Rumor WOW change?

[Serragon]

It is important to understand that the WoW is very specific to the group of saints living at that place at that time.

It only deals with items they were currently using or that they had likely access to. It was never meant to be all encompassing, but some good advice from a loving Father for this particular group of people in the set of circumstances in which they found themselves.

It was not meant to condemn. It was not meant to keep people from making covenants like baptism. It was not meant to keep people from receiving their endowment. It was not meant as an all encompassing law of health for all people forever.

We, in our mortal pride and arrogance, have chosen to use it as a cudgel and as a purity test. The Lord has never required or desired it be such.

I often think about how many people have been denied the blessings of these covenants simply because they struggle to give up smoking or drinking coffee when the Lord never required it of them.

I believe the principles outlined in the WoW are wise and good and that all would benefit by following them. But I believe it to be wrong to require people to follow our current interpretation of them in order to prove their worthiness to enter into covenants with our God.

If the Lord is willing, and the would be covenant maker are willing, who are we to stand in the way and deny it?

[thestock]

Labeling a fellow disciple of Christ as "weaker" is part of the attitude I am describing. Remember Uchdorf when he admonished us not to point our finger at others because they sin differently than we do? We all struggle with things. Another poster made a great point that the WoW makes easy targets of people who's struggles become more public....rather than those who have much more grievous sins that can remain private. But which one is more likely to be in a leadership position or hold a temple recommend? I knew a brother who obeyed the Word of Wisdom but would hit his wife. She would occasionally come to our house after he'd hit her to get some refuge. 6 months after the last time we are aware that it happened, he was called to be a Bishop.

This is just absurd. Man sometimes I hate the millennial's attitude.
Can't say things like "anyone who breaks the WoW" is not going to have the Holy Ghost as much as they should, b/c someone gets "offended".
Can't say things like "anyone who looks at pornography" is not going to have the Holy Ghost as much as they should, b/c someone gets "offended".
Can't say things like "anyone who listens to bad music" is not going to have the Holy Ghost as much as they should, b/c someone gets "offended".

Millennials are the worst kind of hypocrites. They will complain about it anytime anyone mentions to them something they shouldn't be doing, but then blast others for things they see as "the greater sin". But what it really means is they don't want anyone else to tell them what they are doing is wrong.

It's not "pointing the finger' to lay out a statement of fact according to our beliefs in the religion.

And so what if it was 6 months later-you have no idea if the Brother repented in sack cloths and ashes. And besides the point, take some personal responsibility. If a man is called as Bishop who beats his wife and YOU know about it, you are obligated to vote NO to the sustaining. You would be obligated and responsible to ensure that he is NOT sustained. If you aren't in the ward, you should be obligated to tell someone . . .

So stop kvetching about the sins of others in leadership, just b/c you haven't been called to leadership. That's called envy.

I actually agree....I am in the camp of what Uchdorf said....don't point fingers at others because they sin differently than you do. The hypocrite is the one that wants to tell others they are falling short....let that be between them and God and leave us to focus on our own relationship to God. If we feel we need help with it, reach out to leaders. End of story. But yeah, criticizing an entire generation of "millenials" is certainly not hypocritical

So only a leader can tell you if you are falling short?

No, the hypocrite isn't the one who tells others they are falling short. No, man I tell you it's getting harder and harder to communicate with people b/c the very definition of words is changing.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite
"a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings"

A hypocrite is one who states you should follow the WoW, but b/c I'm special I don't have to.
A hypocrite is one who states that heterosexuals should abstain from sexual thoughts of others, but b/c I'm homosexual and special then I don't have to.

A hypocrite has nothing to do with telling other people they are failing. You are only a hypocrite if you say what you are doing is bad-but if I do it it's good. Dude, you should learn what the meaning of hypocrite is.

There is absolutely nothing in the religion that states one should not judge-in fact God commands us to judge-but we are to judge righteously. The only way to judge righteously is to know what is right and what is wrong. Unlike this atheistic world-view that we should have "no judge only love"-totally stupid.

Thank you for clarifying the definiton of hypocrite. Perhaps I was using the word incorrectly. I was mainly using it to describe people who drink their Red Bull or eat a crummy diet but sit up in judgment of people who struggle with coffee or cigarettes from time to time. In the end, we are all hypocrites when we judge others if we do not do so righteously, because we all fall short of the mark in some way. We are to work out our own salvation with the Lord "after all we can do." I see Church Leaders being assistants in this process....rather than people who are to tell us what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. I had a Stake President on my mission refuse to give people a temple recommend if they drank Coca-Cola.....that should just not ever happen....but that's a whole other can of worms.

[JohnnyL]

If the "rule" concerning tea drinking is relaxed I would be quite pleased.
It's nearly 45 years since I've had a cup of tea.

De-restricting tea may remove an obstacle to the restored gospel in China and India.

De-restricting the law of chastity would remove a huge obstacle to people joining the Church all over the world.

But alas, it's not about gaining members, but providing exaltation to members.

The reason church members were told not to drink hot beverages, tea in particular, was because there seemed to be a trend of putting drugs in the tea. It's not really standard practice to do that anymore at social gatherings, so the reason is gone.

CFR.

[inho]

The reason church members were told not to drink hot beverages, tea in particular, was because there seemed to be a trend of putting drugs in the tea. It's not really standard practice to do that anymore at social gatherings, so the reason is gone.

This is the first time I hear this explanation.

[JohnnyL]

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and ... m?lang=eng
A few quotes from prophets... You'll even see "commandment" a few times.

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-br ... 9?lang=eng
You'll notice BY was already very serious about the WoW. No, it didn't start to become serious with HJG.

"Those who, because of their acceptance and use of the Word of Wisdom, possess a clean body, a clear mind and a spirit in tune with the infinite, are best able to assist in establishing the Kingdom of God on earth, and thereby to render greatest service to their fellow men. They also find the greatest happiness in life, for their capacity for joy is unhindered by a weak body, a dull mind, and dim spiritual vision. They find a new wealth of joy in every commonplace of life. They have eyes and they see; ears and they hear. Their understanding is reinforced with the spiritual light of truth. There are many laws of the Gospel that lead towards spirituality. Among them the Word of Wisdom stands unchallenged" (John A. Widstoe, The Word of Wisdom: A Modern Interpretation, 283-84).

"Brigham Young once said that 'every principle of the gospel carries with it a conviction of its truth to those who live it.' I believe that with all my heart. The Word of Wisdom carries with it a conviction of truth to those who live it. What a marvelous thing it is. Four hundred thousand people die each year as a result of tobacco. You cannot live the Word of Wisdom, you cannot observe it, without recognizing the hand of the Lord in this marvelous thing which we call the Word of Wisdom, which is the only law of health anywhere under the heavens that carries with it a divine promise concerning those who observe it and live it. And that conviction comes into our hearts of its truth and divinity as we live it" (Gordon B. Hinckley, Jacksonville Florida West Stake Conference, January 19, 1997).

[JohnnyL]

De-restricting the law of chastity would remove a huge obstacle to people joining the Church all over the world.

But alas, it's not about gaining members, but providing exaltation to members.

The reason church members were told not to drink hot beverages, tea in particular, was because there seemed to be a trend of putting drugs in the tea. It's not really standard practice to do that anymore at social gatherings, so the reason is gone. It's not like promiscuity where the consequences of sleeping around are significantly worse. You can't honestly compare sexual promiscuity with drinking a cup of warm tea with friends? So very different. I think some rules continue to be on the books just because that's how it's always been and it's become comfortable. There's some serious possible consequences to sleeping around. None that I can think of from drinking a cup of warm tea. The church allows or bans certain things based mostly on either scripture, or consequences. Or so I've noticed.

Here, you're giving a mortal guess and opinion on what you think about different commandments, a natural thing to do, and not without significance. However, when it's a commandment, especially a simple and small one, yes, it still makes a difference. Here, search for the word coffee in these two talks: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... g?lang=eng, and https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... d?lang=eng .
What you're saying is, "In my mortal eyes and with my mortal understanding, I judge commandment A as not important as commandment B (and understandably so)." That implies you fully understand all about both commandments, and about their context, and about each person's life.

Is it a "commandment" to attend stake conference priesthood session? Most would say no, it's not. I've received two huge blessings from obeying that commandment/ request/ imperative/ invitation/ whatever...

Even if it were to change to allow coffee and tea (I doubt it), my family and I would still not partake of those things--it's part of a correct principle.

Its not a mortal guess. It's just common sense.

Common sense = mortal guess, lol.

[Jesef]

Just because they used the word "commandment" in reference to WoW, does not make it so, & does not overturn or trump the Lord's words in the revelation itself "not by commandment or constraint" - unless another official revelation comes forth to do so. It has to be canonized. What's with this cultural habit, now fully entrenched, of just quoting every Leader or Apostle opinion/quote like it is gospel truth or scripture?

And, even if the WoW were changed from "not by commandment" ("or constraint" - have we made it a constraint by restricting Temple attendance by it? Yes we have), how do you explain that it is still NOT prohibitionist like our current implementation/practice has become?

16 All grain is good for the food of man; as also the fruit of the vine; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—

17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.

Alcoholic wine is still proscribed (encouraged) for Sacrament - we no longer do this.

"Mild", as opposed to "strong" drinks from verse 5, are alcoholic - specifically mild barley drinks would be ale & beer - typically less than 10% alcohol (wine is usually 15-25%). These are proscribed/encouraged in the Word of Wisdom. How did we become prohibitionists instead of moderation-ists? Well, that requires more history, but it's heavily linked to the U.S. Prohibition movement in the early 1900's & Pres. Joseph F. Smith & then President Grant. But that is not what the revelation teaches. Commandment or suggestion - our prohibitionist Church culture contradicts the revelation flat out.

[JohnnyL]

Just because they used the word "commandment" in reference to WoW, does not make it so, & does not overturn or trump the Lord's words in the revelation itself "not by commandment or constraint" - unless another official revelation comes forth to do so. It has to be canonized. What's with this cultural habit, now fully entrenched, of just quoting every Leader or Apostle opinion/quote like it is gospel truth or scripture?

And, even if the WoW were changed from "not by commandment" ("or constraint" - have we made it a constraint by restricting Temple attendance by it? Yes we have), how do you explain that it is still NOT prohibitionist like our current implementation/practice has become?

16 All grain is good for the food of man; as also the fruit of the vine[/size]; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—

17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain[/size].

Alcoholic wine is still proscribed (encouraged) for Sacrament - we no longer do this.

"Mild", as opposed to "strong" drinks from verse 5, are alcoholic - specifically mild barley drinks would be ale & beer - typically less than 10% alcohol (wine is usually 15-25%). These are proscribed/encouraged in the Word of Wisdom. How did we become prohibitionists instead of moderation-ists? Well, that requires more history, but it's heavily linked to the U.S. Prohibition movement in the early 1900's & Pres. Joseph F. Smith & then President Grant. But that is not what the revelation teaches. Commandment or suggestion - our prohibitionist Church culture contradicts the revelation flat out.

Once more: "it wasn't a commandment, now it is."

NEW wine was for the sacrament.

[Serragon]

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and ... m?lang=eng
A few quotes from prophets... You'll even see "commandment" a few times.

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-br ... 9?lang=eng
You'll notice BY was already very serious about the WoW. No, it didn't start to become serious with HJG.

"Those who, because of their acceptance and use of the Word of Wisdom, possess a clean body, a clear mind and a spirit in tune with the infinite, are best able to assist in establishing the Kingdom of God on earth, and thereby to render greatest service to their fellow men. They also find the greatest happiness in life, for their capacity for joy is unhindered by a weak body, a dull mind, and dim spiritual vision. They find a new wealth of joy in every commonplace of life. They have eyes and they see; ears and they hear. Their understanding is reinforced with the spiritual light of truth. There are many laws of the Gospel that lead towards spirituality. Among them the Word of Wisdom stands unchallenged" (John A. Widstoe, The Word of Wisdom: A Modern Interpretation, 283-84).

"Brigham Young once said that 'every principle of the gospel carries with it a conviction of its truth to those who live it.' I believe that with all my heart. The Word of Wisdom carries with it a conviction of truth to those who live it. What a marvelous thing it is. Four hundred thousand people die each year as a result of tobacco. You cannot live the Word of Wisdom, you cannot observe it, without recognizing the hand of the Lord in this marvelous thing which we call the Word of Wisdom, which is the only law of health anywhere under the heavens that carries with it a divine promise concerning those who observe it and live it. And that conviction comes into our hearts of its truth and divinity as we live it" (Gordon B. Hinckley, Jacksonville Florida West Stake Conference, January 19, 1997).

I am glad you provided these links.

Brigham Young ran multiple stills. He provided liquor for pioneer day celebrations around Utah. He sold liquor to the railroad for $4/barrel. All while occasionally preaching on the virtues of the WoW.

Joseph Smith continued to smoke cigars publicly after receiving the WoW revelation.

Things are a bit more complicated than simply providing a few hand picked quotes. The fact is after historical research into this topic, any reasonable person must conclude that it wasn't taken very seriously by the majority of members, including leadership, for quite a while. It appears alcohol was taken seriously during prohibition, and tobacco and coffee/tea sometime after that.

I don't deny the hand of the Lord in the revelation or the wisdom found therein. I simply believe the Lord when He says it should not be a commandment, and nearly everyone involved in the Church at the time of the revelation felt that way too.

[Jesef]

Just because they used the word "commandment" in reference to WoW, does not make it so, & does not overturn or trump the Lord's words in the revelation itself "not by commandment or constraint" - unless another official revelation comes forth to do so. It has to be canonized. What's with this cultural habit, now fully entrenched, of just quoting every Leader or Apostle opinion/quote like it is gospel truth or scripture?

And, even if the WoW were changed from "not by commandment" ("or constraint" - have we made it a constraint by restricting Temple attendance by it? Yes we have), how do you explain that it is still NOT prohibitionist like our current implementation/practice has become?

16 All grain is good for the food of man; as also the fruit of the vine[/size]; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—

17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain[/size].

Alcoholic wine is still proscribed (encouraged) for Sacrament - we no longer do this.

"Mild", as opposed to "strong" drinks from verse 5, are alcoholic - specifically mild barley drinks would be ale & beer - typically less than 10% alcohol (wine is usually 15-25%). These are proscribed/encouraged in the Word of Wisdom. How did we become prohibitionists instead of moderation-ists? Well, that requires more history, but it's heavily linked to the U.S. Prohibition movement in the early 1900's & Pres. Joseph F. Smith & then President Grant. But that is not what the revelation teaches. Commandment or suggestion - our prohibitionist Church culture contradicts the revelation flat out.

Once more: "it wasn't a commandment, now it is."

NEW wine was for the sacrament.

Sorry, friend, that is just naive/ignorant & incorrect/wrong. You'll have to deal with that. But it is not a commandment - even if it was, beer/ale are not prohibited but said that they are good for man, & the Sacramental wine was not grape juice. But you are free to live in fantasy/delusion land.

[Sunain]

Sorry, friend, that is just naive/ignorant & incorrect/wrong. You'll have to deal with that. But it is not a commandment - even if it was, beer/ale are not prohibited but said that they are good for man, & the Sacramental wine was not grape juice. But you are free to live in fantasy/delusion land.

When multiple prophets of the Lord call it a commandment, it is so. The Word of Wisdom is a commandment.

[Jesef]

Sorry, friend, that is just naive/ignorant & incorrect/wrong. You'll have to deal with that. But it is not a commandment - even if it was, beer/ale are not prohibited but said that they are good for man, & the Sacramental wine was not grape juice. But you are free to live in fantasy/delusion land.

When multiple prophets of the Lord call it a commandment, it is so. The Word of Wisdom is a commandment.

Incorrect. This is the (ignored/forgotten) process for changing or updating scripture/revelation:

Harold B. Lee, The Teachings of Harold B. Lee, edited by Clyde J. Williams, p.544
The only person authorized to bring forth new revelation is the prophet. If anyone, regardless of his position in the Church, were to advance a doctrine that is not substantiated by the standard Church works, meaning the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion. The only one authorized to bring forth any new doctrine is the President of the Church, who, when he does, will declare it as a revelation from God, and it will be so accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church. And if any man speak a doctrine which contradicts what is in the standard Church works, you may know by that same token that it is false and you are not bound to accept it as truth. (73-26 European Area Conference Report, 25 August 1973, pp. 66-72.)

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

Sorry, friend, that is just naive/ignorant & incorrect/wrong. You'll have to deal with that. But it is not a commandment - even if it was, beer/ale are not prohibited but said that they are good for man, & the Sacramental wine was not grape juice. But you are free to live in fantasy/delusion land.

When multiple prophets of the Lord call it a commandment, it is so. The Word of Wisdom is a commandment.

"To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint,"

[Thinker]

A friend got me thinking about going a bit more vegan (did I just write that?). Emphasis on “thinking.” More wisdom in the idea of eating meat sparingly from the World Health Organization...

• “CSPI Petitions USDA for Cancer-Risk Warning Labels on Meat
  For years, researchers have debated the link between the consumption of red meat and cancer. On October 26, 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) took what is perhaps the most definitive and aggressive position thus far by any health organization on this hot-button issue, announcing that, based on a 22-member expert panel’s analysis of more than 800 studies, processed meat (e.g., sausages, bacon) should be classified as “carcinogenic” and red meat should be considered “probably carcinogenic.” This conclusion was immediately questioned.”
  
  On December 1, 2016, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) petitioned the USDA to mandate labels on packages of processed meat and poultry that would warn consumers that frequent consumption of those products may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. CSPI’s petition cites as support the controversial October 2015 WHO findings which concluded that processed meat is carcinogenic to humans.
  https://www.dailyintakeblog.com/2016/12 ... s-on-meat/

And again - it isn’t so much what’s in your mug as how HOT it is. “Hot drinks are not for the body or belly.”

• “On June 15, 2016, the IARC reported that scientific evidence suggests that very hot beverages — around 65 degrees Celsius [149 degrees Fahrenheit] or higher — probably cause esophageal cancer. Although the organization previously had rated coffee as “possibly carcinogenic,” it has now reversed this classification. On the contrary, some studies indicate that coffee may reduce the risk of developing certain types of cancer.”
  https://www.dailyintakeblog.com/2016/06 ... hot-water/

[Jesef]

Has any President of the Church brought forth the new doctrine that the WoW is a “commandment” &, when he did, declared it as a revelation from God, and it was accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church? And if any man (including Church presidents or apostles) spoke a doctrine which contradicts what is in the standard Church works (like that the WoW is a commandment when the canonized standard-work/revelation says it is “not by commandment or constraint”), you may know by that same token that it is false and you are not bound to accept it as truth.

Those of you preaching against this are simply echoing a deeply entrenched but false tradition based on opinions. You don’t seem to be able to fathom Leaders being wrong in their opinions & teachings, or the cultural tradition or practice being wrong.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

You don’t seem to be able to fathom Leaders being wrong in their opinions & teachings, or the cultural tradition or practice being wrong.

Exactly. This is the cause of so much of the problems we have in the Church today.

[JohnnyL]

You don’t seem to be able to fathom Leaders being wrong in their opinions & teachings, or the cultural tradition or practice being wrong.

Exactly. This is the cause of so much of the problems we have in the Church today.

Or, people just wanting an excuse of some sort to do what they want to do, and not feel bad because it doesn't meet their stringent definitions of a "commandment".

Lots of prophets have called the WoW a commandment. I'm pretty sure the other 14 at the time agreed with them. Can anyone find a few of the 15 who hasn't, since... sure, let's say HJG? How about ONE?
But I guess some discontent member's opinion is more important? No.

If you voted "no", what effect would that have? You would get to explain, and they'd say we get your pov, and it's done. It doesn't matter whether you agree or not to the church or the commandment. Unless God would allow it, who knows? But if so, it would surely be to your detriment,

Would it be nice to have everything done well? Sure.

Where in the scriptures, or things "voted on", do we find or have lots of things that we teach? Has the LoC been similarly "imported"? Where do you find anything in the scriptures that... petting, say, is immoral? Or that a 60-y.o. man shouldn't marry a 14-y.o. young woman? Or that since polygamy is an eternal principle, we should live it? I don't find lots of things in there, so ... and I guess I could find excuses for a whole bunch of things.

And yet we have the words of many prophets and apostles that do explain many, many things. Of course there's prayer, too.

[JohnnyL]

Sorry, friend, that is just naive/ignorant & incorrect/wrong. You'll have to deal with that. But it is not a commandment - even if it was, beer/ale are not prohibited but said that they are good for man, & the Sacramental wine was not grape juice. But you are free to live in fantasy/delusion land.

When multiple prophets of the Lord call it a commandment, it is so. The Word of Wisdom is a commandment.

"To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint,"

Here, for the third time: "It wasn't; it is."

[JohnnyL]

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and ... m?lang=eng
A few quotes from prophets... You'll even see "commandment" a few times.

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-br ... 9?lang=eng
You'll notice BY was already very serious about the WoW. No, it didn't start to become serious with HJG.

"Those who, because of their acceptance and use of the Word of Wisdom, possess a clean body, a clear mind and a spirit in tune with the infinite, are best able to assist in establishing the Kingdom of God on earth, and thereby to render greatest service to their fellow men. They also find the greatest happiness in life, for their capacity for joy is unhindered by a weak body, a dull mind, and dim spiritual vision. They find a new wealth of joy in every commonplace of life. They have eyes and they see; ears and they hear. Their understanding is reinforced with the spiritual light of truth. There are many laws of the Gospel that lead towards spirituality. Among them the Word of Wisdom stands unchallenged" (John A. Widstoe, The Word of Wisdom: A Modern Interpretation, 283-84).

"Brigham Young once said that 'every principle of the gospel carries with it a conviction of its truth to those who live it.' I believe that with all my heart. The Word of Wisdom carries with it a conviction of truth to those who live it. What a marvelous thing it is. Four hundred thousand people die each year as a result of tobacco. You cannot live the Word of Wisdom, you cannot observe it, without recognizing the hand of the Lord in this marvelous thing which we call the Word of Wisdom, which is the only law of health anywhere under the heavens that carries with it a divine promise concerning those who observe it and live it. And that conviction comes into our hearts of its truth and divinity as we live it" (Gordon B. Hinckley, Jacksonville Florida West Stake Conference, January 19, 1997).

I am glad you provided these links.

Brigham Young ran multiple stills. He provided liquor for pioneer day celebrations around Utah. He sold liquor to the railroad for $4/barrel. All while occasionally preaching on the virtues of the WoW.

Joseph Smith continued to smoke cigars publicly after receiving the WoW revelation.

Things are a bit more complicated than simply providing a few hand picked quotes. The fact is after historical research into this topic, any reasonable person must conclude that it wasn't taken very seriously by the majority of members, including leadership, for quite a while. It appears alcohol was taken seriously during prohibition, and tobacco and coffee/tea sometime after that.

I don't deny the hand of the Lord in the revelation or the wisdom found therein. I simply believe the Lord when He says it should not be a commandment, and nearly everyone involved in the Church at the time of the revelation felt that way too.

You don't seem to have read much from the links.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

Or that a 60-y.o. man shouldn't marry a 14-y.o. young woman?

That has always been wrong, and will always be wrong. You shouldn't need someone to tell you it's wrong and you should stay away from anyone who tells you it's righteous.

At age 57 Lorenzo Snow married 16-year old Sara Minnie Ephramina Jensen. (had a child a year later. Lorenzo had actually been courting her since she was 14, but married at 16)

[Jesef]

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and ... m?lang=eng
A few quotes from prophets... You'll even see "commandment" a few times.

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-br ... 9?lang=eng
You'll notice BY was already very serious about the WoW. No, it didn't start to become serious with HJG.

"Those who, because of their acceptance and use of the Word of Wisdom, possess a clean body, a clear mind and a spirit in tune with the infinite, are best able to assist in establishing the Kingdom of God on earth, and thereby to render greatest service to their fellow men. They also find the greatest happiness in life, for their capacity for joy is unhindered by a weak body, a dull mind, and dim spiritual vision. They find a new wealth of joy in every commonplace of life. They have eyes and they see; ears and they hear. Their understanding is reinforced with the spiritual light of truth. There are many laws of the Gospel that lead towards spirituality. Among them the Word of Wisdom stands unchallenged" (John A. Widstoe, The Word of Wisdom: A Modern Interpretation, 283-84).

"Brigham Young once said that 'every principle of the gospel carries with it a conviction of its truth to those who live it.' I believe that with all my heart. The Word of Wisdom carries with it a conviction of truth to those who live it. What a marvelous thing it is. Four hundred thousand people die each year as a result of tobacco. You cannot live the Word of Wisdom, you cannot observe it, without recognizing the hand of the Lord in this marvelous thing which we call the Word of Wisdom, which is the only law of health anywhere under the heavens that carries with it a divine promise concerning those who observe it and live it. And that conviction comes into our hearts of its truth and divinity as we live it" (Gordon B. Hinckley, Jacksonville Florida West Stake Conference, January 19, 1997).

I am glad you provided these links.

Brigham Young ran multiple stills. He provided liquor for pioneer day celebrations around Utah. He sold liquor to the railroad for $4/barrel. All while occasionally preaching on the virtues of the WoW.

Joseph Smith continued to smoke cigars publicly after receiving the WoW revelation.

Things are a bit more complicated than simply providing a few hand picked quotes. The fact is after historical research into this topic, any reasonable person must conclude that it wasn't taken very seriously by the majority of members, including leadership, for quite a while. It appears alcohol was taken seriously during prohibition, and tobacco and coffee/tea sometime after that.

I don't deny the hand of the Lord in the revelation or the wisdom found therein. I simply believe the Lord when He says it should not be a commandment, and nearly everyone involved in the Church at the time of the revelation felt that way too.

You don't seem to have read much from the links.

My comments fully respond to yours & your linked quotes. Yours do not adequately address mine (& others) or rationally explain the discrepancy. Thus your repeated statement appears to be strong confirmation bias affirming authoritative opinion turned tradition still masquerading today & taught as doctrine, in the absence of real or official & binding revelation/scripture, contradictory to the actual dictated canonized revelation/scripture still sitting there unaltered, un-revised. And also contradicting the content of said canonized revelation/scripture. Blinded by tradition literally it would seem. Awake!

[Fiannan]

Or that a 60-y.o. man shouldn't marry a 14-y.o. young woman?

That has always been wrong, and will always be wrong. You shouldn't need someone to tell you it's wrong and you should stay away from anyone who tells you it's righteous.

At age 57 Lorenzo Snow married 16-year old Sara Minnie Ephramina Jensen. (had a child a year later. Lorenzo had actually been courting her since she was 14, but married at 16)

How old were the wives Abraham took after the death of his sister/wife Sarah? They bore him children but are not described as miracle births as was Sarah's. So they must have been at least 60 years younger than him.

[Jesef]

Irrational justification by comparison with error, how sad.

[Robin Hood]

It's clear that the WoW is not a commandment. That doesn't mean we should not observe it or that we have an excuse for ignoring it. We don't need to be "commanded in all things".
For me, the opening statements about being warned and forewarned (present and future) concerning evil and conspiring men in the last days are the crux of the issue, rather than the individual proscriptions per se.
So are we breaking a commandment of God if we have a hot drink? Not really.
Would we be flinging his advice and forewarning back in his face? I think we would.

It occurred to me a few years ago that there are other aspects the Lord may have had in mind when the WoW was issued.
These include:
Modern meat production methods/animal husbandry.
The treatment of indigenous people kicked off their land to make way for corporate cash crops (coffee etc).
Production methods (chemicals) for non-seasonal fruit etc. Do we really need strawberries in the winter?
Food miles.
Faceless "food" corporations.
Monsanto...

The list goes on.

[Sunain]

Just because they used the word "commandment" in reference to WoW, does not make it so, & does not overturn or trump the Lord's words in the revelation itself "not by commandment or constraint" - unless another official revelation comes forth to do so. It has to be canonized. What's with this cultural habit, now fully entrenched, of just quoting every Leader or Apostle opinion/quote like it is gospel truth or scripture?

And, even if the WoW were changed from "not by commandment" ("or constraint" - have we made it a constraint by restricting Temple attendance by it? Yes we have), how do you explain that it is still NOT prohibitionist like our current implementation/practice has become?

Has any President of the Church brought forth the new doctrine that the WoW is a “commandment” &, when he did, declared it as a revelation from God, and it was accepted by the Council of the Twelve and sustained by the body of the Church? And if any man (including Church presidents or apostles) spoke a doctrine which contradicts what is in the standard Church works (like that the WoW is a commandment when the canonized standard-work/revelation says it is “not by commandment or constraint”), you may know by that same token that it is false and you are not bound to accept it as truth.

Yes, the motion was brought forth before church in General Conference by President Brigham Young on September 9, 1851. "The motion was accepted unanimously and became binding as a commandment for all Church members thereafter."

The Word of Wisdom:The Principle and the Promises
Boyd K. Packer - Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles - April 1996

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.

It's clear that the WoW is not a commandment.

It appears I need to repost this again. The Word of Wisdom is a commandment not a church policy. Too many people here in this thread are stating otherwise.

When modern day prophets of the Lord, who are His voice upon the earth, state it is a commandment, it is a commandment. Obeying the Word of Wisdom is a requirement for baptism, not just being temple worthy. Modern day revelation supersedes previous scripture and prophets. This is the Lord's pattern just as it was in the Old Testament days. He continues to nudge us towards His higher laws.

The Word of Wisdom isn't even one of His higher laws. If the saints still have issue with it being a commandment, they no wonder we have yet to receive more that was revealed in the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon. It appears the body of the saints isn't ready still.

D&C 89:2. Is the Word of Wisdom a Commandment Today?

Although the Word of Wisdom was received on 27 February 1833, its acceptance by individual members of the Church was gradual. On 9 September 1851, some eighteen years after it was given, the Patriarch to the Church, John Smith, delivered a talk in general conference on the Word of Wisdom. During his address, President Brigham Young arose and proposed that all Saints formally covenant to abstain from tea, coffee, tobacco, whiskey, and “all things mentioned in the Word of Wisdom” (“Minutes of the General Conference,” Millennial Star, 1 Feb. 1852, p. 35). The motion was accepted unanimously and became binding as a commandment for all Church members thereafter.

Bishops and stake presidents are responsible for determining whether members are worthy to receive Church ordinances such as baptism or those available in the temple or to enter the temple to receive ordinances for others. Keeping the Word of Wisdom is a part of that worthiness.

For the first 18 years, there was a transition period. This allowed members, who may have been addicted to these substances, time to ditch the habit instead of trying to do it cold turkey.

D&C 89:2. Why Does the Lord Say “Not by Commandment or Constraint”?

“The reason undoubtedly why the Word of Wisdom was given—as not by ‘commandment or restraint’ was that at that time, at least, if it had been given as a commandment it would have brought every man, addicted to the use of these noxious things, under condemnation; so the Lord was merciful and gave them a chance to overcome, before He brought them under the law. Later on, it was announced from this stand, by Pr ... the Lord. [See Young, Discourses of Brigham Young, pp. 183–84].” (Joseph F. Smith, in Conference Report, Oct. 1913, p. 14.)

President Heber J. Grant emphasized that the Word of Wisdom was a commandment and warned those who did not obey it that “the day is gone by when the Lord will trifle with the Latter-day Saints. He has said that His Spirit shall not always strive with man.” (Gospel Standards, pp. 55–56.) Although the Lord allowed a time of adjustment for those who were already members of the Church when the Word of Wisdom was given, today it is expected that all Saints adhere to the commandment.

The Word of Wisdom

This revelation is known as the Word of Wisdom. Obedience to this commandment is a requirement for baptism into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Great blessings are promised to those who show their faith by obeying this commandment.

Note that the church's official pamphlet on the Word of Wisdom also states "other harmful or addictive substances". Yes, we do not need to be commanded in all things but when we are, like with the Word of Wisdom, we are to obey to be worthy to have His spirit to be with us.

No amount of posturing or rumour mongering is going to change a commandment from the Lord. If such a change were to occur, like the church accepting gay marriage or sealings, it would completely fracture the church irreparably.

The Living Prophet: The President of the Church

The President of the Church presides over all priesthood quorums and the general membership of the Church. President James E. Faust (1920–2007) of the First Presidency explained: “He is the senior Apostle on the earth. He has been ordained and set apart as the prophet, seer, and revelator to the world. He has been sustained as the President of the Church. He is the presiding high priest over all the priesthood on the earth. He alone holds and exercises all the keys of the kingdom under the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the head of this Church and is the chief cornerstone” (“Continuing Revelation,” Ensign, Aug. 1996, 5).

D&C Official Declaration 1

President Wilford Woodruff (1807–98) declared that we can have full confidence in the direction the prophet is leading the Church:
“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty” (Official Declaration 1, “Excerpts from Three Addresses by President Wilford Woodruff Regarding the Manifesto”; emphasis added).

Any prophet trying to circumvent the Lord and His commandments will not be allowed to do so.