Rumor WOW change?

[Silver Pie]

Absolutely! I think the "conspiring men" part ought to be noticed and taught, more than the cultural interpretations of its meanings (that don't match what it actually says).

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.

[Silver Pie]

[ youtube ]mqejXs7XgsU [ /youtube ] without the spaces.

[JohnnyL]

Cool thing is, the WoW can be modified without even changing a word in Sec 89. Just chalk it up to misinterpretation, er, new revelation.

Exactly on target: new revelation.

They could have a new revelation telling them to follow the scripture as stated: "not by commandment" and not to drink hot drinks (which are unnamed in the revelation).

They could. Hot drinks were unnamed, but known.

What is scripture? Words of prophets. What are words of prophets? Well, words of prophets.

[Yahtzee]

Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary also says "hot" could mean stimulating. I think that more likely than temperature as nothing was said about soup.

[Finrock]

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.

Sunain,

Ok, for the sake compromise & for the sake of reason, let’s say that the word of wisdom was magically turned into a commandment in 1851 at an obscure conference that nobody remembers & could only find in the Internet age.

So, hypothetically it’s a commandment now, how do you get prohibition (NO alcohol) from that when it permits alcoholic wine for Sacrament & mild alcoholic drinks such as beer/ale? It’s right there in plain English (just like “not by commandment or constraint”). What’s your leap of logic this time? The history says Pres. Grant supported the Prohibition movement (for political reasons, if you bother to study the pesky historical details again, which you probably won’t). But there it is, the current prohibition practices directly contradict the actual revelation which permits a few forms of alcohol. And we label all such as evil/unworthy.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

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!

It's laughable when someone tries a rebuke so miserably absent of the Spirit.
I'd suggest you truly humble yourself, forgive God and His leaders, pray, and live it in faith till you get an answer.

Translation: I, JohnnyL, don't agree with Jesef and I am incapable of responding to Jesef's counter-arguments and counter-examples in a rational way. I can't support my position logically/rationally, therefore, I am going to call in to question Jesef's character by proclaiming that Jesef doesn't have the Spirit and that he needs to repent. Of course, my proclamation about Jesef's character denotes that I, JohnnyL, on the other hand, am a humble, righteous person.

-Finrock

[Jamescm]

Instead of "We should allow tea and coffee because we allow energy drinks, which we think are more harmful", shouldn't we lean more toward "we should avoid energy drinks, because we think they're more harmful than tea and coffee"?

I feel as though there are ways in which the Church is becoming too "lax"-giving members the option to settle for "less". Most of it has a clear purpose in allowing the strong to become more independent in increasing their strength while weaning the weak away from it all as such a sifting grows nearer, but it is still somewhat disappointing. "You can drink tea and coffee now and still attend the temple, but sort of try and interpret the Word of Wisdom in your own way and follow it." would be a similar call. Those who wish for spiritual strength wouldn't suddenly pick up things previously forbidden unless a call to go ahead and enjoy them in moderation accompanied the message, but weaker members would pick up the habits with relief and possibly drift away from the difficult physical trials that faithful members may face in the future.

That which was given "not by way of commandment" was, indeed, later made a commandment by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ. It is a minimum standard to this day for entry into the temples of the Lord for the receiving of ordinances for one's self and for those in the spirit world.

Obesity should be avoided. One can not reach his or her zenith of spiritual potential without caring for the temple given to him or her personally by Heavenly Father, made in His image. The fear of "fat-shaming" is not a reason to avoid pronouncing obesity to be bad, because it will happen anyway and because obesity is almost always a result of poor lifestyle choices. Becoming more like Christ involves taking responsibility, not shying away from it.

I can tell from personal experience that it was 100% my fault I was fat, and it was 100% only I who could do anything about it, and I don't live a day without gratitude for being able to turn my body around. Taking responsibility for my life is what made me better and happier, not being sensitive about my own feelings in the short-term. I know no person in my own life who is unhealthy despite living even a minimally, reasonably sort-of healthy lifestyle. In every single case, no matter what health-related challenges or disorders they have or how old they are, they make almost nothing but poor diet/activity/sleep decisions day-in and day-out.

"Tradition" is not good or bad, it simply is. There are occasionally elements of tradition that should be shed, but tradition is built up in the first place for generally good reasons. R-rated movies and piercings are not disqualifiers for temple attendance or Celestial inheritance, but they're also not good ideas. I even question the single pair of modest earrings women are "allowed". Why are they? Isn't it merely because of tradition? Instead of dismissing having only one set of earrings as a tradition and wearing more, wouldn't someone seeking to honor the temple that is her body eschew the tradition of earrings in the first place and go without sticking a little piece of metal in them?

The claimed medical benefits and maladies of tea and coffee are varied. Without the Word of Wisdom, I'd probably have been an addicted coffee drinker who would have had to fight to break free without the benefit of God telling me to not drink it in the first place, even if He doesn't spell out to me the various physical and spiritual reasons why at first.

[sandman45]

If people learned how to fast correctly AND followed the WoW with respects to eating food that has nutrition then obesity would disappear for the majority. The majority are over weight because of eating the wrong food too often and eating more than 3 meals a day.

And the conspiring men in the last days would lose a lot of money.

A lot of people have good results with intermittent fasting (which is difficult to do if one is eating high carbs, as the hunger will quite possibly overtake you).

Which is why you eat foods high in fat and protein and vegetables. And stay away from sugar. Which includes breads pastas etc.

If you do that you can last longer during the fast without getting hungry

[BeNotDeceived]

Boyd K Packer said that D&C 89 is only “incidentally” related to health. The principles are a key to revelation and it is prophetic in the way that it describes evil and conspiring men and the destroying angel which afflicts many.

I have found particularly valuable hidden treasures and blessings as I have taken to heart the principles regarding the use of animal flesh.

Big Sugar and Coke Conspiracy

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• Researchers have known since the 1960s that your body metabolizes different types of carbohydrates, like glucose and fructose, in different ways
• Despite this, nutritionists and public health organizations continue to claim that obesity and other metabolic issues are simply a matter of consuming more calories than you burn off
• Evidence show that sugar exerts harmful metabolic effects and appears to be addictive, leading some experts to suggest that elimination, not moderation, is the best option

[The Rebbe]

I must give you my deepest respect (and sympathies) about not having coffee in your life.

I am being earnest and not facetious (well, perhaps just a little). I don't think I could do it.

A day without coffee is like...

...just kidding, I have no idea what that is like.

For those of you who are converts to your faith, did you find this difficult to give up if you were coffee drinkers?

[sandman45]

Perhaps the Brethren will add the commandment of no energy healing to the WoW soon?

Elder Ballard - from his October 2017 General Conference talk -

"In some places, too many of our people are looking beyond the mark and seeking secret knowledge and expensive and questionable practices to provide healing and support. An official church statement issued one year ago states, “We urge Church members to be cautious about participating in any group that promises-in exchange for money-miraculous healings or that claims to have special methods for accessing healing power outside of properly ordained priesthood holders.”

The Church handbook counsels, “Members should not use medical or health practices that are ethically or legally questionable. Local leaders should advise members who have health problems to consult with competent professional practitioners who are licensed in the countries where they practice.” (21.3.6)

Brothers and sisters, be wise and aware that such practices may be emotionally appealing, but may ultimately prove to be spiritually and physically harmful."

Lol modern medicine is all about exchanging money for so called cures etc. modern medicine is the problem. It’s a business. These companies (Pharma) and hospitals make more money the longer you are sick and dependent upon their drugs.

Sounds like Ballard wants us all to keep using this greedy and broken system that is constantly changing and telling us things that are actually harmful and don’t get me started on vaccines and cancer.

[sandman45]

Boyd K Packer said that D&C 89 is only “incidentally” related to health. The principles are a key to revelation and it is prophetic in the way that it describes evil and conspiring men and the destroying angel which afflicts many.

I have found particularly valuable hidden treasures and blessings as I have taken to heart the principles regarding the use of animal flesh.

Big Sugar and Coke Conspiracy

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• Researchers have known since the 1960s that your body metabolizes different types of carbohydrates, like glucose and fructose, in different ways
• Despite this, nutritionists and public health organizations continue to claim that obesity and other metabolic issues are simply a matter of consuming more calories than you burn off
• Evidence show that sugar exerts harmful metabolic effects and appears to be addictive, leading some experts to suggest that elimination, not moderation, is the best option

Excellent video thanks for sharing. Blows my mind that we were all taught completely wrong so that these coorporations could make billions off of us without regard to our health. Even threatening people who were trying to get the truth out about sugar etc with lawsuits.

It was truly greedy and conspiring men taking advantage of the majority.

[LukeAir2008]

The Word of Wisdom is not a commandment and no additional revelation has been received to amend the original revelation.

The requirement to live by the Word of Wisdom in order to enter the Temple did not come into force until 1902. Even then President Joseph F Smith advised Stake Presidents to be liberal with older men who used tobacco and older sisters who drank tea.

In 1921 Heber J Grant made adherence to the Word of Wisdom an absolute requirement for entry into the Temple. This was probably due to the number of drunk members turning up at the Temple.

The modern Church requires investigators to commit to live by the Word of Wisdom prior to baptism.

Most current members of the Church do not live by the Word of Wisdom - they live by their own interpretation of the Word of Wisdom and generally ignore the dietary requirements.

[LukeAir2008]

I knew a sister who would only begin to live the word of wisdom 2 weeks prior to having her recommend interview so she could state with honesty that she was living by the Word of Wisdom.

[Elizabeth]

No problem at all.
As soon as the missionaries informed me of The Word of Wisdom I abided by it and have done so ever since, including no chocolate and rarely flesh, which the missionaries who taught me had stressed.

I must give you my deepest respect (and sympathies) about not having coffee in your life.

I am being earnest and not facetious (well, perhaps just a little). I don't think I could do it.

A day without coffee is like...

...just kidding, I have no idea what that is like.

For those of you who are converts to your faith, did you find this difficult to give up if you were coffee drinkers?

[JohnnyL]

Perhaps the Brethren will add the commandment of no energy healing to the WoW soon?

Elder Ballard - from his October 2017 General Conference talk -

"In some places, too many of our people are looking beyond the mark and seeking secret knowledge and expensive and questionable practices to provide healing and support. An official church statement issued one year ago states, “We urge Church members to be cautious about participating in any group that promises-in exchange for money-miraculous healings or that claims to have special methods for accessing healing power outside of properly ordained priesthood holders.”

The Church handbook counsels, “Members should not use medical or health practices that are ethically or legally questionable. Local leaders should advise members who have health problems to consult with competent professional practitioners who are licensed in the countries where they practice.” (21.3.6)

Brothers and sisters, be wise and aware that such practices may be emotionally appealing, but may ultimately prove to be spiritually and physically harmful."

There is a reason why they came out against energy healing. If you read Mormon leaks-as much as I dispise then. One of the main ways in which Denver snuffer gained adherents was through energy healings... At least that is what a stake president reported to salt lake

Agreed. It's just interesting to me how some in this thread who claim the WoW is a commandment just because the apostles say so, have no problem believing in and working in energy healing (and getting paid for it, to boot), even though the apostles say to avoid it and steer clear of it. Goose/gander, pot/kettle, cafeteria Mormons, and all that.

Of course, it's assumed that's what he meant, as he was never clear about it. I don't ever remember him saying "energy healing", correct?
And was it that, or the use of "Christ" in the product?
When more than one apostle actually says "energy healing", then it might mean something.

[JohnnyL]

Ok, for the sake compromise & for the sake of reason, let’s say that the word of wisdom was magically turned into a commandment in 1851 at an obscure conference that nobody remembers & could only find in the Internet age.

So, hypothetically it’s a commandment now, how do you get prohibition (NO alcohol) from that when it permits alcoholic wine for Sacrament & mild alcoholic drinks such as beer/ale? It’s right there in plain English (just like “not by commandment or constraint”). What’s your leap of logic this time? The history says Pres. Grant supported the Prohibition movement (for political reasons, if you bother to study the pesky historical details again, which you probably won’t). But there it is, the current prohibition practices directly contradict the actual revelation which permits a few forms of alcohol. And we label all such as evil/unworthy.

Mild alcoholic drinks are not beer/ ale. That would be something like "non-alcoholic beer".
Some people want to eat their cake and have it, too.

[Jesef]

Ok, for the sake compromise & for the sake of reason, let’s say that the word of wisdom was magically turned into a commandment in 1851 at an obscure conference that nobody remembers & could only find in the Internet age.

So, hypothetically it’s a commandment now, how do you get prohibition (NO alcohol) from that when it permits alcoholic wine for Sacrament & mild alcoholic drinks such as beer/ale? It’s right there in plain English (just like “not by commandment or constraint”). What’s your leap of logic this time? The history says Pres. Grant supported the Prohibition movement (for political reasons, if you bother to study the pesky historical details again, which you probably won’t). But there it is, the current prohibition practices directly contradict the actual revelation which permits a few forms of alcohol. And we label all such as evil/unworthy.

Mild alcoholic drinks are not beer/ ale. That would be something like "non-alcoholic beer".
Some people want to eat their cake and have it, too.

Total baloney - do some research. "Mild" as opposed to "strong" refers to alcohol content. And the most common "mild" (alcoholic) drinks made from barely are: beer/ale. Beers/ales typically have 4-8% alcohol whereas wine is usually 15-25% & then it gets into much stronger stuff. Try getting into the history & how the Word of Wisdom "magically" became a commandment - it's not a commandment, it says exactly the opposite "not by commandment or constraint" - so "keeping the word of wisdom" means you treat it not as a commandment - ha, ha. But you're totally wrong about even the suggestions in the Word of Wisdom being prohibitionist - that was Heber J. Grant & the early 1900's U.S. Prohibition movement. There were some political motives, too. The First Presidency & Twelve were using wine in their weekly temple sacrament meetings up until 1906. Wave the wand & 100 years later, now we are Prohibitionists teaching our children all alcohol is evil (instead of moderation). And Jesus & tons of prophets drank alcoholic wine. The WoW does NOT prohibit alcohol, it basically discourages drunkenness. And Joseph Smith didn't even "obey" it (because it was never a commandment).

http://www.mormonthink.com/wow.htm
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-cont ... N03_80.pdf

[creator]

do some research. "Mild" as opposed to "strong" refers to alcohol content. And the most common "mild" (alcoholic) drinks made from barely are: beer/ale. Beers/ales typically have 4-8% alcohol whereas wine is usually 15-25% & then it gets into much stronger stuff. Try getting into the history & how the Word of Wisdom ...
But you're totally wrong about even the suggestions in the Word of Wisdom being prohibitionist - that was Heber J. Grant & the early 1900's U.S. Prohibition movement. There were some political motives, too. The First Presidency & Twelve were using wine in their weekly temple sacrament meetings up until 1906. Wave the wand & 100 years later, now we are Prohibitionists teaching our children all alcohol is evil (instead of moderation). And Jesus & tons of prophets drank alcoholic wine. The WoW does NOT prohibit alcohol, it basically discourages drunkenness. And Joseph Smith didn't even "obey" it (because it was never a commandment).

This is true and people who don't believe it are either ignorant (and should probably open their mind and research it) or just like to believe in lies.

[JohnnyL]

Ok, for the sake compromise & for the sake of reason, let’s say that the word of wisdom was magically turned into a commandment in 1851 at an obscure conference that nobody remembers & could only find in the Internet age.

So, hypothetically it’s a commandment now, how do you get prohibition (NO alcohol) from that when it permits alcoholic wine for Sacrament & mild alcoholic drinks such as beer/ale? It’s right there in plain English (just like “not by commandment or constraint”). What’s your leap of logic this time? The history says Pres. Grant supported the Prohibition movement (for political reasons, if you bother to study the pesky historical details again, which you probably won’t). But there it is, the current prohibition practices directly contradict the actual revelation which permits a few forms of alcohol. And we label all such as evil/unworthy.

Mild alcoholic drinks are not beer/ ale. That would be something like "non-alcoholic beer".
Some people want to eat their cake and have it, too.

Total baloney - do some research. "Mild" as opposed to "strong" refers to alcohol content. And the most common "mild" (alcoholic) drinks made from barely are: beer/ale. Beers/ales typically have 4-8% alcohol whereas wine is usually 15-25% & then it gets into much stronger stuff. Try getting into the history & how the Word of Wisdom "magically" became a commandment - it's not a commandment, it says exactly the opposite "not by commandment or constraint" - so "keeping the word of wisdom" means you treat it not as a commandment - ha, ha. But you're totally wrong about even the suggestions in the Word of Wisdom being prohibitionist - that was Heber J. Grant & the early 1900's U.S. Prohibition movement. There were some political motives, too. The First Presidency & Twelve were using wine in their weekly temple sacrament meetings up until 1906. Wave the wand & 100 years later, now we are Prohibitionists teaching our children all alcohol is evil (instead of moderation). And Jesus & tons of prophets drank alcoholic wine. The WoW does NOT prohibit alcohol, it basically discourages drunkenness. And Joseph Smith didn't even "obey" it (because it was never a commandment).

http://www.mormonthink.com/wow.htm
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-cont ... N03_80.pdf

Some people really will go to the ends of the earth to eat their cake and have it, too.

You keep rehashing things, over and over, when they've been completely deflated.

Obey the WoW as the prophets give it, and you'll learn it's true, and reap its blessings.

[Jesef]

You haven't intelligently debunked a single point I've made, JohnnyL - & I think most people would agree. You are the one who just keeps repeating your opinion without any history or facts that make sense to back it up. Just "obey the leaders/'prophets'" is your mantra. And it's a mantra, not an argument. Keep repeating it to yourself. How about you just let the thread go unless you have some real evidence to present. So far you haven't even demonstrated how the Church was bound to accept the WoW as "upgraded" to a "commandment" when it explicitly states the opposite. Do some research, do some analysis & thinking, friend. I'll summarize it for you, though - your worldview & "faith" boils down to this TBM philosophy = "Follow the Prophets, they all have the keys, they can do whatever & we will bend our knees" - sounds like a cult song to me.

[Silver Pie]

Which is why you eat foods high in fat and protein and vegetables. And stay away from sugar. Which includes breads pastas etc.

If you do that you can last longer during the fast without getting hungry

This has been my experience, too. When I eat this way, intermittent fasting (and even water fasting for a few days) is a lot easier.

[I AM]

Perhaps the Brethren will add the commandment of no energy healing to the WoW soon?

Elder Ballard - from his October 2017 General Conference talk -

"In some places, too many of our people are looking beyond the mark and seeking secret knowledge and expensive and questionable practices to provide healing and support. An official church statement issued one year ago states, “We urge Church members to be cautious about participating in any group that promises-in exchange for money-miraculous healings or that claims to have special methods for accessing healing power outside of properly ordained priesthood holders.”

The Church handbook counsels, “Members should not use medical or health practices that are ethically or legally questionable. Local leaders should advise members who have health problems to consult with competent professional practitioners who are licensed in the countries where they practice.” (21.3.6)

Brothers and sisters, be wise and aware that such practices may be emotionally appealing, but may ultimately prove to be spiritually and physically harmful."

Lol modern medicine is all about exchanging money for so called cures etc. modern medicine is the problem. It’s a business. These companies (Pharma) and hospitals make more money the longer you are sick and dependent upon their drugs.

Sounds like Ballard wants us all to keep using this greedy and broken system that is constantly changing and telling us things that are actually harmful and don’t get me started on vaccines and cancer.

-------------
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=48620&p=862145&hili ... r.#p862145

[4Joshua8]

It is my opinion that the current policy regarding the Word of Wisdom is a wise policy based on wise tradition, not on a commandment from God. It is incumbent upon us to obey it, because it is an official policy, but I believe it will be changed (totally my opinion) to a literal translation of the text in section 89, which means it will not be considered a commandment (the section explicitly calls it NOT a commandment), and it will have nothing to do with coffee and tea, unless they are consumed at a hot temperature, which I believe the section refers to when it says "hot." I don't understand why we think God would go to all the trouble to name tobacco and alcohol by name, including a bunch of other things (wheat, barley, etc.), and then not name coffee and tea by name, but instead say, "hot" when referring to them. I think the best way to interpret "hot" is literally, meaning God is telling us it is wise for us to not drink beverages at a hot temperature. Not that we should rely on science to guide our understanding of scripture, but science does confirm this. Drinking hot beverages is bad for health and causes cancer. Of course, people would come out of the woodwork demanding a specific temperature, which would defeat the purpose of section 89, which is God giving us a bit of His wisdom, not by way of commandment, but allowing us to use good principles to guide our own lives.
So, yeah, I believe we'll get a WOW change, and I hope it's soon. Section 89 is marvelous the way it was given to us directly from God. I believe that if God wants it changed to an actual scriptural commandment, He will produce the faith necessary to canonize new scripture pertaining thereunto. Otherwise, I believe it will be restored to its original intent. I guess we'll find out.

[Davka]

It is my opinion that the current policy regarding the Word of Wisdom is a wise policy based on wise tradition, not on a commandment from God. It is incumbent upon us to obey it, because it is an official policy, but I believe it will be changed (totally my opinion) to a literal translation of the text in section 89, which means it will not be considered a commandment (the section explicitly calls it NOT a commandment), and it will have nothing to do with coffee and tea, unless they are consumed at a hot temperature, which I believe the section refers to when it says "hot." I don't understand why we think God would go to all the trouble to name tobacco and alcohol by name, including a bunch of other things (wheat, barley, etc.), and then not name coffee and tea by name, but instead say, "hot" when referring to them. I think the best way to interpret "hot" is literally, meaning God is telling us it is wise for us to not drink beverages at a hot temperature. Not that we should rely on science to guide our understanding of scripture, but science does confirm this. Drinking hot beverages is bad for health and causes cancer. Of course, people would come out of the woodwork demanding a specific temperature, which would defeat the purpose of section 89, which is God giving us a bit of His wisdom, not by way of commandment, but allowing us to use good principles to guide our own lives.
So, yeah, I believe we'll get a WOW change, and I hope it's soon. Section 89 is marvelous the way it was given to us directly from God. I believe that if God wants it changed to an actual scriptural commandment, He will produce the faith necessary to canonize new scripture pertaining thereunto. Otherwise, I believe it will be restored to its original intent. I guess we'll find out.

A literal interpretation would also mean we make our own wine for the sacrament, and beer and ale are a-okay.

Personally, I believe this would be a great clarification/policy change. It would lead true seekers to evaluate why they follow the word of wisdom and what it means to them personally, and limit the cultural aspects.

We should not have to be commanded in all things...