- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
That reminds me, I need to pick up some cigarettes and chew to wash my cows with, and some whisky to was my feet. Reflexzero wrote:That reminds me, I need to pick up some cigarettes and chew to wash my cows with, and some whisky to was my feet.
I just need to brew me some 200 proof for my car’s tank……
:crazy: There is no doubt whatsoever that the Word of Widsom was meant originally as a health code – and it absolutely was not about obedience originally. Obedience was added later, but it still was and is about health, also. It certainly is not a comprehensive health code, and it certainly doesn’t address all things that impact health, but it is a dietary code – and dietary codes are health codes, by definition.
Jesus drank wine, but he also didn’t eat a lot of things that are fine for us to eat now. What Jesus did or didn’t eat or drink is a lousy basis for a modern dietary code – much worse than the Word of Wisdom.
Old-Timer wrote:There is no doubt whatsoever that the Word of Widsom was meant originally as a health code
Ray, I actually see it a little differently. Yes, health was a factor, but I believe the primary purpose of the original WoW was about decorum. IMO, drunkenness, rather than cirrhosis of the liver, was the concern with alcohol and tobacco restrictions were more about un-saintly spittoons than about gum disease.To me, this is an important element, because while soda may also be bad for you, it neither smells nor causes inebriation. In other words, we always talk about health and obedience, but I believe that social behavior is what fixes the WoW to the culture.
Old-Timer wrote:There is no doubt whatsoever that the Word of Widsom was meant originally as a health code – and it absolutely was not about obedience originally. Obedience was added later, but it still was and is about health, also…It certainly is not a comprehensive health code, and it certainly doesn’t address all things that impact health, but it is a dietary code – and dietary codes are health codes, by definition…
Jesus drank wine, but he also didn’t eat a lot of things that are fine for us to eat now. What Jesus did or didn’t eat or drink is a lousy basis for a modern dietary code – much worse than the Word of Wisdom.I don’t see why; sure the diet of Jesus was probably heavily influenced by his own local culture, climate, etc. but that doesn’t necessarily mean it would be the ideal diet for everyone in terms of health. However, my point was simply that it seems really odd that a church that claims to be the one and only true church of Jesus Christ would end up making wine out to be such a serious sin that it should justify keeping its followers out of the temple, Celestial Kingdom, etc. and calling them “unworthy” when Jesus himself drank wine according to the Bible as if there was nothing wrong with it.
And as if that isn’t already unusual enough, Joseph Smith and other Church leaders drank wine on the night he was killed. So how is it that now it has become an unacceptable “sin” and taboo that is strictly enforced in temple recommend interviews? It just doesn’t make much sense and is a blatantly obvious inconsistency that looks like a clear example of commandments of men if we really pay attention to some of the details of where it came from and when. Did God suddenly change his mind and decide this really is a sin now after it apparently wasn’t that important to avoid for either Joseph Smith or Jesus himself?
DevilsAdvocate wrote:… if we really pay attention to some of the details.
That is the one thing that has gotten me in more trouble than anything else….paying attention to those dang pesky details.
Shucks…I’m a programmer, and a single misplaced comma in 10,000 lines of code breaks the whole thing. YIKES!!!! I hate this!
I remember once teaching primary and going through the list of supplies pioneers needed to take. It included specified amounts of coffee and tea which caused the little dudes to want to know what the deal was and made for an interesting discussion with kids who see things a cut and dried. Jesus didn’t eat pork. If we are trying model ourselves after his health code, we should start drinking wine and stop eating pork. But that isn’t the point. People in the Church abstain from alcohol in a manner similar to how other religious adherents wear a cross… or how Muslims and Jews don’t eat pork. It’s part of a lifestyle connected to belief. I don’t really see a lot of value in pointing out the religious inconsistencies of others. Anyone who wants to have a glass of wine with their meal, LDS or not, has my permission to do so. Likewise, anyone who wants to abstain as a matter of faith has my blessing. PS. It was probably healthier to drink wine than water in ancient cities like Capernaum and Jerusalem… Just sayin’.
“But it was just really just grape juice,” quipped the HPG instructor. The other high priests nodded in agreement, feeling confident. However one seated at the end of the table quietly rolled his eyes.
Oh man, this thread is killing me. Lucky I’m there only one in the lunchroom right now. Thanks for the laughs!
I will take the Word of Wisdom over the Mosaic dietary code any day. Easy choice. The central issue, to me, is not the specifics; it is the application of enforcement. I think most people here agree with that. There is a lot of good advice in D&C 89 and some that is outdated – and to say it wasn’t primarily a dietary code is something I just can’t understand, given the words themselves. It is and was a warning about addiction peddlers, with some other health/dietary advice.
Again, it might not be primarily a dietary code now that it has been given command status, but that is an issue of application not original wording and intent.
Finally, the motivation behind seeking/publishing it seems to have been uncleanliness and drunkenness, but the actual wording is about addiction, diet and health.
Giving up bacon. Hmm that would be hard. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
On Own Now wrote:Jesus didn’t eat pork. If we are trying model ourselves after his health code, we should start drinking wine and stop eating pork. But that isn’t the point. People in the Church abstain from alcohol in a manner similar to how other religious adherents wear a cross… or how Muslims and Jews don’t eat pork. It’s part of a lifestyle connected to belief.I don’t really see a lot of value in pointing out the religious inconsistencies of others. Anyone who wants to have a glass of wine with their meal, LDS or not, has my permission to do so. Likewise, anyone who wants to abstain as a matter of faith has my blessing…PS. It was probably healthier to drink wine than water in ancient cities like Capernaum and Jerusalem… Just sayin’. Old-Timer wrote:I will take the Word of Wisdom over the Mosaic dietary code any day. Easy choice…There is a lot of good advice in D&C 89 and some that is outdated – and to say it wasn’t primarily a dietary code is something I just can’t understand, given the words themselves. It is and was a warning about addiction peddlers, with some other health/dietary advice…Again, it might not be primarily a dietary code now that it has been given command status, but that is an issue of application not original wording and intent…Finally, the motivation behind seeking/publishing it seems to have been uncleanliness and drunkenness, but the actual wording is about addiction, diet and health. If different religious groups think what they wear, eat, and drink is so important to the point that they shun or ostracize those that don’t conform to these expectations over this then that’s their problem. That doesn’t change the fact that the WoW simply doesn’t look like a very legitimate and sound doctrine that is internally consistent because of the way the Church has basically made a serious sin out of something that apparently wasn’t a sin to Jesus and Joseph Smith and started strictly enforcing it through temple recommend interviews, fear, shame, social pressure, etc. fairly recently.
If anything all these different religious groups having different rules to live by mostly just goes to show that people are creatures of habit that have a tendency to think their own familiar traditions are more important than they really are (Colossians 2:20-23) when it is plain to see that many others that don’t share the same traditions are doing just as well without these same strict rules and routines. I don’t need to point these inconsistencies out; they are just sitting there waiting for Church members to see as soon as they pay close attention to what some of these scriptures actually say (Luke 8:17) which means the Church is basically depending on them not noticing or paying close attention to some of these details but rather simply counting on members/investigators taking their word for it instead.
It seems like a rather shaky foundation for a doctrine the Church is currently treating as an absolute deal-breaker. Sure there are plenty of active Church members that have already accepted the WoW and gotten used to it the way it is but at the same time if many Church members dare to disobey and find out for themselves that it doesn’t feel wrong to them or cause any obvious problems then good luck convincing them that this is that important and that Church leaders really know what they are talking about after that (John 7:15-18; 1 Thess. 5:21). This has already been happening for probably millions of Church members for decades, hence the old stereotype that many Church members leave because they wanted to sin. On top of that, when investigators hear the idea that drinking coffee or tea is a sin it just isn’t going to make much sense to many of them whether they openly admit it to the missionaries or not.
You know, I think it would be really nice if the question asked in the temple recommend interview (if there has to be one at all) was just, “Do you take good care of the body God has given you?” There are a few people in my ward that I would imagine would be very uncomfortable answering this question with a “yes” for no other reason than that they are morbidly obese. For a few of them, being denied a temple recommend might even be the impetus they need to go on a lifestyle-changing diet. Note: I’m not advocating that anyone be denied a temple recommend for being overweight. All I’m saying is that if the Word of WIsdom is supposed to be dietary word of “wisdom” (i.e. advise, counsel, direction) — as I believe it is — then the spirit of the law ought to be more important than the letter of the law. I typically have a glass or two of wine twice a year — at Thanksgiving and Christmas — when we have dinner with my sister and brother-in-law who are both ex-Mos who drink. Man, I look forward to that wine! There are times when I am tempted to have a glass at a fine restaurant on vacation, but I always talk myself out of it. Once I start making exceptions to my own twice-a-year rule, I can well imagine that it wouldn’t take much for me to become a regular drinker. And every time I go in for a temple recommend, I work myself into a huge basket case because I’m determined not to admit to my vice. I tell the bishop I’m living the Word of Wisdom, despite my two annual lapses, and end up leaving the interview feeling almost embarrassed for even feeling guilty. I know deep down that I
amtaking care of my body and I sincerely believe that the amount of alcohol I drink is far less of a concern to God than the kinds and amounts of food some letter-of-the-law Mormons eat. I have never had a problem with the Word of Wisdom. It was one thing that attracted me to the church, although I don’t understand the coffee and tea evolution from “hot drinks”. I appreciate the fact that the WoW keeps me from trying alcohol. As I have struggled with various emotional issues over the years, I have been tempted (in the last few months) to take alcohol to give me relief from my thoughts. But not wanting to go down that path, and over three decades of abstinence prevent me from taking that step. So, I guess it helps me. I suppose the only thing that bothers me about it is that it’s another control mechanism through its inclusion in TR interviews etcetera. I generally don’t like the control model of the church, and this is one instance of it, although reluctantly, I will admit the anti-alcohol stance has probably stopped me from going down a path that could lead to addiction — who knows.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.