Word of Wisdom, nothing new.

[_malkie]

The stupid thing about the WoW is that it supposedly contains a promise. The promise that those who abide by it will "run and not be weary" and "not faint" and all that jazz. The problem is that this promise is not realized by many, MANY WoW followers.

Perhaps the promise is realised only if you consistently apply tobacco to sick cattle - that's part of D&C 89 that most people probably forget to carry out.

Like, when did you last slap a baccy poultice on an ailing bovine?

Well then, what do you expect?

[_just me]

The stupid thing about the WoW is that it supposedly contains a promise. The promise that those who abide by it will "run and not be weary" and "not faint" and all that jazz. The problem is that this promise is not realized by many, MANY WoW followers.

Perhaps the promise is realised only if you consistently apply tobacco to sick cattle - that's part of D&C 89 that most people probably forget to carry out.

Like, when did you last slap a baccy poultice on an ailing bovine?

Well then, what do you expect?

Good call. I have been derelict in my duties. *shamed*

[_Themis]

This is the same narrow interpretation and reading that many modern-day Mormons suffer from. The WoW is not telling them that the pure wine that they make they cannot drink.

Why don't we let let D&C 89 speck for itself, instead of creating your own interpretations that are clearly in conflict with the text. Verse 5 clearly states it is not good for man, and God disapproves of drinking it except for sacraments.

After all, anyone that knows anything about wine making knows that the person (or people in this case, the Mormons) are going to have to taste and drink the wine they make.

Strawman.

What are they going to do? Wait to determine if it is any good until it is time for the sacrament? That is ridiculous. And if you go on to read in verse 7, you get further clarification since wine is not listed as as being "not for the belly".

How it works is not whether it it not listed after one verse says it is bad and wrong, but whether another verse says it is ok to drink outside of sacrament. That is what you need to produce.

Now as far as this being unique or that alcohol is all the WoW is about, that is not so.

What? How the Heck did you get the idea from anyone that the WoW was only about alcohol. LOL

People have understood a long time that it is important to avoid nasty habits and drunkenness. It is very important to have proper nutrition and exercise as well.

Well that is the point of the OP. That what Joseph came up with was already thought by many.

This is another problem with the modern Mormon interpretation of the WoW.

Sure, but people here already know this. This is why hot drinks, which were though in Joseph's day to be bad for you, had to be reinterpreted by the church after it was clear that temperature was not a factor for being bad or good for you.

They are hypocritical about it. How many fat overweight people (given to an addiction for fast food and sweets) are given a pass to go in the temple and they swear up and down they are keeping the WoW? If this is the Mormon worthiness test (which I really don't think it is), then they need to live by ALL parts of it and not just one small part that is misunderstood.

They are living the WoW as defined by the church today and it's leaders who members believe are inspired of God. I agree that most people are doing far worse things that the WoW does not restrict.

So, basically, if you drink beer (or pure wine) and are healthy - eat nutritional foods and exercise, I do not see anything that would preclude you from living the WoW and going to the temple. This is NOT the case or standard today in modern Mormonism and one of the reasons I have a distaste for it.

Based on your posts, I do not see you getting a TR anytime soon, and if you lost your membership from the past, I doubt you will be able to get a new one. The church can be strict in certain areas you seem unwilling to bend to.

Verse 18, and 20, the Lord states it two ways in fact, he recommends walking and running: 18: "walking in obedience to the commandments" and later 20: "And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint." Now, isn't that interesting how he puts it considering the topic he's discussing?

It does not recommend it at all. It says if you do the other things listed(not exercise) you will be able to run and not be weary. Exercise was not thought of as we do today. Most people got exercise due to the many demands of life back then. I am sure many noticed a correlation to smoking and running.

[_Drifting]

Well that is the point of the OP. That what Joseph came up with was already thought by many.

Yes...yes it is...

[_Tobin]

This is the same narrow interpretation and reading that many modern-day Mormons suffer from. The WoW is not telling them that the pure wine that they make they cannot drink.

Why don't we let let D&C 89 speck for itself, instead of creating your own interpretations that are clearly in conflict with the text. Verse 5 clearly states it is not good for man, and God disapproves of drinking it except for sacraments.

What you are stating is purely an artifact of ripping something out of context. You can make it mean anything you want. You would only use verse 5 and remove it from the rest of the material later one. Also, remember that verses are artificial constructs only used for reference purposes and not meant to instill context, so keep reading for the context. Do you see the words "pure wine" implying the wine cited before was "impure" as I stated? See the failure to include wine as "not for the belly" later on? Clearly your out-of-context interpretation does not bear up to examination as you proceed through the text.

After all, anyone that knows anything about wine making knows that the person (or people in this case, the Mormons) are going to have to taste and drink the wine they make.

Strawman.

What are they going to do? Wait to determine if it is any good until it is time for the sacrament? That is ridiculous. And if you go on to read in verse 7, you get further clarification since wine is not listed as as being "not for the belly".

How it works is not whether it it not listed after one verse says it is bad and wrong, but whether another verse says it is ok to drink outside of sacrament. That is what you need to produce.

Oh really, please enlighten me as to how this scenario works in the real world then?

Now as far as this being unique or that alcohol is all the WoW is about, that is not so.

What? How the Heck did you get the idea from anyone that the WoW was only about alcohol. LOL

People have understood a long time that it is important to avoid nasty habits and drunkenness. It is very important to have proper nutrition and exercise as well.

Well that is the point of the OP. That what Joseph came up with was already thought by many.

The OP stated it was only about abstinence from alcohol and that the assumption was this commandment was unique. As I stated, neither of these criticisms of the WoW are correct. The WoW is NOT solely about abstinence from alcohol nor is there any expectation that the information contained within it is unique.

Verse 18, and 20, the Lord states it two ways in fact, he recommends walking and running: 18: "walking in obedience to the commandments" and later 20: "And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint." Now, isn't that interesting how he puts it considering the topic he's discussing?

It does not recommend it at all. It says if you do the other things listed(not exercise) you will be able to run and not be weary. Exercise was not thought of as we do today. Most people got exercise due to the many demands of life back then. I am sure many noticed a correlation to smoking and running.

I agree with your statement about the concept of "exercise". That is why it is implicit within the instruction - it is an action oriented statement in verse 18 with a corresponding action oriented result. It is the connotation (era, people, culture, etc) that is important here and how it is used. That is what I was noting.

[_Themis]

What you are stating is purely an artifact of ripping something out of context. You can make it mean anything you want.

You have got to be kidding. LOL You show no context for your interpretation which conflicts with the text,a dn then accuse me of doing it, when my interpretation fits the text. Unbelievable.

You would only use verse 5 and remove it from the rest of the material later one.

Again, you have got to be kidding. You do make me laugh a lot. I show you verse 5 where it specifically says its bad and God disapproves, and only gets one exception. Wine is only used for one thing, so the context is not hard to figure out. Then you use another verse which does not say anything about wine and conclude now that the text is saying is ok to drink. Holy Crap Batman. You need to establish your interpretation by showing where in the text it's says wine is ok to drink other then the exception given.

Also, remember that verses are artificial constructs only used for reference purposes and not meant to instill context, so keep reading for the context.

This does not help you as I have already shown.

Do you see the words "pure wine" implying the wine cited before was "impure" as I stated? See the failure to include wine as "not for the belly" later on? Clearly your out-of-context interpretation does not bear up to examination as you proceed through the text.

Incorrect again. Again not listing wine in another verse does absolutely nothing to make it now ok. Pure wine was in reference to enemies as you can see in D&C 27:3.

Oh really, please enlighten me as to how this scenario works in the real world then?

You made a argument that one who makes the wine would need to test it for quality as also meaning it is therefore ok for all to drink it. It's a bad argument, and not supported by the text or it's context. No one is arguing that one would not taste it for quality.

The OP stated it was only about abstinence from alcohol and that the assumption was this commandment was unique. As I stated, neither of these criticisms of the WoW are correct. The WoW is NOT solely about abstinence from alcohol nor is there any expectation that the information contained within it is unique.

You seem to have a problem with comprehension, and I mean a really bad problem with it. You get whatever idea in your head and state it as fact, yet if one reads the OP you find nothing at all even suggesting what you say above.

I agree with your statement about the concept of "exercise". That is why it is implicit within the instruction - it is an action oriented statement in verse 18 with a corresponding action oriented result. It is the connotation (era, people, culture, etc) that is important here and how it is used. That is what I was noting.

There is nothing implicit within the text about exercising. Your reading comprehension is really bad. The text only mentions doing what it says will help one to be healthier and be able to run and not be weary.

[_Tobin]

Themis, at this point, I'll just agree to disagree with you. There is nothing in your statements (except as I've already noted) that is reasonable or even worth discussing any further. You clearly do not understand the OP, the WoW, or the name of the topic or why I'm stating what I'm stating. You interpretation doesn't fit with other traditions or scriptures and you are welcome to it, but it is isolated and won't withstand any amount of examination.

[_Themis]

Themis, at this point, I'll just agree to disagree with you. There is nothing in your statements (except as I've already noted) that is reasonable or even worth discussing any further. You clearly do not understand the OP, the WoW, or the name of the topic or why I'm stating what I'm stating. You interpretation doesn't fit with other traditions or scriptures and you are welcome to it, but it is isolated and won't withstand any amount of examination.

LOLOLOLOL Unbelievable. I think you are a nice person, but you really do not have good comprehension skills. You are right that we won't agree, but I doubt you will find any that will agree with you on many things like this. That you can't understand this stuff is what I find very puzzling.

[_Themis]

The OP stated it was only about abstinence from alcohol and that the assumption was this commandment was unique. As I stated, neither of these criticisms of the WoW are correct. The WoW is NOT solely about abstinence from alcohol nor is there any expectation that the information contained within it is unique.

It would be interesting to have Drifting comment if he thinks he made any statement that meant that the WoW was only about abstinence from alcohol, and see who has better comprehension skills here. Not that it would I am really good at it though.

[_Tobin]

The OP stated it was only about abstinence from alcohol and that the assumption was this commandment was unique. As I stated, neither of these criticisms of the WoW are correct. The WoW is NOT solely about abstinence from alcohol nor is there any expectation that the information contained within it is unique.

It would be interesting to have Drifting comment if he thinks he made any statement that meant that the WoW was only about abstinence from alcohol, and see who has better comprehension skills here. Not that it would I am really good at it though.

Themis, Drifting and I have already discussed the OP and why I took the position I did (the one you seem to have so many problems understanding). Just read the thread.