Cold Caffeine Vs Hot Caffeine

[ldsfaqs]

Having been raised in a strict LDS household, caffeine in all of its evil forms was absolutely forbidden. Hot or cold, it didn’t matter. Evil was evil. This strict adherence of avoiding caffeinated beverages made perfect sense to me during my formative years. After all, wasn’t it the caffeine content in the drink that God forbid and not the temperature?

Well something changed in the 70’s and 80’s. Little by little the standard eroded… soon the avoidance of cold caffeinated beverages was no longer frowned upon within the church…consuming cold caffeine became a personal choice. Soon active church members everywhere were seen in public ordering and consuming cold caffeine laden cola drinks.

I consumed my first caffeine beverage, a Dr. Pepper, as an adult in my mid 20’s. This soon morphed into experimenting with other previously forbidden caffeine drinks such as the formerly evil Coke and Pepsi. I eventually settled on my cold caffeine beverage of choice…Diet Pepsi.

Jump ahead 20 years…

I’m on a vacation to visit a never-Mormon cousin back east. While out for dinner he takes note that I ordered a Diet Pepsi. Knowing that I was LDS, this seeming compromise of his perception of LDS standards came as a complete surprise to him. It took him a few days to even get the courage to broach the subject. But finally after watching me drink Diet Pepsi on several other occasions he finally asked me a simple question. “Craig, I’ve noticed that you drink Diet Pepsi…but you’ve refused my repeated offers for some coffee at breakfast… (then he dropped the bomb)…why is it ok for Mormons to consume cold caffeine but not hot caffeine?”

He caught me completely off guard, I didn’t have a good answer for him…and I kind of stumbled in trying to offer him a less than adequate answer…suggesting that I hadn’t really thought about it and that although it used to be outlawed…it is now ok. This answer was unsatisfying to both of us. Rather than being a missionary moment for me…his questions began a spiral into cognitive dissonance for me.

Prior to his question, I had never analyzed the inherent conflict of the LDS position regarding caffeine consumption. If caffeine is the problem…then way isn’t caffeine to be avoided in all of its forms…no matter the temperature? But…on the surface…it appeared that it wasn’t the caffeine but its temperature that presented the problem.

I had simply accepted that the church no longer found evil the consumption of cold caffeine and filled that exception in the Word of Wisdom by drinking Pepsi products when it was no longer prohibited, ignoring the obvious double standard.

My cousin’s question exposed the conflict in the Word of Wisdom that had prior to that very moment totally escaped my conscience.

So can anyone help me understand the inherent conflict apparently created by the cold vs hot caffeine dilemma?

I think the problem is you are confusing the strictness of your own family with the Church itself.

I've known the rare family who wouldn't even play standard playing cards, because of the "evil" symbolized.

But, most LDS it didn't matter to them, because the symbols meant nothing to them.

I've been in some Wards in which Caffeinated drinks were not allowed for activities. Been on most others where the Ward didn't care.

The WOW only ever applied to "Tea & Coffee", not Caffeine.

Some LDS in their "zeal" to follow the Prophets when a time or two some have said the Saints should stay away addictive substances including caffeinated drinks, have translated that into dogma, when it has only been prophetic encouragement. Obviously, LDS should follow the words of the prophets and avoid substances such as Caffeine, but they aren't "banned" like Coffee and Tea (from the tea leaf) is.

[ERayR]

I was taught in church that tannic acid, not caffeine, is what makes coffee and tea harmful.

I was always taught that to obey was better than to sacrifice.

Edited June 30, 2011 by ERayR

[Rivers]

Ha! Then, & I can drink iced tea!

The weakest of the saints??

Aren't we ALL weak in one area or another? Doesn't everyone struggle with some type of addiction - even religious idealism?

Some addictions or weaknesses are more obvious than others - but we all struggle.

Yes you're right. And if Latter-Day Saints were allowed to drink alcohol, there would be a lot of alcoholics in the church.

[Rivers]

I was always taught that to obey was better than to sacrifice.

I was also taught that God gave us all brains and expects us to use them. People who are commanded in all things are lazy and unwise servants.

Edited June 30, 2011 by Rivers

[Rivers]

Snide, snide, snide. I am still reading them. The CFR still applies.

Joseph in fact banned whiskey in Nauvoo for awhile but because of all the visitors to the city he allowed it to be sold. That doesn't mean he drank it. Emma would in fact have had a problem with it. When he opened the bar in the mansion house until Porter could open his bar, Emma refused to remain under the roof until he removed it which he promptly did. WOW

He did drink wine in the Carthage jail to lift his spirit. But its no big deal to me. The WOW was not given by commandment or constraint at the time.

Edited June 30, 2011 by Rivers

[Deborah]

He did drink wine in the Carthage jail to lift his spirit. But its no big deal to me. The WOW was not given by commandment or constraint at the time.

I agree and even if he did drink whiskey I don't have an issue with that. We need to keep these things in context and not resort to presentism.

[LeSellers]

We need to keep these things in context and not resort to presentism.

What?!?!!! And take all of the fun out of the debates?! You gotta be nutz.

Chronocentrism is king, king I say!!

Lehi

Edited June 30, 2011 by LeSellers

[Jaybear]

I agree and even if he did drink whiskey I don't have an issue with that. We need to keep these things in context and not resort to presentism.

Presentism? I think you are missing the point.

I think those pointing out that Smith drank wine/whiskey, are not condemning Smith, but are questioning the doctrinal basis for the Church to deny temple access to those like Smith who choose to drink wine/whiskey on occasion to lift their spirits.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Presentism? I think you are missing the point.

I think those pointing out that Smith drank wine/whiskey, are not condemning Smith, but are questioning the doctrinal basis for the Church to deny temple access to those like Smith who choose to drink wine/whiskey on occasion to lift their spirits.

Ugh, it is presentism, because it was not given as a commandment while JS was alive. And only through the present lens of "it being a commandment" is one trying to find fault with JS. Get it now?

[Jaybear]

Ugh, it is presentism, because it was not given as a commandment while JS was alive. And only through the present lens of "it being a commandment" is one trying to find fault with JS. Get it now?

You are either underestimating your critics, or I am overestimating them.

We both agree that Smith was not "at fault" for drinking because it was not given to Smith as a commandment.

Why then would critics point out the fact that Smith drank on occassion?

1. They are stupid, or lazy, and they have not read the text of the WOW, which makes it clear, that it was not issued by God to the saints though his prophet Smith as a commandment;

or

2. They are not criticizing Smith, but the current "interpretation" of the Wow by the Bretheren.

I think its the latter.

Edited June 30, 2011 by Jaybear

[ERayR]

I was also taught that God gave us all brains and expects us to use them. People who are commanded in all things are lazy and unwise servants.

It is not about being commanded in all things. It is about adhering to sound principles. It is indeed a lazy and unwise servant that listens only to his own council and deems himself wiser than God.

[Jaybear]

It is not about being commanded in all things. It is about adhering to sound principles. It is indeed a lazy and unwise servant that listens only to his own council and deems himself wiser than God.

What sound principles do you believe are being conveyed to the saints by the word of wisdom.

Some say its about health.

Some say its about obedience.

Some say its about separating saints from the world.

Some say its only for the weakest of the saints.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

What sound principles do you believe are being conveyed to the saints by the word of wisdom.

Some say its about health.

Some say its about obedience.

Some say its about separating saints from the world.

Some say its only for the weakest of the saints.

Perhaps it is all of those?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You are either underestimating your critics, or I am overestimating them.

We both agree that Smith was not "at fault" for drinking because it was not given to Smith as a commandment.

Why then would critics point out the fact that Smith drank on occassion?

1. They are stupid, or lazy, and they have not read the text of the WOW, which makes it clear, that it was not issued by God to the saints though his prophet Smith as a commandment;

or

2. They are not criticizing Smith, but the current "interpretation" of the Wow by the Bretheren.

I think its the latter.

I honestly don't know why they are even bringing it up. It is not one of a critical nature. I would not say that they are stupid or lazy.... well maybe lazy, because I don't think some people do know the text. Perhaps they are just simply bringing it up for the heck of it. I will give them the benefit of the doubt on this non issue. Take care jaybear.

[Craig Paxton]

I honestly don't know why they are even bringing it up. It is not one of a critical nature. I would not say that they are stupid or lazy.... well maybe lazy, because I don't think some people do know the text. Perhaps they are just simply bringing it up for the heck of it. I will give them the benefit of the doubt on this non issue. Take care jaybear.

Although I don't consider myself a church critic...at one time I might have been so considered...but with time, I've mellowed...however, I do consider myself a critical thinker of all things Mormon. Yes I question each and every premise that Mormonism is built upon...AND that I do consider different than being a church critic.

So with that understanding:

I began this thread...not as an attack on the WoW...but to help me understand how active believers justify their adherence to it...when there is an inherent conflict built into the word of wisdom...as interpreted by the modern church.

Coffee is disallowed…but caffeine free coffee is fine. That is the summation of my premise. While there have been some posters who question the veracity of this conundrum…I know for a fact that it exists. I must therefore conclude that it is the caffeine in the coffee that is the problem and not the coffee. Then to further the illogical nature of this WoW enigma, caffeine consumed in cold soda drinks is considered perfectly fine. Thus the original question posed by my never Mormon cousin.

To me it seems to come down to where the caffeine is consumed and its temperature. While I allow that some posters disagree with me…and while I am open to a more nuanced view of the WoW, this problem still exists. And without some clarification from the COB...it will remain. I won’t hold my breath.

Edited June 30, 2011 by Craig Paxton

[frankenstein]

You are either underestimating your critics, or I am overestimating them.

We both agree that Smith was not "at fault" for drinking because it was not given to Smith as a commandment.

Why then would critics point out the fact that Smith drank on occassion?

1. They are stupid, or lazy, and they have not read the text of the WOW, which makes it clear, that it was not issued by God to the saints though his prophet Smith as a commandment;

or

2. They are not criticizing Smith, but the current "interpretation" of the Wow by the Bretheren.

I think its the latter.

why would someone spin something? because usually with a spin there are enough people that will become disenchanted and leave a group because of spin and the same spin will harden those already disenchanted.

I would say most critics of the LDS Church repeat the same issue over and over to different people, because even though the critic has been given the correct answer to the question, the critic will always find someone who does not have the answer and the critic will be able to disenchant that person. Just the other day I mentioned to my wife that Joseph Smith had a gun at Carthage, she was mildly troubled and expressed "Since they don't mention it in the Carthage tour, it gives the appearance they are trying to hide that he had a gun". Such a lamentation is what many express in their "Why I left the Mormon Church". I asked the same question of my youngest brother and he said his Bishop had taught his priest quorum "all the craziest true things about the Church History" which included the gun, Joseph's "spiritual wives" etc. But mention those topics to someone who has not heard them and that person will likely become disenchanted and leave the Church.

So in the end why do critics mention it? Because it is a tried and true way to causing disenchantment, that is, on some level it is an effective tool for the critic to use. Thankfully, I heard the drinking and smoking in a 8 part series by Truman G. Madsen.

[frankenstein]

Coffee is disallowed…but caffeine free coffee is fine. That is the summation of my premise. While there have been some posters who question the veracity of this conundrum…I know for a fact that it exists. I must therefore conclude that it is the caffeine in the coffee that is the problem and not the coffee. Then to further the illogical nature of this WoW enigma, caffeine consumed in cold soda drinks is considered perfectly fine. Thus the original question posed by my never Mormon cousin.

Why don't LDS drink coffee and tea, because God said. The problems develop, as manifested in your reasoning, when someone tries to explain away God and put in their own reasoning. I drank a Dr. Pepper, last night, I have a craving for one everyday - do I think that starts to violate the intent and principle of the WoW, yes I do. Do I think it has anything do with caffiene not in the least - other than keeping me up at night - but I realize that sodas are unhealthy, and living that God forsaken deseret 64oz of water a day doesn't cut it, and drinking sodas is even worse.

Did President Hinkcley make at least 3 statement on Caffiene, yes I believe he did, I saw and heard each one, once to Mike Wallace, and twice on Larry King. Does drinking caffienated soda keep me out of the Temple, no it doesn't.

[thesometimesaint]

Craig Paxton:

The WoW says that in consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men we are to avoid certain things. That we will be healthier for it. It is not a scientific treatise on why which and what substances in those things we are to avoid.

[LeSellers]

without some clarification from the COB...it will remain.

Why on earth would a senior enlisted submariner want to weigh in on this? And why would that be definitive?

Lehi

[Jaybear]

why would someone spin something? because usually with a spin there are enough people that will become disenchanted and leave a group because of spin and the same spin will harden those already disenchanted.

Spin? This has nothing to do with spinning facts.

Craig said in the church he was raised, Smith was portrayed as someone who lived the WOW. I am sure Craig was told that when Smith was a child he refused alcohol prior to surgery on his leg.

Pointing out that Smith did in fact drink whiskey and wine, is not "spinning" the facts, but correcting a factual misunderstanding.

But after thinking about it, it now occurs to me that what some critics are doing is exploiting a deeply ingrained belief/philosophy that many Mormons harbor that drinking/smoking is sinful, and living the WOW is virtuous. That never occurred to me in my prior posts, as I have never viewed drinking or smoking as a moral issue.

Now I see what is meant by "faulting" Smith.

[thesometimesaint]

Jaybear:

Since when do we hold anyone accountable for something they never said?

The WoW as given to JS was NOT by commandment. IOW it was a word of advice. Albeit a good one. It was later modified by people we accept as Prophets to be a commandment.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Jaybear:

Since when do we hold anyone accountable for something they never said?

The WoW as given to JS was NOT by commandment. IOW it was a word of advice. Albeit a good one. It was later modified by people we accept as Prophets to be a commandment.

I am pretty sure Jaybear knows this.

Sometimes I wonder if the discussion board is a waste of time and I am not talking about you. Just that it is really easy to talk past each other and it seems that sometimes points that seem obvious are lost. It is frustrating.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Spin? This has nothing to do with spinning facts.

Craig said in the church he was raised, Smith was portrayed as someone who lived the WOW. I am sure Craig was told that when Smith was a child he refused alcohol prior to surgery on his leg.

Pointing out that Smith did in fact drink whiskey and wine, is not "spinning" the facts, but correcting a factual misunderstanding.

But after thinking about it, it now occurs to me that what some critics are doing is exploiting a deeply ingrained belief/philosophy that many Mormons harbor that drinking/smoking is sinful, and living the WOW is virtuous. That never occurred to me in my prior posts, as I have never viewed drinking or smoking as a moral issue.

Now I see what is meant by "faulting" Smith.

You know what is funny about this "issue" is that JS may not have drank whiskey as a kid because his parents viewed it a sin. But we learn that the WoW came about because of what?? As I recall the WoW came years have his surgery as a kid. Does that matter?

I have no issue knowing that JS drank wine once in a while. This seems to be along the same lines as JS having a gun at Carthage.

So, growing up you had an idea of who some one was. It turns out, that later you learned a few things that you did no know and suddenly the church is false. I don't get it.

[Deborah]

So, growing up you had an idea of who some one was. It turns out, that later you learned a few things that you did no know and suddenly the church is false. I don't get it.

This has always been what I don't understand. Aren't the things you already knew true? So why if you find out someone didn't live up to your ideal image that everything is all of a sudden false? In reading the OT I have no image of perfect men being called as prophets. I think that these men have been idealized and people really ought to read the OT again.

[alter idem]

You are either underestimating your critics, or I am overestimating them.

We both agree that Smith was not "at fault" for drinking because it was not given to Smith as a commandment.

Why then would critics point out the fact that Smith drank on occassion?

1. They are stupid, or lazy, and they have not read the text of the WOW, which makes it clear, that it was not issued by God to the saints though his prophet Smith as a commandment;

or

2. They are not criticizing Smith, but the current "interpretation" of the Wow by the Bretheren.

I think its the latter.

If we give critics the benefit of the doubt, then we assume the reason they bring this up is number 2--they disagree with the current 'interpretation' of the Wow by the 'brethren'.

It was the Prophet Heber J. Grant who made adherence to the WofW part of Temple worthiness. As Prophet, he had the authority to do so. He also had the authority to determine how this would be done--we don't follow a dead prophet, but the living prophet and so as members we trust that he prayed for guidance and did what the Lord would want him to--and it became what we live under today--'no alcohol, tobacco, coffee or tea. If critics don't like this, I'm sorry--but as a believing member, it works for me.

As the Prophet seer and revelator for the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints, faithful members believe he had this right and authority. It doesn't matter how it was interpreted in the past, the fact that it wasn't a commandment when it was first given, etc. but what matters is how it is interpreted by our leaders today. And this makes sense to LDS since we believe that we are taught line upon line and as we grow in the gospel, and can receive more enlightenment, things should change. If they didn't, we wouldn't need a living Prophet, we could just continue to follow past Prophets.