Caffeine

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Ammon+Apr 16 2004, 10:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ammon @ Apr 16 2004, 10:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Outshined@Apr 15 2004, 01:37 PM

I don't try to dance around the WOW; I just follow it to the best of my understanding, without searching for loopholes, as any commandment.

Amen!

A WORD OF WISDOM, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days- (D&C 89:1-2)

Has your scripture above now been changed or edited by a recent or current prophet to now have the WofW viewed as a commandment?

M.

[srm]

Originally posted by AFDaw+Apr 16 2004, 09:31 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (AFDaw @ Apr 16 2004, 09:31 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@Apr 16 2004, 09:21 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--Faerie@Apr 15 2004, 06:30 PM

If your bishop is that strict, then oh well..what's more important, a steak..or the blessings of the temple?

But where would that stop? how about if he felt you should share your wife? We should not just blindly be led by the Bishop and his whims. What about if he really felt that you should really start tithing 11% for a recommend?

Isn't there some kind of promise that our leaders will never lead us astray? (By leaders I mean Prophets, stake presidents, bishops) Seems like I remember something like that.

I think that they are refering to the Prophet & the 1st presidency. because people have definatly been led astray by Bishops.

[srm]

Gee...how about you NEVER trust your bishop or his discernment???

Of course I do. But when you said, "If your bishop is that strict, then oh well..what's more important, a steak..or the blessings of the temple?" I think that you're off base. If the Bishop over steps his bounds you shouldn't just say, "If your bishop is that strict, then oh well..what's more important, a steak..or the blessings of the temple? " you should do something about it.

Give me a break!!! If you live in a ward where the bishop is THAT corrupt, you need to relay a message to the Stake President and if HE's that corrupt then you can go above him...

You say, "THAT corrupt" well then how corrupt is OK?

That's what the bishop is there for..to help us in our journey...If God wanted us to do it on our own, He wouldn't have placed so many positions of leadership on the earth...

My bishop is old fashioned, but I trust him. I sustained him along w/ our Stake Presidency, so I will uphold their decisions. That doesn't mean I will blindly follow them, I have enough smarts to see if they are teaching false doctrine and so should you sweetie

Yes, I agree. but it does happen that a bishop might teach false doctrine. If a Bishop were to say that I could not have a recommend if I ate meat, I wouldn't just say, "If your bishop is that strict, then oh well..what's more important, a steak..or the blessings of the temple? " I do something about it "...and so should you sweetie " BTW, that is why the recommend questions are standardized.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by AFDaw+Apr 16 2004, 09:31 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (AFDaw @ Apr 16 2004, 09:31 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@Apr 16 2004, 09:21 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--Faerie@Apr 15 2004, 06:30 PM

If your bishop is that strict, then oh well..what's more important, a steak..or the blessings of the temple?

But where would that stop? how about if he felt you should share your wife? We should not just blindly be led by the Bishop and his whims. What about if he really felt that you should really start tithing 11% for a recommend?

Isn't there some kind of promise that our leaders will never lead us astray? (By leaders I mean Prophets, stake presidents, bishops) Seems like I remember something like that.

Yes...it states that if the saints are 'doing their duty' that they can sleep like a babe in it's mother's arms without fear of being lead astray....but as with all blessings...we must obey the law upon which that blessing is predicated ....i.e. be doing our duty; in order to receive it.

Our duty for this particular blessing is to ask.....if we are being lead correctly or not....

Brigham Young said:

"What a pity it would be, if we were led by one man to utter destruction!

Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much

confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God

whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind

self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders

with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in

their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did

they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the

right way. Let every man and woman know, themselves, whether their leaders are

walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation

continually." (JD 9:150)

"How easy it would be for your leaders to lead you to destruction, unless

you actually know the mind and will of the spirit yourselves." (JD 4:368)

"I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be

satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the

spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied...Suppose that the people were

heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the

kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people,

saying, 'If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are,'

this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord." (JD 3:45)

"...Now those men, or those women, who know no more about the power of God,

and the influences of the Holy Spirit, than to be led entirely by another

person, suspending their own understanding, and pinning their faith upon

another's sleeve, will never be capable of entering into the celestial glory,

to be crowned as they anticipate; they will never be capable of becoming Gods.

They cannot rule themselves, to say nothing of ruling others, but they must be

dictated to in every trifle, like a child. They cannot control themselves in

the least, but James, Peter, or somebody else must control them. They never can

become Gods, nor be crowned as rulers with glory, immortality, and eternal

lives. They never can hold sceptres of glory, majesty, and power in the

celestial kingdom. Who will? Those who are valiant and inspired with the true

independence of heaven, who will go forth boldly in the service of their God,

leaving others to do as they please, determined to do right, though all mankind

besides should take the opposite course. Will this apply to any of you? Your

own hearts can answer." (JD 1:312)

I think President Hinckley's talk in conference mentioned 'doing our duty'...it would be good to go back and read that talk again.

[Faerie]

You're right SRM...:)

I was being a bit overexaggerated when I mentioned corruption *tongue in cheek*...Of course if a bishop doesn't give you a recommend cuz you eat meat..there's something wrong there..maybe he's a SDA in disguise..lol..I suppose my latter thoughts on going to the Stake Pres to do something about it supercedes the "steak vs temple" comment...

I personally have never had a recommend interview where they ask if I eat meat or if I drink iced tea. They simple ask, "Do you follow the WoW." I answer yes w/ the knowledge that I do...I had a small dr pepper this afternoon...I don't feel that's inappropriate...I follow the WoW though :)

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Starsky --

but as with all blessings...we must obey the law upon which that blessing is predicated ....i.e. be doing our duty; in order to receive it.

Our duty for this particular blessing is to ask.....if we are being lead correctly or not....

I think that's the best explanation of the "the leaders will never lead you astray" doctrine that I've ever seen.

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Maureen+Apr 16 2004, 11:04 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ Apr 16 2004, 11:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Ammon@Apr 16 2004, 10:07 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--Outshined@Apr 15 2004, 01:37 PM

I don't try to dance around the WOW; I just follow it to the best of my understanding, without searching for loopholes, as any commandment.

Amen!

A WORD OF WISDOM, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days- (D&C 89:1-2)

Has your scripture above now been changed or edited by a recent or current prophet to now have the WofW viewed as a commandment?

M.

I think I've answered my own question with this find.

Obeying His Word

“People argue over whether the Word of Wisdom is simply the word of the Lord or a commandment. What difference does it make? The word of the Lord becomes a commandment to me, and I am so very grateful for that marvelous thing which we call the Word of Wisdom” (meeting, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, 31 July 1998). “Latter-day Counsel: Selections from Addresses of President Gordon B. Hinckley,” Ensign, Feb. 2002, 49

Since your prophet seems to see the WofW as a commandment, does that make it a commandment? (Yes - the same question, asked in a different way)

M.

[srm]

Originally posted by Faerie@Apr 16 2004, 12:11 PM

I personally have never had a recommend interview where they ask if I eat meat or if I drink iced tea. They simple ask, "Do you follow the WoW."

Exactly...which gets back to my original point...it is between you and the Lord.

[Outshined]

Originally posted by srm@Apr 16 2004, 05:36 PM

Exactly...which gets back to my original point...it is between you and the Lord.

I agree.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Apr 16 2004, 12:36 PM

Starsky --

but as with all blessings...we must obey the law upon which that blessing is predicated ....i.e. be doing our duty; in order to receive it.

Our duty for this particular blessing is to ask.....if we are being lead correctly or not....

I think that's the best explanation of the "the leaders will never lead you astray" doctrine that I've ever seen.

Thanks. :)

[Tr2]

Exactly...which gets back to my original point...it is between you and the Lord.

If your church really doesn't take a stance of the WoW, then why do many mormons treat it as though it came from the mouth of God which must be obeyed without exception?

[Guest lt]

actually the church does allow some tea's for medicinal purposes.......

just thought you should know.....The church is just trying to have us live as christ would, his body was his

temple and so are ours. We can have somethings in small moderation, but others are actually more harmful than they are good.......

[shanstress70]

just thought you should know.....The church is just trying to have us live as christ would, his body was his

temple and so are ours. We can have somethings in small moderation, but others are actually more harmful than they are good.......

WWJD? I betcha Jesus would drink a nice cold glass of iced tea!

This just keeps going around in circles. We can have some things in moderation, like alfredo sauce (a heart attack on a plate), but absolutely NO TEA, which is great for your body! And sure, there may be bad things that tea does that we just don't know about yet, but that could be true for anything. Or it could have only positive effects and someone, somewhere made a mistake.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Ammon+Apr 16 2004, 10:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ammon @ Apr 16 2004, 10:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Outshined@Apr 15 2004, 01:37 PM

I don't try to dance around the WOW; I just follow it to the best of my understanding, without searching for loopholes, as any commandment.

Amen!

Really,

You mean you don't try and justify hot chocolate by thinking, well sure it's hot and sure it's a drink but it not really a hot drink. Never mind what the scriptures say, it's the current interpretation that important!

[Guest Starsky]

I think the wise thing to do is try living it according to the way the church has put it out....and see if there are the benefits promised....prove it here with....

[Maureen]

Originally posted by shanstress70@Apr 16 2004, 06:53 PM

This just keeps going around in circles. We can have some things in moderation, like alfredo sauce (a heart attack on a plate), but absolutely NO TEA, which is great for your body! And sure, there may be bad things that tea does that we just don't know about yet, but that could be true for anything. Or it could have only positive effects and someone, somewhere made a mistake.

Exactly! When we look back at the time the WofW was first introduced, the temperance movement was alive and well. The birth of the WofW started with Emma complaining about the smoking and cleaning out the spittoon; or if there was no spittoon the mess. So it only makes sense that if the men felt deprived of their treat, the women should have to give something up also - coffee and tea. If that moment in time (of Emma complaining) never happened, chances are the LDS church would be today just like any other religious community - a coffee and tea drinking one - which is quite normal, IMO.

shanstress70, the choice is really yours. You are an adult, you have the ability to use common sense as you have shown in your posts. If you wish and like to drink your tea you should; you are responsible for the well being of your body. God gave you the ability to reason and to choose what is good for you. IMO, you are on the right track.

M.

[srm]

Originally posted by Maureen+Apr 17 2004, 11:55 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ Apr 17 2004, 11:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--shanstress70@Apr 16 2004, 06:53 PM

This just keeps going around in circles.  We can have some things in moderation, like alfredo sauce (a heart attack on a plate), but absolutely NO TEA, which is great for your body!  And sure, there may be bad things that tea does that we just don't know about yet, but that could be true for anything.  Or it could have only positive effects and someone, somewhere made a mistake.

Exactly! When we look back at the time the WofW was first introduced, the temperance movement was alive and well. The birth of the WofW started with Emma complaining about the smoking and cleaning out the spittoon; or if there was no spittoon the mess. So it only makes sense that if the men felt deprived of their treat, the women should have to give something up also - coffee and tea. If that moment in time (of Emma complaining) never happened, chances are the LDS church would be today just like any other religious community - a coffee and tea drinking one - which is quite normal, IMO.

shanstress70, the choice is really yours. You are an adult, you have the ability to use common sense as you have shown in your posts. If you wish and like to drink your tea you should; you are responsible for the well being of your body. God gave you the ability to reason and to choose what is good for you. IMO, you are on the right track.

M.

although interesting...your theory has precious little evidence...

[Maureen]

Originally posted by srm@Apr 17 2004, 02:35 PM

although interesting...your theory has precious little evidence...

What theory is that? - My speculation of why coffee and tea were picked? It's just human nature - tit for tat. :)

M.

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Maureen+Apr 17 2004, 02:55 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ Apr 17 2004, 02:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--srm@Apr 17 2004, 02:35 PM

although interesting...your theory has precious little evidence...

What theory is that? - My speculation of why coffee and tea were picked? It's just human nature - tit for tat. :)

M.

I guess it's not speculation after all. This is what I found from one of those evil anti-mormon websites:

<span style='color:blue'>"I think I am as well acquainted with the circumstances which led to the giving of the Word of Wisdom as any man in the Church, although I was not present at the time to witness them. The first school of the prophets was held in a small room situated over the Prophet Joseph's kitchen,... When they assembled together in this room after breakfast, the first they did was to light their pipes, and, while smoking, talk about the great things of the kingdom, and spit all over the room, and as soon as the pipe was out of their mouths a large chew of tobacco would then be taken. Often when the Prophet entered the room to give the school instructions he would find himself in a cloud of tobacco smoke. This, and the complaints of his wife at having to clean so filthy a floor, made the Prophet think upon the matter, and he inquired of the Lord relating to the conduct of the Elders in using tobacco, and the revelation known as the Word of Wisdom was the result of his inquiry." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 12, p. 158)

The following appeared in an interview with David Whitmer which was published in the Des Moines Daily News: "...quite a little party of the brethren and sisters being assembled in Smith's house. Some of the men were excessive chewers of the filthy weed, and their disgusting slobbering and spitting caused Mrs. Smith (who, Mr. Whitmer insists, was a lady of predisposed refinement) to make the ironical remark that 'It would be a good thing if a revelation could be had declaring the use of tobacco a sin, and commanding its suppression.' The matter was taken up and joked about, one of the brethren suggesting that the revelation should also provide for a total abstinence from tea and coffee drinking, intending this as a counter 'dig' at the sisters. Sure enough the subject was afterward taken up in dead earnest, and the 'Word of Wisdom' was the result." (The Des Moines Daily News, Saturday, October 16, 1886)

http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/w_wisdom.htm

M.

[Outshined]

I didn't see anything about hemp, and its dangers to habitual knitters........maybe it's in the next chapter.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by srm+Apr 17 2004, 02:35 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ Apr 17 2004, 02:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Maureen@Apr 17 2004, 11:55 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--shanstress70@Apr 16 2004, 06:53 PM

This just keeps going around in circles.  We can have some things in moderation, like alfredo sauce (a heart attack on a plate), but absolutely NO TEA, which is great for your body!  And sure, there may be bad things that tea does that we just don't know about yet, but that could be true for anything.  Or it could have only positive effects and someone, somewhere made a mistake.

Exactly! When we look back at the time the WofW was first introduced, the temperance movement was alive and well. The birth of the WofW started with Emma complaining about the smoking and cleaning out the spittoon; or if there was no spittoon the mess. So it only makes sense that if the men felt deprived of their treat, the women should have to give something up also - coffee and tea. If that moment in time (of Emma complaining) never happened, chances are the LDS church would be today just like any other religious community - a coffee and tea drinking one - which is quite normal, IMO.

shanstress70, the choice is really yours. You are an adult, you have the ability to use common sense as you have shown in your posts. If you wish and like to drink your tea you should; you are responsible for the well being of your body. God gave you the ability to reason and to choose what is good for you. IMO, you are on the right track.

M.

although interesting...your theory has precious little evidence...

I actually heard that idea from Richard Nietzel Holzapfel, a BYU religion professor and author. He doesn't strike me as the kind of person to make things up, so I suspect there's at least some evidence for this somewhere.

[srm]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck+Apr 17 2004, 07:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (TheProudDuck @ Apr 17 2004, 07:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@Apr 17 2004, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by -Maureen@Apr 17 2004, 11:55 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--shanstress70@Apr 16 2004, 06:53 PM

This just keeps going around in circles.  We can have some things in moderation, like alfredo sauce (a heart attack on a plate), but absolutely NO TEA, which is great for your body!  And sure, there may be bad things that tea does that we just don't know about yet, but that could be true for anything.  Or it could have only positive effects and someone, somewhere made a mistake.

Exactly! When we look back at the time the WofW was first introduced, the temperance movement was alive and well. The birth of the WofW started with Emma complaining about the smoking and cleaning out the spittoon; or if there was no spittoon the mess. So it only makes sense that if the men felt deprived of their treat, the women should have to give something up also - coffee and tea. If that moment in time (of Emma complaining) never happened, chances are the LDS church would be today just like any other religious community - a coffee and tea drinking one - which is quite normal, IMO.

shanstress70, the choice is really yours. You are an adult, you have the ability to use common sense as you have shown in your posts. If you wish and like to drink your tea you should; you are responsible for the well being of your body. God gave you the ability to reason and to choose what is good for you. IMO, you are on the right track.

M.

although interesting...your theory has precious little evidence...

I actually heard that idea from Richard Nietzel Holzapfel, a BYU religion professor and author. He doesn't strike me as the kind of person to make things up, so I suspect there's at least some evidence for this somewhere.

Where and when did he say it and what is his source?

[Snow]

SRM,

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

[srm]

Originally posted by 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?

[Snow]

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?

I get what you're saying but for Pete's sake, it's PD talking. Not that's I'm defending him, he would probably laugh at the thought. But he's a clear thinker and fairly guileless in his posting. His point was that Holzapolooza was and educated source who must have had some reason to say what he said. It clear that PD doesn't know exactly what the resource was. It doesn't prove anything certainly, just and piece of some puzzle.