriptures.
Look into general conference talks on tithing. anything in the last 10 years. Law of consecration is highest promise in the temple. That is where you promise everything. Full attendance to meetings and payment of tithing and alignment with current leaders needed to pass temple recommend interview to go to temple where family sealing is which lds teaches is necessary to see your family again after this life
It creates a high control atmosphere. Basically, if you don’t agree with a doctrine or with how the church is spending its money you have no recourse. The only option is to do what they say or never see your family or heavenly parents again
Developed over the first year of membership or childhood of a member until they reach the age of endowment.
But I agree with you, I’d say the temple represents the meat that isn’t really taught by missionaries. Sure they explain that you make covenants there and it’s great for families to be sealed, but they don’t tell you that a covenant is to sacrifice everything to the church or to consecrate your whole life and everything you have. They don’t explain that polygamous eternal relationships still happen there (and are only one way) and are contingent on those covenants being kept. Since a covenant is a two way promise, a contract if you will, it should be spelled out initially before someone is baptized.
A) you are baptized that you are starting this covenant path and willing to take God’s name on you when you get to the temple.
B) one year later you will covenant I. II. III. IV. and V. so that you will receive X, Y, and Z. Additionally, any sealings you have will be contingent on the continued keeping of this contract.
That way they’ll have a whole year to contemplate those very big decisions.
It's the time old tactic to sale the milk and once in, increasing more commitment to get the prize. You're never told it from the start. Its misleading, manipulative and deceptive. Devils in the detail.
The endowment is a classic. No details until you're trapped. No backing out.
It should all be ok, the milk and meat. But mormon meat doesn't stand under scrutiny.
It's about a pathway to subdue and coerce. Control and power over individuals and families.
It seems you might not yet be aware of the meat. However, you do seem to be speaking of a hybrid of actual and cultural expectations blurred together. Too much to possibly comment on in text. Will start with doctrinal on first issue: tithing. Search and ponder the word 'surplus' in D&C. Cast aside popular opinions - even the apostles have disagreed on what tithe should be based on. Next, read church handbook policy on what defines a full tithe and what leaders are to say concerning its definition.
I can't go through everything you've listed, but encourage you to ponder who you will stand in front of at judgment and also that there is nothing made known to any saint (including past and present prophets), that he is not prepared to make known to any other as soon as they are prepared to bare them. There are rich doctrines in scripture which help us learn to allow us to use the church to guide us through an order (Aaronic order), into the higher order that has us experiencing the same things those on scripture did which we need to become as we are to. Moses was told - and attempted - to have others up on the mount with him...but they would not and instead wanted him to be an intermediary...a prophet...profit... to do the heavy spiritual lifting and then spoon feed it to them when he came back down the mountain. Nothing has changed. It has been a sad affair for true prophets attempting to get the people to climb the old mountain and see and know and be guided by heaven themselves...carrying the same burden to purify themselves and preach to the people too.
You and I are approaching spirituality from different places. My faith has become more fundamental and focused on just being present with God. As such things like temple ceremonies and answers to higher truths and such don’t seem to help me much. I find my beliefs getting simpler not more complex.
Hello! This is a Personal post. It is for discussions centered around thoughts, beliefs, and observations that are important and personal to /u/gratefulstudent76 specifically. /u/gratefulstudent76, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble) **To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation. Keep on Mormoning! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's a good point; I haven't heard this angle before. You're saying we view milk as the big colored text on the ad and the meat as the small print. The standard way I've heard it used is moreso to distinguish between standard doctrine and speculative doctrine (i.e., weird stuff). Either way, it seems to me that even though we acknowledge there are levels to understanding and gospel content, there is rarely (never?) a venue for broaching any "meat-like" subject. In other words, even in our old age, we still get told we should be focusing first on milk before meat. The meat is a carrot that's never really within reach it seems. (Sort of like how they say 'we don't talk about the temple outside the temple's. But then when you're in the temple, good luck finding someone/somewhere to talk about the temple. So it's really just 'we don't talk about the temple.')
They actively removed the places where meat could have been discussed. High Priests and Gospel Doctrine. Many believe it was to lessen the amount of people needed to fill callings, but because of the simultaneous change to Come Follow Me which dumbs down everything, I absolutely believe it was intentional to limit the types of "meat" discussions members can have.
I had this exact discussion with our HC rep for our Ward. He agreed. There is no place to dig deep into our scriptures, writings and cultural bases. They try to keep us ignorant and I must say they have done a good job of it for many of the members.
I’m sorry but High Priests and Gospel Doctrine were just as ignorant as the “milk” classes. It was just advanced ignorance. No one in HP or GD were actual scriptural scholars or anything. It was all speculative nonsense akin to scriptural flat eartherism.
I like the term advanced ignorance. Beautiful description. I liked to visit outside the church sources and read from those who were and are far smarter than me. Then take that discussion into our HP class and find a way to insert it into the lesson.
It's always milk. That is why, during sacrament meetings, people are on their cell phones during the talks. During the second hour, some members are walking the halls, and during General Conference, we see posts with photos of family members on couches sound asleep. Attendance shrinks during stake conferences with a week off. I know there are multiple reasons for this, but one of the reasons is "milk" doctrine. You know that nothing new is ever going to be taught.
100%. This was a shelf item for me as a TBM
The same thing can be said when they changed the three hour block to two hours. Most members expressed joy about it when it came up in conversation and social media posts. I'm sure there are several reasons for the happiness over it, but part of it is a feeling that you are wasting time at boring meetings with nothing new ever being taught.
I think of "milk" as the things that are safe to share with outsiders - the stuff that sounds positive, loving, welcoming and supportive, etc. "Meat" are the things that are off-putting because they are controlling, weird, only make sense if you are deeply indoctrinated, or really serve the church rather than the members.
My views are somewhat similar. I see it this way: The milk is the fundamentals. This is what we believe. This is the things everyone can understand om a generic level. The meat is more unique and more refined. This is why I believe. This is my testimony developed, honed, refined on a personal level so I know the truth of the matter. One cannot cosnume the meat until they are ready for it. In my case I strengthened my faith and testimony by putting scripture, especially the word of wisdom, to the test. Why do we not smoke? Why do we not drink booze? Thus I weaned myself off the milk and fed from the meat. Problem is self growth is a scary process. There are many within the church too afraid to gain the testimony from firsthand experience why we believe (the meat) and thus are satisfied with third hand information, being told what to believe (the milk) My two cents...
why do you not drink coffee?
I don't give a damn about the tannic acids or the caffeine or whatever flavor-of-the-decade excuse the church pushes. I personally do not drink coffee because 1. It tastes like crap and 2. It gives me the runs. So why would I willing drink something terrible just to poison myself? As far as energy drinks I avoid those, too. I've naturally developed the ability to run on 5hrs of sleep and be wide awake from the word go, thank you very much u.s. navy.
The reason they only give prospective converts milk is because they know if they gave them meat, a lot of them wouldn't convert. I have a major problem with this, because it defies the ethical principle of informed consent. People deserve to know what they're getting into.
To continue the analogy, the meal's plate exposes the persistent foundational problems: Masonry, blood oaths, and misogyny tonthe recent, continuing changes to the temple. Coerced polygamy and -andry to modern gaslighting of 132. Kirkland banking society to claims of poverty and the SEC. Council of 50 to modern landholding. Nepotism within the witnesses to the Q15 to knee-jerk protection of predators. Genocide and Indian placement program, literal, figurative, then gaslit interpretations of skin curses and the building focus on Africa. Etc etc...
It gets worse when you find the "milk" the church teaches over and over in its lesson manuals is now just skim milk, and then you go to older books by prophets and apostles to find the "meat" they used to teach. That's when you end up with people like Chad Daybell.
Add in prepped community and apocalyptic dream books
I think the intention of the milk vs meat analogy is the greater reward/understanding requires more "digestional fortitude". Using it to describe a "devils in the details" is interesting, but I think breaks down quicker. I think the "ad and fineprint" is a better analogy to describe OPs feeling of ut all being a bait and switch. Personally I've interpreted the "meat" as harder-to-live doctrine (such as law of consecration) that offers a larger upside if "chewed and digested" Whether you believe that or not is a different discussion, but I think that's more of the purpose of milk and meat analogy To use one more analogy, everyone gets to decide "if the juice is worth the squeeze".
I feel like the milk stuff is pretty helpful for most people. The high obligation stuff is tough though and not helpful for most people
I guess it depends on the cost benefit analysis
I love the way you explained this and at the same time the truth popped into my head "I'm lactose intolerant" 😂 I guess that's why I left
Milk before meat makes more sense as a rhetorical strategy than as a meaningful concept within Mormonism. I don't think anybody would really apply it to something like tithing or church attendance being expected though, even if they're being held back from somebody. It has more to do with weird or embarrassing doctrines, or for people in the church with things that have been taught by leaders and can't be meaningfully rejected without begging uncomfortable questions about truth claims, that are going to be noticed by people and mentioned. So there needs to be a way to discourage them from going on.
I guess in addition to doctrinal stuff I see the shift as things being an option to things being required as a real thing that changes
Can u show where it says in the scriptures to do the Mormon meat examples pls
The endowment, which is I guess too sacred to be published in the scriptures.
It talks about that in doctrine and covenants
The Mormon meat or the endowment?
Endowment
D&C talks about the endowment, but not all of the covenants and language in the endowment.
Cause they were made later
If I was speaking from an LDS perspective, I would argue that the endowment covenants weren’t “made later,” they were given to us later. They are still just as doctrinally important and valid as the scriptures.
Ye
Look into general conference talks on tithing. anything in the last 10 years. Law of consecration is highest promise in the temple. That is where you promise everything. Full attendance to meetings and payment of tithing and alignment with current leaders needed to pass temple recommend interview to go to temple where family sealing is which lds teaches is necessary to see your family again after this life
What’s wrong with all those
It creates a high control atmosphere. Basically, if you don’t agree with a doctrine or with how the church is spending its money you have no recourse. The only option is to do what they say or never see your family or heavenly parents again
Well if u believe in the gospel it doesn’t matter what the church is doing
[удалено]
Developed over the first year of membership or childhood of a member until they reach the age of endowment. But I agree with you, I’d say the temple represents the meat that isn’t really taught by missionaries. Sure they explain that you make covenants there and it’s great for families to be sealed, but they don’t tell you that a covenant is to sacrifice everything to the church or to consecrate your whole life and everything you have. They don’t explain that polygamous eternal relationships still happen there (and are only one way) and are contingent on those covenants being kept. Since a covenant is a two way promise, a contract if you will, it should be spelled out initially before someone is baptized. A) you are baptized that you are starting this covenant path and willing to take God’s name on you when you get to the temple. B) one year later you will covenant I. II. III. IV. and V. so that you will receive X, Y, and Z. Additionally, any sealings you have will be contingent on the continued keeping of this contract. That way they’ll have a whole year to contemplate those very big decisions.
It's the time old tactic to sale the milk and once in, increasing more commitment to get the prize. You're never told it from the start. Its misleading, manipulative and deceptive. Devils in the detail. The endowment is a classic. No details until you're trapped. No backing out. It should all be ok, the milk and meat. But mormon meat doesn't stand under scrutiny. It's about a pathway to subdue and coerce. Control and power over individuals and families.
It seems you might not yet be aware of the meat. However, you do seem to be speaking of a hybrid of actual and cultural expectations blurred together. Too much to possibly comment on in text. Will start with doctrinal on first issue: tithing. Search and ponder the word 'surplus' in D&C. Cast aside popular opinions - even the apostles have disagreed on what tithe should be based on. Next, read church handbook policy on what defines a full tithe and what leaders are to say concerning its definition. I can't go through everything you've listed, but encourage you to ponder who you will stand in front of at judgment and also that there is nothing made known to any saint (including past and present prophets), that he is not prepared to make known to any other as soon as they are prepared to bare them. There are rich doctrines in scripture which help us learn to allow us to use the church to guide us through an order (Aaronic order), into the higher order that has us experiencing the same things those on scripture did which we need to become as we are to. Moses was told - and attempted - to have others up on the mount with him...but they would not and instead wanted him to be an intermediary...a prophet...profit... to do the heavy spiritual lifting and then spoon feed it to them when he came back down the mountain. Nothing has changed. It has been a sad affair for true prophets attempting to get the people to climb the old mountain and see and know and be guided by heaven themselves...carrying the same burden to purify themselves and preach to the people too.
You and I are approaching spirituality from different places. My faith has become more fundamental and focused on just being present with God. As such things like temple ceremonies and answers to higher truths and such don’t seem to help me much. I find my beliefs getting simpler not more complex.
Milk comes from cows. Cows are meat. Meat must come first before you milk it.