The New WoW Question

[SettingDogStar 410]

Per the update 

“11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?”

The new way this is worded ignores anything about Coffee and Tea and is pointing directly at the revelation itself. 

So, I’d like your thoughts, is iced coffee, tea, and beer back in the table? Is Starbucks about to have a large influx of Mormons getting their cold coffee chops on? Or no? 

I joke, but seriously. What do you think? Is it just a simple reword or does it have implications?

[Calm 33,441]

3 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Per the update 

“11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?”

The new way this is worded ignores anything about Coffee and Tea and is pointing directly at the revelation itself. 

 

Not really.  The policy is known as the Word of Wisdom, imo, as much as the scripture.

Edited October 7 by Calm

[SettingDogStar 410]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not really.  The policy is known as the Word of Wisdom, imo, as much as the scripture.

Which is odd to me since technically there isn’t anything actually written. What bishops or SP allow varies, sometimes wildly, between areas of the world. Whereas if we just relied on the scripture, or at least it’s orignal interpretation, it’s pretty clear to me.

However, I have NO problem with it being either edited or a new revelation added about it. I just think it’s completely confusing when the policy doesn’t always match the actual scriptures. I had investigators get confused too haha

[Calm 33,441]

8 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Which is odd to me since technically there isn’t anything actually written

You mean as a policy?

[SettingDogStar 410]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

You mean as a policy?

Well kind of yeah. Because while we have something in the Handbook (I think, can’t remember) it obviously allows for decent leeway. It also wasn’t canonized (if there is something in a handbook) and the policies/interpretations of the WoW have changed many many times (which i think we’re aware of.)

Again, I have no problem with updating the WoW. However, it needs to be updated a little more openly. Investigators I had were very confused when we would tell them the requirements for baptism and then they’d actually read the thing.

Edited October 7 by SettingDogStar

[MustardSeed 1,570]

I think I will answer that I understand it and believe it but usually don’t follow.  I cannot get out of bed early. 

[SettingDogStar 410]

1 minute ago, MustardSeed said:

I think I will answer that I understand it and believe it but usually don’t follow.  I cannot get out of bed early. 

Well you’re good to go cause the WoW doesn’t mentioned getting out of bed early! Haha Cause otherwise I’d be in trouble too.

[JAHS 3,228]

3 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

5 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I think I will answer that I understand it and believe it but usually don’t follow.  I cannot get out of bed early. 

Well you’re good to go cause the WoW doesn’t mentioned getting out of bed early! Haha Cause otherwise I’d be in trouble too.

That's in D&C 88: 124
"Cease to be idle; cease to be unclean; cease to find fault one with another; cease to sleep longer than is needful; retire to thy bed early, that ye may not be weary; arise early, that your bodies and your minds may be invigorated."

It does say cease to sleep long than is needful. Some of us need more sleep than others. 😉

[Tacenda 3,406]

32 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Per the update 

“11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?”

The new way this is worded ignores anything about Coffee and Tea and is pointing directly at the revelation itself. 

So, I’d like your thoughts, is iced coffee, tea, and beer back in the table? Is Starbucks about to have a large influx of Mormons getting their cold coffee chops on? Or no? 

I joke, but seriously. What do you think? Is it just a simple reword or does it have implications?

I bet it just enables questions and clears up the confusion.

[SettingDogStar 410]

Just now, JAHS said:

That's in D&C 88: 124
"Cease to be idle; cease to be unclean; cease to find fault one with another; cease to sleep longer than is needful; retire to thy bed early, that ye may not be weary; arise early, that your bodies and your minds may be invigorated."

It does say cease to sleep long than is needful. Some of us need more sleep than others. 😉

Ah, but that isn’t the Word of Wisdom section my dear friend. Though I do agree! 

[longview 645]

The "Penumbra" of the scriptural Word of Wisdom means to me that we should not take any stimulants or something toxic or mind altering.  So in the last several years I have weaned myself OFF soda drinks, sugary crap, excessive meat, artificial substances, etc.  I have been looking closely at the RDA and the list of ingredients.  I am pointedly ruling out High Fructose Corn Syrup, any sodium chloride higher than 3%, artificial sweeteners, petrochemical byproducts, dangerous sounding preservatives . . .

[JLHPROF 9,513]

32 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Per the update 

“11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?”

The new way this is worded ignores anything about Coffee and Tea and is pointing directly at the revelation itself. 

So, I’d like your thoughts, is iced coffee, tea, and beer back in the table? Is Starbucks about to have a large influx of Mormons getting their cold coffee chops on? Or no? 

I joke, but seriously. What do you think? Is it just a simple reword or does it have implications?

Well let's see:

• 11. Do your keep the Word of Wisdom?
  vs.
  11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom

I don't see that it gives any more wiggle room than before.  I suppose your personal understanding comes into play more under the new question.  Some understand it to mean different things than others.
Not everyone will understand the Word of Wisdom the same way, just like any other principle of the gospel.

But I personally think "understand and obey" is more precise than "keep".

[JAHS 3,228]

32 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Per the update 

“11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?”

The new way this is worded ignores anything about Coffee and Tea and is pointing directly at the revelation itself. 

So, I’d like your thoughts, is iced coffee, tea, and beer back in the table? Is Starbucks about to have a large influx of Mormons getting their cold coffee chops on? Or no? 

I joke, but seriously. What do you think? Is it just a simple reword or does it have implications?

I think the wording invites the opportunity to help the person understand what it means. The way I understand it
No alcohol (includes beer)
No tobacco (smoking or chewing or anything like unto it)
No hot drinks (interpreted as being hot  black coffee or black tea)
And today we include some addictive drugs 

Other than that it left to individual interpretation.

[bluebell 23,733]

38 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Per the update 

“11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?”

The new way this is worded ignores anything about Coffee and Tea and is pointing directly at the revelation itself. 

So, I’d like your thoughts, is iced coffee, tea, and beer back in the table? Is Starbucks about to have a large influx of Mormons getting their cold coffee chops on? Or no? 

I joke, but seriously. What do you think? Is it just a simple reword or does it have implications?

Considering the article that the church just released in the New Era, no, it doesn't have any implications on what the church expects.  

[SettingDogStar 410]

5 minutes ago, JAHS said:

I think the wording invites the opportunity to help the person understand what it means. The way I understand it
No alcohol (includes beer)
No tobacco (smoking or chewing or anything like unto it)
No hot drinks (interpreted as being hot  black coffee or black tea)
And today we include some addictive drugs 

Other than that it left to individual interpretation.

Which is an interesting interpretation in comparison to past saints (including Joseph) and what “mild barley drinks” are. 

I do agree with you, however.

Edited October 7 by SettingDogStar

[JAHS 3,228]

1 minute ago, SettingDogStar said:

Which is an interesting interpretation in comparison to past saints (including Joseph) and what “mild barley drinks” are. 

I do agree with you, however.

Yep, and future saints will need to add even more things to the list as man continues to invent new ways to destroy his body.

[rpn 1,918]

29 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Which is odd to me since technically there isn’t anything actually written. What bishops or SP allow varies, sometimes wildly, between areas of the world. Whereas if we just relied on the scripture, or at least it’s orignal interpretation, it’s pretty clear to me.

 

Last month's New Era contained an article outlining the requirements of the word of wisdom.   https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/2019/08/the-word-of-wisdom-what-it-is-what-it-isnt

In the instructions provided leaders and members today, leaders are instructed not to add to or omit the specific questions.

[SettingDogStar 410]

1 minute ago, JAHS said:

Yep, and future saints will need to add even more things to the list as man continues to invent new ways to destroy his body.

Sure, but obviously Joseph didn’t think beer was destroying to the body (or at least didn’t think God cared so much about it that he’d take the Spirit from him for drinking a little.)

Also I always liked the idea of it being an actual word of wisdom, like suggestions. We’d eventually become the Law of Moses if we just kept a list of all “bad” things and restricted baptism to only those with a certain diet.

Edited October 7 by SettingDogStar

[Scott Lloyd 18,679]

34 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Which is odd to me since technically there isn’t anything actually written. What bishops or SP allow varies, sometimes wildly, between areas of the world. Whereas if we just relied on the scripture, or at least it’s orignal interpretation, it’s pretty clear to me.

However, I have NO problem with it being either edited or a new revelation added about it. I just think it’s completely confusing when the policy doesn’t always match the actual scriptures. I had investigators get confused too haha

From “True to the Faith,” a reference source published by the Church, in the entry on “Word of Wisdom”:

In the Word of Wisdom, the Lord commands us not to take the following substances into our bodies:
    Alcoholic drinks (see D&C 89:5–7).

    Tobacco (see D&C 89:8).

    Tea and coffee (see D&C 89:9; latter-day prophets have taught that the term “hot drinks” refers to tea and coffee).

Anything harmful that people purposefully take into their bodies is not in harmony with the Word of Wisdom. This is especially true of illegal drugs, which can destroy those who become addicted to them. Stay entirely away from them. Do not experiment with them. The abuse of prescription drugs also leads to destructive addiction.

 

[SettingDogStar 410]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

From “True to the Faith,” a reference source published by the Church, in the entry on “Word of Wisdom”:

In the Word of Wisdom, the Lord commands us not to take the following substances into our bodies:
    Alcoholic drinks (see D&C 89:5–7).

    Tobacco (see D&C 89:8).

    Tea and coffee (see D&C 89:9; latter-day prophets have taught that the term “hot drinks” refers to tea and coffee).

Anything harmful that people purposefully take into their bodies is not in harmony with the Word of Wisdom. This is especially true of illegal drugs, which can destroy those who become addicted to them. Stay entirely away from them. Do not experiment with them. The abuse of prescription drugs also leads to destructive addiction.

 

Okay, but again it isn’t cannonized or claiming to be revelation at all. True to the faith isn’t scripture at all nor is it even an official church source for Bishops and SPs considering the often given leeway in certain things.

[Scott Lloyd 18,679]

7 hours ago, JAHS said:

I think the wording invites the opportunity to help the person understand what it means. The way I understand it
No alcohol (includes beer)
No tobacco (smoking or chewing or anything like unto it)
No hot drinks (interpreted as being hot  black coffee or black tea)
And today we include some addictive drugs 

Other than that it left to individual interpretation.

Green tea would be included as well, since it is tea. The only difference is that black tea has been oxidized, like an apple or avocado cut open and left on the counter. There has been no exemption given by the Church for the consumption of green tea. 
 

And coffee and tea in any form or temperature are ruled out. 

Edited October 8 by Scott Lloyd

[JLHPROF 9,513]

1 minute ago, JAHS said:

Yep, and future saints will need to add even more things to the list as man continues to invent new ways to destroy his body.

It's interesting how the focus is on leaders adding new restrictions.
How do we as members actually define "the Word of Wisdom"?  That question alone provides a lot of insight.

 

[JLHPROF 9,513]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Green tea would be included as well, since it is tea. The only difference is that black tea has been oxidized, like an apple or avocado cut open and left on the counter. There has been no exemption given by the Church for the consumption of green tea. 

Yes, but why wouldn't hot cocoa, postum, pero/caro, herbal tea, etc?

[Scott Lloyd 18,679]

16 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

Okay, but again it isn’t cannonized or claiming to be revelation at all. True to the faith isn’t scripture at all nor is it even an official church source for Bishops and SPs considering the often given leeway in certain things.

True to the Faith is a reference summary of the doctrines and teachings of the Church. It is published by the Church, accessible on the Church website and Gospel Library app to all Church members, including bishops and stake presidents. 

And you’re moving the goal posts. Earlier you said there had been “nothing written.” 

I doubt that authoritative leeway has been given to local Church leaders to rewrite or revise the Word of Wisdom as it is taught generally in the Church. I suppose some local leaders go off the rails here and there, but I’m not personally acquainted with any such instance. 

Edited October 8 by Scott Lloyd

[SettingDogStar 410]

5 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

It's interesting how the focus is on leaders adding new restrictions.
How do we as members actually define "the Word of Wisdom"?  That question alone provides a lot of insight.

 

That’s the main question depending on who you ask!’