Word Of Wisdom - A Spiritual Commandment

[CASteinman]

There are thoughts that the Word of Wisdom is neither a commandment nor spiritual in nature.

The Jesus with the prophets and apostles teach us otherwise:

The Word of Wisdom is definitely a Commandment:

"September 9, 1851, President Brigham Young stated that the members of the Church had had sufficient time to be taught the import of this revelation and that henceforth it was to be considered a divine commandment. This was first put to vote before the female members of the congregation and then before the men and by unanimous vote accepted. President Joseph F. Smith at a conference meeting in October 1908, made the same statement, and this has been repeated from time to time." - Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol 1. Chapter 48 page 196.

"Now, elders of Israel, if you have the right to chew tobacco, you have a privilege I have not; if you have a right to drink whisky, you have a right that I have not; if you have a right to transgress the Word of Wisdom, you have a right that I have not." -Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 12:30-31, April 7, 1867

"The Word of Wisdom is today a commandment of the Lord to us, first given to us "not by constraint or commandment," but of later years given to us by the Prophet Brigham Young and by the Prophet Joseph F. Smith as a commandment to this people." -Heber J. Grant, Improvement Era 19:833, June 9, 1916

"While the revelation came first as a “greeting; not by commandment or constraint” (D&C 89:2), when members of the Church had had time to be taught the import of the revelation, succeeding Presidents of the Church declared it to be a commandment. And it was accepted by the Church as such." - Boyd K Packer, The Word of Wisdom: The Principle and Promises, General Conference, April 1996.

"The Word of Wisdom is a commandment. In 1851 President Brigham Young gave to this Church the Word of Wisdom as a final and definite commandment. From the time it was given to the Prophet Joseph until 1851 it was considered as a matter of preference or suggestions to the people, a word of advice and counsel. From 1851 until this day it is a commandment to all the members of the Church of Jesus Christ. " - Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, chapter 8, page 201.

The Word of Wisdom is not merely Temporal but also Spiritual:

"The Word of Wisdom does not promise perfect health but that the spiritual receptors within you might be strengthened. " - Boyd K Packer, How to Survive in Enemy Territory, The New Era, April 2012.

"The Word of Wisdom is a spiritual law." - Russel M Nelson, Addiction or Freedom, General Conference, October 1988.

Verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; ... neither Adam, your father, whom I created.

Behold, I gave unto him that he should be an agent unto himself; and I gave unto him commandment, but no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal, neither carnal nor sensual." - Jesus Christ, Doctrine and Covenants Section 29.

Edited August 22, 2012 by CASteinman

[Tacenda]

There are thoughts that the Word of Wisdom is neither a commandment nor spiritual in nature.

The Jesus with the prophets and apostles teach us otherwise:

The Word of Wisdom is definitely a Commandment:

"September 9, 1851, President Brigham Young stated that the members of the Church had had sufficient time to be taught the import of this revelation and that henceforth it was to be considered a divine commandment. This was first put to vote before the female members of the congregation and then before the men and by unanimous vote accepted. President Joseph F. Smith at a conference meeting in October 1908, made the same statement, and this has been repeated from time to time." - Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol 1. Chapter 48 page 196.

"Now, elders of Israel, if you have the right to chew tobacco, you have a privilege I have not; if you have a right to drink whisky, you have a right that I have not; if you have a right to transgress the Word of Wisdom, you have a right that I have not." -Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 12:30-31, April 7, 1867

"The Word of Wisdom is today a commandment of the Lord to us, first given to us "not by constraint or commandment," but of later years given to us by the Prophet Brigham Young and by the Prophet Joseph F. Smith as a commandment to this people." -Heber J. Grant, Improvement Era 19:833, June 9, 1916

"While the revelation came first as a “greeting; not by commandment or constraint” (D&C 89:2), when members of the Church had had time to be taught the import of the revelation, succeeding Presidents of the Church declared it to be a commandment. And it was accepted by the Church as such." - Boyd K Packer, The Word of Wisdom: The Principle and Promises, General Conference, April 1996.

"The Word of Wisdom is a commandment. In 1851 President Brigham Young gave to this Church the Word of Wisdom as a final and definite commandment. From the time it was given to the Prophet Joseph until 1851 it was considered as a matter of preference or suggestions to the people, a word of advice and counsel. From 1851 until this day it is a commandment to all the members of the Church of Jesus Christ. " - Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, chapter 8, page 201.

The Word of Wisdom is not merely Temporal but also Spiritual:

"The Word of Wisdom does not promise perfect health but that the spiritual receptors within you might be strengthened. " - Boyd K Packer, How to Survive in Enemy Territory, The New Era, April 2012.

"The Word of Wisdom is a spiritual law." - Russel M Nelson, Addiction or Freedom, General Conference, October 1988.

Verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; ... neither Adam, your father, whom I created.

Behold, I gave unto him that he should be an agent unto himself; and I gave unto him commandment, but no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal, neither carnal nor sensual." - Jesus Christ, Doctrine and Covenants Section 29.

I understand what you're doing here CA, but I have to say that JS and BY didn't always follow the WoW commandment. Nor did Jesus when he drank wine. And it was the real stuff, not just grape juice.

[CASteinman]

I understand what you're doing here CA, but I have to say that JS and BY didn't always follow the WoW commandment. Nor did Jesus when he drank wine. And it was the real stuff, not just grape juice.

That is approximately 50% true and 100% irrelevant.

Edited August 22, 2012 by CASteinman

[Tacenda]

That is 100% irrelevant and approximately 50% true.

You got me there.

[Storm Rider]

I missed the revelation about the Word of Wisdom being a commandment. I sure you overlooked it in your short list; do you have a reference for it? If not, then congratulations you just joined in understanding the difference between a policy and a commandment. Cheers.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Storm Rider

[pmccombs1]

The Word of Wisdom is definitely a Commandment:

"September 9, 1851, President Brigham Young stated that the members of the Church had had sufficient time to be taught the import of this revelation and that henceforth it was to be considered a divine commandment. This was first put to vote before the female members of the congregation and then before the men and by unanimous vote accepted. President Joseph F. Smith at a conference meeting in October 1908, made the same statement, and this has been repeated from time to time." - Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol 1. Chapter 48 page 196.

My opinion is that these kinds of things ought to be canonized so that we don't have to refer back to "Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol 1. Chapter 48 page 196" in order to learn that the Word of Wisdom is actually now something other than what it claims to be in our canonized scripture. What is official? If this has been received by revelation, voted and accepted by the saints, then there ought to be a modification to the canon so that there can be no question on the matter. Why does our scripture still say something that isn't acurate for our time? Why is our canon closed?

[CASteinman]

My opinion is that these kinds of things ought to be canonized so that we don't have to refer back to "Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol 1. Chapter 48 page 196" in order to learn that the Word of Wisdom is actually now something other than what it claims to be in our canonized scripture. What is official? If this has been received by revelation, voted and accepted by the saints, then there ought to be a modification to the canon so that there can be no question on the matter. Why does our scripture still say something that isn't acurate for our time? Why is our canon closed?

Listen to Conference.

[CASteinman]

I missed the revelation about the Word of Wisdom being a commandment. I sure you overlooked it in your short list; do you have a reference for it? If not, then congratulations you just joined in understanding the difference between a policy and a commandment. Cheers.

Check the quotes above. They are all referenced. They distinctly say that it is a commandment.

Edited August 22, 2012 by CASteinman

[CASteinman]

It is useful to remember that the first 3 verses of D&C 89 are not part of the actual Revelation but are clerical notes added to the Revelation. The word of the Lord comes after verse 3. Here are the first 3 verses -- the parts that are clerical emendations:

A Word of Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion— to be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days— given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.

[Kenngo1969]

Why do I continue to abstain from beer or wine or coffee when medical consensus continues to grow that imbibing these substances in moderation may actually have health benefits? Because I have covenanted to do so. Why do I continue to abstain from premarital intimate physical relations? Why would I do so even when the world would see nothing wrong if I were to find someone with whom I could engage in physical intimacy? Because I have covenanted to abide by the law of chastity.

Are there temporal, tangible, physical benefits to avoiding these things? Sure. I don’t have to worry about becoming addicted to a substance I’ve never even tried, and I don’t have to worry about contracting a sexually-transmitted disease (STD) or bringing a new life into the world under what I would consider to be less than ideal circumstances if I don’t engage in intimacy without benefit of marriage. Is there physical power in keeping these covenants? Sure. Physically, I’m better off than I would be if I were to contract an STD or another illness which, while not primarily sexual in nature, could still harm my health (such as hepatitis, in any of its glorious varieties).

True, I could lessen the risk of physical harm (although I couldn’t completely eliminate it) by using a condom if I were engage in intimacy without benefit of marriage. And by no means do I mean to suggest that anyone who has not covenanted to abstain from certain substances somehow is less in God’s eyes for using such substances even if I make a different choice. And I could contract hepatitis or AIDS through no fault of my own. If that were to happen, would that take away the power inherent in covenant keeping? No. But I do these things—I keep these covenants (albeit imperfectly, in some respects)—because there is spiritual power in covenant keeping, whatever the arguable harmlessness of engaging in intimacy while using a condom, or of using, in moderation, substances which are proscribed by the Word of Wisdom.

However else I might avoid harm, and whatever other benefits might accrue to me by doing otherwise, there is power—spiritual power—in keeping my covenants. If I keep them, I have access to power to which I would not have access if I were to do otherwise. That’s true no matter what the world says about drinking wine, beer, or coffee in moderation, and no matter what it says about what’s permissible when two people are in a “committed relationship.”

Edited August 22, 2012 by Kenngo1969

[pmccombs1]

Listen to Conference.

That's insufficient. I wasn't alive when the declaration was made. There is too little continuity in a conference talk, and usually not even sufficient authority (i.e. we know that there is an established method for accepting new revelation "by common consent"). It appears that common consent was achieved in relation to the Word of Wisdom in order to make its status as a commandment official. If so, this ought to have been canonized and the "clerical" part of section 89 redacted or updated. That's why we have scriptures. Why do we allow them to mislead us when we continually receive additional light and knowledge?

[CASteinman]

That's insufficient. I wasn't alive when the declaration was made.

Doesn't matter. Conference is where it is taught.

If so, this ought to have been canonized and the "clerical" part of section 89 redacted or updated.

Perhaps you can convince the brethren to name you President of the Church and you can have your way.

[KevinG]

There is a heck of a lot of continuity on the Word of Wisdom in conference talks http://www.lds.org/search?query=%22word+of+wisdom%22〈=eng&collection=general-conference

It is a slothful servant who must be commanded in all things.

[CASteinman]

usually not even sufficient authority

Originally I was including this in my previous reply but I reconsidered and decided this deserved its own reply. Because this is the heart of the matter.

If it is an Apostle -- it is impossible for it to be insufficient authority.

The Apostles are sufficient Authority and especially when their words go out in the Official Organs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, they are authoritative.

Now you may seek bibliolatrous and dead prophet approval for your positions or a lack of desire to be submissive to the commandment, but the Apostles and the Prophets are the Authorities on the matter.

You do not have to accept their authority and you do not have to be a member of the Church. The Lord, in His astonishing Goodness has provided for all of us -- even those of us who are rebellious.

But the house is nicer if we can find it in our hearts to be disciples.

[CASteinman]

Why do I continue to abstain from beer or wine or coffee when medical consensus continues to grow that imbibing these substances in moderation may actually have health benefits?

FYI... I just read (with gratitude) a study that says you get much much more resveratrol from a handful of blueberries than you would get in a bottle of wine.

Blueberries. Yum. Just saying...

[KevinG]

FYI... I just read (with gratitude) a study that says you get much much more resveratrol from a handful of blueberries than you would get in a bottle of wine.

Blueberries. Yum. Just saying...

And all without the risk of loss of motor control, loss of restraint and possible addiction to alcohol.

[pmccombs1]

Are there temporal, tangible, physical benefits to avoiding these things?

I think one of the greatest reasons for the Word of Wisdom is that it creates an identity within us. It is a form of solidarity that also alows us to think of ourselves as the Lord's own.

As a law of health, the current list of of "rules" that we understand to be the same as "the Word of Wisdom" is rather unimpressive. Don't drink coffee, black or green tea, alcohol; don't smoke or chew tobacco; abstain from illegal drugs. Those opportunities for addiction and abuse (and perhaps even some health and social benefits) are soon enough filled up with other vices as we find plenty of unhealthy habits to take their place.

The prospect of living righteously is a possibility for some of us, right up until it becomes a commandment. Taboos and neuroses seem to go hand in hand; prohibiting a thing appears to be a sure way to make it especially problematic until the culture assimilates it. And then you have people who only obey "because they promissed," or out of tradition, and not because they understand the doctrine and desire to be godly.

I think it is a worthy goal to make bad men good. However, I suspect that most of the time we only succeed in making bad men behave well.

[KevinG]

I think it is a worthy goal to make bad men good. However, I suspect that most of the time we only succeed in making bad men behave well.

Civilizing men is a good start but few can sustain good behavior over the long term without a change of heart. Getting legalistic over what is commandment and what is suggestion in the word of wisdom is a good indicator if someone is converted or merely blindly obedient.

Edited August 22, 2012 by KevinG

[pmccombs1]

If it is an Apostle -- it is impossible for it to be insufficient authority.

I disagree. Things must be done in wisdom and order. We already have sufficient evidence of apostles later accused of "speaking only for themselves" and not for the Lord. A process was established by modern day revelation to ensure, by common consent, that the authorities spoke for God and that people would hear His voice and accept it. The Lord does not give what we will not accept, and has not asked us to follow blindly.

[pmccombs1]

Perhaps you can convince the brethren to name you President of the Church and you can have your way.

My way? Ha! I would return the commandment to its former "recommendation" status. When the Lord makes me prophet, that's what I'll do. And it will be indisputable!

[KevinG]

My way? Ha! I would return the commandment to its former "recommendation" status. When the Lord makes me prophet, that's what I'll do. And it will be indisputable!

When you get that call please do something about broccoli. I hate the stuff and my wife keeps insisting it is good for me.

[pmccombs1]

Civilizing men is a good start but few can sustain good behavior over the long term without a change of heart. Getting legalistic over what is commandment and what is suggestion in the word of wisdom is a good indicator if someone is converted or merely blindly obedient.

For my part, I confess a lack of conversion. Obedience, yes... I wouldn't call it blind, though, but personal.

[CASteinman]

I think it is a worthy goal to make bad men good. However, I suspect that most of the time we only succeed in making bad men behave well.

I rather liked this statement in so many ways -- but it is rather a strange and somewhat negative one -- by the use of the word "only"

Making bad men behave well -- and good men behave better -- is what it is all about. It is not an "only" or "merely" thing. It is the Work of God. I am thankful for it.

[pmccombs1]

When you get that call please do something about broccoli. I hate the stuff and my wife keeps insisting it is good for me.

It's fantastic when steamed right, with a bit of salt and a sprinkle of parmesan cheese!

The truth is, I think we really ought to focus more on the "dos" of the WoW and not just on the "don'ts".

[KevinG]

It's fantastic when steamed right, with a bit of salt and a sprinkle of parmesan cheese!

OK just as long as boiled to mushy with a lumpy coating of Velveeta is considered a sin.

The truth is, I think we really ought to focus more on the "dos" of the WoW and not just on the "don'ts".

Yes, we Mormons are not immune to hobby horses.