The New WoW Question

[california boy]

17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

OK, so I was right. You  did bring it up after all. I did not “drag [you] into this.” 

So Scott, this is how the board operates.  Someone makes a statement or quotes someone and others asks questions about it.  In this case, Hamba quoted the attitude of Brigham Young on alcohol.  I asked the question about whether Brigham Young owned a saloon and distillery.  My question was a result of the quote Hamba stated.  If he had not have used the quote, I would not have asked the question.  

This was not an issue for me as you stated.  It was a question.  I personally wouldn't care of Brigham Young owned 10 distilleries.  I am interested in what he really thought about drinking alcohol.  The quote that Hamba only tells one part of the story.  Sorry if the other part of the story is such a problem for you.

[california boy]

13 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

That's what I understood this quote by you to mean:

"BY may have been preaching one message, but his personal actions were telling another story."

If I took this wrong I apologize.

I think the issue appears to be more complex than just a black and white answer.  Given his interest in producing and consuming alcohol, I don't think he had as big of issue with using alcohol as was first quoted by Hamba.  In reviewing all of the articles that have been linked, it appears that many of the early saints were consuming alcohol that is pretty consistent with how a lot of people consume alcohol today.  The gamut went from abstaining to getting drunk.

[ALarson]

10 minutes ago, california boy said:

I think the issue appears to be more complex than just a black and white answer.  Given his interest in producing and consuming alcohol, I don't think he had as big of issue with using alcohol as was first quoted by Hamba.  In reviewing all of the articles that have been linked, it appears that many of the early saints were consuming alcohol that is pretty consistent with how a lot of people consume alcohol today.  The gamut went from abstaining to getting drunk.

I'm not sure why any would deny that there was alcohol consumption and selling that took place by church members (and leaders including Brigham Young) during the early years in Salt Lake.  It reminds me of the claims that Jesus really wasn't drinking wine, but it was actually only grape juice.

The Word of Wisdom evolved.   That means it's different today than it was back then as far as what was expected of members and also expected behavior by the leaders.  But let's not pretend it was only for medicinal purposes or that it didn't take place....that's pretty ridiculous to try to claim, IMO.

I do believe that BY eventually had strong feelings against the consumption of alcohol...but it's not accurate to only use those quotes if we want a complete picture of what took place over the years in Utah (or before), IMO.

Edited October 9, 2019 by ALarson

[ksfisher]

3 minutes ago, california boy said:

I think the issue appears to be more complex than just a black and white answer.  Given his interest in producing and consuming alcohol, I don't think he had as big of issue with using alcohol as was first quoted by Hamba.  In reviewing all of the articles that have been linked, it appears that many of the early saints were consuming alcohol that is pretty consistent with how a lot of people consume alcohol today.  The gamut went from abstaining to getting drunk.

I think you're right, the issue was complex.  I believe that was why when Section 89 was revealed the Lord gave it "not by commandment or restraint" and "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints."  That was why it wasn't until 1933 that observance of the Word of Wisdom was not mandated  to enter the temple.  The Lord was patient with His people.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, california boy said:

I am claiming that there is a long history of men claiming to speak for God or were under divine guidance as they made policies and claims of directions from God that were a product of their time more than in communication with the Divine.

Which I don't disagree with, but we were discussing specifically why Jesus was criticizing the Pharisees and whether or not this was for hypocrisy or something else...at least that was how I understood the interchange.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And I thought Calm already addressed wine production in St. George, saying it was intended for sacramental wine. 

No, that is not what I said/quoted.  My reading is that the original purpose of the Church/Young vineyard was for both sacramental wine and a cash crop for exporting.  

Wine (in general as opposed to the Church production of it) was used quite a lot locally.  It also reads like even church owned wine probably ended up in local social use due to having so much more than intended because grapes and wine were used as tithing by the private owners so the Church had more than just self produced.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

7 hours ago, california boy said:

From the article you posted, it sounds like the saints had no problem using wine similarly to how it is used today.  And it sounds like Brigham Young would go down there and also have a glass of wine with his meal.  And evidently they were actively using wine until 1892. I also didn't realize there were so many wineries down there.

I was unaware that they were using wine for the sacrament. Found that interesting.  Thanks for the link.

Yep.  Whether original intent was to restrict social and recreational use by the Saints (which I think the article implies), what actually happened was not that restrictive.  People tend to use what they produce if they can.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, ALarson said:

But it's written by several that BY built a distillery, but some may have called it a saloon too (?).   I'm not sure how many years it was in business, but I do believe eventually all liquor was made and sold by nonmembers.

 

The quote I linked to said the distillery was never used iirc because the army came in and brought a cheap source, so it wasn't needed to produce alcohol for medicinal uses anymore and Young sounded like he refused to make money off of it (he himself apparently never drank whiskey, saw it in a different category to wine or beer).

I doubt they meant the saloon was the distillery, not the way the intended use was described.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I still say the linked article lacks footnoting and sourcing, but I’m not interested in pursuing the matter. 

That was my problem last night, I found a number of assertions, but nothing was documented.  Haven't looked yet today as haven't finished reading thread to see if documentation has been found.

Quote

I've read this same information elsewhere.  I'm not sure why this is such an issue.

Because they could be just repeating the info, each assuming the other did the research.

Added:  looks to me like ALarson provided decent documentation, so no need for me to look for more.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

Never mind, having a hard time processing today.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, SettingDogStar said:

If you’re going to micromanage someone’s drinking because of scripture then you should do it with the whole revelation.

Then that goes to if you are going to micromanage one revelation, you should do it with all revelation and we end up with 613 or more rules.

I prefer picking a few to focus on in diligence as examples to teach us how to live the Law of God in general, how to apply principles of discipleship on our own.

When I learned algebra, my teacher had us work a number of specific proofs both basic and complicated at the beginning in step by step process he worked with us on the board while the final test was then if we could solve problems we had never encountered before using the same principles.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I think the issue appears to be more complex than just a black and white answer.  Given his interest in producing and consuming alcohol, I don't think he had as big of issue with using alcohol as was first quoted by Hamba.  In reviewing all of the articles that have been linked, it appears that many of the early saints were consuming alcohol that is pretty consistent with how a lot of people consume alcohol today.  The gamut went from abstaining to getting drunk.

He seemed to have viewed whiskey as in a different category.  His own original distillery ended up being closed before producing anything.  I don't know if other distilleries (as opposed to wineries) were opened up by the Church.  The Zion's Mercantile quote seems to indicate it did.

Quote

When the distillery was almost completed and in good working order, an army was heard of in our vicinity and I shut up the works I did not make a gallon of whisky at my works, because it came here in great quantities, more than was needed. I could have made thousands of dollars from my still, which has ever since been as dead property...

One of the links I posted had Young saying he had never drunk whiskey, don't know how old he was when he said that and if it changed.  I only read comments about him drinking a glass of wine on occasion (with a meal if I understood correctly).  He didn't seem to be repulsed by limited use of whiskey by others (the quote about allowing the older people to drink a little whiskey without hassling them).

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

It wasn't a charge though, it was a question.  That is what we do on this board.  Ask questions to get other peoples views on various statements.  I was very interested in the article Calm linked as well as some of the other information that was posted.  If I hadn't asked the question, then I would not have known the answers that were provided.  The answer turned out to be way more than yes or no.  And hopefully, I was not the only one that learned a little more about how BY operated.

You are so defensive and take everything so personally.  You think everyone is a critic of the church that is searching for the facts.  This discussion has shed light on this issue. Is it now anti-Mormon to search for answers about the Church's past?.

Oh, it was more than just posing a question. It was a deceitful way to introduce out-of-context facts into a conversation with plausible deniability (“I was only asking a question”) as Mike Huckabee did a couple of election cycles ago when he asked in a media interview, “Don’t Mormons believe Jesus and Satan are brothers?”

And you have disparaged the Church of Jesus Christ enough over the years to qualify as a critic. 

[MustardSeed]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

He seemed to have viewed whiskey as in a different category.  His own original distillery ended up being closed before producing anything.  I don't know if other distilleries (as opposed to wineries) were opened up by the Church.  The Zion's Mercantile quote seems to indicate it did.

One of the links I posted had Young saying he had never drunk whiskey, don't know how old he was when he said that and if it changed.  I only read comments about him drinking a glass of wine on occasion (with a meal if I understood correctly).

Lucky guy - several women to legit choose from and wine with dinner. :0

[Scott Lloyd]

49 minutes ago, Calm said:

No, that is not what I said/quoted.  My reading is that the original purpose of the Church/Young vineyard was for both sacramental wine and a cash crop for exporting.  

Wine (in general as opposed to the Church production of it) was used quite a lot locally.  It also reads like even church owned wine probably ended up in local social use due to having so much more than intended because grapes and wine were used as tithing by the private owners so the Church had more than just self produced.

I didn’t mean to say it was exclusively for sacramental use. And technically that’s not what I said, but I see how it could be taken that way, and I should have clearer in my wording. 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What about them? 

Well let me see...

The WoW talks about eating meat sparingly. How many TR holders do that. My guess is not many. Is that worse than drinking a beer or two, or a glass of wine a day health wise? Yes it is. 

Is lots of sugar and for you? Worse than coffee and tea? Yes. In fact coffee and tea have been shown to be good for you. Yet look at the amount of sugar Mormons consume. As well as meat. Look at obesity rates among LDS people. I thing a few cups of coffee a day, a cup of tea or two, a beer or two, a glass of wine is far better for you health wise than all the garbage LDS people consume to their detriment.

If the WoW is a health guide, then why prohibit temple attendance for some things but not others? And don't tell me the WoW is an obedience thing rather than a health thing. 

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Is that worse than drinking a beer or two, or a glass of wine a day health wise? Yes it is. 

Why?

(Healthwise, my understanding is that the type of meat, how it is prepared and what else is eaten makes a big impact on whether or not a high level of meat intake is healthy or not.  I think it would be very wise for everyone to cut down on meat intake unless special needs healthwise...for example, I get sick without some animal protein daily, fish is best.  I think it is also a great idea to cut back due to methane and other ecological impact of large meat production.  Economically it makes more sense for people to get protein and calories from cheaper, but still high quality sources.)

Alcohol can have a lot of calories (100-300 in a glass of wine depending on sweetness, etc; standard serving of whiskey of 1.5 oz is about 100).  Worse, drinking alcohol recreationally may lead to careless consumption.  My daughter is diabetic and she got constant warnings in her training about being careful with alcohol until we moved down to Utah...and she was 12 up in Canada.  Guess they wanted to drill it into her beforecshe developed a habit.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, Teancum said:

And don't tell me the WoW is an obedience thing rather than a health thing. 

Not allowing half of the discussion isn't helpful, imo.

[etana]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why?

(Healthwise, my understanding is that the type of meat, how it is prepared and what else is eaten makes a big impact on whether or not a high level of meat intake is healthy or not)

Yes, i think it is a lot more nuanced than any simple pithy reduction to a list of don'ts. Meat is complicated as is alcohol and tea, all of which can be beneficial or detrimental. I see it as avoiding making our consumption a stumbling block for others (the weakest of saints), Romans 4:21, 1 Cor 8:13. So if i avoid Ice cream around my mother, who struggles to stop after a scoop, i'm living the spirit of the WoW. If i grab a big slice of cake and extra scoops and frequent red meat around my family members who i know to be struggling with obesity, i am not.

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, etana said:

Yes, i think it is a lot more nuanced than any simple pithy reduction to a list of don'ts. Meat is complicated as is alcohol and tea, all of which can be beneficial or detrimental. I see it as avoiding making our consumption a stumbling block for others (the weakest of saints), Romans 4:21, 1 Cor 8:13. So if i avoid Ice cream around my mother, who struggles to stop after a scoop, i'm living the spirit of the WoW. If i grab a big slice of cake and extra scoops and frequent red meat around my family members who i know to be struggling with obesity, i am not.

Love this attitude.  My husband who is very supportive in other ways keeps bringing in empty carbs while I have a big problem with compulsive eating at times due to medication I take for sleep (sedatives often remove self control).  I can lose 2-3 lbs on low carb, but it is never low carb in our pantry and come 2 am when the cravings hit....sigh.

[Teancum]

30 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not allowing half of the discussion isn't helpful, imo.

Not sure what your point is.

[Teancum]

42 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why?

(Healthwise, my understanding is that the type of meat, how it is prepared and what else is eaten makes a big impact on whether or not a high level of meat intake is healthy or not.  I think it would be very wise for everyone to cut down on meat intake unless special needs healthwise...for example, I get sick without some animal protein daily, fish is best.  I think it is also a great idea to cut back due to methane and other ecological impact of large meat production.  Economically it makes more sense for people to get protein and calories from cheaper, but still high quality sources.)

Alcohol can have a lot of calories (100-300 in a glass of wine depending on sweetness, etc; standard serving of whiskey of 1.5 oz is about 100).  Worse, drinking alcohol recreationally may lead to careless consumption.  My daughter is diabetic and she got constant warnings in her training about being careful with alcohol until we moved down to Utah...and she was 12 up in Canada.  Guess they wanted to drill it into her beforecshe developed a habit.

My point is that LDS members pat themselves on the back for not drinking coffee, tea, a glass of wine or a beer or two. Yet so many are obese, consume far to much foods, sugar, sweets.... 

yet their health may be far worse then those who consume moderately the things I list above. 

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, Teancum said:

My point is that LDS members pat themselves on the back for not drinking coffee, tea, a glass of wine or a beer or two. Yet so many are obese, consume far to much foods, sugar, sweets.... 

yet their health may be far worse then those who consume moderately the things I list above. 

Okay, don't disagree with that or at least that some do.  Healthy behaviour is holistic, not just a few behaviours.  I do think the Church could do a better job with encouraging good health practices.

Edited October 9, 2019 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

12 minutes ago, Teancum said:

My point is that LDS members pat themselves on the back for not drinking coffee, tea, a glass of wine or a beer or two. Yet so many are obese, consume far to much foods, sugar, sweets.... 

yet their health may be far worse then those who consume moderately the things I list above. 

Please share the links to the data that led you to make these two claims. I'd like to analyse them for myself. Thanks!

[Calm]

21 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Not sure what your point is.

An analogy imo would be saying let's discuss the pros and cons of nuclear energy and then adding "but don't tell me about efficiency of energy production".