Role of moderation in gospel teaching

[jb789]

Hi all,

I'm curious what thoughts people have on the role of moderation/temperance in gospel teaching. For example, we know that the word of wisdom prohibits any drinking of alcohol, usage of tobacco (other than for washing of beasts), etc.

My question is: do any believe that God mandates complete abstinence (in my example, as pertaining to the WoW), as a stepping-stone to the eventual (and much more difficult to regulate) practice of true moderation? Let me explain...

As we know, using the WoW example, alcohol and tobacco are very addictive. Thus, it is much easier to refrain from them entirely (thus completely avoiding possible addiction), then say to partake of a bit of alcohol on rare occasion, with judgement and moderation (an example of this is, prior to the WoW, general authorities would smoke, and Joseph himself, according to Rough Stone Rolling, would drink on occasion, yet never to excess/drunkenness).

Is it fair to say that, knowing the tendency of people to easily give in excessively to their carnal desires, that God prescribes complete abstinence from these things? Whereas, if we had a more mature and developed self control, we could indeed partake of them in true moderation and temperance? It appears to me that true moderation, if one is actually capable of this, is the higher law, yet due to the "weakest of the saints", complete abstinence at this time is prescribed in several cases (the WoW being one of them).

Thoughts?

[MarginOfError]

Hi all,

I'm curious what thoughts people have on the role of moderation/temperance in gospel teaching. For example, we know that the word of wisdom prohibits any drinking of alcohol, usage of tobacco (other than for washing of beasts), etc.

My question is: do any believe that God mandates complete abstinence (in my example, as pertaining to the WoW), as a stepping-stone to the eventual (and much more difficult to regulate) practice of true moderation? Let me explain...

As we know, using the WoW example, alcohol and tobacco are very addictive. Thus, it is much easier to refrain from them entirely (thus completely avoiding possible addiction), then say to partake of a bit of alcohol on rare occasion, with judgement and moderation (an example of this is, prior to the WoW, general authorities would smoke, and Joseph himself, according to Rough Stone Rolling, would drink on occasion, yet never to excess/drunkenness).

Is it fair to say that, knowing the tendency of people to easily give in excessively to their carnal desires, that God prescribes complete abstinence from these things? Whereas, if we had a more mature and developed self control, we could indeed partake of them in true moderation and temperance? It appears to me that true moderation, if one is actually capable of this, is the higher law, yet due to the "weakest of the saints", complete abstinence at this time is prescribed in several cases (the WoW being one of them).

Thoughts?

Well, for starters, it's important to note context. The Word of Wisdom, as it exists in Doctrine and Covenants 89, does not prohibit the consumption of alcohol. It prohibits the consumption of hard drink, but it encourages using grain for mild drink. Hard drinks are made through a process of distillation (think vodka) while mild drink is made through fermentation (beer and wine). It wasn't until after Prohibition that the Church interpreted the Word of Wisdom to include all alcoholic beverages*.

It's very likely that the "weak and the weakest of the saints" had some play in the decision, along with "the evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men."

It's also interesting to note that the first three verses of D&C 89 were not written by Joseph Smith. They were written by the committee that put together the Book of Commandments (and approved by Joseph Smith).

Ultimately, I think we should recognize that there is a principle behind the Word of Wisdom. What it is trying to accomplish is the spiritual and mental health of the saints (hence the promises of health in the navel, being able to walk and not be weary, and the promise of secret treasures of knowledge). I think it's become general understanding that addiction to any substance is a detraction from spiritual and mental health. Abstinence from some substances, then, could possibly be related to their extremely addictive qualities, while moderation may be expected in other cases because of a lower propensity toward addiction.

This, however, is just an interpretation of our current body of knowledge. It is not doctrine and should not be taught as such. I have no problem with sharing such interpretations in classes at Church, but it should be qualified with the proper disclaimers.

*Which I believe was inspired, and is why we have prophets, but the point is that there was a change to the commandment.

[Dravin]

My question is: do any believe that God mandates complete abstinence (in my example, as pertaining to the WoW), as a stepping-stone to the eventual (and much more difficult to regulate) practice of true moderation?

Okay, you're using the WoW as an example, but where else are you thinking abstinence as a precursor to moderation? Pornography? Premarital sex? Taking the name of the Lord in vain? Coveting? I'm not bringing these up to say, "Aha! Your abstinence as a precursor to moderation for the Word of Wisdom doesn't work because of pornography!" I'm bringing it up because you're putting it forth as a general principle and I trying to figure out where you think this principle extends beyond the WoW.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Dravin

[MarginOfError]

It's a reasonable point, Dravin. There are cases where I think moderation ought to be preferred over abstinence, and cases where I prefer abstinence over moderation.

The formula for defining which is preferable weighs the propesnity for addiction with the potential damage cause by consumption and the level of consumption that is likely to take place.

Caffeine is quite addictive, but the instantaneous effect of it's consumption is small, and I'm unlikely to consume lots of it anyway. Thus, I feel inclined toward moderation (depending on the levels of caffeine in the available beverage).

Heroine is highly addictive, can wreak havoc on the system, and is expensive. I'm inclined to lean toward abstinence in such a case.

Just something to think about.

[Dravin]

It's a reasonable point, Dravin.

Did I say it wasn't? He puts it forth as a general principle and spends the whole post talking about the WoW. I was asking where else he sees this general principle applying. I suppose my alternative applications were chosen to show there must be limits in it's application, but they aren't an attempt to demonstrate his thinking false. In fact I went through the effort of specifically disclaiming them as demonstrators of false thinking as it pertains to the Word of Wisdom.

Your response isn't explaining how the principle applies beyond the WoW, you focus your post on it as well, so you aren't trying to answer my question. I can't help but think you've misread me, thus my clarification above.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Dravin

[JudoMinja]

My question is: do any believe that God mandates complete abstinence (in my example, as pertaining to the WoW), as a stepping-stone to the eventual (and much more difficult to regulate) practice of true moderation? Let me explain...

While what you are suggesting makes sense and may possibly be true, I've always thought pretty much the opposite:

That the WoW and other commandments are a stepping-stone that the weakest can follow, because we are not ready to follow what would be much harder- meaning when we are ready for it and can handle it we will be asked to abstain from even MORE than we already are.

The Lord wants us to take in only those things that are good and healthy for us, but he also doesn't want to "command in all things"- so he gives us guidelines that should be easy enough to follow that everyone is capable of doing it. When you think about it, the requirements for entry into the temple are very easy and even the weakest of people would be capable of meeting those requirements if they at least have the desire to do so and have the full support of their friends and families. And, throughout the history of His church, as His people have proven themselves capable of following the "basics" he lays out, He then requires of them even more.

With the WoW as an example- this would mean that while we are currently only instructed to abstain from alcohol, tobacco, coffee and tea... If we ever reach a day where nearly everyone is abstaining from these drinks, the Lord will then ask even more of us- and what He asks of us will be conducive to our health and strength since that is the purpose of the Word of Wisdom.

[MarginOfError]

Did I say it wasn't? He puts it forth as a general principle and spends the whole post talking about the WoW. I was asking where else he sees this general principle applying. I suppose my alternative applications were chosen to show there must be limits in it's application, but they aren't an attempt to demonstrate his thinking false. In fact I went through the effort of specifically disclaiming them as demonstrators of false thinking as it pertains to the Word of Wisdom.

Your response isn't explaining how the principle applies beyond the WoW, you focus your post on it as well, so you aren't trying to answer my question. I can't help but think you've misread me, thus my clarification above.

Try applying the same formula to anything else. It will still work.

[JudoMinja]

Try applying the same formula to anything else. It will still work.

Well... it doesn't work if applied to anything else... Just look at the examples Dravin gave in the post where he first mentioned it. Pornography in moderation? Taking the Lord's name in moderation? .... Seems pretty clear that there are some things we are simply meant to abstain from because they are flat-out bad. When talking just about substances with the potential for being addictive, the formula you gave for moderation makes sense- but those tend to be things that fall within the WoW and it doesn't extend to other areas of the gospel like Dravin was trying to point out.

[Vort]

Try applying the same formula to anything else. It will still work.

• Worship God in moderation.
• Worship idols in moderation.
• Take the Lord's name in vain in moderation.
• Keep the Sabbath in moderation.
• Honor your parents in moderation.
• Commit murder in moderation.
• Commit adultery in moderation.
• Steal in moderation.
• Bear false witness in moderation.
• Covet in moderation.
• Love one another in moderation.
• Embezzle in moderation.
• Rape your neighbor in moderation.
• Beat your children in moderation.
• Watch pornographic movies in moderation.

It is not obvious to me that this principle works.

[Dravin]

Try applying the same formula to anything else. It will still work.

I think Judo mentions why that doesn't work, we're being taught to abstain from adultery as a precursor to the higher law where adultery will be practiced in moderation? We're taught to abstain from not forgiving people until such time as we will practice the higher law of not forgiving people in moderation? Jb, as his post is written and how I'm reading it, isn't just saying the abstinence taught in the Word of Wisdom is a precursor for moderation as it pertains to the Word of Wisdom. He is saying there is a general principle of being taught abstinence as a precursor to moderation of which the Word of Wisdom is an example.

and it doesn't extend to other areas of the gospel like Dravin was trying to point out

Note I'm not saying it doesn't extend to other areas of the Gospel, just that it we obviously can't just apply it to everything we are taught to abstain from. There may be other areas where this idea holds true, which is why I'm asking Jb about those areas.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Dravin

[MarginOfError]

For example:

Pornography is addictive and it is very spiritually damaging. I would say the costs of "moderate use" still outweigh the risks.

[john doe]

I think a lot of us practice moderation in living the Gospel and doing the things we are supposed to do already.

[Dravin]

For example:

Pornography is addictive and it is very spiritually damaging. I would say the costs of "moderate use" still outweigh the risks.

Okay, but is that what Jb says? Are confusing your model of "risk benefit analysis to determine if we should engage in something" with Jb's principle of their being a higher law of moderation that is preceded by a lessor law of abstinence. In the context of pornography that would be that the command to abstain from pornography is a lessor law to the higher law of pornography in moderation.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Dravin

[MarginOfError]

Okay, but is that what Jb says? Are confusing your model of "risk benefit analysis to determine if we should engage in something" with Jb's principle of their being a higher law of moderation that is preceded by a lessor law of abstinence. In the context of pornography that would be that the command to abstain from pornography is a lessor law to the higher law of pornography in moderation.

I guess that depends on how you define moderation. If you consider moderation to be flexible enough to include abstinence--or in other words, moderating your behavior in a way that is consistent with the principles of the Gospel--then yeah it works.

I must concede the point, however, that I don't think that's what Jb had in mind.

[Dravin]

I guess that depends on how you define moderation. If you consider moderation to be flexible enough to include abstinence--or in other words, moderating your behavior in a way that is consistent with the principles of the Gospel--then yeah it works.

I must concede the point, however, that I don't think that's what Jb had in mind.

I think generally speaking moderation stops where abstinence begins. Also moderation in my mind indicates that partaking of it is acceptable to the Lord. So when someone says adultery in moderation I don't think: "We are left to decide if we partake of adultery, we weigh the risk, benefits, counsel from the Lord, and the spirit to see where in moderation we need to be, from abstinence on one end to unrestricted on the other."

If your point is that, "Following the spirit and counsel of the Lord rather than relying on a strict list of does and don'ts (I'm thinking for example the Law of Moses versus the Law of the Gospel) shows understanding of the higher principle, when applicable, of why we don't partake instead of just that we don't partake." That I can follow. However, when someone says, "Adultery in moderation." that isn't what I or I doubt anyone else here hears.

[ClickyClack]

I come from a long line of addicts. My only brother is an addict, my mother is an addict, her mother and father were addicts.

I can tell you two things:

1. Addiction will destroy your life and the lives of those around you in ways that you can't imagine.

2. By the time you know that addiction may be a problem for you, it's far too late.

A lot of my non-LDS friends have said "Oh, come on, you can have a beer once in a while." I just tell them "Maybe I can, maybe I can't. But I've seen what alcoholism does to families, and I'm not going to take a chance and find out."

[applepansy]

I believe the WoW is a law that will prepare us to live a higher law.

I do not believe that abstinence is preparing us for moderation. That just doesn't make sense on so many levels I'm not going to elaborate further.

Back to the WoW: Several years ago the doctor I went to was an amazing doctor, a great person and LDS to boot. We were talking about the causes of disease and the little understanding we and the medical/scientific community really have about the cause of disease, and how it related to what I was dealing with at the time. He said something to me that got my attention to the point I've never forgotten it: (paraphrasing) "There will come a day when a doctor's role will be education, not prescribing medications." If you know the feeling that comes when you hear a pure truth you'll understand what I felt when he said that, especially knowing the WoW.

Does moderation apply to the WoW? It can. Should it? Not in the world we live in today.

There was a time when alcohol was used medicinally a lot. It was the only way to deliver the "medication" into the body -- that's moderation. We have more knowledge of these things now and rarely need alcohol in that way. (I'm not talking about Nyquil. :) ) Thirty plus years ago alcohol was prescribed by older Obstetricians for false labor. Today, there are other options and alcohol is avoided completely because of the damage it can cause to the developing baby.

Having said all that ... I agree with JudoMinja.

[HEthePrimate]

Okay, you're using the WoW as an example, but where else are you thinking abstinence as a precursor to moderation? Pornography? Premarital sex? Taking the name of the Lord in vain? Coveting? I'm not bringing these up to say, "Aha! Your abstinence as a precursor to moderation for the Word of Wisdom doesn't work because of pornography!" I'm bringing it up because you're putting it forth as a general principle and I trying to figure out where you think this principle extends beyond the WoW.

Well, just because a principle isn't universally applicable doesn't mean it's never applicable. One could see sexual abstinence before marriage as a precursor to moderation in marriage. That is, learning a certain amount of self-control so that when you are married, you can show appropriate consideration to your partner by not demanding of him/her anything s/he's not comfortable with.

[HEthePrimate]

Does moderation apply to the WoW? It can. Should it? Not in the world we live in today.

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, the WoW is not just about alcohol. It's about healthful living. I've known people who faithfully refrain from drinking coffee, tea, and alchohol, but eat meat with every meal and consume copious amounts of sugar. Not healthy, and not in the spirit of the WoW. Moderation is just as, if not more, applicable in today's world as it ever was.

[jb789]

If your point is that, "Following the spirit and counsel of the Lord rather than relying on a strict list of does and don'ts (I'm thinking for example the Law of Moses versus the Law of the Gospel) shows understanding of the higher principle, when applicable, of why we don't partake instead of just that we don't partake." That I can follow.

This was the point I was getting at. Obviously such a thing as adultery in moderation would be ridiculous!

I used the WoW as an example, not the only thing moderation might be applied to. Though I do remember a BYU professor of religion, stating that, if we indeed could be free of lust and see the human body as a thing of beauty, then nudism as in art could be observed in a pure/true light. This is another example perhaps of moderation - if we are highly prone to lust, then complete abstaining from viewing anything that would trigger this is recommended. But, if we have more control of our thoughts, we can see the beauty in nude art, and thus it can actually increase our appreciation for the human body.

Ultimately, what I'm saying is, that moderation/living by the Spirit is the higher law, and that until people are ready for that, the Lord prescribes more absolutes (such as strict commandments). The more developed spiritual person does not live by strict commandments, but is guided by love of God and fellow men at the core. In this sense, I believe being guided by the Spirit, as opposed to strict laws of absolutes, is the higher law, and that the concept of moderation, applied to many things, has a role in this (whereas strict commandments are given when one has not developed enough spiritual sensitivity to judge correctly).

[Dravin]

Well, just because a principle isn't universally applicable doesn't mean it's never applicable.

Never said it was the case. If I thought it wasn't applicable at all because it wasn't universally applicable I would have said so. Talking about it as a general principle and saying the Word of Wisdom is an example suggests it's applicable beyond the Word of Wisdom. Thus the question about where else he saw it as applicable. Though it's all rather moot at this point as I understand what he's saying now.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Dravin

[HEthePrimate]

Never said it was the case. If I thought it wasn't applicable at all because it wasn't universally applicable I would have said so. Talking about it as a general principle and saying the Word of Wisdom is an example suggests it's applicable beyond the Word of Wisdom. Thus the question about where else he saw it as applicable. Though it's all rather moot at this point as I understand what he's saying now.

Fair enough.

[applepansy]

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, the WoW is not just about alcohol. It's about healthful living. I've known people who faithfully refrain from drinking coffee, tea, and alchohol, but eat meat with every meal and consume copious amounts of sugar. Not healthy, and not in the spirit of the WoW. Moderation is just as, if not more, applicable in today's world as it ever was.

Have you read the WoW? It says exactly what we should be doing to be healthy. Keeping the WoW is more than just what to stay away from.

[applepansy]

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, the WoW is not just about alcohol. It's about healthful living. I've known people who faithfully refrain from drinking coffee, tea, and alchohol, but eat meat with every meal and consume copious amounts of sugar. Not healthy, and not in the spirit of the WoW. Moderation is just as, if not more, applicable in today's world as it ever was.

We can respectfully agree to disagree, but I think we're talking about two different things.

The WoW just as specific about being healthy as it is about substances to avoid.

So let me rephrase: Moderation does not apply in today's world to the WoW because we should follow what it says to eat/drink as much as for what it says not to eat/drink.

No where in the WoW does it say eat copious amounts of sugar.

[Guest]

No where in the WoW does it say eat copious amounts of sugar.

YAY! *goes and cleans off walmart shelves of M&Ms*

heehee