Cold Caffeine Vs Hot Caffeine

[LeSellers]

one of the few vices I have. My church doesn't care what I drink!

Nor do we. You are not among the covenant people, so you do not have to worry about breaking the covenant.

But, as the quote says, "sacrifice (making holy) brings forth the blessings of heaven". There are some things (many, in fact) that are worth giving up for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Lehi

[Nofear]

Most juices including apple juice have tannins.

Nature's conspiracy runs deep, quite a few of the foods we eat have poisons: Ten foods in your kitchen that contain gruesome poisons

Edited June 25, 2011 by Nofear

[Nofear]

I was taught in church that it was the tannic acid in coffee and tea that makes it bad.

There's a reason we boil or soak our acorns before eating them.

[Yirgacheffe]

Nature's conspiracy runs deep, quite a few of the foods we eat have poisons: Ten foods in your kitchen that contain gruesome poisons

I will never look at chili the same way.

[Stargazer]

The plain truth is that the Word of Wisdom, as outlined by Church leaders, doesn't make sense: decaffeinated coffee is not forbidden, and yet caffeinated sodas are not forbidden either. So the combination of caffeine and coffee is forbidden, but neither by itself. What if I sat down at my meal with two drinks: a decaf coffee and a coke?

Not sure where you get your information from, but everything I have heard about the subject is that coffee and black tea (camelia sinensis) are what is to be understood as "hot drinks". Decaffienated coffee is no more acceptable than unmodified coffee . As some others have pointed out, it isn't the caffeine.

When Church leaders decided to turn the Word of Wisdom into a series of hard and set rules, I think they probably just flubbed on the details a bit. I don't hold it against them. I'm content with the borders of my property shifting every so often or being murky if I don't live too close to them. It's when I smell the coffee that I'd most like to take the line-makers to task. (*pointing at the ground* "now wait a second, the line curves there, and zig-zags there. if you kept with that zag there and lost this zig here then i could have that damn coffee" *grabs him by the lapels* "what were you thinking?")

Actually, the only hard and set rules are: coffee, tea, alcoholic drinks and tobacco. It is simple in the extreme. So don't try to set a threshhold at which decaf isn't quite decaffed enough. It isn't the caffeine.

And we are not Pharisees.

[Stargazer]

If the ban is not about caffeine, why can't I get a Coke at BYU football game?

Because there are LDS who would be highly offended at it being offered at BYU. Because there are many people like Craig Paxton who were raised as Mormon Pharisees, and who were convinced that anything less than every-jot-and-tittle obedience to every single point of the Law was going to land them promptly in the Telestial Kingdom. Madness.

Since I don't live there and have never so much as watched a BYU football game, is it really true that they don't serve Coke there?

[Stargazer]

I drink malt beverages on a regular basis. There are sweet malts, and there are ones that actually more closely resemble beer. I'll also confess that sometimes I will drink non-alcoholic beer that has like the 0.05 percent alcohol, though I will admit that sometimes even that small amount can somehow have an impact on my spirituality(something just doesn't seem right). However, there are 0,0% kinds out there and they are pretty good.

Hey, me too! I have wondered though, about those labels saying less than 0.05% alchohol. It has the flavor of being a statement put on the bottle in order to avoid governmental regulations, not because there's any alcohol in there. You know, I am sure, that the federal government taxes alcoholic beverages, but if a beverage doesn't have any alcohol (or the amount is less than a particular threshhold), then it's not taxed.

On my mission in Germany, many of us missionaries were rather fond of non-alcoholic malt beverages such as Karamalz, and others. Our mission president, who was German-born, never seemed to have a problem with it. But then again, in Germany non-alcoholic malt drinks are waaaay more prevalent than they are here in the US.

[Nathair/|\]

Hey, me too! I have wondered though, about those labels saying less than 0.05% alchohol. It has the flavor of being a statement put on the bottle in order to avoid governmental regulations, not because there's any alcohol in there. You know, I am sure, that the federal government taxes alcoholic beverages, but if a beverage doesn't have any alcohol (or the amount is less than a particular threshhold), then it's not taxed.

On my mission in Germany, many of us missionaries were rather fond of non-alcoholic malt beverages such as Karamalz, and others. Our mission president, who was German-born, never seemed to have a problem with it. But then again, in Germany non-alcoholic malt drinks are waaaay more prevalent than they are here in the US.

I'd like to find a completely alcohol free Guinness equivalent. The closest I can find is Sharps and similar.

[Stargazer]

How about decaf-Herbal tea's for medicinal purposes? Do you get a TR then?

One thing that really gets me snarly is people trying to tell me that peppermint tea is against the WOW because it's "tea".

No it's not.

The word tea originally meant that black tea camelia sinensis. But since the word "infusion" is too ackward for general use (that is what you are doing when you steep dried plant materials in hot water, making an infusion), the word "tea" crept into use in the place of "infusion". Nowadays, everything gets called "tea" whether it is black tea or not. This leads to the Pharisees among us deciding that herbal teas are against the WoW.

They ought to visit England, where the evening meal is frequently referred to as "tea'. I remember when my family moved there for my Dad's employment, and the first LDS family (I was the only Mormon in my family) I visited invited me to stay for the evening meal. Except that they said 'Would you like to stay for tea/" And I thought that maybe they weren't taking the WoW very seriously. Later I discovered this alternate use for the word, but those LDS who are Pharisees best not visit England, because they will not be able to eat food in the evening, because that's called "tea".

[scooby]

Not sure where you get your information from

David O McKay & Widtsoe, as discussed earlier.

Edited June 25, 2011 by scooby

[california boy]

I just want to preface that I do not drink coffee even though I am no longer a member. But I stumbled across this today and thought of this thread.

Personally I think obeying the wow is more about obedience than health. I mean what difference is it if we die 5 years earlier. Doesn't that mean we are headed to the Celestial Kingdom that much sooner. Well maybe not me, but you.

Edited June 25, 2011 by california boy

[Calm]

The Handbook states:

Word of Wisdom

The only official interpretation of “hot drinks” (D&C 89:9) in the Word of Wisdom is the statement made by early Church leaders that the term “hot drinks” means tea and coffee.

Members should not use any substance that contains illegal drugs. Nor should members use harmful or habit-forming substances except under the care of a competent physician.

I would assume that if someone has an addictive habit with drinking caffeinated soda, that they should make an effort to break it in the spirit of the law.

[thesometimesaint]

california boy:

There certainly are many health problems associated with drinking alcohol, and smoking cigarettes. However that most important parts of the WoW aren't the don't but the does. Along with the spiritual blessing of obedience.

Actually we are to protect our live, and five years too soon eliminates those 5 years for added improvement, or repentance.

[Wants2know]

The plain truth is that the Word of Wisdom, as outlined by Church leaders, doesn't make sense: decaffeinated coffee is not forbidden, and yet caffeinated sodas are not forbidden either. So the combination of caffeine and coffee is forbidden, but neither by itself. What if I sat down at my meal with two drinks: a decaf coffee and a coke?

When Church leaders decided to turn the Word of Wisdom into a series of hard and set rules, I think they probably just flubbed on the details a bit. I don't hold it against them. I'm content with the borders of my property shifting every so often or being murky if I don't live too close to them. It's when I smell the coffee that I'd most like to take the line-makers to task. (*pointing at the ground* "now wait a second, the line curves there, and zig-zags there. if you kept with that zag there and lost this zig here then i could have that damn coffee" *grabs him by the lapels* "what were you thinking?")

Really? Well now I'm confused. So I can drink decaf? What about iced coffee???

[Jigglysaint]

Hey, me too! I have wondered though, about those labels saying less than 0.05% alchohol. It has the flavor of being a statement put on the bottle in order to avoid governmental regulations, not because there's any alcohol in there. You know, I am sure, that the federal government taxes alcoholic beverages, but if a beverage doesn't have any alcohol (or the amount is less than a particular threshhold), then it's not taxed.

On my mission in Germany, many of us missionaries were rather fond of non-alcoholic malt beverages such as Karamalz, and others. Our mission president, who was German-born, never seemed to have a problem with it. But then again, in Germany non-alcoholic malt drinks are waaaay more prevalent than they are here in the US.

I've seen that on sale around here somewhere. I forget if I've tried it before, but if not I'll get some. I do like the 0.05% stuff and I just figure that just like when I found that my favorite bowl of ramen noodles contained green tea extract, I just sort of turn a blind eye because if I tried to be totally pure, I'd go crazy. There can be a level of obsessivness, especially among newer members to try and keep that covenant to the point where it gets overbearing. The Lord wants us to obey, but not at the cost of one's sanity. My rule is that if I accidentally or purposly ingest something with coffee, tea or alcohol, I finish it up and don't buy it again. It's easy to get down on yourself for covenant breaking and feelings of hypocrisy.

[HeatherAnn]

@@@hhhh...s@me @ne Kn@ws me...

Well here is what I think...if anyone cares...

When Joseph Smith wrote the Word of Wisdom he was responding to Emma's complaints and he saw in the temperance movements in Ohio an opportunity. He never lived the Word of Wisdom in his lifetime and took it as the suggestion that he meant it to be. From the time of his death and culminating with the Heber J. Grant administration...the WoW went through an evolution. Under Brigham Young's tenure the pioneers were instructed to bring a supply of coffee on their westward trek and he built a brewery to brew beer upon arrival in SLC.

With each subsequent church president...the WoW became more and more strict until by the time of Heber J. Grant and the advent of prohibition, all alcohol had become banned and the consumption of tea and coffee became codified to receive a temple recommend.

Coffee is an innocuous substance that is neither harmful to one’s health unless one has a low tolerance to caffeine…but it does offer many healthy antioxidants and has been shown to reduce some cancers.

I personally do believe that caffeine is not the issue any more (although through the evolution that the WoW has undergone it certainly was at one time) because coffee does not offer any health risks abstinence from it has morphed into a mark of faith and sacrifice….a measuring stick. The church could change abstinence from coffee with an abstinence of potato chips…and it wouldn’t matter. In other words it is NOT the food/drink one is abstaining from that is the issue …it is that you are abstaining from something. Coffee just happens to be the item that is abstained from and faithful Mormon’s use this as a yard stick to measure obedience.

It also helps define and separate Mormon’s from the rest of the world. But let’s get a few things straight; tea and coffee are NOT harmful in any way shape or form. Wine, and some alcoholic drinks in moderation have many health benefits. Meat eaten out of season is not harmful, barley drinks (beer is the only one I’m aware of) in moderation is not harmful.

So the bottom line, the Word of Wisdom is not really about health…its about creating a uniform group, control, sacrifice and conformity in the Mormon community.

Hey you asked me to pick…

Interesting. I agree mostly. I just think that there is some wisdom in avoiding alcohol, tobacco & too much meat.

And if you're like me, too much caffeine could make you a nervous wreck, but a little now & then is a life-saver (esp. driving long trips).

Craig, I'm glad you brought this up, because it's been bugging me for while.

Oh, & it's definetely NOT the temperature. I hope everyone's clear on that. If it's temperature, why do we have ovens, or things like soup or anything hot?? ha!

Didn't they figure out that it wasn't the tea that was making people healthier (in poorer countries) but it was the water being boiled & cleansed in the process?

As much for the empty calories as the caffeine. One researcher found that if one drinks on average one soda can a day (nondiet) that is equivalent to 15 lbs additional weight a year (which means one either sacrifices useful nutrition in cutting back on other foods to cut calories or has to increase exercise to burn those extra calories). I also heard eons ago, need to do some research one of these days to confirm it or not, that carbonation destroys vitamins....Bs IIRC so even that aspect of soda may be problematic for those trying to be healthy in their choices.

I've also heard that soda is really unhealthy. Some sodas have MORE caffeine than some coffee & many teas, & most sodas (besides diet) are about 1/7th sugar or corn syrp.

It's also cause & effect... after drinking a soda, I feel bloated & not like I want to go run a marathon.

Edited June 27, 2011 by HeatherAnn

[LeSellers]

I can drink decaf?

Why bother? I know I wouldn't. (The smell of coffee makes me gag.)

What about iced coffee???

No.

Lehi

[Bernard Gui]

I drink malt beverages on a regular basis. There are sweet malts, and there are ones that actually more closely resemble beer. I'll also confess that sometimes I will drink non-alcoholic beer that has like the 0.05 percent alcohol, though I will admit that sometimes even that small amount can somehow have an impact on my spirituality(something just doesn't seem right). However, there are 0,0% kinds out there and they are pretty good.

There's Postum and Pero, if you can find them.

Does non-alcoholic beer qualify?

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

Vegemite should be on the forbidden list.

Eating kimchee should be a commandment.

Bernard

[Deborah]

The smell of coffee makes me gag.

Me too. I always hear people talk about how good it smells but I've never understood it. My Mom was a coffee drinker when I was growing up and I could never stand it when it was brewing.

[Doug the Hutt]

The straw man consisted of presenting the Word of Wisdom and church doctrine as against caffiene and by criticizing the Word of Wisdom as incomplete revelation for health guidelines. It was not meant to be a comprehensive doctrine regarding diet and health.

Nice appeal to authority.

DaddyG,

I don't think he presented it as a straw man. He presented it as a real life dialogue that happens all the time -- I've heard and been a part of several discussions very similar to his over the years and I'm sure you have as well. There are so many conflicting elements of the doctrine makes it confusing. Cr@ig's family had a certain interpretation of the WoW which forbade caffeine -- my wife's family is the exact same way, no caffeinated drinks including pop (soda) (I think they would be put off by being called pharasees). The question from his cousin is almost a duplicate of one I had with a friend of mine a few years ago. You know the caffeine dilemma even gets more complicated when we recall President Hinckley's interview with Larry King in 1998:

Larry King Live -- 09/08/1998

... CALLER: I was wondering about some of the guidelines in dietary restrictions Mormons live by, and how strictly members follow it. Because I was reading, once, the word of wisdom. My impression was that its major point was that one should respect all life, including animals and, as such, only consume them when absolutely necessary to sustain life, and to then eat them sparingly. But I've noticed that Mormon -- this is rarely followed by Mormons, and I'm wondering if this has anything to do with, as reported by "TIME" magazine.

Larry King: OK, president?

Gordon B. Hinckley: Oh, I don't know. You've read a part of the word of wisdom. The word of wisdom covers many things. It covers the excessive use of meat, as I see it. It covers, in a very particular way, the use of tobacco and alcohol.

Larry King: By saying no?

Gordon B. Hinckley: By saying, by proscribing those things.

Larry King: No to caffeine?

Gordon B. Hinckley: No to caffeine, coffee and tea.

Larry King: Do you know why? Dietary -- in the Old Testament were based on the health of animals and stuff.

Gordon B. Hinckley: Well, the wonderful thing is that the Book of Mormon -- I mean, the word of wisdom has shown to be fruitful in what -- the accomplishments.

Larry King: You are ahead of yourself in the health craze?

Gordon B. Hinckley: Yes, this man I met here not too long ago at UCLA, Inkstrom (ph), I think his name is, who has conducted a study for some 14 years, taking a peer group of Latter-day Saints, a peer group of the other population, and reached a conclusion that because of the degree to which we observe the word of wisdom, Mormons have a life expectancy of from eight to 11 years longer.

Now, who in the world wouldn't give almost anything for eight to ten years of life? I have here with me, right now, a statement from "The Los Angeles Times" on this very fact. "The study conducted by UCLA tracks the morality rates and health practices of nearly 10,000 California high priests and their wives for 14 years. As a follow up to research Inkstrom published in 1989, the study confirms that the healthiest active Mormons have a life expectancy that is eight to 11 years longer than that of the general white population in the U.S.," close quote.

Larry King: Based on those figures, my wife will outlive me by 67 years?

Gordon B. Hinckley: I wouldn't be surprised.

Larry King: Neither would I. We'll be right back, don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(+1 point to the 1st person who wearily points out that:

1. he was just speaking as a man

or

2. his comments weren't accepted as doctrine by the membership in General Conference)

"It was not meant to be a comprehensive doctrine regarding diet and health". Is anything the Lord reveals considered "comprehensive"? How are we really supposed to know if we're being obedient when God gives us ambiguous commandments, or tells us that such-and-such isn't a commandment but then does a 180? How are we supposed to know the validity of the Gospel when its doctrine shifts about depending on the situation (need I even mention the changes?)? The WoW was supposed to be do-able by even the weakest ****-retentive saint who could be called a saint. The core of the problem seems to come down the fluid nature of LDS doctrine. One day you can drink wine and beer with Joseph and be just fine, and another day (assuming you live that long) you'll be chastised by President Grant for do so. One day you're taught to have lots of wives. Another day you're advised to stop it, and then another day you're ex'ed for doing it. One day you're making certain oaths & covenants that we're not allowed to talk about, and the next day you're wondering why those unmentionable restored oaths just changed one day, and then changed again a few years later. One day you're learning that Adam is god, the next you're pulled aside and castigated by your Bishop for even mentioning such a thing in Gospel Doctrine class. For many that's just not the "firm foundation" we envisioned -- seems the essence of the firm foundation migrated from various consistent teachings and placed upon the shoulders of the 15 Apostles. So now anything can change because we're only looking at the leadership, not the teachings. And that just doesn't seem right -- any religion can do the same thing and we would be out there decrying their organization's lack of authority and state of apostasy. We do that all the time when the missionaries teach that our church is the only true and living church of Jesus Christ, the only one with the authority to perform priesthood ordinances. Does that make any sense?

Have a nice day.

[thesometimesaint]

Doug the Hutt:

We're not pharasees.

[frankenstein]

Doug, don't forget that he said to Mike Wallace also, and I think twice on separate occasions to Larry King.

[ELF1024]

I drink my cola at room temperature, does that count?

[Craig Paxton]

The straw man consisted of presenting the Word of Wisdom and church doctrine as against caffiene and by criticizing the Word of Wisdom as incomplete revelation for health guidelines. It was not meant to be a comprehensive doctrine regarding diet and health.

Nice appeal to authority.

The rhetorical tool "Straw Man" is thrown around a lot on this forum...it would be nice if those that used it actually knew what a ‘straw man fallacy argument’ actually was before they used the term. For those that would like to actually learn so that they use the term correctly in the future...in layman’s terms, it is a rhetorical tool used to muddy an argument by introducing a supposedly easier argument NOT used in an original premise in the hope that by supposedly winning some rhetorical gain through the use of their straw man they can claim victory over the original premise. An off shoot of this rhetorical trick and off times easier approach than to actually debate the original premise straight on is to call the original premise itself, the Straw man, in the hope that through this maneuver rather than arguing the actual premise head on, one can win the argument. But in reality it is really just a diversionary rhetorical trick…called a straw dog or in rhetorical lingo an Argumentum ad stipulae canis. This is what DaddyG has attempted to do. Rather than argue the original premise found in my original post he has perhaps cleverly or maybe unwittingly used a straw dog rhetorical argument by calling my original premise itself the Straw Man. I don’t know if he actually knew he was doing this or if he knows that I would be aware of this rhetorical tool or if he merely believes that I wouldn’t call him out on it. In any case…the original premise stands.

There still remains within the LDS church a conundrum between Hot and Cold Caffeine drinks and their impact on qualifying for a temple recommend. Where caffeine found in hot coffee is prohibited, caffeine found in cold cola’s is perfectly acceptable. To those who doubt this reality…all one needs to do is simply ask anyone who has sat on both sides of the temple recommend interview process … Umm … such as I have done. Decaffeinated coffee consumption is perfectly fine and will not disqualify an applicant from a recommend while someone who indulges in hot caffeinated coffee will not qualify for a recommend. It isn’t the use of coffee…but rather the caffeine in the coffee that is the disqualifier…YET…the use of cold caffeine in a cola is perfectly acceptable. Although I will allow that if that same caffeinated coffee was served and consumed as iced coffee…that form of cold caffeine would also disqualify the recommend seeker as well… Umm another conundrum…

I should note that I have no beef with DaddyG...if he chooses to argue my original premise...I am more than happy to defend it...but I won't roll over and concede through the use of a rhetorical ploy.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Craig Paxton