Do you HAVE to give up coffee or can you choose it away?

[Iggy]

It it true that it becomes more pleasing to God when it is in a latte or mochachino concoction rather than say, an expresso?

Moksha, can't you be serious just once and not be so damn flippant? Why are you so mocking of the commandments that have been given to God's covenant people? It is comments like this one that make me believe that you are only a fair weather mormon. Only when it is approved by others not of the LDS faith. Grow up why don't you.

For so many adult converts, quitting drinking coffee and tea is not a simple thing like you and those NOT of the LDS faith think it is. I went through withdrawal when I quit. Never did I go through the same pain, and physical torments when I quit drinking alcohol or when I did drugs.

I knew I would have head aches, shakes and possibly some mood swings. Never was I told I would have the vomiting, the radical mood swings. The inability to do even the simple things for myself, like feed myself a cup of soup! I wasn't able to drive a car or go to work. I am thankful that it only lasted about 1.5 weeks. I am thankful my employer understood and didn't fire me. I am thankful that I am totally off coffee- in any way, shape, and form. I am also off alcohol, in any way, shape and form. Including bourbon drenched cookies and cakes, etc.

Two Christmas's ago, my husband and I went to a family party. Every one there was drinking alcohol. Didn't bother us a bit, we mingled and were really enjoying ourselves. Then his cousin-in-law sat next to me and put his Old Fashioned on the table. I could smell it, and ooohhh, it smelled sooo good. I actually salivated and drooled. I stopped myself from picking up his drink and downing it. I jerked up out of the chair and dashed into the restroom. Husband was waiting for me, wondering what was wrong. I said we had to leave, now. He didn't argue or ask questions. We said our good byes to everyone and when we got the car I told him what happened. Not only did I react that way to the Old Fashioned drink that CuzInLaw was drinking, I also reacted the same way to the coffee that his wife was pouring some of the guests.

Just because coffee and tea are not restricted like alcohol is, just because there are articles written that say it is good for you, doesn't mean that that is true.

I choose to listen to my Lord, Heavenly Father, via the mouth of his living prophet when he says to not consume certain things. I also choose to not drink or eat anything that has coffee in it. I don't care if the article writers say it is good. They are not God's living Prophet. They do not have stewardship over me. I do, my husband does, my bishop does and God's living Prophet does - have stewardship over me. I then exercise the agency God gave me to either heed their voice or not to.

Out of respect to God, I do not belittle and mock his commandments. Doesn't matter if I am going to heed them or not, I do not mock them.

[lilered]

Don't forget there is a principle involved with the W of W. It is one of obediance!!!! Are you willing to be obediant in a few things here on earth for the promise of riches in this life ( run and not be weary, etc.) and in Celestial Kingdom? If ones attitude is one of picking and choosing which commandments will be obeyed, then it stands to reason the reward will be administered the same way.

[Wingnut]

D&C 89:9 And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.

Some of the early Brethren explained what was meant by this phrase. Hyrum Smith, brother of the Prophet, wrote: "And again, 'hot drinks are not for the body, or belly;' there are many who wonder what this can mean; whether it refers to tea, or coffee, or not. I say it does refer to tea, and coffee." ("The Word of Wisdom," Times and Seasons, 1 June 1842, p. 800)

And when the question was brought to the Prophet himself, Joseph Smith said: "I understand that some of the people are excusing themselves in using tea and coffee, because the Lord only said 'hot drinks' in the revelation of the Word of Wisdom. Tea and coffee are what the Lord meant when he said 'hot drinks.'" (In Widtsoe, Word of Wisdom, pp. 85-86)

What about soft drinks containing habit-forming drugs or caffeine, such as cola drinks? Although soft drinks are not mentioned specifically in the Word of Wisdom, an official statement by the Church's leaders reads:"With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided." (Priesthood Bulletin, Feb. 1972, p. 4)

[Prodigal_Son]

What about soft drinks containing habit-forming drugs or caffeine, such as cola drinks? Although soft drinks are not mentioned specifically in the Word of Wisdom, an official statement by the Church's leaders reads:"With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided." (Priesthood Bulletin, Feb. 1972, p. 4)

In Pres. Hinckley's first television interview, he was asked (paraphrasing), "Do you Mormons drink caffeinated sodas??" And Pres GBH said NO. End of discussion, as far as I'm concerned.

I drink caffeinated pop, myself, to get through my work - but have no illusions about whether what I'm doing is sin or not.

[bmy-]

In Pres. Hinckley's first television interview, he was asked (paraphrasing), "Do you Mormons drink caffeinated sodas??" And Pres GBH said NO. End of discussion, as far as I'm concerned.

I drink caffeinated pop, myself, to get through my work - but have no illusions about whether what I'm doing is sin or not.

I wonder if God would rather you sleep through sacrament or drink a coke to get there and be attentive. Just saying that it mustn't be black and white -- few things in life are.

Can anyone address the issue of the overwhelming majority going to the temple 'unworthy'? In regards to eating meat when not in times of winter or famine.

[pam]

I wonder if God would rather you sleep through sacrament or drink a coke to get there and be attentive. Just saying that it mustn't be black and white -- few things in life are.

Can anyone address the issue of the overwhelming majority going to the temple 'unworthy'? In regards to eating meat when not in times of winter or famine.

The eating of meat was not banned. We are advised to eat meat sparingly. There is nothing that says we can't eat meat when not in times of winter or famine.

One of the things I learned while growing up, one of the reasons that members during the early Church years were advised about winter etc was that there were no refrigeration as we know today. Whatever they butchered during the summer had to be eaten quickly or much was spoilt. During the winter was a different story as winter had it's own refrigeration benefits.

Edited September 16, 2008 by pam

[jimuk]

What it comes down to in my opinion is " SACRIFICE " The tougher it is the bigger the sacrifice, and your blessings will be many for this.

Jesus made the biggest sacrifice of all by putting himself forward knowing the physical pain he was to go through for us.

[MarginOfError]

In Pres. Hinckley's first television interview, he was asked (paraphrasing), "Do you Mormons drink caffeinated sodas??" And Pres GBH said NO. End of discussion, as far as I'm concerned.

I drink caffeinated pop, myself, to get through my work - but have no illusions about whether what I'm doing is sin or not.

What he actually said was "They know better." But Television isn't exactly a doctrinal setting. Interpret it however you wish, but the Lord does not reveal new doctrine to the world in television interviews

[Prodigal_Son]

What he actually said was "They know better." But Television isn't exactly a doctrinal setting. Interpret it however you wish, but the Lord does not reveal new doctrine to the world in television interviews

You're assuming it's new doctrine...

[MarginOfError]

Actually, I'm not. In fact, I'm stating that abstaining from caffeine isn't doctrine at all.

[jimuk]

What it comes down to is this, imho, is caffeine a wholesome substance to put into our bodies.

M.o.E is right when he says that it is not doctrine, but we know what kind of stuff we should not drink because of some of the ingredients that they contain, and is it prudent for the well being of our bodies, i am no scientist so i have to go by what i am told or read on the subject.

[hordak]

The eating of meat was not banned. We are advised to eat meat sparingly. There is nothing that says we can't eat meat when not in times of winter or famine.

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;

Sparingly is supported here.

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

It doesn't say we can't but it pleases God if don't.And isn't that why we should follow the WoW. I will admit this is a funny line, it supports both positions depending on how long you pause at the word used. However reading on.

14 All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth;

15 And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger.

This seems to support the idea that the beast, fowls and wild animals are only for times of famine because it isn't talking about grain,the staff of life.I suppose verse 15 could apply only to the wild animals.But that would make hunting and eating game wrong.Perhaps my bishop isn't as good as he seems;).

One of the things I learned while growing up, one of the reasons that members during the early Church years were advised about winter etc was that there were no refrigeration as we know today. Whatever they butchered during the summer had to be eaten quickly or much was spoilt. During the winter was a different story as winter had it's own refrigeration benefits.

That makes sense but using historical circumstances to decide why we have the laws and which laws to follow is not a good idea IMO.Take strong drinks for example.

7 And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.

During the early church years this was true.Much of the alcohol was homemade and even the commercial stuff didn't have the government oversight it has today.Strong drink back then could be used to wash your body(antiseptically) but it doesn't apply today.

[Prodigal_Son]

What he actually said was "They know better." But Television isn't exactly a doctrinal setting. Interpret it however you wish, but the Lord does not reveal new doctrine to the world in television interviews

Actually, I'm not. In fact, I'm stating that abstaining from caffeine isn't doctrine at all.

I don't mean to be argumentative... but I guess I am. You're wrong. the prophet joined Mike Wallace on 60 minutes, representing the entire church and the following conversation ensued:

Mike Wallace: Example. Mormons adhere to a very strict health code. No alcohol, no tobacco, no coffee, no tea, not even caffeinated soft drinks...

Gordon B. Hinckley: Right.

How are you going to twist that? Like I said, I'm a caffeine drinker. So please don't think of me as some holier-than-thou hypocrite. But I know, FOR A FACT, that my choice to consume these beverages is a sin.

[Misshalfway]

How are you going to twist that? Like I said, I'm a caffeine drinker. So please don't think of me as some holier-than-thou hypocrite. But I know, FOR A FACT, that my choice to consume these beverages is a sin.

When I think about this issue, if you want to call it that, I have a hard time taking it to the extreme of sin. (I am referring to the cola/caffiene debate) I suppose if you want to wrestle me to the ground on that one you could perhaps in the end win. But, I know that a diet coke doesn't keep me from the temple. I also know that if I abstain from the caffeine or limit my overall caffeine/carcinogen intake, that I will not only enjoy benefits to my body but to my access to the Spirit in my life as well. For me it isn't about what I shouldn't be doing so much as it is what I SHOULD that makes the difference in how I view this commandment and the goals of the Lord in instituting it.

[Prodigal_Son]

When I think about this issue, if you want to call it that, I have a hard time taking it to the extreme of sin.

What would you call "failure to heed the prophet" then? A spade's a spade. It isn't a BIG sin. I never said it was. But it's still sin.

[Misshalfway]

What would you call "failure to heed the prophet" then? A spade's a spade. It isn't a BIG sin. I never said it was. But it's still sin.

Ok then. Wrestle me to the ground if you must.

[pam]

Oooooooooo can I watch?

[MarginOfError]

I don't mean to be argumentative... but I guess I am. You're wrong. the prophet joined Mike Wallace on 60 minutes, representing the entire church and the following conversation ensued:

Mike Wallace: Example. Mormons adhere to a very strict health code. No alcohol, no tobacco, no coffee, no tea, not even caffeinated soft drinks...

Gordon B. Hinckley: Right.

How are you going to twist that? Like I said, I'm a caffeine drinker. So please don't think of me as some holier-than-thou hypocrite. But I know, FOR A FACT, that my choice to consume these beverages is a sin.

Again, I reiterate, doctrine is not pronounced from the microphone of 60 Minutes. If the command is to be given that we are do abstain from caffeine, it will be given through General Conference, or a letter to the membership of the Church that will be read over the pulpit (there may be a very few other venues but that is beyond the scope of this thread). Simply put, as the conditions are currently stated, if two people present to the Lord under the exact same guilt, save one consumes caffeine and one does not, I am certain that those to individuals will receive the same reward.

And I mean neither to call you holier-than-me, nor a hypocrite. Just want to clarify what is Church doctrine and what is personal interpretation.

[Prodigal_Son]

Again, I reiterate, doctrine is not pronounced from the microphone of 60 Minutes. If the command is to be given that we are do abstain from caffeine, it will be given through General Conference, or a letter to the membership of the Church that will be read over the pulpit (there may be a very few other venues but that is beyond the scope of this thread). Simply put, as the conditions are currently stated, if two people present to the Lord under the exact same guilt, save one consumes caffeine and one does not, I am certain that those to individuals will receive the same reward.

And I mean neither to call you holier-than-me, nor a hypocrite. Just want to clarify what is Church doctrine and what is personal interpretation.

Okay, glad we're just discussing and not fighting. (Sometimes it's a bit hard to tell.)

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I can see your point. And I don't disagree about the salvation of these two individuals...

But from where I stand, when the prophet tells millions of viewers that we don't do it... then we DON'T do it. Or shouldn't be, anyhow. I'm pretty sure the proverbial "THUS SAITH THE LORD" isn't a requisite. PLUS, "For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for be that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant."

[Wingnut]

But from where I stand, when the prophet tells millions of viewers that we don't do it... then we DON'T do it. Or shouldn't be, anyhow.

You have a point there, however, I refer you back to the official statement which indicates that the problem is in the habit-forming consumption.

PLUS, "For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for be that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant."

Again, you have a point. Unfortunately it doesn't hold much water (or soda?) because it can go both ways. Neither are we commanded that we cannot drink it, nor are we commanded that we can. We are to use the correct principles we have been taught (that some substances are harmful to the body, especially when consumed in certain manners), and then govern ourselves.

[Vort]

I don't mean to be argumentative... but I guess I am. You're wrong. the prophet joined Mike Wallace on 60 minutes, representing the entire church and the following conversation ensued:

Mike Wallace: Example. Mormons adhere to a very strict health code. No alcohol, no tobacco, no coffee, no tea, not even caffeinated soft drinks...

Gordon B. Hinckley: Right.

How are you going to twist that?

I agree with MarginOfError's analysis, but consider this as well: The president of the Church was being interviewed, and was asked a question that was phrased about 85% accurately. What was he to do? Essentially stop the interview by saying, "Now, you didn't actually ask that question quite right, so let me set you straight. Many Church officials have counseled against habit-forming substances, including caffeinated drinks, but that's not a temple recommend question, so technically it's not required of faithful members of the Church." Whereupon Wallace responds, "Right, well, um...what were we talking about?" Or just go ahead and answer the intent of the question?

He chose the latter, which I think was the right decision, instead of disrupting the interview and then opening up a whole can of worms about what constitutes "official doctrine" and how much Church members should listen to their leaders' counsel vs. how much they are allowed to figure things out without suffering censure for their decisions, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam.

Like I said, I'm a caffeine drinker. So please don't think of me as some holier-than-thou hypocrite. But I know, FOR A FACT, that my choice to consume these beverages is a sin.

If you truly believe this, then you ought to quit drinking caffeinated sodas. Doing so is damaging to your spirit.

[Prodigal_Son]

...but that's not a temple recommend question, so technically it's not required of faithful members of the Church."...

Wow. That's your basis for a sin vs. non-sin?

Your perspective MIGHT be accurate. Buts it's also complete conjecture.

If you truly believe this, then you ought to quit drinking caffeinated sodas. Doing so is damaging to your spirit.

The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak, my friend. I've quit using it multiple times, only to find that I make a crummy businessman/father/husband when I'm trying to "stay clean". So I choose to accept this vice for the time being until I am in better mastery of my natural man and can conquer this particular weakness... I'd rather suffer the consequences of this SIN, rather than cause everyone around me to suffer while I try to avoid committing it. :)

[Vort]

I know where you're coming from. When I was in grad school, I drank about two liters of Mountain Death, er, Dew per day. I had a continual headache for about three months, until I finally bit the bullet, suffered my own private Hell Week, and quit the stuff. Now I only drink it, ironically enough, when I have a headache.

[Prodigal_Son]

I know where you're coming from. When I was in grad school, I drank about two liters of Mountain Death, er, Dew per day. I had a continual headache for about three months, until I finally bit the bullet, suffered my own private Hell Week, and quit the stuff. Now I only drink it, ironically enough, when I have a headache.

I have a 48-hour detox myself. I'm lucky, I guess. When my work season ends, I quit (temporarily). The first day off, it's all I can do to stay awake. The second day is like having the world's worst jet lag. Day 3: it's all good.

[bmy-]

The eating of meat was not banned. We are advised to eat meat sparingly. There is nothing that says we can't eat meat when not in times of winter or famine.

One of the things I learned while growing up, one of the reasons that members during the early Church years were advised about winter etc was that there were no refrigeration as we know today. Whatever they butchered during the summer had to be eaten quickly or much was spoilt. During the winter was a different story as winter had it's own refrigeration benefits.

"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."

It's already been posted... but no one seemed to address it. It's glossed over all the time. It's so easy to choose away.

They had refrigeration in the form of ice/salt and holes in the ground. It wasn't as good as the systems we have in place now -- but they could store things.