- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I’m not quite sure how beneficial black tea really is. I think it was a factor in my mother’s death. As for coffee… it’s the acid which is also a problem. Like carbonated drinks, it has a tendency to eat the enamel on your teeth, with or without sugar. Coffee also dehydrates you and is a diuretic (unlike tea, which does hydrate you)
SamBee wrote:I’m not quite sure how beneficial black tea really is. I think it was a factor in my mother’s death.
As for coffee… it’s the acid which is also a problem. Like carbonated drinks, it has a tendency to eat the enamel on your teeth, with or without sugar. Coffee also dehydrates you and is a diuretic (unlike tea, which does hydrate you)
Of course there is always multiple factors…but, most nutritionists and medical scientists would argue that one of the worst long-term dietary problems we have in this country is refined sugar. And the Mormons are helping that statistic along!
I apologize for ruining the humor and getting back on task 
👿 I keep thinking Im done here, but then someone will say something that brings me back…
MH – I want to be careful and not put words in your mouth or read between the lines (just read Ray’s post about doing just that
Quote:…I just say that you need to pick your battles; disobeying the WoW is a losing proposition, and I don’t think it is a battle worth fighting….
A couple of things – and I am asking for your (or others) opinion, and I’m interested in what others here believe, so here goes – IF the WoW is a losing proposition, and a battle not worth fighting —
what place do those who choose to not follow it have in the church?I mean I respect those on this site who follow it. Most of you have stated honestly that “it’s not your issue” (sam being the exception?). What if it was your issue?
What do we tell those who won’t join the church or leave it, because of the WofW?“It’s a losing proposition, and a battle not worth fighting.” And MH, I’m saying this very sincerely and respectfully – I am interested in how you might, and others might respond to those people, and I don’t think that you or I would say that????
As the DA stated so eloquently on another thread about the WofW — it is probably the biggest “deal breaker” and “cult like” issue in the church today. IN MY EXPERIENCE – I have seen perhaps 100’s of folks who use the WofW as an excuse not to join (baptismal covenant) and 100’s of members who feel uncomfortable attending church and go inactive because of the WofW. NO OTHER REASON (for many of them at least). How do we resolve that concern?
Yes, I get that for those who have lived it their whole lives, it’s not an issue. But that is not the case for MOST people on this planet. It IS an issue – cultural, family, tradition, friends and yes, some even “addicted.” But for MOST, IMO, it’s not about addiction, in fact, MOST folks who are involved in three of the Big Four (alcohol, tea and coffee) have none to very little negative side affects. Its – in most cases I believe – about giving up their culture, traditions, friends and sometimes family relationships to follow a “wear a pink suit” commandment
that makes no sense. (we’ve already established on other WofW threads that one CANNOT argue this “commandment” based on a health code. it just does not pan out that way and doesn’t make any kind of logical sense , so I don’t think we need to hear those responses.) So I go back again and ask “the wise” — What place do those who choose NOT to follow it, for whatever reason, have in the church, and what can we say to those who leave because of it?
I just want to add. I really really like this thought. Brian Johnston wrote:The vitally important part of this discussion here is to see how many different approaches can lead to powerfully spiritual adaptation and change. Hopefully at some point, we will realize there is no way to “prove” the new universal and absolute boundary line in the Word of Wisdom. I’ve read through several different personal answers from people in this thread, both orthodox and “rebellious.” All of them have something in common that is very important — you are doing what you do for a reason, and that reason produces valuable results.
Some people continue to obey the WofW in the normal way, but *NOW* they are doing so with an actual reason that has deep meaning to them. They could drink tea or a beer, but they choose not to and they know why they choose not to. That is pure religion IMO.
Some people alter their practice of the WofW, and they are also doing this in a conscious way that has deep meaning. It could be about enjoyment, a sense of de-programming oneself (which can be powerful when done with a lot of self-reflection), or also seeking a direct relationship with God in regards to “commandments.”
Either way, or in paths in between, we should be doing what WE think is best — doing the best with what we have been given as life experience. We should test the boundaries of our heart and mind, and we should question our self above all in our journey. This is the essence of becoming comfortable in the new personal journey that starts after leaving the Conventional-Synthetic faith framework (aka “stage 3”).
Rix wrote:SamBee wrote:I’m not quite sure how beneficial black tea really is. I think it was a factor in my mother’s death.
As for coffee… it’s the acid which is also a problem. Like carbonated drinks, it has a tendency to eat the enamel on your teeth, with or without sugar. Coffee also dehydrates you and is a diuretic (unlike tea, which does hydrate you)
Of course there is always multiple factors…but, most nutritionists and medical scientists would argue that one of the worst long-term dietary problems we have in this country is refined sugar. And the Mormons are helping that statistic along!
Totally agree. It’s one of the causes of weight gain too.
Quote:As the DA stated so eloquently on another thread about the WofW — it is probably the biggest “deal breaker” and “cult like” issue in the church today. IN MY EXPERIENCE – I have seen perhaps 100’s of folks who use the WofW as an excuse not to join (baptismal covenant) and 100’s of members who feel uncomfortable attending church and go inactive because of the WofW. NO OTHER REASON (for many of them at least). How do we resolve that concern?
Yes, I get that for those who have lived it their whole lives, it’s not an issue. But that is not the case for MOST people on this planet. It IS an issue – cultural, family, tradition, friends and yes, some even “addicted.” But for MOST, IMO, it’s not about addiction, in fact, MOST folks who are involved in three of the Big Four (alcohol, tea and coffee) have none to very little negative side affects. Its – in most cases I believe – about giving up their culture, traditions, friends and sometimes family relationships to follow a “wear a pink suit” commandment that makes no sense. (we’ve already established on other WofW threads that one CANNOT argue this “commandment” based on a health code. it just does not pan out that way and doesn’t make any kind of logical sense , so I don’t think we need to hear those responses.)
Tea and coffee are fairly minor things in the big scheme of things (although I do have my misgivings, as said), and no one’s going to go to Hell for drinking them, IMHO, but alcohol is a big problem. Not for everyone, but for a large enough section of the population. It’s because it can be very addictive for some people (a financial argument) and also behavior altering.
I do agree with you that the WoW is a major reason people probably leave, or go inactive, but I don’t agree with you that it is the most cult-like issue. Since we’ve already delved into sex on another thread, we’re probably going to have to deal with this problem too on another one. Is the church a cult? Is it cult-like? I don’t believe it is in every sense, but there are certain aspects which lend themselves to this definition. But I wouldn’t say the WoW is one of them. Many Baptists, Methodists and Pentecostals drink no alcohol, but they don’t really have the cult stick waved at them (well, Pentecostals sometimes, maybe). I think the “ask no questions” matter is a far more cult-like tendency, and I think authoritarianism, where it exists in the church is another one. The church has a siege mentality, because of some of its doctrines, and because of misunderstandings, and because of some of the more ridiculous attacks on it (Ed Decker, anyone?). I think this siege mentality is a vicious circle.
cwald wrote:So I go back again and ask “the wise” — What place do those who choose NOT to follow it, for whatever reason, have in the church, and what can we say to those who leave because of it?
Hmm, I think these are good questions. Of course the answers here will be different than the “average” Mormon, but I try to look at things a little more long-term, big picture.I had this discussion with a neighbor last summer at a BBQ at my house. He is a GA’s son, former bishop, and very active — but apparently a little more free-thinking than most TBMs. He said that the church leadership is really wrestling with the WoW right now…particularly after the recent research showing the health benefits of coffee, green tea, and red wine. Of course it is a bit of a PR problem for the church…when they try to resolve the standard teaching that the WoW is/was inspired by an unchanging, all-knowing God, but today we learn that there are some good to certain substances contained in it.
Couple that with the “egg-on-the-face” if you suddenly “change” the teaching — what does that say about how “inspired” it was?! He said there is talk of reverting back to it being a “suggestion,” rather than a commandment…as it was originally. I also agree that is the best overall step to take. But like usual, it takes time with some “long-timers” in the leadership that probably struggle to change….
But it is very difficult to be accepted in church if you go home and crack open a cold brew. And if it really keeps some from joining, that can’t be good either. I guess time will tell what will happen….
Quote:particularly after the recent research showing the health benefits of coffee, green tea, and red wine.
Green tea seems to have a lot going for it. Red wine, less convinced, because it has to be consumed in small quantities – cheap stuff will wreck your head in the morning, and again, it has our old friend tannin in it. At least it doesn’t give you a gut, like beer.
Cafe coffee can give me heart palpitations though, which can’t be good. That and headaches and various other psychological side effects.
SamBee wrote:Quote:particularly after the recent research showing the health benefits of coffee, green tea, and red wine.
Green tea seems to have a lot going for it. Red wine, less convinced, because it has to be consumed in small quantities – cheap stuff will wreck your head in the morning, and again, it has our old friend tannin in it. At least it doesn’t give you a gut, like beer.
Cafe coffee can give me heart palpitations though, which can’t be good. That and headaches and various other psychological side effects.
Sheesh, you must be taking much more than average! I consume small amounts of each now (that wasn’t always the case), and am exercising more and eating better. I just had my physical last week. I’m healthier than ever! I attribute that to disobeying the “WoW!”
😆 Rix wrote:I just had my physical last week. I’m healthier than ever! I attribute that to disobeying the “WoW!”
😆 Very funny.
😆 😆 😆 Quote:A couple of things – and I am asking for your (or others) opinion, and I’m interested in what others here believe, so here goes – IF the WoW is a losing proposition, and a battle not worth fighting — what place do those who choose to not follow it have in the church?
I mean I respect those on this site who follow it. Most of you have stated honestly that “it’s not your issue” (sam being the exception?). What if it was your issue? What do we tell those who won’t join the church or leave it, because of the WofW? “It’s a losing proposition, and a battle not worth fighting.”
And MH, I’m saying this very sincerely and respectfully – I am interested in how you might, and others might respond to those people, and I don’t think that you or I would say that????
Cwald, I am really surprised that this is such a serious issue for you, but I’ll try to approach it with a scriptural example. Your arguments against the WoW seem to be similar to arguments that early Christians had in relation to the Law of Circumcision. Some Jews thought it was so important that Gentiles should be circumcised, while others, such as Paul argued against it. A compromise was reached in 50 AD: “the Jerusalem Church created a double standard: one for Jewish Christians and one for Gentile converts.” Jewish converts to Christianity had to be circumcised, while Greek Gentiles did not. See this Wikipedia link for more details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_controversy_in_early_Christianity So, while I understand your point that the WoW is not an eternal principle (and neither is circumcision), nevertheless, institutions run by men (whether they be ancient apostles, or modern ones), often make compromises according to the dictates of their inspiration (or lack of it.) I don’t see a way around it. God didn’t see fit to straighten out the early Christian regarding circumcision, and he hasn’t seen fit to straighten us out on the WoW, so to me, it just doesn’t seem to be worth fighting about it. If you were an ancient Greek wanting to partake of Christianity prior to 50 AD, you needed to become circumcised–surely a much more difficult practice to accept than giving up alcohol and coffee. Even following this decree in 50, the Apostle Paul participated in a circumcision in 54 AD. Paul continued to preach that circumcision was unnecessary, but
Quote:Paul, who called himself Apostle to the Gentiles, attacked the practice, though not consistently. In the case of Timothy, whose mother was Jewish Christian but whose father was Greek, he personally circumcised him “because of the Jews” that were in town. He also appeared to praise its value in Romans 3:1-2.
As you know, “cult like” is a term that many Mormons find objectionable. I would encourage you to use Puritanical, or Pharisaical–I think these terms are less pejorative, and get the same idea across. Jeff Spector just published an article at Mormon Matters titled, “Pharisaical Observation” that I think well applies to this discussion:
http://mormonmatters.org/2010/05/11/pharisaical-observation/ So, given the choice between adult circumcision and obeying the WoW, I’d say the WoW “is not a battle worth fighting.” It seems to me that you almost seem to have a testimony that the WoW shouldn’t be a baptismal requirement. While I agree that it wasn’t a requirement in the early church, and probably shouldn’t be a requirement, I guess I would follow Paul’s example and keep it ‘”because of the [Mormons]” that were in town.’
I guess I’d say to a potential convert–is that cup of coffee or bottle of wine worth denying yourself the blessings of fellowship with the saints and the blessings of the priesthood? It seems silly to give up the gospel for coffee, but I’m sure there are people that believe it is a principle of free agency to reject it. Well, CWald, do you really think coffee is worth giving up the blessings of disobedience of the WoW?
We can think of lots of past practices in the Bible that we don’t follow anymore, such as scapegoating, capital punishment for sabbath-breaking, not eating pork, etc. It seems to me that despite the fact that we have followed such principles that are now seen of little eternal consequence, they did serve a purpose for a time. If Rix is right that the upper echelons are trying to back away from the WoW, then perhaps we are in a similar decade as the debate about circumcision.
Quote:…If you were an ancient Greek wanting to partake of Christianity prior to 50 AD, you needed to become circumcised–surely a much more difficult practice to accept than giving up alcohol and coffee.
Even though this makes my groin ache, granted, it is a pretty good point you make.
Quote:As you know, “cult like” is a term that many Mormons find objectionable. I would encourage you to use Puritanical, or Pharisaical
Okay – fair enough.
Quote:It seems to me that you almost seem to have a testimony that the WoW shouldn’t be a baptismal requirement.
😮 Yes, I absolutely DO have a testimony that the WoW should not be a baptismal requirement, and I don’t apologize for it either.Thanks MH for the response – I appreciate your candor and opinion. Good food for thought.
Okay, Now I’ve got to go find another thread to rant about. I’m out of here.
😈 I’ll throw my personal opinion out there too that I don’t think the WofW, in particular the focus on avoiding four specific substances, should be a requirement for baptism. Baptism to me should be the “gateway” not the destination. We talk about it like that all the time … but then we go and make sure someone is near perfect (our myopic view of perfection in fact) before allowing them to even start down the path. Requirement for temple participation (or other higher, advanced ceremony or high-profile leadership positions)? I agree much more with that, even if that keeps me personally out. Those are supposed to be pinnacles of spiritual and religious achievement.
Rix wrote:SamBee wrote:Quote:particularly after the recent research showing the health benefits of coffee, green tea, and red wine.
Green tea seems to have a lot going for it. Red wine, less convinced, because it has to be consumed in small quantities – cheap stuff will wreck your head in the morning, and again, it has our old friend tannin in it. At least it doesn’t give you a gut, like beer.
Cafe coffee can give me heart palpitations though, which can’t be good. That and headaches and various other psychological side effects.
Sheesh, you must be taking much more than average! I consume small amounts of each now (that wasn’t always the case), and am exercising more and eating better. I just had my physical last week. I’m healthier than ever! I attribute that to disobeying the “WoW!”😆 No, seriously, it only takes a cup or two to do this. Stuff from cafes, and chain coffee shops. It’s stopped completely since I gave it up, but I did once or twice get blips from strong coffee. (One shot!) It also used to give me twitches when I went to sleep. I never get that now really.
The WoW is mild compared to most religions. Have you ever read Jewish and Muslim dietary law? Or even JWs (who have to be vegetarian)? Hindus have certain dietary restrictions (no beef/steak for example), and vow taking Buddhists are supposed to refrain from all stimulants (WoW stuff) and depressants, and often are vegetarian too.
What Brian said. I also wish WofW adherence wasn’t a baptismal requirement but only a temple requirement. However, it’s not currently, so I accept it for now and hope it changes in the future. Here’s a question: How much is the WofW really a baptismal requirement? Is it mission specific? Missionary specific? Bishop specific? I think so. The reason I wonder… several Sundays ago I heard a full time missionary state that “Billy Bob” was going to get baptised next Saturday. Someone else asked the question, “Did you teach him the WofW lesson yet?” Missionaries replied, “Yeah, why?” Other person said, “Well, I saw him walking down the road smoking a couple days ago.” Missionaries looked at each other and then said, “What day was it?” Other person said, “Thursday.” Missionaries said, “Well, that’s okay because he told us Thursday night that he’d had only a couple of cigarettes this week, but he’s quit now.” Someone else asked, “Have you taught the Law of Chastity yet, because he’s still living with ‘Daisy Mae’.” Missionaries replied that they were teaching him that lesson tonight.
Bottom line, the bishop pressed a little and “Billy Bob” met directly with the mission president that next week and got baptised the next Saturday as planned and we never saw him at church again until his wedding to said “Daisy Mae” a few weeks later, which occurred in the cultural hall, though “Billy” needed several breaks during the reception so he could go outside and smoke.
Obviously he never really quit.
I’m not saying that Billy Bob should or should not have been baptised, but just wondered if there was any specific guidelines as to what constituted obedience to WofW necessary for baptism. I kind of think it’s a “rely on the spirit” sort of thing, which in the case of CONVERT baptisms is left to exuberant missionaries who usually always feel the spirit to baptize people.
Amen, brother… and pass the stogie.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.