The Word of Wisdom and common sense!

[Backroads]

Wait.... Are you seriously asking why different people have difference weakness?

That would actually be a good answer to Maureen's question!

[Maureen]

Wait.... Are you seriously asking why different people have difference weakness?

I was mainly asking Backroads why she made the choices she made and she gave me a very satisfying answer.

M.

[estradling75]

I was mainly asking Backroads why she made the choices she made and she gave me a very satisfying answer.

M.

Ahh good... I have a pet peeve about people accuse the LDS members of being brainwashed clones moving in lock step... and then turning around and using the fact that we aren't as some judge of truthfulness

[JudoMinja]

Ok, I know I'm coming into this late, but I've just read over everything in the thread (you've got quite the discussion going). Here's my take on things.

The Word of Wisdom does not = common sense because the understanding of God does not = the understanding of Man.

Sure, science is great. We can learn a lot from science. But science can be wrong. Relying on nothing but science, people once believed that the world was flat, that the earth revolved around the sun, that there was no such thing as germs, etc. The more science improves the more our understanding improves, but that does not change the fact that science still contains flaws. This is because Man is an imperfect being. No matter how logically and intellectually we approach a topic, we can be wrong.

Right now science tells us that alcohol in moderation is good for us, that tea is good for us, and that tobacco is bad for us. The Word of Wisdom says that all three are bad for us. So, either the Word of Wisdom is wrong, or science is wrong. Since we know that science can be wrong and that God is never wrong, which do you think it is?

The reason other things which we know to be bad for us are not specifically included in the Word of Wisdom is because God does not want us to be commanded in all things. As you have said, he gave us logic and agency and wants us to use them. He wants us to use our own good judgment to determine what is and is not good for us, what is and is not healthy and then exercise our agency in following that judgment. If he were to tell us exactly what is good and exactly what is bad, outlining a strictly regimented health code, we would be held accountable for it. Breaking a commandment is breaking a commandment. No matter how much we rationalize, if we go against God's word we are going to answer for it in the end. For those things in which we were not commanded but rather used our own judgment to determine right and wrong, we will be judged accordingly.

Current prophets have provided clarification for vague terms in the WoW and described items they believe the WoW refers to, and everyone has the ability to discern for themselves whether they want to take that clarification as "commandment" or "counsel". How strictly every individual adheres the the words of modern day prophets depends entirely on that individual and where they stand spiritually. Some are stringent, and some are lenient. How will these people be judged in the end? That is entirely between them and God.

I love to learn. I love science, and I love using my brain. I am a very logical person and like to think things through. However, I know that I am flawed in my ability to see the whole picture. I am human.

God does see the whole picture. He knows all, sees all. He is perfect. If He tells me to do something, I follow to the best of my ability, even if my logic does not agree.

[Maureen]

...Right now science tells us that alcohol in moderation is good for us, that tea is good for us, and that tobacco is bad for us. The Word of Wisdom says that all three are bad for us. So, either the Word of Wisdom is wrong, or science is wrong. Since we know that science can be wrong and that God is never wrong, which do you think it is?

I am non-LDS so I'm sure you can guess my answer.

The reason other things which we know to be bad for us are not specifically included in the Word of Wisdom is because God does not want us to be commanded in all things. As you have said, he gave us logic and agency and wants us to use them. He wants us to use our own good judgment to determine what is and is not good for us, what is and is not healthy and then exercise our agency in following that judgment.

Current prophets have provided clarification for vague terms in the WoW and described items they believe the WoW refers to, and everyone has the ability to discern for themselves whether they want to take that clarification as "commandment" or "counsel". How strictly every individual adheres the the words of modern day prophets depends entirely on that individual and where they stand spiritually. Some are stringent, and some are lenient. How will these people be judged in the end? That is entirely between them and God....

This has me thinking that possibly the WofW doesn't require the boot afterall, IMO. :) For my own non-LDS satisfaction I would be quite happy (based on what's written above) if the WofW question was removed from the TR requirement. This way it's a principle that has a lot of leeway and a member's interpretation of it doesn't get in the way with what's fair for a temple visit. It's hard to expain where I'm coming from but I think this type of change would make choices within the WofW fair for everyone, IMO.

M.

[estradling75]

I am non-LDS so I'm sure you can guess my answer.

This has me thinking that possibly the WofW doesn't require the boot afterall, IMO. :) For my own non-LDS satisfaction I would be quite happy (based on what's written above) if the WofW question was removed from the TR requirement. This way it's a principle that has a lot of leeway and a member's interpretation of it doesn't get in the way with what's fair for a temple visit. It's hard to expain where I'm coming from but I think this type of change would make choices within the WofW fair for everyone, IMO.

M.

Question... If you are not a member.. Why do you care what we do or don't do? I mean saying that you'd be satisfied if whole organization changed to suit your whims when it has no impact on you at all seem very ego trippy

Edited March 31, 2011 by estradling75

[Wingnut]

Question... If you are not a member.. Why do you care what we do or don't do? I mean saying that you'd be satisfied if whole organization changed to suit your whims when it has no impact on you at all seem very ego trippy

See my asking of the same question already, and the OP's answer to it.

[estradling75]

See my asking of the same question already, and the OP's answer to it.

Right... I was posing a rhetorical question to see if she would see how arrogant she appears to coming across...

[Maureen]

Question... If you are not a member.. Why do you care what we do or don't do? I mean saying that you'd be satisfied if whole organization changed to suit your whims when it has no impact on you at all seem very ego trippy

I wouldn't call it to suit my whims. I see it more a way for me to understand a bit better why people worship and believe the way they do. If I can grasp how someone else thinks in regards to beliefs, then it's easier to understand where they are coming from. I don't think it hurts anyone if I exercise my imagination in the process. It's really hard to explain, but that's how I see it.

M.

[Maureen]

Right... I was posing a rhetorical question to see if she would see how arrogant she appears to coming across...

My intention is not to sound arrogant, hence the smilie emoticons I used.

M.

[estradling75]

I wouldn't call it to suit my whims. I see it more a way for me to understand a bit better why people worship and believe the way they do. If I can grasp how someone else thinks in regards to beliefs, then it's easier to understand where they are coming from. I don't think it hurts anyone if I exercise my imagination in the process. It's really hard to explain, but that's how I see it.

M.

Let me put it plainly then... If you were to come into my house and say, 'You need to change your curtains, your tv, your furniture, the way you dress and they way you do your hair. My response would be an incredulous 'What?? Why??' And then your if your answer was 'because it would make me feel better.' I would kick you to the curb so fast you'd lose a track of what day it was.

If you want to understand us then listen to what we tell you. The standard is set and clear, but each person makes their own choice in how much to obey or how far to take it based on there own experiences and likes and dislikes and understanding.

[Backroads]

estradling, you might want to calm down. You are becoming very defenseive, which is not good in a spirited and friendly debate. What Maureen is doing is no different than when I pick the brains of others of different spiritual persuasions.

Edited March 31, 2011 by Backroads

[john doe]

Okay folks, let's play nice.

[Maureen]

Let me put it plainly then... If you were to come into my house and say, 'You need to change your curtains, your tv, your furniture, the way you dress and they way you do your hair. My response would be an incredulous 'What?? Why??' And then your if your answer was 'because it would make me feel better.' I would kick you to the curb so fast you'd lose a track of what day it was.

If you want to understand us then listen to what we tell you. The standard is set and clear, but each person makes their own choice in how much to obey or how far to take it based on there own experiences and likes and dislikes and understanding.

Here's a few more emoticons just for you estradling75.

:chillpill:

M.

[slamjet]

So in thumbing through this thread I learned:

- Rx sharing is illegal.

- Over-reliance on Rx is debatable as to the WoW.

- David Whitmer was ex'd because of lack of adherence to the WoW.

- Celebrities live by a different set of laws.

- Tea is still a hotly (man, I kill myself sometimes) debated topic.

- Be careful who you let do your interior designing.

- Rx drugs may be iffy, but is acceptable.

Ok, a bit of tongue in cheek, but man, what a discussion and not a word of what the main intended purpose (at lease in my opinion) of the WoW is about: Moderation and Common Sense.

My dad told me a story of when a GA visited his mission field in Argentina (back in the early 60's) this GA ordered a bottle of Coke. The other elders gave him a look of questioning. He told them "I know how this is made." In other words, rather than drink the water and possibly get sick, he choose to drink a debatable beverage because he knew it was bottled to a certain standard and he wouldn't catch a bug from it.

There are some things prohibited, somethings not prohibited, but reading between the lines there are two themes:

1) Moderation is the key.

2) Wisdom and common sense, outside the prohibited items, is given to us to judge for ourselves what is good.

I love maté. I've been drinking it since I was at least 2 years old (I have the picture as proof) if not earlier. Some will say it's a "hot drink" thus prohibited. But it's an herbal tea. Science, for the most part, has shown it to be quite healthy and beneficial. However, I'm not going to argue with someone about it because they, as an individual, interpret "hot drink" a different way than I do. I can remember my dad telling me that "when the GA's go down to Argentina, Brazil and some of Chile and tell them that it is prohibited like they say coffee is here in the United States, then I'll stop drinking it." In other words, it was given to him to decide because it lacked exclusive mention in the WoW and by the GA's.

Our God given ability to decide for ourselves what's right. That's what's being tested with the WoW.

[Maureen]

Not only are you wise slamjet, you have a great sense of humour that the women will love.

M.

[slamjet]

Not only are you wise slamjet, you have a great sense of humour that the women will love.

M.

[jayanna]

I don't understand what the debate about the Wow is...it is clearly lined out in the Gospel Principles manual...which for those non-members who don't know what that is, it's a manual that is distributed by the headquarters of the chruch to wards throughout the world. The same chapter is taught in every ward, it promotes unity and understanding of the basics of the gospel.

It specifically lists alcohol, coffee, tea, drug abuse, overeating, any substance that is habit forming, etc. It also says why we use the WOW and the temporal and spiritual significance of it.

Have a read, it explains a lot. Gospel Principles Chapter 29: The Lord’s Law of Health

I have such a huge testimony of this, and I would share it, but I think that feelings are running a little hot, and it wouldn't be received very well. So, I though it would be best to let a church manual clear up some rumor and speculation about do's and do nots.

[RipplecutBuddha]

Part of the discussion has addressed why the WoW has not been updated recently, and I think the general consensus is that it has been updated, but it has not been modified in the scriptures. This, I think, is the real matter.

We have to look at how the LDS Church deals with ongoing revelation, and the cannonization of accepted revelations.

The WoW is in the canon of the LDS Church because it is a standard that applies to all members, and it also sets us apart, being a very unique belief at the time it was revealed. Also taking into account it was one of many revelations given to Joseph Smith, it gains further importance.

However...

We also accept revelations from prophets from Brigham Young to Thomas Monson today. The general process is that newer revelation refines and/or overrules previous revelation, depending on what the newer revelation states. Let me give an acceptable example for most Christians;

Moses was given revelations from God as to how Israel was to conduct itself before him. The revelations ranged from everyday behavior to precise rules of worship. This was a true revelation and it was the only way to gain access to salvation at the time.

Then Jesus brought about the New and Everlasting Covenant of his Gospel. The newer revelation from Christ refined the revelations given to Moses. In some cases it overruled the Law of Moses altogether, as in the case of animal sacrifice.

The WoW, as has been stated, is a starting point. Another way to look at it is as a guide to establish basic rules of thought, and let the details be settled in the mind of the faithful. Can you imagine how extensive that one revelation would have to have been were it to include every possible way we can harm our bodies?

Another revelation in the Doctrine and Covenants finds the Savior Jesus telling us "It is not needful that I should command in all things for he that must needs be commanded in all things is a slothful, and not a wise servant. Wherefore he looseth his reward."

Or, as a fellow missionary put it, "God gave us a brain and he expects us to use it."

There have been updates to the principles found in the WoW over the years, but as to adding or removing from the specific revelation itself....that would be akin to altering the Law of Moses to modern situations.

[JudoMinja]

I am non-LDS so I'm sure you can guess my answer.

Of course I know you are non-LDS, so I understand your view on the matter. However, you should also be able to understand our perspective. You are a believer in God, and you accept what you believe to be His revelations and word as True. If something in the Bible goes against your common sense or the understanding of science, I'm pretty sure you'd side with the Bible. If you didn't, you wouldn't be a believer. Our major difference is that LDS accept more than just the Bible as God's Word. The WoW is a commandment/counsel from God. That which has been spelled out point-blank is commandment. If we go against it, we will answer for it. That which was more vague and open to interpretation offers a little more lee-way.

This has me thinking that possibly the WofW doesn't require the boot afterall, IMO. :) For my own non-LDS satisfaction I would be quite happy (based on what's written above) if the WofW question was removed from the TR requirement. This way it's a principle that has a lot of leeway and a member's interpretation of it doesn't get in the way with what's fair for a temple visit. It's hard to expain where I'm coming from but I think this type of change would make choices within the WofW fair for everyone, IMO.

M.

Because the WoW is open to interpretation, there is lee-way in the TR requirement. Since we view the WoW as a commandment, it is important that those who wish to enter the temple are adhereing to its counsel. When people are interviewed, they are not asked- do you drink coffee? Do you drink tea? Do you drink caffinated sodas? No. They are asked- do you keep the WoW? Since exactly what should and should not be avoided is not spelled out, members are then able to judge for themselves whether they are following it to the best of their ability.

Personally, I do not find the WoW unfair in any way. I do not think asking about it for a TR is unfair. We all know what has been obviously and plainly pointed out to us to avoid. The rest is left up to our own judgement. I agree with slamjet in that the WoW is really about moderation. Look at all the DO's in the WoW. It is a general health code that will help those who follow it become more fit and able. Even those things that have nothing to do with eating- rise early and go to bed early, exercise but do not run faster than you are able- stress moderation. I really see it as an extension of Daniel's wisdom when he chose not to eat the kings meat. The Bible does not spell out exactly what Daniel's choice of diet was or other health practices, but I would guess that he followed the WoW.

[Backroads]

Part of the discussion has addressed why the WoW has not been updated recently, and I think the general consensus is that it has been updated, but it has not been modified in the scriptures. This, I think, is the real matter.

...

There have been updates to the principles found in the WoW over the years, but as to adding or removing from the specific revelation itself....that would be akin to altering the Law of Moses to modern situations.

I guess I'm not aware of any specific updates to the WoW that have been revealed as commandment. What are they?

[Guest powerja]

Sometimes Bishops are wrong.

[RescueMom]

There's plenty in the Bible we don't believe in anymore, i.e. stoning women who commit adultry, owning slaves, not sewing on Sunday...it's one of the reasons Christ was brought forth and crucified because he didn't do as the Bible said. He cured the sick on Sunday, that was a sin during his time. It was considered blasphamy and he was brought up on charges because of it.

The law of the WoW is what we have now at hand, and it could stand forever, or it could change at some point. Christ himself lived by a different health law than we do now.

The early members of the chruch in this era lived the law of consecration, and that law is no longer in effect. And I can't imagine it going into effect now, even though it is a higher law.

[Maureen]

Sometimes Bishops are wrong.

powerja, could you clarify?

M.

[RescueMom]

Sometimes Bishops are wrong.

This is true, I've know of at least one instance where a Bishop and Stake President were wrong and strongly rebuked by the area 70's as well as the 1st Presidency.