Caffeine

[srm]

I remember that smoking was considered not either good or bad...but only socially acceptable.

You must be really, really...really old.

[srm]

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields+May 18 2004, 09:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Strawberry Fields @ May 18 2004, 09:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 18 2004, 12:12 PM

Now this is intertesting,  Fresa says,

I can even tolerate the caffeine free stuff with lime.

Caffine is colorless, oderless and tasteless.

I said that.

Ask any Diet Coke Lover if they can taste the difference between the leaded (caffeine) and the unleaded (caffeine free) versions and I bet they say yes.

Now that you say that I may sound a bit crazy but that is how I feel. :)

SF

Fresa = strawberry

I know...I agree, but regardless they say it is colorless etc.

[broadway]

Originally posted by srm+May 18 2004, 01:09 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ May 18 2004, 01:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -broadway@May 18 2004, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by -shanstress70@May 18 2004, 05:05 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--broadway@May 17 2004, 11:00 AM

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.

You've actually just pointed out another flaw in the WoW. If it is the heat of the drinks that is bad, then WHY is hot choc, etc. not forbidden? And why is iced tea? No matter what way you look at it, it MAKES NO SENSE! I think it's a power thing.

At this point, because it has been revealed to us not to drink beverages that high in caffeine...that is why. I do not think there is a 'flaw' in the WOW, only a 'flaw' in how people accept it or take it.

The WOW is about being healthy. It is proven that tea is really bad for a person's body, so is coffee. Just because there are other beverages that are bad for you as well doesn't mean that you should just disregard the WOW concerning tea and coffee. If anything, as a person who knows the health dangers of drinking other kinds of beverages, you should be even more restrictive on yourself...not less.

Hold the phone. Where "has been revealed to us not to drink beverages that high in caffeine."

It has been revealed to us not to drink tea and coffee (these are beverages that are high in caffeine). I did not mean to imply that revelation includes the word 'caffeine'. I mean to say that the beverages it does specifically mention are high in caffeine....much more so than many it doesn't mention (though some may include, such as sodas hot chocalote etc)

Sorry for the confusion...hope that clears that up.

BTW, you didn't have to seem so excited to find an error in my reply. As I am pregnant (due any day now), my mind will be preoccpied with other things than perfection in debating...bare with me some, in the future, alright? thanks.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by srm@May 18 2004, 10:19 PM

I remember that smoking was considered not either good or bad...but only socially acceptable.

You must be really, really...really old.

Actually, I should have said my mother told me of the time when such was the case. When she was on a mission down in Elpasso, Texas the spanish speaking people were dependant upon the tabacco crobs for their livelihood. It was very difficult to teach the WofW because it was socially unexceptable to speak against tabacco...

Health was not the issue...economy, job security was and being socially acceptable was.

[shanstress70]

SRM, I'm not going to get into why I think the WoW was written. Let it suffice to say that I don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet and for that reason I have decided to leave the church. I do agree that peoples' lives are better without tobacco, drugs, or alcohol... especially the latter two. They have ruined MANY lives. But I don't think it is a word from God. I think it's common sense. The parts about coffee and tea are what I disagree with. There are SO MANY inconsistencies (why are some parts of the WoW not enforced such as meat, some say the reason for hot drinks is temp, some say cafffeine, etc.), and it just makes no sense to me. It's been discussed in this and other threads and just goes round and round. It really seems like a waste of time since some of you will always defend it, and some of us will try to tear it apart. To each his or her own, I suppose!

Tao: "Today we know smoking is unhealthy, so that proves JS was a prophet."

And Tao, whether a believer or non-believer is reading that, it is a laughable statement! You think 'proves' might just be an incorrect term? Sorry, but there is no proof that JS was a prophet. If that is the case, why didn't he get the message that lead shouldn't be used in paint? Or that asbestos shouldn't be used in insulation? Or that eating too much fat is not good and can lead to cancers? It may not have been common knowledge that smoking was bad for you back then, but if you ask me, that's common sense. It can't be good for you to inhale something into your lungs. Or if talking about chewing tobacco, that stuff leaves holes in your gums. Who WOULDN'T know that isn't good for you?

[srm]

Originally posted by shanstress70@May 19 2004, 04:26 AM

SRM, I'm not going to get into why I think the WoW was written. Let it suffice to say that I don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet and for that reason I have decided to leave the church. I do agree that peoples' lives are better without tobacco, drugs, or alcohol... especially the latter two. They have ruined MANY lives. But I don't think it is a word from God. I think it's common sense. The parts about coffee and tea are what I disagree with. There are SO MANY inconsistencies (why are some parts of the WoW not enforced such as meat, some say the reason for hot drinks is temp, some say cafffeine, etc.), and it just makes no sense to me. It's been discussed in this and other threads and just goes round and round. It really seems like a waste of time since some of you will always defend it, and some of us will try to tear it apart. To each his or her own, I suppose!

Tao: "Today we know smoking is unhealthy, so that proves JS was a prophet."

And Tao, whether a believer or non-believer is reading that, it is a laughable statement! You think 'proves' might just be an incorrect term? Sorry, but there is no proof that JS was a prophet. If that is the case, why didn't he get the message that lead shouldn't be used in paint? Or that asbestos shouldn't be used in insulation? Or that eating too much fat is not good and can lead to cancers? It may not have been common knowledge that smoking was bad for you back then, but if you ask me, that's common sense. It can't be good for you to inhale something into your lungs. Or if talking about chewing tobacco, that stuff leaves holes in your gums. Who WOULDN'T know that isn't good for you?

It sounds like the WOW is irrelevant to your feelings. The key issue is that you don't believe that Joseph was a prophet. What is it that leads you to feel this way?

[shanstress70]

I will post my reply to this in the thread that is already in progress. This one is too long already, and my response would fit better there. It is in General Discussion - "I'm Leaving' thread.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by srm@May 19 2004, 07:59 AM

It sounds like the WOW is irrelevant to your feelings. The key issue is that you don't believe that Joseph was a prophet. What is it that leads you to feel this way?

This is so typical. If you feel this way then (insert something unrelated.) Let's assume Joseph Smith was a prophet. The revelation he recorded on the word of wisdom stated specifically that this was NOT a commandment.

[srm]

This is so typical.  If you feel this way then (insert something unrelated.) 

You're gonna need to explain what you're trying to say here...sorry

Let's assume Joseph Smith was a prophet.  The revelation he recorded on the word of wisdom stated specifically that this was NOT a commandment.

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by Taoist_Saint@May 18 2004, 04:33 PM

I was talking to the Bishop the other day, and he said that we follow the WoW not because it is a test of obedience (which is what I considered it to be)...but because there are real health benefits.

His example was smoking.

He said that in the time of JS, smoking was considered to be healthy. God knew better, so he told JS to include it in the WoW. Today we know smoking is unhealthy, so that proves JS was a prophet.

Is it true that people used to think smoking was healthy?

If so, then I suppose the theory is that in another 100 years they will probably find something seriously wrong with coffee too.

There have always been people who thought tobacco smoking is unhealthy:

1604

King James I writes A Counterblaste to Tobacco. It says smoking is “loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, and dangerous to the lungs.” The king said if he ever had the Devil to dinner, he’d offer him a pipe.

Early 1600’s

Countries all over the world write laws to ban tobacco and stop smoking. In Russia, punishment for smoking includes whipping, slitting the nose, and being sent to Siberia.

1701

Nicholas Andryde Boisregard warns that young people using too much tobacco have trembling, unsteady hands, staggering feet and suffer a withering of “their noble parts.”

1795

Samuel Thomas von Sömmering of Maine reports lip cancer in pipe smokers.

1845

John Quincy Adams writes to the Rev. Samuel H. Cox: “In my early youth I was addicted to the use of tobacco in two of its mysteries, smoking and chewing. I was warned by a medical friend of the pernicious operation of this habit upon the stomach and the nerves.”

On the other hand, some people have also thought it was healthy:

1665-66

During The Great Plague in Europe, people smoke tobacco because they think it will protect them from getting sick.

Interestingly enough, the first government to take a public-health stance against tobacco was Nazi Germany:

1939

The Reich Committee in Germany prints Tabak und Organismus (Tobacco and the Organism). It blames smoking for cancers of the lips, tongue, mouth, jaw, esophagus, windpipe and lungs.

The bottom line is that some people have always recognized the dangers of tobacco, despite the best efforts of the tobacco companies to suppress the news. It follows, then, that Joseph Smith wasn't alone in considering it dangerous, and that his warning against it aren't proof that he was a prophet, anymore than John Adams' recognition of its health hazards made him a prophet.

Of course, it's perfectly logical that God might send a revelation to resolve a disputed question like whether tobacco was harmful. But a revelation is not the only possible explanation for the Word of Wisdom, since other contemporary people came to the same conclusion without a revelation.

[Rodney]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@May 19 2004, 12:29 PM

Interestingly enough, the first government to take a public-health stance against tobacco was Nazi Germany...

My choice of verbiage would have been, "Coincidentally enough, the first ..."

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

:)

[Guest bizabra]

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.

the law of full concencration or whatever?

tee heee

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Taoist_Saint@May 19 2004, 04:37 PM

I agree...

I don't personally think that the tobacco thing proves JS was a prophet...I was quoting my Bishop

If anything, it proves that he had access to knowledge about tobacco that was not known to the general public. Or who knows...maybe he was a psychic.

A prophet? Maybe he was...but to prove he is a prophet, we need more information than his statements about tobacco.

Sorry, I misunderstood. Well, tell your bishop I think that is laughable! B)

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

[srm]

Originally posted by curvette+May 20 2004, 08:51 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ May 20 2004, 08:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

I know, but why couldn't God later reveal that it is to be treated as a commandment?

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by srm+May 20 2004, 09:05 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ May 20 2004, 09:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@May 20 2004, 08:51 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

I know, but why couldn't God later reveal that it is to be treated as a commandment?

Yes...I think that maybe the WofW was just warming up the people...as a word to the wise...and then became commandment when most became wise.... :)

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Starsky+May 20 2004, 10:21 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Starsky @ May 20 2004, 10:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@May 20 2004, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by -curvette@May 20 2004, 08:51 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

I know, but why couldn't God later reveal that it is to be treated as a commandment?

Yes...I think that maybe the WofW was just warming up the people...as a word to the wise...and then became commandment when most became wise.... :)

Now you're talking crazy-talk!

[Maureen]

Originally posted by srm+May 20 2004, 09:05 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ May 20 2004, 09:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@May 20 2004, 08:51 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

I know, but why couldn't God later reveal that it is to be treated as a commandment?

Or maybe, some of the leaders back in 1904 were quite miserable that plural marriage was finally ending which gave the LDS church its uniqueness; that they decided the next best thing was to make the WofW a firm commandment which would bring back some of that uniqueness to the church.

I read this particular theory somewhere but I can't remember where.

M.

[Guest Chell]

Originally posted by Starsky+May 20 2004, 04:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Starsky @ May 20 2004, 04:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@May 20 2004, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by -curvette@May 20 2004, 08:51 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

I know, but why couldn't God later reveal that it is to be treated as a commandment?

Yes...I think that maybe the WofW was just warming up the people...as a word to the wise...and then became commandment when most became wise.... :)

This is possible. Who knows. Right?

[Guest Chell]

Originally posted by LaurelTree@Apr 13 2004, 11:02 PM

I just take it this far for my own good...My goal in this life is to get rid of my weaknesses, not make new ones.

Where you gonna get a coke in heaven when you crave for one? I prefur to lighten my load now.

Just a thought.

Laureltree

I like this. Thank you. :)

[Cal]

Originally posted by Strawberry Fields+May 18 2004, 08:59 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Strawberry Fields @ May 18 2004, 08:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--curvette@May 18 2004, 02:48 PM

I've never seen a scientific study conclude that tea is bad for us.  In fact, study after study consistently show that it is incredibly GOOD for us.  (I see a couple of other people have also read those studies.)

I think that is was tea or maybe it was coke... When I was in high school somebody put a screw into a glass of one of them (coke or tea) and within a week it was eating through the screw.

Do the same thing to the screw with lemon juice---same result--the reason for the deterioration is that metals react with acids--though the acids in soda and fruit juices are too weak to do the dissolving as quickly as you claim. Better quit drinking all juices which have citric acid or carbonic acid (which all carbonated drinks have)

At the time of JS some people may have smoked cigars, but is was NOT considered virtuous by the more pious religious types of the age---JS's WoW simply reflected the piety of the religious types of the times.

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by Maureen+May 20 2004, 10:00 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ May 20 2004, 10:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -srm@May 20 2004, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by -curvette@May 20 2004, 08:51 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--srm@May 19 2004, 10:48 AM

Whether is is a commandment or not is irrelevant to whether is was a revelation or not.

It was a revelation that was clearly stated to be a NON commandment.

I know, but why couldn't God later reveal that it is to be treated as a commandment?

Or maybe, some of the leaders back in 1904 were quite miserable that plural marriage was finally ending which gave the LDS church its uniqueness; that they decided the next best thing was to make the WofW a firm commandment which would bring back some of that uniqueness to the church.

I read this particular theory somewhere but I can't remember where.

M.

Now, how exactly does that make any sense? Eh?

Let's not distinguish ourselves by being more christ-like, decent, charitable, honest, or what-not, but instead, let's twist the actual text of the WofW around and use it to deny our membership of something as trivial as a cup of coffee. Yeah! THAT'S the ticket! THAT'LL be the way we remain a "peculiar people"!

Huh? I keep scratching my head, wondering. . . . . . . . .

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

I wish someone would invent a non-alcoholic beer with caffeine.

[Guest Starsky]

LOL, Tao! You are so creative!