Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

D&C 89:17 Says We Can Have Beer?! Or So There Is A Claim By Some.


Recommended Posts

Posted

I'd say one reason that we should avoid beer and alcohol is it's addictive, plus the smell is putrid- If the blog author thinks otherwise he should visit AA

Surely one's breath after consuming a garlic-heavy meal is unpleasant smelling, but that hardly makes it an unhealthy food. Any number of foods that we eat on a regular basis can be addictive. Folks who regularly have sugar-laden deserts typically do not enjoy quality health, and are frequently overweight (and oft-times obese). In my opinion, the dramatic overload of fructose in most packaged foods these days is certainly more dangerous to long term health than the minimal amount of alcohol in most beers.

Posted (edited)

Meat preservation has been round for ages.

Meat and its Preservation in the 19th Century

http://janeaustenswo...e-olde-england/

There was no refrigeration or canning in the early 19th Century. Drying, pickling, and curing with salt were the only long term methods for meat preservation available at the time.

BTW Salt Peter is used to preserve color, and not the shelf life of meats. The use of herbs and spices was initially to disguise meat that had gone bad. Later on people found out they really liked the taste of herbed and spiced meats.

In the times of Zions Camp fish not properly preservered stank after three days. Did they pack it in salt, or did they make fish jerky out of it?

I've cured some of my own meats. Unless properly cured it can make you very very sick.

Edited by thesometimesaint
Posted

I've already said that I don't have a problem with the early Saints drinking beer. All I am saying they probably also drank Barley Water.

Do you have any record of that anywhere? And what does it matter if they did? They might have also drank apple juice. How is that relevant?

Posted (edited)

BTW Salt Peter is used to preserve color, and not the shelf life of meats.

Not true. Though saltpetre has the added advantage of preserving the colour of meats, as just one more salt it has been used since the early 1800s to preserve the meat from spoilage, proving especially effective against Clostridium botulinum, in contrast to sodium nitrate (link).

The use of herbs and spices was initially to disguise meat that had gone bad.

Also not true, though a persistent falsehood that, as a professional historian whose work has touched upon the spice trade, I feel compelled to correct. See here for a concise refutation.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Posted

Meat preservation has been round for ages.

Meat and its Preservation in the 19th Century

http://janeaustenswo...e-olde-england/

I know about salt curing. One had to par-boil the meat to reduce the salt content before cooking and using it. That much salt certainly must have some deleterious effects on ones health.

Posted

BTW Salt Peter is used to preserve color, and not the shelf life of meats.

And I have heard it has some negative effects on male libido.

Posted (edited)

So my husband mentioned when I reported this discussion to him, that we probably need to be aware that among the more well to do of the day (he is a Charles D-ckens fan), their meals would often consist of at least three courses of meat, even at times during breakfast where one would eat a pie, ham, kidneys, etc. and dinners would include a fish, fowl and meat course. Considering the general state of the Saints over most of Joseph's lifetime, unless he was directing this counsel to a small section of the LDS community, most would be lucky to get one meat meal a day, I bet...though I have not studied it and only take my conclusion based on tales of hunger and what people ate in hard times.

If this above was considered the ideal to aim for, then perhaps sparingly isn't quite the same as I've imagined which is eating very little of something very infrequently. Even today we have extreme meals, though we generally have some small additional amounts of meat on a salad or combine our meats all together like in having a bacon wrapped burger with cheese....or something like this:

http://most-expensive.com/burgers-world

Edited by calmoriah
Posted

Considering Joseph Smith is known to have been a beer drinker and even has wine in the jail the night before his death in the one sided gunfight... why the prohibition? It was not and is not a commandment even tho seemingly made so in the early 20th Century. It appears to be a control measure exercised by those who misuse their leadership positions.

Posted

Considering Joseph Smith is known to have been a beer drinker and even has wine in the jail the night before his death in the one sided gunfight... why the prohibition? It was not and is not a commandment even tho seemingly made so in the early 20th Century. It appears to be a control measure exercised by those who misuse their leadership positions.

Yup, that is what those old prophets and apostles are good for; just creating crap for you to obey. Guess what, you get to choose whatever you want to do and no one will force you to do anything different. Quit yer belly-achin and choose. No one is lookin 'or your shoulder and I sure as heck a'int callin on ya to obey. East, drink, and be merry is what the good book says. Who you wanna be?

Posted (edited)

Even though the scriptures specify "beasts of the field"?

It depends on the way you read the sentence. I think the sentence structure would properly be interpreted the way I have done so, but I could be wrong. The sentence starts out by declaring grain to be good for man and beast and then it breaks this down further in the following manner:

Man

Beasts of the field

Fowls of heaven

Wild animals

When the sentence says, "and these hath God made for man...", it would, logically, be referring to that which immediately precedes it, which is wild animals. Otherwise you would have to include man as one of things made for man, or even the grain itself.

Hope that makes sense.

Edited by T-Shirt
Posted

Do you have any record of that anywhere? And what does it matter if they did? They might have also drank apple juice. How is that relevant?

None direct. But Barley Water is every bit as ancient as beer. They obviously had the necessary materials, and knowledge to make both.

None a bit.

They may have drank a limited amount of apple juice in season. Apple cider and maybe even hard cider were common. But we have no actual accounts of the early Saints drinking those either. Though it is entirely possible that hard cider was included in what JS was talking about in the WoW. Ohio and Illinois of the early 19th Century were noted for their wine making areas.

Relevent to the idea that those early Saints were neither Teetotalers nor Lushes. Today of course we are teetotalers, and have been longer than any of us have been alive.

Posted (edited)

Yup, that is what those old prophets and apostles are good for; just creating crap for you to obey. Guess what, you get to choose whatever you want to do and no one will force you to do anything different. Quit yer belly-achin and choose. No one is lookin 'or your shoulder and I sure as heck a'int callin on ya to obey. East, drink, and be merry is what the good book says. Who you wanna be?

He has a point. A lot of discussion on this board has mentioned that it's more for obedience, the WoW. If what Cal mentioned about the meat eating in that day. If indeed they ate it at every meal sometimes, then it surely does become a obedience deal. ETA: Or for those that didn't have much meat how hard it would be to have restrictions. Where it was difficult to quit eating it. Also, the tea/coffee would be difficult to quit. The frontier would have been difficult without that hot drink to get them going in the cold, not to mention the caffeine! Edited by Tacenda
Posted

Which is a shame since Fido stew is delicious ... cooked with chillies, lime leaves, lemongrass, galangale, etc. and served over hot rice.

I only have a little time left living on this side of the world (I'm moving not dying!).

Unfortunately dog is one thing I've not had the pleasure of tasting. I would imagine it's better than the jelly-fish I had, which was like crunchy fishy cabbage.

Posted

It depends on the way you read the sentence. I think the sentence structure would properly be interpreted the way I have done so, but I could be wrong. The sentence starts out by declaring grain to be good for man and beast and then it breaks this down further in the following manner:

Man

Beasts of the field

Fowls of heaven

Wild animals

When the sentence says, "and these hath God made for man...", it would, logically, be referring to that which immediately precedes it, which is wild animals. Otherwise you would have to include man as one of things made for man, or even the grain itself.

Hope that makes sense.

It does make sense. I think each member is given the opportunity to study and apply the scriptures by the spirit so I think that what may apply to one person in one way may apply to a other in another way. So if your interpretation works and you feel good about it then I've no issues with it. I appreciate having some areas of subjectivity.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Joseph Smith drank beer and alcoholic beverages. Even wine the night before the losing shootout at the Carthage jail. The word of wisdom is not a commandment - I says so. Those who make it so go directly against the revelation.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...