It appears to me that we have become preoccupied with form-over-function in the avowed avoidance of coffee, tea, alcohol and tobacco, while over-eating, drinking caffeinated beverages and such continues unabated. The spirit of the initial revelation has been lost in the zeal for control.

Basically, I believe that the interpretation of the WoW is splitting hairs and it’s required adherence for Temple attendance is badly in need of review. Do we still need a commandment for things that we know within our selves from our internal operating manual (the light of Christ)?

I agree with Brent Hartman (see #6 & #33).

If the WoW prohibits certain plants (like Camellia sinensis) then ya’ll better stop drinking caffeinated soda. Where do you think they extract the caffeine from?

I say the ambiguity about the WoW is a strong sign of how the Brethren want us to treat it. You don’t see much confusion about how to posses true charity – for example. Can you imagine Pres. Monson getting up in GC and dissecting the nuances of the WoW? There are weightier matters to focus on.

Respecting the interpretations of others (even if we disagree) is the real issue here.

I agree that even something as seemingly clear as “hot” is still open to interpretation. One could say that hot refers to spicy drinks, or even Paris Hilton’s favorite drink (a sure sign of apostasy).

The fact that so many prophets of this dispensation can’t come up with consistent interpretations is, from my perspective, why this was not given as a commandment but as good temporal advice. Let everyone judge for themselves how they should implement this advice in their lives, and let them deal with the temporal consequences as they come.

When men start using their interpretation of temporal laws to determine spiritual blessings for others, then we get into a position that I can’t sustain.

The current interpretation where a man who drinks a glass of tea every now and then, is not worthy of temple blessings, but a man who eats meat for every meal is worthy, is just plain ridiculous. If this so-called “law” of health is so important then why do I see so many overweight, poor-health, sugar addicted temple recommend holders?

In other words, this arbitrary enforcement of something that was never given as a commandment is what I have a problem with. I’ve never seen a good explanation as to why some parts of the WoW are so important that your spiritual well being depends on living them, but other parts of the very same WoW have no bearing whatsoever on you spiritual well being. I certainly wouldn’t want to be the one defending that position.

As Eliza R. Snow said, “truth is reason”, and i don’t see any reason in the current interpretation of the WoW. I do see reason in my “interpretation”, but I could be a little biased.

I feel it’s important that one’s interpretation should not be allowed to contradict the actual scripture they are interpreting, and one should not allow fallible man’s interpretation to create a greater barrier between man and God, than the problem they are trying to solve.

The problem is that whether or not you believe that there is in fact some pure revelation that exists independent of our interpretation of it, as human beings we cannot but interpret. Your position on the WoW is ultimately an interpretation. You read “hot” to refer to temperature and “not by commandment or constraint” to mean, well… I’m not sure what you take this to mean (should the WoW then not be a temple recommend question?). You substantiate your interpretation with the interpretation of earlier prophets.

There are of course many other interpretations. The bottom line for me, however, is that anyone making an interpretation must provide reasons for their interpretation being the “best” interpretation. Pretending that an interpretation is not an interpretation, which you do in your first post or at least pretend that the passage does not need an interpretation, is ridiculous. The meaning of scriptures are not self-evident and to assert that it is, IMO, is to do a great injustice to them.

So, with all that said, persuade us that your interpretation is the best one. Citing a series of out-dated GA quotes does not suffice, as there are just as many, if not more providing a different interpretation; and many of those quotes tend to be from more recent GAs who most LDSs tend to take as more authoritative than previous ones.

I feel it’s important that one’s interpretation should not be allowed to contradict the actual scripture they are interpreting, and one should not allow fallible man’s interpretation to create a greater barrier between man and God, than the problem they are trying to solve.

Is not following the advice given in the word of wisdom going to do more harm than those who condemn you for not following that advice, and prevent you from obtaining the blessings for exaltation based on nothing but fallible interpretation? I don’t think so.

Here’s some more interesting quotes:

George Q. Cannon in 1868 stated: “We are told, and very plainly too, that hot drinks–tea, coffee, chocolate, cocoa and all drinks of this kind are not good for man…we must feed our children properly… We must not permit them to drink liquor or hot drinks, or hot soups…” (Journal of Discourses, reported by David W. Evans 7 April 1868, Vol. 12, p. 221,223)

Brigham Young stated that “…hot drinks are not good. We will use cold drinks to allay thirst and warm drinks for medicine.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 12, p. 209)

Wilford Woodruff said that “it was wisdom to deal with all such matters according to the wisdom which God gave; that a forced abstinence was not making us free, but should [put us] under bondage with a yoke upon our necks.” (Wilford Woodruff Journal, 7 November 1841; History of the Church, 2:35)

“Some of the brethren are very strenuous upon the “Word of Wisdom,” and would like to have me preach upon it, and urge it upon the brethren, and make it a test of fellowship. I do not think that I shall do so. I have never done so.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 9, p. 35)

My point is, these passages require interpretation to be made “clear”, and interpretation is often a tricky matter. It’s difficult for me to take anyone seriously who pretends otherwise.