Jump to content
smac97

It's Official: Vaping is a No-Go for Latter-day Saints

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Mountain Dew is basically heroin.

Now you tell me?!! :unknw::(

Share this post


Link to post

 

16 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Moreover, what's with the "guilt-by-association" thing?  If the prohibition is against tea (as in camellia sinensis), then what difference does it make, from a WoW perspective, as to how the tea leaves are processed (black tea is oxidized, green tea is not)?

Thanks,

-Smac

It sounds like she thinks it is a different part of the same plant, rather than just the leaf unprocessed and processed.

Quote

And yet the explanation given for the church’s prohibition of green tea is essentially...that it’s bad because it is derived from the same plant as black tea.

A better argument would be to point to something okay in its natural state, but not okay after a particular process is applied...only thing occurring to me is making alcohol out of grain, but not really that close.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

.  I may not be explaining myself clearly, but do you see the distinction I am making?

Making the Word of Wisdom a catchall for physical health recommendations as many like to do goes outside the limits of the scripture itself, even if not outside the domain of prophets and leaders to teach and guide.

I understand why it is done just as the "Law of Chastity" makes it easy to talk about sexual behaviour without having to get into the specific behaviours.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The church should not have to command us in ultra-specific ways to be healthy.

26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.
27 Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;
28 For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.

29 But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned.

I take this scripture to mean the commandments are the minimum. They do not exalt.  They lead to Christ. Through Christ we become free, free to do more good then we thought possible. I did not understand how daunting the Lord’s question to the Brother of Jared was until I was praying about something important trying to help someone and got the distinct impression that God wanted to know what I thought should be done. Not in a “counsel your God” kind of way but a “stand on your own two feet and walk” kind of way. We see this weakness in some in the church. I know of people who want to do an objectively good thing but they pray and get no confirmation for it and go to the bishop wanting him to tell them what they should do.

Beyond a certain point the gospel branches out. The good things I can do are not the same as what someone else can. We have our own gifts. We keep the commandments but we move beyond into other realms of good that we can have a great impact in. To be clear I am not suggesting gospel hobbyism. It is more holistic then that.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

What part of the Word of Wisdom is violated? This sounds very much like the silliness that some used to say that Coca-Cola was against the WofW.

.....................................

Careful, Homey, my mother loved Coca-Cola.

Share this post


Link to post

Raw steak vs processed meats... block cheese vs cheese-whiz … apple juice vs hard apple cider.  Processing makes a difference , always has. My spouse has a bad reaction to wheat products, yet the WoW says wheat is good for man. Hmmmm.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, strappinglad said:

Raw steak vs processed meats... block cheese vs cheese-whiz … apple juice vs hard apple cider.  Processing makes a difference , always has. My spouse has a bad reaction to wheat products, yet the WoW says wheat is good for man. Hmmmm.

Thank you ( still no points to give, apparently I spent them all last night...add-on:  looks like they are back)

Apple juice vs Apple cider would be a useful example for Reiss' objection to excluding green tea as well as the black tea that was probably meant originally...though perhaps green tea was not uncommon then, so would have been included.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

Raw steak vs processed meats... block cheese vs cheese-whiz … apple juice vs hard apple cider.  Processing makes a difference , always has. My spouse has a bad reaction to wheat products, yet the WoW says wheat is good for man. Hmmmm.

Clearly you need to exorcise your spouse. Let us know how it goes.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Careful, Homey, my mother loved Coca-Cola.

I drank soda in various forms - coke, mountain dew, dr. pepper. The times I was reprimanded by Utah Mormons telling me that those drinks were against the WofW is countless. Their comments never made sense. I would consistently ask them to point it out to me in the 89th Section. It did not exist and never did exist. 

Please, drink your coke if you like it and feel good about it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Calm said:

Making the Word of Wisdom a catchall for physical health recommendations as many like to do goes outside the limits of the scripture itself, even if not outside the domain of prophets and leaders to teach and guide.

I understand why it is done just as the "Law of Chastity" makes it easy to talk about sexual behaviour without having to get into the specific behaviours.

I do understand the idea, but I draw a line on telling others that the scriptures say so. It creates a problem when they actually read the Section or scriptures cited and it is not there. We need to be clear about these things.  Individuals can share opinion, but they may not create new scripture.  It undermines their position and the meaning of truth. 

We can and should still counsel our youth on health issues, but do it within the proper context and on the right foundation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I drank soda in various forms - coke, mountain dew, dr. pepper. The times I was reprimanded by Utah Mormons telling me that those drinks were against the WofW is countless. Their comments never made sense. I would consistently ask them to point it out to me in the 89th Section. It did not exist and never did exist. 

Please, drink your coke if you like it and feel good about it. 

My late wife was hooked on Pepsi, especially fresh, on tap at a Maverik station.  She'd get a headache if she didn't get her fix.

Share this post


Link to post

Few people know this historical fact, but there was a type of "moving daguerreotype" technology briefly in the 1850's.  We've recently discovered one made in Utah, of Governor Brigham Young addressing the saints.  Entitled "A Preachment on John Barleycorn, nicotene, and the temptations of Eve" (Colorized)

 

Edited by LoudmouthMormon

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

do understand the idea, but I draw a line on telling others that the scriptures say so

I think it would be helpful to explain as part of our manuals The Word of Wisdom starts with Section 89 as a basis, but has been built up with additional counsel from prophets, including even when Joseph was alive with hot drinks being defined by Hyrum as coffee and tea and then later we get added....

Thus The Word of Wisdom (not Section 89) is considered a commandment while Section 89 was not and probably shouldn't be as given (since that is what it says).

We need to stop calling Section 89 The Word of Wisdom, imo.  It is a word of wisdom, just as we have multiple "a new and everlasting" covenants and these may vary over time though they all contribute to The New and Everlasting Covenant.

But most members define The Word of Wisdom as Section 89 so me preaching Section 89 is NOT The Word of Wisdom, but only a word of wisdom would probably be inappropriate new doctrine.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Calm said:

I think it would be helpful to explain as part of our manuals The Word of Wisdom starts with Section 89 as a basis, but has been built up with additional counsel from prophets, including even when Joseph was alive with hot drinks being defined by Hyrum as coffee and tea and then later we get added....

Thus The Word of Wisdom (not Section 89) is considered a commandment while Section 89 was not and probably shouldn't be as given (since that is what it says).

We need to stop calling Section 89 The Word of Wisdom, imo.  It is a word of wisdom, just as we have multiple "a new and everlasting" covenants and these may vary over time though they all contribute to The New and Everlasting Covenant.

But most members define The Word of Wisdom as Section 89 so me preaching Section 89 is NOT The Word of Wisdom, but only a word of wisdom would probably be inappropriate new doctrine.

This.

Vaping is not against the Word of Wisdom scripture. 

It's against the Word of Wisdom Church administrative policy today.

Word of Wisdom 2.0 but not the orginal.  Updated in this article to include iced drinks, vaping, and green tea. As opposed to the unofficial supplements of past years such as caffeine, chocolate and soda.

So enjoy the health benefits of snickers, mountain dew, and a nice steak (8oz max).  But avoid the sugar free anti oxidant rich health benefits of green tea.

None of which is in D&C 89.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Nutritionists and medical professionals cannot decide what healthy living is like

Exactly Nehor, and that's the reason we have thousands of different "diet plans" no Doctor or nutritionist agrees with the other.  They'll tell you don't eat eggs there is to much cholesterol, the other ones say that eggs are a "superfood"....LOL. 

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, smac97 said:

The same part, I think, that prohibits meth and heroin.

Did you read the article?  Did you review the potential risks associated with vaping?

Then why are you labeling guidance against it as "silliness?"

I don't understand this.  Isn't the Word of Wisdom intended to help us lead healthier lives?

Thanks,

-Smac

In truth, the Word of Wisdom is NOT about physically healthy lives. It is about helping us keep our spirits ready to receive revelation. Yes, the Lord wants us to live as long as possible (in our mortal form), but He is even more interested in our being able to hear and feel the Holy Ghost. A drunk or addicted person (regardless what the substance) is not in a place to recognize the voice of the Spirit and, therefore, cannot be in tune with the revelations of God. Better health is just a side benefit for those who obey the WofW. mw (P.S. Remember that there are many good people who live the WofW and still suffer physical maladies)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, smac97 said:

Most vaping pods contain nicotine, which is highly addictive, and all of them contain harmful chemicals. Vaping is clearly against the Word of Wisdom.”

Even if they did not contain those things this might also be one of those avoiding the appearance of evil sort of things (1 Thessalonians 5:22)

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Grundelwalken said:

In truth, the Word of Wisdom is NOT about physically healthy lives.

I think it is.  The Gospel encourages us to keep our physical bodies healthy.  The Word of Wisdom is part of that.

Just now, Grundelwalken said:

It is about helping us keep our spirits ready to receive revelation.

I agree.  But it's not either/or.  A person whose physical body is unhealthy (such as by being addicted to a mind-altering substance) is not really situated well to receive revelation.

Just now, Grundelwalken said:

Yes, the Lord wants us to live as long as possible (in our mortal form), but He is even more interested in our being able to hear and feel the Holy Ghost. A drunk or addicted person (regardless what the substance) is not in a place to recognize the voice of the Spirit and, therefore, cannot be in tune with the revelations of God. Better health is just a side benefit for those who obey the WofW.

I don't think better physical health just "just a side benefit."  I think the Word of Wisdom is intended to foster both spiritual and physical health. From the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

Quote

Word of Wisdom is the common title for a revelation that counsels Latter-day Saints on maintaining good health and is published as Doctrine and Covenants...

...

Those who follow this counsel and keep the other commandments of God are promised that they will have "health in their navel and marrow to their bones," "shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint," "shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures," and "the destroying angel shall pass by them…and not slay them" (D&C 89:18-21; cf. Dan. 1:3-20;2:19-30).

The promises associated with the Word of Wisdom are considered both temporal and spiritual. The temporal promise has been interpreted as better health, and the spiritual promise as a closer relationship to God. These promises reflect the concern of the Church with both the temporal and spiritual Welfare of its members. They also reflect God's concern with the condition of the physical body of every person, paralleling aspects of other religious health codes defining types of foods forbidden for health and spiritual reasons.

...

Church leaders universally caution against any use of such drugs as marijuana and cocaine and the abuse of prescription drugs. While none of these substances are mentioned specifically in the Word of Wisdom, the concept of the sanctity of the body and the deleterious effects of chemical substances on it have been emphasized as an extension of the Word of Wisdom.

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Calm said:

Thank you ( still no points to give, apparently I spent them all last night...add-on:  looks like they are back)

Apple juice vs Apple cider would be a useful example for Reiss' objection to excluding green tea as well as the black tea that was probably meant originally...though perhaps green tea was not uncommon then, so would have been included.

Interestingly, the New Era articles states that the difference between black tea and green tea is that the leaves have been fermented.

Isn't that also the difference between wine and grape juice?  Fermenting?

By New Era logic, grape juice should also be prohibited by the Word of Wisdom.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Interestingly, the New Era articles states that the difference between black tea and green tea is that the leaves have been fermented.

Isn't that also the difference between wine and grape juice?  Fermenting?

By New Era logic, grape juice should also be prohibited by the Word of Wisdom.

 

You mean fermented grape juice after the EtOH is evaporated out leaving a dehydrated product that can be reconstituted into a harmless, tea-like facsimile?

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, CV75 said:

You mean fermented grape juice after the EtOH is evaporated out leaving a dehydrated product that can be reconstituted into a harmless, tea-like facsimile?

I'm not understanding your point.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, rockpond said:

Interestingly, the New Era articles states that the difference between black tea and green tea is that the leaves have been fermented.

Isn't that also the difference between wine and grape juice?  Fermenting?

By New Era logic, grape juice should also be prohibited by the Word of Wisdom.

 

You are misunderstanding the New Era's point.

I don't think they are making the distinction because they believe that the fermented tea leaves are what make black tea prohibited.  I think they are only saying that green tea and black are both the exact same thing, just processed differently.  There are a lot of members who believe that black tea is wrong but green tea is fine.  The magazine is making the point that both are the same product, though treated differently, so neither are allowed.

Edited by bluebell
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, bluebell said:

You are misunderstanding the New Era's point.

I don't think they are making the distinction because they believe that the fermented tea leaves are what make black tea prohibited.  I think they are only saying that green tea and black are both the exact same thing, just processed differently.  There are a lot of members who believe that black tea is wrong but green tea is fine.  The magazine is making the point that both are the same product, though treated differently, so neither are allowed.

No, I’m agreeing with you on the point that the New Era is making. 

Black tea and green tea are made from the same leaves, but one is fermented and the other is not. 

My point is they similarly, grape juice and wine are both made from grapes, but one is fermented and the other is not.  

Why does the fermentation not make a different when it comes to tea leaves but it does make a difference when it comes to grapes?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...