D&C 49

[inquirringmind]

What does "forbiddeth to abstain from meats" in verse 18 mean (and why does the footnote say "biddeth")?



Right now it's winter, so maybe we don't have to worry about it, but I find this very confusing.



Should we (generally, except in winter or famine) be vegetarians?

[Jake]

Depends on who you ask. Let the Spirit guide you on how to understand that verse.

If I were you, I would ignore all the footnotes and let the scriptures speak for themselves. Better yet, get a copy of the 1835 edition of the D&C. Then there are no footnotes at all, plus you get the Lectures on Faith where it belongs, in the scriptures.

[ajax]

I try to take full advantage of winter here in TX by going to one of the many world class BBQ joints for some beef ribs:

beefribs.jpg (9.52 KiB) Viewed 1910 times

[inquirringmind]

?

Hyrum Smith, brother of the prophet Joseph and Patriarch to the Church, wrote in 1842 in the Times and Seasons, which was then an official Church publication… "God...knows what course to pursue to restore mankind to...pristine excellency and primitive vigour, and health; and He has appointed the Word of Wisdom as one of the engines to bring about this thing, to remove the beastly appetites, the murderous disposition and the vitiated taste of man, to restore his body and vigour, promote peace between him and the brute creation, and as one of the little wheels in God's design, to help to regulate the great machinery, which shall eventually," and I call your attention to the word 'eventually,' "revolutionize the earth, and bring about the restoration of all things." (Times and Seasons 3:799-801)

He went on to say, "let them be sparing of the life of animals" it sounds like for Hyrum it went beyond just a matter of just human physical health, doesn't it? "let them be sparing of the life of animals, it is pleasing saith the Lord that flesh be used only in times of winter, or of famine."

...


Does D&C Section 49 Cancel Section 89?

If you choose to tread a similar path, be aware that you will encounter some Latter-day Saints who will ignorantly criticize you because they do not understand Section 49 of the Doctrine and Covenants and try to make it justify their own flesh-eating habits. They forget that this section was given two years before the Word of Wisdom (Section 89) and can't see that 49:18 is actually a warning to those who would prohibit others from abstaining from eating flesh rather than a condemnation of those who do abstain.

There is understandable reason for honest confusion on this point. First, there is an error in a footnote in the present edition of the LDS scriptures which suggests that "biddeth" means "forbiddeth." However, just as "left" surely does not mean "right," nor does "good" mean "bad," to "bid" someone does not mean the same as to "forbid" someone. "I bid you to come to my house" is the exact opposite of "I forbid you to come to my house." The inaccurate footnote prompts us to incorrectly believe that the person who asks another to abstain from meats is not ordained of God. However, the original scripture (which was published for 148 years without that footnote) teaches that he who forbids others to abstain from meats is the one who is not ordained of God. Furthermore, if forbid really meant bid it would alter 49:15 to also condemn "whoso 'biddeth' to marry."

Another component of the confusion is that some readers believe the clause "that man should not eat the same" is some sort of quotation by an imagined and unidentified vegetarian heretic. I suggest that it is really a modifying clause that clarifies what it means to "abstain from meats." In other words, the passage could be interpreted, "Whoever forbids others to abstain from meats, "others" being those who believe that humans should not eat animal flesh, is not ordained of God to forbid them." This is consistent with the context of the rest of the section that instructed a non-LDS, Shaker community how it might modify its beliefs to be consistent with Mormon theology. On some points Shaker and LDS doctrine were poles apart, but on the this point Joseph Smith seems to have been telling the vegetarian Shakers that they would not be compelled by LDS leaders to eat meat if they were to convert to Mormonism.

http://www.vegsource.com/articles/catano.htm

[lemuel]

I will give you one bit of wisdom. It is a crime against nature to eat well done beef. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because they cooked their steaks to an internal temperature of 140 degrees...[\ronswanson]

[Jake]

stuff

Well, either Section 49 IS at odds with 89, or the author of that statement is doing some mental gymnastics to promote a vegetarian lifestyle.

Section 89 is clear with this statement:

Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly

Not much room for misinterpretation here.

But just about everyone has forgotten this part, the single most important part of the revelation:

To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom,

Long story short - We should quit worrying about what other people eat and worry about our own diet. As for me and my house, we will serve BACON!

[ajax]

Jake, fwiw the "not by commandment or constraint" part is Joseph's introduction to the revelation, not the revelation itself.

The Lord does say in verse 18:

"And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments"

In any case, whether commandment or not, meat is not strictly prohibited.

Long story short - We should quit worrying about what other people eat and worry about our own diet. As for me and my house, we will serve BACON

Amen.

[Jake]

the "not by commandment or constraint" part is Joseph's introduction to the revelation, not the revelation itself.

A point of technicality, but true. Thanks for the clarification.

And I enjoyed the hamburger I ate for lunch.

[inquirringmind]

In any case, whether commandment or not, meat is not strictly prohibited.

Not in winter or times of famine, but what about the rest of the time?

[ajax]

I'm famished at least once a day.

[Jeremy]

I'm famished at least once a day.

[SkyBird]

Depends on who you ask. Let the Spirit guide you on how to understand that verse.

If I were you, I would ignore all the footnotes and let the scriptures speak for themselves. Better yet, get a copy of the 1835 edition of the D&C. Then there are no footnotes at all, plus you get the Lectures on Faith where it belongs, in the scriptures.

Very well said...

"the Spirit knoweth all things"
(Book of Mormon | Alma 7:13)

[inquirringmind]

So do any of you know whether or not it's a sin to eat meat in the spring, summer, and fall (in an affluent country like the United States, where famine is unheard of)?

[davedan]

1. "Forbid to abstain" is a double negative. The footnote clarifies that meat is okay. The resurrected Christ ate broiled fish in the spring.

2. The LDS Word of Wisdom is NOT teaching "seasonal veganism" but teaching the food pyramid. Grains should take the big spot on the plate, veggies the medium spot and meat the little spot.

3. Sometimes it may be difficult in famine or winter to get veggies or grains so you should do the best you can in those circumstances.

[lemuel]

Just started my sous vide prime rib for tomorrow...

Vegetarians do have my respect.

[hyloglyph]

So do any of you know whether or not it's a sin to eat meat in the spring, summer, and fall (in an affluent country like the United States, where famine is unheard of)?

I don't "know" but my understanding is that all life is sacred and it pleases the Lord if we eat meat sparringly. I don't believe eating a burger everyday would be a "sin" though. According to Jesus in Matthew 15, nothing we put into our bodies can defile us-- so I wouldn't worry about the sin part.. However if we want to gain more Godly attributes I think eating less animal flesh is one way to do it. In the ideal world, all of nature lives in harmony and peace, the lamb and the lion lay down together etc etc. Maybe terrestrial organisms only take a life when absolutely necessary and in such circumstances the animal may give its life up honorably.

This should remain a personal thing at all times, it is not something we can force on others or something we can use to guage their level of righteousness by.

But the way I read section 89 is eating meat if it's not winter, cold, or famine, is just as big a breach of the WoW as drinking whiskey, and it is a bigger breach of the WoW than drinking iced coffee or beer. Good thing the WoW is not supposed to be a commanent.

[Zed7]

There appears to be a difference between wild meat and the beasts of the field.

D&C 89 (1835 version)

12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;

(what is the definition of beasts? D&C 49:19 For, behold, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and that which cometh of the earth, is ordained for the use of man for food and for raiment, and that he might have in abundance.)

Back to 89

13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used [*note the comma here in our version never existed in the 1835 version]only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine. [with the removal of the comma this effectively removes any confusion about what this verse is saying]

14 and 15 together

All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth; And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger.

What are "these"? "these" (note the semicolon) is directly referring to the wild animals that run and creep on the earth. Therefore, in times of famine and excess hunger, we go and hunt wild animals.

[hyloglyph]

There appears to be a difference between wild meat and the beasts of the field.

I have thought this way for some time now. I agree that there seems to be a distinction.

I had a few references for this outside of the two D&c verses you mentioned but I forgot them, and Im at work right now so I can't easily look them up.

This is interesting though. Was there a bible verse somewhere that made a distinction between animals and dumb animals?

[hyloglyph]

Just a coincidence that I happened to read this last night. I thought it was interesting that I had never caught this:



21 And it came to pass that the man received him into his house; and the man was called Amulek; and he brought forth bread and meat and set before Alma.

22 And it came to pass that Alma ate bread and was filled; and he ablessed Amulek and his house, and he gave thanks unto God.


So Amulek put bread and meat in front of Alma, and he ate bread and was filled.

[heartsongs]

What does "forbiddeth to abstain from meats" in verse 18 mean (and why does the footnote say "biddeth")?



Right now it's winter, so maybe we don't have to worry about it, but I find this very confusing.



Should we (generally, except in winter or famine) be vegetarians?

Maybe it is not necessarily just for meat per se...but, for any meat, the flesh of a fruit would be meat etc...I think that fad diets such as all vegan (no meats ever) or going no carbs, or no sugar ever, no bananas, or completely stopping all that God has ordained for and given to man as a "gift," we are supposed to, and should accept and use with moderation, not to excess, but with thankfulness for the good things that God has given to us.

I think if the Lord didn't want us to ever eat meat, or to never eat grains, or certain fruits he would have said so just like he did with strong drinks and tobacco. He specifically told us not to use them (tobacco and strong drinks) that they were not for the consumption of man. In some faiths they also abstain from the meats (gifts) of marriage. This should not be so as the Lord commanded us from the beginning to multiply and replenish the earth and that a son should leave his parents and cleave to his wife. So, I think that "meat" is more than just actual animal meat. Just my opinion though.

[inquirringmind]

Just a coincidence that I happened to read this last night. I thought it was interesting that I had never caught this:



21 And it came to pass that the man received him into his house; and the man was called Amulek; and he brought forth bread and meat and set before Alma.

22 And it came to pass that Alma ate bread and was filled; and he ablessed Amulek and his house, and he gave thanks unto God.


So Amulek put bread and meat in front of Alma, and he ate bread and was filled.

What chapter is that?

And does that mean that Alma turned the meat down?

[hyloglyph]

Just a coincidence that I happened to read this last night. I thought it was interesting that I had never caught this:



21 And it came to pass that the man received him into his house; and the man was called Amulek; and he brought forth bread and meat and set before Alma.

22 And it came to pass that Alma ate bread and was filled; and he ablessed Amulek and his house, and he gave thanks unto God.


So Amulek put bread and meat in front of Alma, and he ate bread and was filled.

What chapter is that?

And does that mean that Alma turned the meat down?

I think it is Alma chapter 8, or somewhere in there.

I don't know what it means, but I try for the most pure reading of it.

[lemuel]

Just started my sous vide prime rib for tomorrow...

Vegetarians do have my respect.

It was amazing.

[oneClimbs]

I just finished a new book called "Discovering the Word of Wisdom" by Jane Birch which I think is spot on and is right in line with the research I have done on the subject. I'm working on a review of it right now for oneClimbs.com

http://www.amazon.com/Discovering-Word- ... +of+wisdom" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I strongly believe that we should teach doctrines and principles and let the Spirit teach us individually on how to apply those things in our lives. However, we as Latter-day Saints do not teach or live the principle of the Word of Wisdom correctly, especially in respect to the appropriate use of animal flesh.

Most people assume that the evils and designs conspiring men just apply to drugs, alcohol and Coca-Cola yet we turn a blind eye to the industries built around needless slaughter when we have been blessed with so many ways to live a healthy, nourished life without the need to shed blood. I think Joseph Fielding Smith said it best:

This is my answer to you in relation to President Brigham Young’s statement that mothers should not feed their small children meat. Yes! Small children do not need the flesh of animals. May I add also that adults would be better if they would refrain from too much eating of meat. As far as I am concerned the eating of meat should be very sparingly. In fact I will be contented if the Millennium was to be ushered in next week. When it is, we will learn that the eating of meat is not good for us. Why do we feel that we do not have a square meal unless it is based largely on meat. Let the dumb animals live. They enjoy life as well as we do.

In the beginning the Lord granted man the use of the flesh of certain animals. See Genesis 9:1-6, but with so many fruits of the soil and from the trees of the earth, why cannot man be content? Naturally in times of famine the flesh of animals was perhaps a necessity, but in my judgment when the Millennium reaches us, we will live above the need of killing dumb innocent animals and eating them. If we will take this stand in my judgment we may live longer. [In a letter to a member sister in El Paso, Texas, dated 30 Dec. 1966, quoted in Health Is A Blessing: A Guide to the Scriptural Laws of Good Health, by Steven H. Horne, advance publication copy (Springville, Utah: Nature’s Field, 1994), p. 34.]

The Word of Wisdom can be looked at in three different levels:

> Temporal Salvation (physical health)
> Spiritual Blessings (revelation and covenantal protection)
> Stewardship Over Creation (proper use of plant and animal life)

I was raised in Texas on a typical Texan diet, but a string of experiences and a closer look at the scriptures led me to question that diet. Once I understood these three key aspects of the Word of Wisdom, I've made major changes in my life and have seen the fruits bless me greatly.

I would challenge each of you to look at the scriptures and words of our apostles over time honestly and outside the influence of your tradition. The evils and designs of conspiring men apply to EVERY subject mentioned in the Word of Wisdom, including the proper use of plant and animal life.

I used to make fun of vegetarians, vegans, animal rights people, and anything like unto them. In my culture it was a token of manhood to hunt, kill and cook the flesh of beasts. I know people that would eat the raw testicles of the male animals they killed as a 'token of bravery'. It's eerily similar to Moroni 9:10 - "And after they had done this thing, they did murder them in a most cruel manner, torturing their bodies even unto death; and after they have done this, they devour their flesh like unto wild beasts, because of the hardness of their hearts; and they do it for a token of bravery."

As I have honestly looked at the Word of Wisdom and the principles contained therein, I have realized that my culture and traditions were not in harmony with what is pleasing to the Lord. It has been a challenge, but as I have tried my best to figure out how to live a lifestyle that is in harmony with those principles, I have found answers and transformed my life, health and spirituality. I found answers to my questions and great hidden treasures of knowledge.

[inquirringmind]

On another forum, someone suggested that "forbiddeth"

might be a simple case of a usage error made in the original manuscript.

But how could Joseph have made a "usage error" like that in verse 18, when he just used the word properly in verse 15?

And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.

Does anyone know of any examples of similar usage errors in any of Joseph's other writings?
And if the semi vegetarian interpretation of D&C 49 is true, might it explain Alma 8:18-22?

Now it came to pass that after Alma had received his message from the angel of the Lord he returned speedily to the land of Ammonihah. And he entered the city by another way, yea, by the way which is on the south of the city of Ammonihah.

19 And as ahe entered the city he was an hungered, and he said to a man: Will ye give to an humble servant of God something to eat?

20 And the man said unto him: I am a Nephite, and I know that thou art a holy prophet of God, for thou art the man whom an angel said in a vision: Thou shalt receive. Therefore, go with me into my house and I will impart unto thee of my food; and I know that thou wilt be a blessing unto me and my house.

21 And it came to pass that the man received him into his house; and the man was called Amulek; and he brought forth bread and meat and set before Alma.

22 And it came to pass that Alma ate bread and was filled; and he blessed Amulek and his house, and he gave thanks unto God.

Though Amulek put meat and bread on the table, it seems Alma only ate bread.

Could that be because it wasn't winter, and Alma knew it wouldn't pleasing to God for him to eat meat at that time of year?