Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smac97

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

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

 Oh boy, am I becoming the male equivalent of a crazy cat lady?

That is only dawning on you now?  😛

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, rockpond said:

And, if something is unhealthy and/or addictive, aren't we capable of abstaining (and teaching our children to abstain) without it needing to be a part of the WoW?

 

And yet there are kids vaping, so apparently not. 

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Calm said:

And yet there are kids vaping, so apparently not. 

Yes, and people are drinking alcohol and coffee as well. 

My point was that as Saints, we shouldn’t need every unhealthy thing added to the “no” list in the WoW. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

We know he changed it because the prophet changed it. You could pray about it I suppose if you think it is the next blood atonement.

So the Word is Wisdom has changed and we know it was the Lord behind the change because the prophet changed it.  CFR of where the prophet changed the WoW. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

That is only dawning on you now?  😛

If I ever call them fur babies I want someone to euthanize me as soon as possible. You will be doing me a favor. It is kinder that way.

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

So the Word is Wisdom has changed and we know it was the Lord behind the change because the prophet changed it.  CFR of where the prophet changed the WoW. 

Not so much changed as clarified to cover new situations but yes, the apostles were involved in the decision and sought the counsel of the Lord. As to your CFR here is a video of the prophet signing off on the new interpretation from a news site:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, rockpond said:

Yes, and people are drinking alcohol and coffee as well. 

My point was that as Saints, we shouldn’t need every unhealthy thing added to the “no” list in the WoW. 

I am specifically only concerned about kids whose brains aren’t fully formed Yet so need different treatment than adults imo.  This was published in the New Era, obviously the concern was targeted towards kids, not adults  

You said we should trust the parents to teach the kids to avoid it. That is not working for many. Vaping can be dangerous for kids, especially since it can lead to smoking. Certainly we don’t need every unhealthy thing on the no list, but a commonly misused one by kids who haven’t yet formed the thought processes well enough to make wise decisions about their long term health?  Not seeing the harm of helping parents out with kids who need extra or giving kids caring and support if they have crap parents who don’t care enough themselves 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The Word of Wisdom is an evolving thing. Of course God could add directly to it. He has chosen not to.

First you said that the WoW is evolving and that God could add to it but has chosen not to. 

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

He said it through his prophets who clarified it.

When I said God did not directly change it I mean he did not directly change the text. I believe he is behind changes.

I did not say the lord did not alter the command. I said he did not alter the text.

Then you said that though God didn't change the text, the clarified it through his prophets.

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

We know he changed it because the prophet changed it. 

How do we know?  You explained that we know God clarified it because the prophet changed it.

6 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Not so much changed as clarified to cover new situations

So I am gathering that each time you used "changed" you didn't really mean to use that, you meant "clarified".

6 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

but yes, the apostles were involved in the decision and sought the counsel of the Lord.

So the apostles were involved in the decision to clarify the WoW and they sought the counsel of the Lord.

Are you suggesting that they then had these clarifications revealed to them and so they decided to publish them anonymously in the New Era?

6 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

As to your CFR here is a video of the prophet signing off on the new interpretation from a news site:

So I take it you are not able to provide any support to your claim that the apostles received these recent clarifications from the Lord?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Calm said:

I am specifically only concerned about kids whose brains aren’t fully formed Yet so need different treatment than adults imo.  This was published in the New Era, obviously the concern was targeted towards kids, not adults

I agree.

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

You said we should trust the parents to teach the kids to avoid it. That is not working for many. Vaping can be dangerous for kids, especially since it can lead to smoking. Certainly we don’t need every unhealthy thing on the no list, but a commonly misused one by kids who haven’t yet formed the thought processes well enough to make wise decisions about their long term health?  Not seeing the harm. 

I'm okay with the church teaching kids to avoid these harmful substances and habits.  I just don't think we should be inserting them into the Lord's revealed word and pretending that this is part of His Word of Wisdom without His express revelation to so indicate. For me, it weakens true revelation for us to take an existing revelation and add our own words, beliefs, and philosophies and claim that the Lord "clearly" meant them to be there.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

I think you missed the point of that list which is even clear commands have unclear boundary cases. For the record I don't care about restaurant cake, cherries, or sauces typically. And I'll occasionally drink kobacha and vinegar for the effect on gut flora.

As for worthiness, if part of this life is learning obedience to God, then some commands that we don't fully understand may be important to follow. If everything were obvious it wouldn't be much of a test nor a way to develop our character in a place of ignorance.  

As to why God does that, I think he's trying to teach us something. I'm constantly reminded of the old story of David Lee Roth of Van Halen. He'd make a list of demands for a venue and one of the demands would be the ridiculous one of a bowl of M&Ms with all the brown ones removed. He'd actually check this every time. It turned out that the reason he did this was because their shows had a lot of dangerous special effects where people could and did get injured if things were prepared right. The test was to see how careful and conscientious the staff at the venue were. If they didn't do the M&Ms because they didn't understand what was going on, they almost certainly wouldn't do properly all the rigging and so forth. The particular test of obedience was arbitrary but was ultimately more about something deeper.

While some elements of the Word of Wisdom really were practical and about health, I think in practice it is to help us have something obvious and easy to learn obedience. Not, as with Roth, as a way for God to know if we have that character, but for us to come and understand. It's developing a key aspect of our personality in the midsts of a biological personality and ignorance.

For the record, I'm convinced that "hot drinks" in the original D&C 89 was about literally hot drinks and thus would include hot possum and other such things. However I think how the Word of Wisdom became transformed in the 1920s & 30s was both about the danger of conspiring minds using alcohol, tobacco and so forth (all mostly demonstrable IMO) but also creating separation signifiers for our community. What had once separated us had mostly disappeared (primarily marriage and economic orders) and we had something to replace it. I think that also was and remains an important element. (I think garments function in a similar way although I think they have other functions)

In saying all that I recognize that for many, especially of the upcoming generation, the very idea of obedience as a good is intrinsically denied and sometimes found repellant. I disagree and think culturally we're coming to have to problematic attitudes. People are coming to see only what is immediately useful to the Individual in an obvious way as of value.

No, I clearly understood what you meant.  And I understand the concept of some arbitrary rule just to test obedience to God.  I think a lot of the Jewish laws that creeped in was probably thought about in a similar way.  I guess I have a different view of what God wants us to accomplish on this earth.  He doesn't need obedience for obedience sake.  He needs us to change our hearts.   To have charity.  To think outside ourselves. We have plenty of commandments to test our obedience to God without inventing artificial ones.

As far as the changes on the WoW in the 20's and 30's, I think it is strictly a decision made during the frenzy of prohibition.  It was a different time across the country with dry counties and dry states, and eventually a dry nation.  Claiming revelation from God has it's pluses and minuses.  It gives authority to Church policy, but it makes it difficult to change Church policy when the policy no longer works or looses its value.  How do you tell everyone that the commandment is no longer a commandment when the Church placed such incredible emphasis on it.  I think it is pretty clear that in this day and age, if you were going to come up with a health law, coffee and tea would probably not be listed.  And I agree with you.  I think originally hot drinks were what was advised against.  That too was a product of the times.   Many people in that time period thought it was healthy to only drink room temperature beverages.  If refrigerators had been invented by then, there would probably have been a prohibition against drinking cold beverages as well.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It is but the members demand it and, in the case of a youth trend like vaping, I can see being a little more explicit. The judgement center in teen brains is still in the oven and not quite done.

Oh I don't disagree with this one bit.  And I would think it wise for the church to advise against vaping.  I just don't think it should be tied to a commandment.  Does everything have to be a commandment before they are taken seriously.  If that is true, then that is another big issue that needs to be addressed.

 

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I think if you stood before God and said that his response would be to ask how you did on the other commandments. When you point out the ones you did not keep perfectly he would ask if that failure led you to Christ’s atonement.

While obedience to the commandments is important it is even more important that the attempts to keep those commandments lead you to the Savior. Anyone who seriously and honestly attempts to keep all the commandments finds themself coming up short. This can lead to despair or to a true understanding of the atonement and how the commandments are set up in a way so that only with the Savior’s help can we ever keep them. I do wonder if the simple questions in the Temple Recommend process are designed that way for this reason. They are not difficult to answer one way or the other. If you asked me if I was sufficiently bearing the burdens of my neighbor or whether I was filled with charity for God and all men I would have to think a lot and probably answer no. Instead we have some commandments that are relatively simple and concrete yes/no inquiries. Maybe the Temple Recommend questions are more of a test of: “Are you trying to live the commandments sufficiently to tackle the simple ones so that you will/are/have turned to Christ to make you whole and capable of obeying all the commandments?” The Law of carnal commandments is still the schoolmaster to Christ even if it is not as strict and time consuming as the Law of the Torah from Sinai.

As to how random the commandments seem I suspect that this world is the only one in all of creation that fell this far. It is oddball. It should feel constricting and almost nonsensical. It almost explains why so many who come here are so debilitated. I will stop before I veer off into probable heresy. ;) 

I can agree with most of what you are saying.  And I think the key question you ask is do your attempts to keep those commandments lead you to the Savior. When attempts to keep the commandments and we fail, does that always bring us closer to the Savior?  If a person has a smoking addiction, do they feel so guilty over that one issue that it keeps them from attending church?  Does it make them feel separated and unworthy to approach God "once again" about their addiction?  Does a youth feel like they can't participate in the sacrament because they have a tattoo or because they vaped?  

I know a woman who as a teenager had a CTR tattooed on her ankle.  It was before the church came out against tattoos.  I always wondered how she handled that.  Did every time she looked at it make her feel guilty?  Did others judge her as being unworthy?  Did that tattoo bring her closer to Christ or make her feel like she couldn't approach Him?  

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I envy you. As much as I like my sugar gliders they alone are not an enticement to long life. Oh boy, am I becoming the male equivalent of a crazy cat lady?

I think you passed the crazy cat lady long ago.  

Edit to add:  I see that Calm saw the irony of your question before me.  I don't want to pile it on.  We love your cat lady quirkiness 😁

Edited by california boy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If a bunch of UFO enthusiasts go up on a hill at night to spot UFOs they always see UFOs.

There is a reason controlled studies are the gold standard.

And this. People lie on the Internet all the time. A preponderance of anecdotes is not evidence, especially when there are so many people with a vested financial interest in legalization. Add in a bunch of people who want it to be legal for personal reasons and you have a perfect environment for pseudoscience.

Always be extra skeptical of questionable evidence that supports something you want to believe.

My late wife was really into alternative medicine, and spent a fair amount of money studying the various alternative alternatives. Heh.  She actually got a certificate in Nutritional Therapy, which involved a year-long syllabus, including lectures and a fair amount of serious study.  I'm a bit of a sciency person, and I spent some effort trying to follow what she was learning, and for the most part it was not bad stuff. I remember one important point they made, and that was that this branch of therapy was largely preventative, and although there were some nutritional therapies taught that were effective in actually helping with treating some illnesses (and they were VERY careful in saying things like this, in order to avoid charges of "practicing medicine without a license"), there came a point where people needed to transition over from "holistic nutrition" to actual medicine and doctors.

There are other, much less palatable, outfits out there which are blatantly deceiving people and collecting money while doing it.  After my wife's cancer was diagnosed, she seemed to forget what she had learned as a nutritional therapist, and started digging into some of those deceptive philosophies. 

One was an herbal concoction called Essiac, supposedly an Indian cure for cancer. You can buy the stuff online, but you can also make your own.  She made her own, and it didn't help at all.  When I investigated it further, I found that the person after whom it was named (a woman with the last name Caisse) sold the formula to a Canadian pharmceutical company. This company actually tried to do a legitimate study of the formula, and found that they got mixed results: some people with cancer improved; some people had no change; and some people's cancer got worse.  In short, it was pharmacologically worthless.  But there are people making money selling books, components and lectures on the stuff, even now.  Of course, the stuff didn't help my wife at all -- we (yes, I helped her) made it strictly according to the recipe, and she drank the stuff as recommended.  After I found out that the stuff had been proven to be useless, I stopped helping her with it.

She also got a hold of a book "The Cure for All Cancers" by some whackjob biochemist named Hulda Clark.  And yes, the woman was an actual PhD biochemist, so she should have known better.  Either that or she was delusional.  Anyway, this whackjob wrote this book, and my wife was going to follow her program, which included a "medical device" that could be bought on the internet (or built yourself if you could do basic electronics assembly). So I read the first chapter of the whackjob's book: it was complete and utter crap.  But, to give credit where it is due, it was well-written, sounded scientifically literate (she was a PhD, after all), included lots of nifty diagrams, and looked quite believable.  IF, and this is a really big IF, you were unable to look things up on the internet and were critical-thinking impaired.  As apparently quite a few people are.  In short, Dr. Clark's claim was that all cancers are caused by parasites. And not just any parasite, she had a particular parasite in mind.  This parasite was Fasciolopsis buski.  She claimed that if you had cancer, no matter what kind, then you were infested with this parasite.  And if you got rid of the parasite, then you would go into remission and be cured.  Yay!  I'm tempted to explain her methods, but I will just say that they don't matter, because Fasciolopsis buski is a southeast Asian parasite that requires three life stages to propagate, and if one stage host is absent it cannot progress and eventually dies, case closed.  Oh, but she had an explanation for that: apparently this parasite changes its life cycle in the presence of propyl alcohol, so one way to help prevent infestation is to avoid taking in propyl alcohol.  Get rid of shampoos and suchlike that contain it.

Oh, and what did Dr. Clark die of?  Cancer of course. You can still find her books for sale, and there are a number of herbal outfits selling concoctions made according to her recipes.  

The Crap is Out There.  Literally.   <=== that's a shout-out to the X-Files, by the way

Sorry for the long diatribe, I get really upset with the way my wife decided to handle her cancer, and with the scam artists out there who victimize those in desperate need.  Including those who disparage modern medicine in favor of things that have never been proven to work.  Makes the old bloodletters look like geniuses of the first order.

NOTE: I'm not saying that all alternative therapies are useless, and that there are no treatments out there which might be effective at this or that.  I'm just saying, BE AWARE, BE CAREFUL, AND DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ.

Edited by Stargazer
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

She alsgot a hold of a book "The Cure for All Cancers" by some whackjob biochemist named Hulda Clark.  And yes, the woman was an actual PhD biochemist, so she should have known better.  Either that or she was delusional.  Anyway, this whackjob wrote this book, and my wife was going to follow her program, which included a "medical device" that could be bought on the internet (or built yourself if you could do basic electronics assembly). So I read the first chapter of the whackjob's book: it was complete and utter crap.  But, to give credit where it is due, it was well-written, sounded scientifically literate (she was a PhD, after all), included lots of nifty diagrams, and looked quite believable.  IF, and this is a really big IF, you were unable to look things up on the internet and were critical-thinking impaired.  As apparently quite a few people are.“

My Mom is one of them, though it was more experimental than swear by it. She believed you could find truth anywhere so she assumed truth was everywhere. And if the person was sincere and told a story of overcoming odds, well she trusted because she is a good woman with a good heart and can’t imagine why someone would scam others in her gut even if intellectually she accepts it.  She kept herself functional by focusing the n the basics of good nutrition and keeping physically active. The other stuff she tried to see if it would help make things easier just as she would try what the doctors suggested.  She went the route of alternative as well because some of what traditional treatments went horribly wrong.  I think I finally dumped the machine she gave me for getting rid of the parasites (yeah, I argued it would work, but she is not trained in science so someone nice telling her it did work meant as much...especially since she had miracles occur with priesthood blessings which science would say wouldn’t work either and yet did.  That plus the mistakes science trained doctors made on her, she knew science didn’t know everything. 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, california boy said:

Oh I don't disagree with this one bit.  And I would think it wise for the church to advise against vaping.  I just don't think it should be tied to a commandment.  Does everything have to be a commandment before they are taken seriously.  If that is true, then that is another big issue that needs to be addressed.

 

I can agree with most of what you are saying.  And I think the key question you ask is do your attempts to keep those commandments lead you to the Savior. When attempts to keep the commandments and we fail, does that always bring us closer to the Savior?  If a person has a smoking addiction, do they feel so guilty over that one issue that it keeps them from attending church?  Does it make them feel separated and unworthy to approach God "once again" about their addiction?  Does a youth feel like they can't participate in the sacrament because they have a tattoo or because they vaped?  

I know a woman who as a teenager had a CTR tattooed on her ankle.  It was before the church came out against tattoos.  I always wondered how she handled that.  Did every time she looked at it make her feel guilty?  Did others judge her as being unworthy?  Did that tattoo bring her closer to Christ or make her feel like she couldn't approach Him?  

It does not always work but I am convinced this is the primary path to accepting the Savior’s atonement and desperately needing it. The risk is worth it. Some have a sentimental fondness for Christ without going down this road but I really doubt that saves anyone. The realization that one is unworthy is also vital. As you say it can lead to despair as well but it also opens up the strait and narrow.

9 hours ago, california boy said:

I think you passed the crazy cat lady long ago.  

Edit to add:  I see that Calm saw the irony of your question before me.  I don't want to pile it on.  We love your cat lady quirkiness 😁

I prefer to think that is my ADHD and not my singleness. Please do not take away my delusions. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, california boy said:

And I understand the concept of some arbitrary rule just to test obedience to God.  I think a lot of the Jewish laws that creeped in was probably thought about in a similar way.  I guess I have a different view of what God wants us to accomplish on this earth.  He doesn't need obedience for obedience sake.  He needs us to change our hearts.   To have charity.  To think outside ourselves. We have plenty of commandments to test our obedience to God without inventing artificial ones.

I don't think he needs obedience for obedience sake. I think he is trying to teach faith though which means giving us limitations and asking us to trust him. As I said I think there's also secondary effects - particularly after the end of polygamy and the united order. I think it contributed to a kind of group identity helping develop a community identity. Jewish codes also created a separation from surrounding cultures. So while I think he needs us to change our hearts, I think it's primarily in terms of developing a certain relationship with him we couldn't do in his presence. I don't think it's merely becoming ethical and charitable, although clearly that's a part.

Going off on a bit of a tangent, I do worry that religion is being transformed into not being about faith in God but charity/ethics only in short term immediacy. Admittedly new norms are developing out of that, much as they did with Christianity. However one thing I really fear about the present moment is immediacy being the prime determinative factor of what gets accepted or rejected.

Edited by clarkgoble
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/15/2019 at 5:59 AM, snowflake said:

Agreed, this whole somewhat silly conversation about tea, coffee, iced tea, caffeine free iced coffee etc...etc.. seems so legalistic and dare I say ...like the Pharisees. Silly arguing about what one can put in their body when  we are told in Mark 7:15 nothing you put in your body can defile you.

 

 15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

Exactly, you technically aren't defiled until it's been completely digested and passed.

In all seriousness in Acts 15, the Jerusalem Conference determined that there would be dietary restrictions for adherence of the [Christian] Way, for both Jew and Gentile and sent their decision abroad. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/15/2019 at 7:42 PM, JLHPROF said:

Given the obesity and diabetes epidemic in almost all of western civilization perhaps the Church should add them back in officially this time.

They are far worse for health than any tea or coffee.  I don't think health is the primary concern as long as tea is a sin and soda is permitted.  Some other doctrinal principle must be behind these pronouncements. 

Personally, I've dropped 30lbs by dropping soda.

You're my favorite, so it make me sad to see you saying the same talking points as exmos re: soda/coffee.

If you've ever been in a Starbucks, you know that most people order coffees with more sugar, cream, and sweeteners than most sodas.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 8/16/2019 at 3:47 PM, clarkgoble said:

For the record, I'm convinced that "hot drinks" in the original D&C 89 was about literally hot drinks and thus would include hot possum and other such things.

If the word of wisdom prohibits drinking hot possums I'm all on board... ;) 

ETA: I see Mark beat me to the joke...

Edited by MiserereNobis
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/16/2019 at 11:44 PM, rockpond said:

So I am gathering that each time you used "changed" you didn't really mean to use that, you meant "clarified".

This is how Catholics justify the pronouncements of the ecumenical councils over the centuries. They aren't saying something new, they aren't adding to what Christ and the Apostles taught, they are simply clarifying how the truth of the gospel applies to specific questions and situations.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

If the word of wisdom prohibits drinking hot possums I'm all on board... ;) 

The original manuscript for D&C 89 prohibited the drinking of any marsupial, but this was strangely left out of the published version. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 8/16/2019 at 10:27 PM, The Nehor said:

Not so much changed as clarified to cover new situations but yes, the apostles were involved in the decision and sought the counsel of the Lord. As to your CFR here is a video of the prophet signing off on the new interpretation from a news site:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ

I don't know if this was a joke that went over my head or just a change in a link- but this link does not seem to go where you intended.

Edit:

Well knowing you I should have guessed and I guess I did sort of...  ;)

My daughter heard the song come on from the other room and she said "Did you get Rick rolled"??

Augh!  Got me!

I do not speak Millenial very well....  ;)

Edited by mfbukowski
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, jpv said:

You're my favorite, so it make me sad to see you saying the same talking points as exmos re: soda/coffee.

If you've ever been in a Starbucks, you know that most people order coffees with more sugar, cream, and sweeteners than most sodas.

The WoW has become an obedience test, not a law of health.  That's my only point.

That and the ongoing issues with assumption of revelation vs. revelation.

And most Starbucks customers don't actually like coffee.  You're right, it's all about the sugar and cream.  I just dislike using hypocritical standards to push a policy while simultaneously claiming it's God's updated word.

Just be honest and admit it's an obedience policy, not a revelatory health law any more.

Edited by JLHPROF
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I sense some faith crises about to hit. Better get a gospel topic essay up ASAP! The anti-mormons have already registered a website devoted to this historical cover-up: mormonsandmarsupials.com

That is why I have marsupials as pets. If I ever decide to sin I can drink their urine I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, jpv said:

You're my favorite, so it make me sad to see you saying the same talking points as exmos re: soda/coffee.

If you've ever been in a Starbucks, you know that most people order coffees with more sugar, cream, and sweeteners than most sodas.

You have no idea what you are talking about. The vast majority of coffee consumed is brewed. Many (1/3) drink that black. Those that add sugar add a teaspoon or two. A 12 ounce root beer has 11 teaspoons of sugar!

Does Starbucks sell junky coffee? Yes! Is that representative of what most drink. No. 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...