Caffeine

[Maureen]

Originally posted by srm+Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Apr 17 2004, 11:35 PM

SRM,

Didn't PD just say (imply) that he didn't know what the source was?

perhaps but where and when did Holzapfel say it? AND...what exactly did he say?

Maybe he used the sources from:

Journal of Discourses, Vol. 12, p. 158 and The Des Moines Daily News, Saturday, October 16, 1886.

M.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by srm+Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Apr 17 2004, 11:35 PM

SRM,

Didn't PD just say (imply) that he didn't know what the source was?

perhaps but where and when did Holzapfel say it? AND...what exactly did he say?

If memory serves, he said it in an afternoon Doctrine & Covenants class sometime during the fall semester of 1996, in one of the two outside first floor large lecture rooms in the Maeser Building at BYU. I can't exactly remember which one.

I have a hard time remembering exactly what was said eight years ago, and my class notes are moldering away in some Provo landfill, but the gist of what he said was essentially what Maureen said -- that the genesis of the Word of Wisdom was in Emma's disgust with the brethren's tobacco chewing, and when the brethren learned that the sisters were pressuring the Prophet to get a revelation against tobacco, they countered that the sisters would have to give up ... er, um ... tea and coffee (being the only marginally bad habit of the women that the men could think of). Essentially, it was a tactic like when Southern senators inserted sex discrimination into the categories of discrimination prohibited by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It was supposed to be a "poison pill" that would keep the prohibition from being passed altogether. It didn't work out that way.

Snow -- Thanks for the defense (chortle, chuckle -- jk). But only "fairly" guileless? On my honor as an officer of the court, I'm as guileless as a lamb.

/forked tongue flick

[Guest Starsky]

Snow -- Thanks for the defense (chortle, chuckle -- jk). But only "fairly" guileless? On my honor as an officer of the court, I'm as guileless as a lamb.

/forked tongue flick

How refreshingly....honest?

[srm]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck+Apr 19 2004, 10:11 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (TheProudDuck @ Apr 19 2004, 10:11 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Apr 17 2004, 11:35 PM

SRM,

Didn't PD just say (imply) that he didn't know what the source was?

perhaps but where and when did Holzapfel say it? AND...what exactly did he say?

If memory serves, he said it in an afternoon Doctrine & Covenants class sometime during the fall semester of 1996, in one of the two outside first floor large lecture rooms in the Maeser Building at BYU. I can't exactly remember which one.

I have a hard time remembering exactly what was said eight years ago, and my class notes are moldering away in some Provo landfill, but the gist of what he said was essentially what Maureen said -- that the genesis of the Word of Wisdom was in Emma's disgust with the brethren's tobacco chewing, and when the brethren learned that the sisters were pressuring the Prophet to get a revelation against tobacco, they countered that the sisters would have to give up ... er, um ... tea and coffee (being the only marginally bad habit of the women that the men could think of). Essentially, it was a tactic like when Southern senators inserted sex discrimination into the categories of discrimination prohibited by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It was supposed to be a "poison pill" that would keep the prohibition from being passed altogether. It didn't work out that way.

Snow -- Thanks for the defense (chortle, chuckle -- jk). But only "fairly" guileless? On my honor as an officer of the court, I'm as guileless as a lamb.

/forked tongue flick

I just got an e-mail from Holzapfel. As I assumed he was not saying that this was the genesis of the WOW...rather it is what Whitmer said about the genesis decades later. He called it a 'reconstruction by Whitmer AND that he (Holzapfel) does not subscribe to it.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by srm+May 10 2004, 12:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ May 10 2004, 12:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -TheProudDuck@Apr 19 2004, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by -srm@Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Apr 17 2004, 11:35 PM

SRM,

Didn't PD just say (imply) that he didn't know what the source was?

perhaps but where and when did Holzapfel say it? AND...what exactly did he say?

If memory serves, he said it in an afternoon Doctrine & Covenants class sometime during the fall semester of 1996, in one of the two outside first floor large lecture rooms in the Maeser Building at BYU. I can't exactly remember which one.

I have a hard time remembering exactly what was said eight years ago, and my class notes are moldering away in some Provo landfill, but the gist of what he said was essentially what Maureen said -- that the genesis of the Word of Wisdom was in Emma's disgust with the brethren's tobacco chewing, and when the brethren learned that the sisters were pressuring the Prophet to get a revelation against tobacco, they countered that the sisters would have to give up ... er, um ... tea and coffee (being the only marginally bad habit of the women that the men could think of). Essentially, it was a tactic like when Southern senators inserted sex discrimination into the categories of discrimination prohibited by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It was supposed to be a "poison pill" that would keep the prohibition from being passed altogether. It didn't work out that way.

Snow -- Thanks for the defense (chortle, chuckle -- jk). But only "fairly" guileless? On my honor as an officer of the court, I'm as guileless as a lamb.

/forked tongue flick

I just got an e-mail from Holzapfel. As I assumed he was not saying that this was the genesis of the WOW...rather it is what Whitmer said about the genesis decades later. He called it a 'reconstruction by Whitmer AND that he (Holzapfel) does not subscribe to it.

Interesting.

Of course, either Holzapfel or I could be mistaken in our memory of what he said eight years ago, but I don't remember him qualifying the story as merely Whitmer's account.

[srm]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck+May 10 2004, 12:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (TheProudDuck @ May 10 2004, 12:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@May 10 2004, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by -TheProudDuck@Apr 19 2004, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by -srm@Apr 18 2004, 09:37 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Apr 17 2004, 11:35 PM

SRM,

Didn't PD just say (imply) that he didn't know what the source was?

perhaps but where and when did Holzapfel say it? AND...what exactly did he say?

If memory serves, he said it in an afternoon Doctrine & Covenants class sometime during the fall semester of 1996, in one of the two outside first floor large lecture rooms in the Maeser Building at BYU. I can't exactly remember which one.

I have a hard time remembering exactly what was said eight years ago, and my class notes are moldering away in some Provo landfill, but the gist of what he said was essentially what Maureen said -- that the genesis of the Word of Wisdom was in Emma's disgust with the brethren's tobacco chewing, and when the brethren learned that the sisters were pressuring the Prophet to get a revelation against tobacco, they countered that the sisters would have to give up ... er, um ... tea and coffee (being the only marginally bad habit of the women that the men could think of). Essentially, it was a tactic like when Southern senators inserted sex discrimination into the categories of discrimination prohibited by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It was supposed to be a "poison pill" that would keep the prohibition from being passed altogether. It didn't work out that way.

Snow -- Thanks for the defense (chortle, chuckle -- jk). But only "fairly" guileless? On my honor as an officer of the court, I'm as guileless as a lamb.

/forked tongue flick

I just got an e-mail from Holzapfel. As I assumed he was not saying that this was the genesis of the WOW...rather it is what Whitmer said about the genesis decades later. He called it a 'reconstruction by Whitmer AND that he (Holzapfel) does not subscribe to it.

Interesting.

Of course, either Holzapfel or I could be mistaken in our memory of what he said eight years ago, but I don't remember him qualifying the story as merely Whitmer's account.

Of course, pato, he probably teaches this info every semester. Or at least every semester when he's teaching D&C. I'd wager his 'multiple times' recollection would be better that your hearing it once, eight years ago.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

srm -- It sounds like an interesting e-mail. I'd love to see exactly what H. had to say, if you don't think he'd mind you passing it on.

[srm]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@May 10 2004, 02:02 PM

srm -- It sounds like an interesting e-mail. I'd love to see exactly what H. had to say, if you don't think he'd mind you passing it on.

send me your e-mail & I'll forward it to you.

[Lindy]

Originally posted by Outshined+Apr 13 2004, 04:05 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Outshined @ Apr 13 2004, 04:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--LaurelTree@Apr 13 2004, 05:02 PM

Where you gonna get a coke in heaven when you crave for one?

Don't give them any ideas for new commercials.......

Forget the coke....how about a ditty for Mt. Dew within the pearly gates?

"Go look high on the mountain, for the green dew of life hereafter"

[Cal]

Now folks, here is what I would like to know: What was the purpose of the WoW?

If it was just a little game JS and Emma were playing, why should it be seen a a commandment direct from the seat of the Almighty?

If it WAS given by the Almighty, when did the Almighty start giving SUGGESTIONS? ("Not by way of commandment....etc) Is God getting soft minded in his old age? Use to be in olden times, you even glance the wrong way at God, or even a burning city, and you were turned into pillar of salt. And now God is giving SUGGESTIONS?

Gee, Lot, "I suggest you not look at the burning city in the back ground, but.....that's just a suggestion" Lot: Ohh, OK, then I think I'll just take a peek" Then, ZAPP. Lot's kids: "how come Daddy turned so pale, and he seems to have a really bad case of arthritis. Hey now he is crumbling all over the place.?" The other kid: : "Hey, yeah, that's not really fair. It was only a SUGGESTION".

My logic tells me it was no suggestion from God at all. It was JS's idea of, as someone said above, getting back at the ladies. A guy doesn't give up his chewing tobacco and whiskey without the ladies giving up something.

Here is the version of the WoW that would have REALLY impressed me (apparently God doesn't care too much about impressing me) :" JOE, tell your followers to limit their intake of wine and beer to a glass or two per day--that much is actually good for them. However, for the few who have relatives or ancestors who had alcohol abuse problems--command them to NEVER drink a drop of the stuff. The chewing tobacco thing is risky, and I SUGGEST they avoid it, but in about 80 years they are going to start doing something with that stuff that will really tick me off. They are going to roll it into little sticklike thing wrapped with paper, promote it like it was the elixier of life, and give everybody lung cancer, heart disease and all kinds of other nasty diseases. Just so the saints will know exactly what I mean, they are going to call those things cigarettes. Tell Emma tea is bad for her just to tick her off, it will be our little secret. Oh, and by the way, this next one is not a SUGGESTION, it is a commandment: BOIL YOUR WATER"

[broadway]

Originally posted by bizabra+Apr 14 2004, 12:32 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bizabra @ Apr 14 2004, 12:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -broadway@Apr 13 2004, 06:28 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Ammon@Apr 13 2004, 01:20 PM

I love Coca-Cola. It is, hands down, my favorite beverage. A day without a Coke is like a day without sunshine. Nevertheless, I know that many members refuse to drink caffeinated beverages of any kind, especially here in California. And I remember as a youth in the 70s hearing General Authorities speak against caffeinated beverages such as Coke, Pepsi, etc.  Clearly, coffee and tea are out of bounds; that much is taught in the missionary discussions forthright. Nevertheless, what is the position on drinks such as Coke or candy such as chocolate? I honestly don't know at this point. Any insight?

EDIT: this question has nothing to do with my postings on other sites.  I am simply curious, as I thoroughly enjoy ice-cold Coca-Cola.

A really wise man, a friend of our family's who served as a bishop, said this...

If you get to the weekend and don't drink any sodas at all, and begin getting headaches and other withdrawal signs, you are drinking too much. The WOW is about health. Being addicted to a drug (regardless of how 'small' the drug may be) isn't healthy. If you can go all weekend without sodas and do not get affected by it, then odds are, you aren't drinking so much that it is unhealthy for you.

Pretty wise insight, isn't it?

broadway

How about if you are addicted to exercise? Or knitting? Or watching TV?

Is it keeping you from doing other things?

This may go into a little bit of the doctrine (if it is a doctrine) of Sins of Omission...

Basically, if you are addicted to knitting, say, and you do this so much that you forget to read your scriptures, then it may be a sin of Omission...

Now, would knitting keep you from going to the temple? Of course not. Niether would drinking Coca-Cola.

Exercizing too much is very certainly unhealthy for you. You can damage your body that way. Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and is under your care to maintain it. You will be help accountable for this.

TV watching is very risky as well, since we are to stay away from pervesreness.

I could imagine that even scripture reading could become a sin if done so much one forgets to maintain health or do other things that are commanded of them.

Thankfully, though, we were all given brains to figure this stuff out for ourselves, and Heavenly Father/prayer for when we cannot figure these things out ourselves.

[punaboy]

I notice folks in this thread calling caffeine an "artificial chemical additive" of foods. This may be true in some cases today, but caffeine is far from artificial, unless you feel that all things made by God are "artificial". It is certain that God made caffeine, for it is found naturally in many dozens of plants.

Interestingly, the LDS missionaries in Paraguay are free to drink mate, a plant and beverage of the same name containing a lot of caffeine. They usually drink mate everyday, as their investigators commonly offer it to them at home meetings. It is really a national drink in Paraguay, and seems to be quite healthful, as the people all drink from the same straw but don't seem to get ill from it. It lifts their spirits and imparts well being as well. Other healthful herbs are also added to the mate brew. The missionaries quite like it.

Other countries have herbal drinks as well, such as the very psychoactive and somewhat addictive kava in the Pacific islands. AFAIK, the church allows members to drink these things, and still be temple worthy.

If you can get a prescription (or other professional counsel) from a licensed MD to use caffeine, or drink tea or whatever, the church seems to allow it alright. Even the ban on "illegal drugs" is lifted if you obtain the drugs by legal means.

Personally, I think the caffeine in Coca Cola is prolly the least harmful part of it. The impure waters used, the chlorine added, and the excess of phosphoric acid, etc. are all unhealthful But for me it is also true, that the taste of ice-cols Coke is heavenly.

And I second the notion that Coke might be found in heaven. A divine being should have the right to "replicate" any compound they wish too. Coke sure can't hurt the resurrected body, nor can addiction become a problem!

[Guest Starsky]

Maybe it is how well you are in control of yourself that will give you peace/heaven after this life. And that hell will be having something else in control....of you.

[Guest curvette]

Over the years I've come to believe that this is a very small issue that we tend to make a big deal out of. I think it's a perfect example of how we can "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel."

[shanstress70]

Umm, yerba mate! I read an article about all its health benefits. Not to mention its weight loss effects. I bought some and was drinking a cup a day. But then I ran out and it's kind of hard to find around here.

My husband's cousin was on a mission in Venezuela and drank it all the time there as well.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by curvette@May 15 2004, 06:10 PM

Over the years I've come to believe that this is a very small issue that we tend to make a big deal out of. I think it's a perfect example of how we can "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel."

Yes...strain at a gnat. I would think that is what the WoW is...

I once had a MTC teacher tell the group that the foundation to spiritual perfection was disapline. Personal disapline. I think it is true. If our foundation is undisaplined, the next step up can't be found.

[broadway]

It is a small thing that a lot of people have a hard time obeying...

It is where some people get hanged up. The church 'makes a big deal' out of it since that is where the church is having its problems. A man can try to teach a person about the universe but won't have much success if they are having a hard time grasping that earth is finite and small.

If the church is having a hard time with such a small part of the gospel, then how is the church going to be able to handle the deeper things, such as the law of full concencration or whatever?

It is a small deal that gets blown into a big deal by our members, not the leaders.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by broadway@May 15 2004, 07:44 PM

It is a small thing that a lot of people have a hard time obeying...

It is where some people get hanged up. The church 'makes a big deal' out of it since that is where the church is having its problems. A man can try to teach a person about the universe but won't have much success if they are having a hard time grasping that earth is finite and small.

If the church is having a hard time with such a small part of the gospel, then how is the church going to be able to handle the deeper things, such as the law of full concencration or whatever?

It is a small deal that gets blown into a big deal by our members, not the leaders.

Good answer!

[Cal]

Originally posted by curvette@May 15 2004, 06:10 PM

Over the years I've come to believe that this is a very small issue that we tend to make a big deal out of. I think it's a perfect example of how we can "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel."

I recall reading that when Heber J. Grant re-instituted the WoW as this big commandment (before him it was considered less than important--the church even had a brewery under BY), some of the GA's didn't like this strong emphasis being placed on it. See Michael Quinn on the subject.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Starsky+May 15 2004, 06:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Starsky @ May 15 2004, 06:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--curvette@May 15 2004, 06:10 PM

Over the years I've come to believe that this is a very small issue that we tend to make a big deal out of.  I think it's a perfect example of how we can "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel."

Yes...strain at a gnat. I would think that is what the WoW is...

I once had a MTC teacher tell the group that the foundation to spiritual perfection was disapline. Personal disapline. I think it is true. If our foundation is undisaplined, the next step up can't be found.

Discipline in what context? And discipline handed out by whom and determined by whom? If I exercise TOO MUCH, am I undisciplined? If I drink too much water, am I undisciplined? If I attend church too many times a week, am I undisciplined? If I drink one cup of coffee each morning am I undisciplined? If I cuss, once a year, am I undisciplined? If I cuss once a day, am I undisciplined? If I cuss, every 3 minutes, am I undisciplined?

The term becomes quite relative doesn't it.

You may think someone who drinks on glass of wine, once a week on sunday evening as undisciplined. Others may find this extremely DISCIPLINED. Its all in the value system you set up.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Cal+May 16 2004, 04:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ May 16 2004, 04:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Starsky@May 15 2004, 06:21 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--curvette@May 15 2004, 06:10 PM

Over the years I've come to believe that this is a very small issue that we tend to make a big deal out of.  I think it's a perfect example of how we can "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel."

Yes...strain at a gnat. I would think that is what the WoW is...

I once had a MTC teacher tell the group that the foundation to spiritual perfection was disapline. Personal disapline. I think it is true. If our foundation is undisaplined, the next step up can't be found.

Discipline in what context? And discipline handed out by whom and determined by whom? If I exercise TOO MUCH, am I undisciplined? If I drink too much water, am I undisciplined? If I attend church too many times a week, am I undisciplined? If I drink one cup of coffee each morning am I undisciplined? If I cuss, once a year, am I undisciplined? If I cuss once a day, am I undisciplined? If I cuss, every 3 minutes, am I undisciplined?

The term becomes quite relative doesn't it.

You may think someone who drinks on glass of wine, once a week on sunday evening as undisciplined. Others may find this extremely DISCIPLINED. Its all in the value system you set up.

EXCESS bro is not disapline....

TAking in unhealthy products or amounts is not disapline.

You failed miserably to take my meaning and twist it up side down...

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Starsky@May 16 2004, 09:28 PM

EXCESS bro is not disapline....

TAking in unhealthy products or amounts is not disapline.

You failed miserably to take my meaning and twist it up side down...

Ever eat margarine, Starsky? If so, then you don't have a lot of discipline (going by your meaning). Trans fats, as found in margarine, are VERY unhealthy.

What about bacon, palm oil, refined flours, etc?

[broadway]

The 'hot drinks' part of the WOW is quite literal. It is unhealthy for one's stomache to drink liquids at extreme temperatures. The most common hot drinks happen to be tea and coffee, which have other bad side effects due to caffiene. I would imagine that drinking Hot Chocolate or herbal tea or chicken broth at the same high temperature would be just as unhealthy. Look up "Hot Drinks" in "Mormon Doctrine. Pretty interesting.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by shanstress70+May 17 2004, 04:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shanstress70 @ May 17 2004, 04:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Starsky@May 16 2004, 09:28 PM

EXCESS bro is not disapline....

TAking in unhealthy products or amounts is not disapline.

You failed miserably to take my meaning and twist it up side down...

Ever eat margarine, Starsky? If so, then you don't have a lot of discipline (going by your meaning). Trans fats, as found in margarine, are VERY unhealthy.

What about bacon, palm oil, refined flours, etc?

To avoid everything bad is sometimes really bad for you...do you breath Shanstress??? Do you know how bad polution is for your lungs....stop breathing alright? LOL

BTW...I choose to use 'special butter subs'. No trans fattys here...bacon yuk! and flour...only whole wheat...when I use it at all...I prefer nuts and fresh veggies and fruits. Don't much like meat, but use tuna and love crab salad...something wrong with those? LOL...maybe we should just stop eating all together....I am for that!!!

[srm]

Originally posted by curvette@May 15 2004, 06:10 PM

Over the years I've come to believe that this is a very small issue that we tend to make a big deal out of. I think it's a perfect example of how we can "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel."

touche