Comments on: What makes tea and coffee against the W of W? http://www.hotpepper.ca/lds/wordofwisdom/2008/02/what-makes-tea-and-coffee-against-the-w-of-w/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-makes-tea-and-coffee-against-the-w-of-w Sun, 05 Feb 2012 02:28:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: kmsiever http://www.hotpepper.ca/lds/wordofwisdom/2008/02/what-makes-tea-and-coffee-against-the-w-of-w/comment-page-1/#comment-2075 kmsiever Tue, 21 Jun 2011 12:43:55 +0000 http://www.hotpepper.ca/lds/wordofwisdom/?p=18#comment-2075 Many prophets have interpreted “hot drinks” to mean tea and coffee. Hot chocolate is not against the Word of Wisdom because it is not tea or coffee. Actually, there is no prohibition on meat. Specifically, the sparingly refers to flesh of beast of the field and fowl of the air. No mention of poultry or fish. But you won’t find any disagreement from me about people getting temple recommends despite eating too much meat. Same goes for not eating fruits and vegetables and whole grains. Many prophets have interpreted “hot drinks” to mean tea and coffee. Hot chocolate is not against the Word of Wisdom because it is not tea or coffee.

Actually, there is no prohibition on meat. Specifically, the sparingly refers to flesh of beast of the field and fowl of the air. No mention of poultry or fish. But you won’t find any disagreement from me about people getting temple recommends despite eating too much meat. Same goes for not eating fruits and vegetables and whole grains.

]]> By: TJ http://www.hotpepper.ca/lds/wordofwisdom/2008/02/what-makes-tea-and-coffee-against-the-w-of-w/comment-page-1/#comment-2074 TJ Tue, 21 Jun 2011 12:32:24 +0000 http://www.hotpepper.ca/lds/wordofwisdom/?p=18#comment-2074 The WW does not ban "Camellia sinensis", it bans "hot drinks." You assure us that "hot chocolate" is not a "hot drink" because it has no Camellia sinensis. How on earth can you take the plain meaning of a word and ignore it in favor of a term that does not exist in the WW? Did God not know the term Camellia sinensis? Meat should be eaten "sparingly". Yet people can get TRs if they eat meat at every meal. That's not "sparingly" (and I don't need a Latin term to say why! The WW does not ban “Camellia sinensis”, it bans “hot drinks.” You assure us that “hot chocolate” is not a “hot drink” because it has no Camellia sinensis. How on earth can you take the plain meaning of a word and ignore it in favor of a term that does not exist in the WW? Did God not know the term Camellia sinensis?

Meat should be eaten “sparingly”. Yet people can get TRs if they eat meat at every meal. That’s not “sparingly” (and I don’t need a Latin term to say why!

]]>