Digging Holes in the Bank (Part I of II)

The very first blog that I posted is entitled, Lay Not our Sword upon the Shelf. It pertains to the word of God and much of the symbolism used in scripture to portray it. I have posted several subsequent blogs that address the word of God and the central place it has in our lives. Importantly, the word of God is not only portrayed as an iron rod in Lehi's dream, but is described as an iron rod throughout the Standard Works. That iron rod is a great sword wielded by the Spirit of God (see Ephesians 6:17). "Holding fast" to the iron rod, then, presupposes that we have taken the Holy Spirit as our guide (see D&C 45:57). He is the adhesive that tightens our grip to the word, He is the expedient that gives it life, and He makes it germinate and grow within.

What is generally observed from Lehi's dream about the iron rod is the fact that it led "to the tree by which [he] stood" (1 Nephi 8:19). But, what is often missed in this same verse is the fact that it "extended along the bank of the river". Two questions are germane to this important, but unpopular, fact:

1) what is the river?, and
2) why does the iron rod (sword of the spirit) extend along its bank?

Throughout the scriptures, bodies of water are often symbolic of God's judgments. For example, the Red Sea was parted so that Israel could pass through. But when Pharaoh and his armies attempted the same passage, the record states that--

Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. 

And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them (Exodus 14:27-28)

To the wicked, the sea was the power of God's judgments--a symbol that no wicked person can enter the promised land without first passing through them. Thus, the Red Sea became a an Old Testament symbol of Hell, or God's judgments  upon the wicked. In 1 Nephi 15:26, it is recorded that Nephi's brother's asked the question: "What meaneth the river of water which our father saw?" Nephi's reply supports the foregoing conclusion:

And I said unto them that the water which my father saw was filthiness; and so much was his mind swallowed up in other things that he beheld not the filthiness of the water.

And I said unto them that it was an awful gulf, which separated the wicked from the tree of life, and also from the saints of God.

And I said unto them that it was a representation of that awful hell, which the angel said unto me was prepared for the wicked.

And I said unto them that our father also saw that the justice of God did also divide the wicked from the righteous; and the brightness thereof was like unto the brightness of a flaming fire, which ascendeth up unto God forever and ever, and hath no end. (1 Nephi 15:26-30)

As noted in these verses, the river of water is a representation of filthiness, an awful gulf, an awful hell, and the justice of God.

One may wonder: "How is it that God's justice, which is pure and free from all stain, is also a representation of filthiness? Nephi explained, that "the kingdom of God is not filthy, and there cannot any unclean thing enter into the kingdom of God; wherefore there must needs be a place of filthiness prepared for that which is filthy" (1 Nephi 15:34). This place prepared is, according to Nephi, "that awful hell of which I have spoken." Nephi likewise identified the devil as "the preparator of it" (1 Nephi 15:35). Importantly, the devil is not the one who prepared hell, for the LORD plainly stated that He was the one who prepared hell (Moses 6:29; compare D&C 29:28, 2 Nephi 28:23). Conversely, the devil is the "preparator" of it, meaning that he is the "person who prepares a specimen" for hell (see Dictionary.com). It was the devil who prepared Pharaoh and his army to possess and make filthy the waters of the Red Sea (Note: there is some controversy as to the name of the Red Sea, see Psalms 106, footnote 7b, Exodus 23, footnote 31b, and the location where the Israelites crossed. I have seen several documentaries on the matter, even though the matter is of little importance. If seeing is believing, then I have personally accepted the view outlined in this 28-minute video entitled The Red Sea Crossing).

The brother of Jared similarly described the formidable ocean that he and his company was to pass over in small barges:

For behold, ye shall be as a whale in the midst of the sea; for the mountain waves shall dash upon you. Nevertheless, I will bring you up again out of the depths of the sea; for the winds have gone forth out of my mouth, and also the rains and the floods have I sent forth.

And behold, I prepare you against these things; for ye cannot cross this great deep save I prepare you against the waves of the sea, and the winds which have gone forth, and the floods which shall come. Therefore what will ye that I should prepare for you that ye may have light when ye are swallowed up in the depths of the sea? (Ether 2:24-25).

One cannot pass through God's judgments save He prepares the way--and the way that He has prepared is the atonement of Jesus Christ. It is by faith in Him and His atonement that one is able to pass through His judgments into the promised land without being destroyed by God's wrath. The apostle Paul thus wrote: "By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned" (Hebrews 11:29).

When Israel passed through the Rea Sea, they were symbolically passing through God's judgments, described as a "wall of water on their right and a wall of water on their left" (Exodus 14:21-22). Of their own accord, there was no evidence that they were worthy to pass through God's judgments without a breach in the wall (also called the gates of hell, see 2 Nephi 4:32) consuming them. Righteousness comes through Christ alone (Romans 10:1-4). But Israel had something Pharaoh and his armies did not have--they had the covenants of the LORD. They had the promise of redemption from God's judgments, DEATH and HELL, (see 2 Nephi 9:10) through the atonement of Jesus Christ. They had the Holy One of Israel to stand in the breach and hold back God's wrath and judgments! (see Psalms 106:23,; compare Ezekiel 13:5, 22:30 and Isaiah 30:13-14). But if One is to be able to stand in the breach, then He must be willing and able to suffer those punishments held back from those He redeems.

Clear fountains, great rivers, and small streams that pour into God's judgments are often viewed as the word of God. It was a fountain of water that saved Hagar, Sarah's maid (see Genesis 16:6-7). By striking the rock, Moses caused waters to flow from the rock (see Exodus 17:6) whereby Israel was saved from certain death. Such waters that flow forth of pure fountains give life to all that they touch. Speaking of such rivers, Joel wrote:

And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the Lord, and shall water the valley of Shittim. (Joel 3:18).

The fact that a fountain flows from the house of the Lord is instructive. In His house, waters are pure. In His house, the covenants and word of the Lord flow unsullied . . . free from the philosophies of men . . . and the repetitive words of instruction given therein contain a unique message to every listening ear . . . every time, no matter how frequent, they are heard. With beauty that only God can devise, Ezekiel described the life-giving waters that come forth of the house of the Lord:

And it shall come to pass, that every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither: for they shall be healed; and every thing shall live whither the river cometh.

And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine (Ezekiel 47:9, 12).

Unfortunately, Satan seeks to make filthy all that is clean. Referring to one of the devil's senior advocates, Ezekiel said of Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt . . . that he "camest forth with [his] rivers and troubledst the waters with [his] feet, and fouledst [the clean] rivers" (Ezekiel 32:2). John likewise saw a day when this leviathan would cast from its mouth "water as a flood after the [Church of God], that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood" (JST, Revelation 12:15). Of that day, the apostle Paul foresaw that men would be "ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of truth" (see 2 Timothy 3:7).

That day is often thought to have already occurred during the Dark Ages. However, the "perilous times" (see 2 Timothy 3:1) that brings about the quandary of "ever learning" was certainly not those years in which there was little or no learning at all among a world steeped in ignorance. Rather, the apostle Paul was quite precise as to the timing of this academic bankruptcy. With a clarity that only Nephi can match, the apostle expressed that this crisis would come "in the last days." Adding food for thought, President Howard W. Hunter declared that “all dispensations have had their perilous times, but our day will include genuine peril” (see An Anchor to the Souls of Men. Ensign, October 1993, p. 70). It was with this peril in mind that Paul penned his second letter to Timothy foretelling of a time when man would be “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth”—

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

These verses most assuredly point to our day, for Paul’s warning that “we would not endure sound doctrine” alludes to an earlier event of which Paul said was recorded “for an admonition for those upon whom the end of the world shall come" (JST 1 Corinthians 10:11). Summarizing this event, one month following their departure from Egypt, the assembly of Israel cried out in hunger. To Moses, the Lord responded: "Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them" (Exodus 16:4). Although described by David as angels’ food (see Psalms 78:25), other scriptures note that the manna tasted like fresh oil (see Numbers 11:7-8). Thus, the congregation often scorned the light bread (see Numbers 21:5). During one such perilous incident, the mixt multitude cried:

Why came we forth out of Egypt? 

Who shall give us flesh to eat? 

We remember the fish . . . the cucumbers, and the melons . . .. 

But now our soul [is] dried away: [there is] nothing at all, beside this manna, [before] our eyes (Numbers 11:4-6).

In retribution for their scorn of this “bread from heaven”—an emblem of the Word of God—the Lord “brought quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, as it were a day’s journey on [either] side . . . round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth.” Eager to partake of this flesh, the congregation gathered the quails, and he that gathered least gathered ten homers. (Numbers 11:31-32). Understanding that a single homer is equivalent to 6½ bushel produces a rather ghastly perspective of an unchecked lusting after flesh. Hence, while the flesh was yet between their teeth, “the Lord smote the people with a very great plague,” and many perished. And, in simplified English, they called the place where they buried the dead, “the graveyard of those who lusted." (Numbers 11:33-34, including footnote 34a. King David wrote that the fattest were slain of the plague, see Psalms 78:31).

Just as ancient Israel did not endure the light bread but heaped to themselves flesh, Paul declared that saints of the last days would not endure sound doctrine—the bread of heaven—but instead heap to themselves philosophers espousing perilous ideals, the likes of which include "Sigmund Freud, Charles Darwin, John Dewey, Karl Marx, and John Maynard Keynes" (see Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson,1988, p. 307). Although latter-day prophets have warned us about these specific individuals, the number that can be added to them espousing perilous “isms” of every kind is truly heaping. Because of them, Nephi wrote, all have “gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men" (2 Nephi 28:14).

With this long, preliminary instruction, I now turn to the event after which this blog is entitled: Digging Holes in the Bank.

The Spider's Web

Words matter! How one word is defined can determine entire doctrinal interpretations. Correctly defined words render true doctrine whereas sloppy definitions lead to the sophistries of men. For example, did you know that the word "new" means "old" from a scriptural perspective. For example, in D&C 22:1 the "new and everlasting covenant" is defined as "even that which was from the beginning." In other words, the new covenant is the original covenant given to Adam and Eve. Thus, speaking with a new tongue does not mean speaking a recently invented language. Rather, it means speaking with the tongue of angels, or the tongue of Adam (see 2 Nephi 31:14; compare Zephaniah 3:9). Similarly, living on a new world means living on a world "like the one where we used to live", or place of original residency (compare Ether 13:9), and the New Jerusalem is "like unto the Jerusalem of old" (see Ether 13:8). And finally, to receive a white stone whereon a new name is written (see D&C 130:11) means receiving the name . . . well, let him understand who has ears to hear!

I preface this blog with this interesting doctrinal anomaly so that the next doctrinal anomaly, new revelation, will be understood to be old doctrine. So . . . here it is: Since FIRST is LAST, AND NEW is OLD, THEN I HOPE IT WILL BE NO PROBLEM TO CONVINCE YOU THAT HOT is COLD! With this maze of words in mind, I now pose a question that has been the central subject of the Word of Wisdom since the days of Joseph Smith:

What are "HOT" drinks mentioned in D&C 89:9?

Before you stop reading, recall that I said that I prefaced this blog with a doctrinal anomaly so that the rest of this blog is palatable. I know how much we like our energy drinks and that we have, in large part, justified our indulgence on the basis that these drinks are not generally thought of as being prohibited in the Word of Wisdom. But I hope the following will provide a view that opens eyes and tempers feelings. And I specifically beg of you to read the full blog, so you do not miss the NEW and critical point made towards the end.

It seems that the question concerning the religious legality of caffeinated drinks arises every time the Word of Wisdom is discussed. Over the years, various Brethren have counselled against partaking of caffeinated drinks. It is not my intent to recount all of their comments in this blog. But due to the recent lack of attention given to this topic, I think recalling a few is worthwhile:

First, President Spencer W. Kimball wrote:

I never drink any of the cola drinks and my personal hope would be that no one would. However, they are not included in the Word of Wisdom in its technical application. I quote from a letter from the secretary to the First Presidency, "But the spirit of the Word of Wisdom would be violated by the drinking or eating of anything that contained a habit-forming drug." With reference to the cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken any attitude on this matter ... but I personally do not put them in the class as with tea and coffee because the Lord specifically mentioned them [i.e., hot drinks].... I might say also that strychnine and sleeping pills and opium and heroin are not mentioned in the Word of Wisdom and yet I would discourage them with all my power (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 202).

Second, in a talk given in the Assembly Hall on September 17, 1976,  President Ezra Taft Benson likewise taught:

You have been counseled repeatedly to "live in the world, but not be one of the world." Sometimes some of our members want to live as close as they can to worldly standards and yet qualify for a temple recommend. Live by the covenants you took in the temple; do not live on the fringes. You will be judged by the kinds of movies you attend, by the way you dress, and by the music to which you listen. 

Some years ago one of our teachers told his students that he used cola drinks and that it did not prevent him from holding a temple recommend. This was an indication of poor judgment on his part, and it illustrates what I mean by living "on the fringes." Live the spirit of the commandments. (Ezra Taft Benson, The Gospel Teacher & His Message.)

Finally, in April 1975, Bishop Vaughn J. Featherstone recounted the following experience:

I was over in England a while back and a bishop asked me, "What is the Church's stand on cola drinks?" I said. "Well, I can't remember the exact wording of the bulletin, but I remember seeing the bulletin when I was a stake president. The Church, of course, advises against them." 

He said, "Well, I have read the Priesthood Bulletin, but that isn't what it says to me." 

And I said. "Would you get your Priesthood Bulletin? Let's read it together." And so we found under the heading "Cola Drinks": "...the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs...." (The Priesthood Bulletin, Feb. 1972, p. 4.) 

He said, "Well, you see, that doesn't mean cola." 

I said, "Well, I guess you will have to come to your own grips with that, but to me, there is no question." You see, there can't be the slightest particle of rebellion, and in him there is. We can find loopholes in a lot of things if we want to bend the rules of the Church. (Featherstone, Vaughn, J., A Self-Inflicted Purging, Conference Report, April 1975, pp. 99-102; Ensign, May 1975, pp. 66-68.)

Official Statements concerning the use of caffeinated drinks are not as numerous as statements made by the Brethren. However, several are also worth noting. The Church Handbook of Instructions gives the following counsel regarding the definition of "hot drinks" in the Word of Wisdom:

The only official interpretation of “hot drinks” (D&C 89:9) in the Word of Wisdom is the statement made by early Church leaders that the term “hot drinks” means tea and coffee.

Members should not use any substance that contains illegal drugs. Nor should members use harmful or habit-forming substances except under the care of a competent physician.

Likewise, the Priesthood Bulletin referred to by Elder Featherstone above, discourages the use of any habit-forming drugs:

The Word of Wisdom, section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants, remains as to terms and specifications as found in that section. There has been no official interpretation of that Word of Wisdom except that which was given by the Brethren in the very early days of the Church when it was declared that ‘hot drinks’ meant tea and coffee.

With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided.

In more recent years, several informative articles regarding the abuse of energy drinks were published in the December 2008 New Era and Ensign. In each, Dr. Thomas J. Boud identifies the harmful effects of energy drinks (see also Caffeine-The Subtle Addiction). Of particular interest was the inclusion of images of webs created by spiders that had been given traces of various drugs, one of which was caffeine. One can easily judge as to whether caffeine provides any benefit for a spider.

Images of webs created by spiders on drugs

I presume I could spend a lifetime quoting the Brethren, Official Church Policies, and medical doctors concerning the spiritual and temporal effects of ingesting caffeinated drinks, but I seriously doubt it would change the minds or direction of so any who have a well-developed habit of drinking the daily cola. Hence, since Elder Packer has aptly taught that doctrine changes behavior, I return to the central question regarding this element of the Word of Wisdom: What is a "hot" drink? What does the word "hot" mean? This is a question that is not answered by any of the foregoing talks, policies, or articles. I believe, however, that the answer to this question is what provides the doctrine that should guide one's conduct.

In response to this question, Elder John A. Widstoe noted:

When the Word of Wisdom was first promulgated in 1833, the question was at once asked: What is the meaning of "hot drinks?" Was it an injunction against consuming beverages so hot as to burn the tongue or mouth? That did not seem reasonable. (John A Widtsoe, Word of Wisdom: A Modern Interpretation, 85)

If Elder Widstoe is correct—and I believe that he is—then what is wrong with a drink that is “hot”? This can perhaps be understood by referring to another warning in the Word of Wisdom—the warning to avoid “strong drinks”. What is meant by “strong”? It would be silly to suppose that, in using the word “strong,” the Lord was referring to the muscularity of a liquid. Rather, the Book of Mormon plainly describes that the “strength” of a “strong drink” pertains to the chemical properties of one of its physical ingredients—alcohol (see Alma 55:13-16) and the effects that it has when ingested.

Similarly, the property of “heat” in a “hot drink” has nothing to do with the physical temperature (i.e., degrees Fahrenheit) of the drink. Instead, the “heat” of a “hot drink” is a reference to the chemical properties of its physical ingredients—that is, caffeine. With this in mind, take note of the definition of the word “hot” taken from the Webster’s 1828 Dictionary--the dictionary in use at the time the Lord gave the Word of Wisdom revelation to the prophet Joseph Smith:

HOT, adjective

1. Having sensible heat; opposed to cold; as a hot stove or fire; a hot cloth;hot liquors. hot expresses more than warm.
2. Ardent in temper; easily excited or exasperated; vehement.
3. Violent; furious; as a hot engagement or assault.
4. Eager; animated; ; brisk; keen; as a hot pursuit, or a person hot in a pursuit.
5. Lustful; lewd.
6. Acrid; biting; stimulating; pungent; as hot as mustard or pepper.

Are "hot drinks" those that will burn the tongue if drank precipitously? Or are they cold drinks that, when ingested, heat up the body? To illustrate, our everyday usage of the word "hot" takes on new meaning when an eligible young woman is thought of as "hot" to a young bachelor. Does the young man literally think that her body temperature is higher than 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, or does the thought of her simply light a fire in him and "heat up" his inner self? (Note to Reader: I'm intentionally excluding senior citizens from this worldly analogy).

So, when Joseph and Hyrum Smith explained that “hot drinks” referred to “tea and coffee”, it seems clear that they were simply clarifying that the word “hot” was a direct and specific reference to the “hot” stimulants found therein, and NOT to the “hot” temperature of the drink. Confirming this conclusion, President David O. McKay noted that "there is a substance in tea and coffee which[,] when taken into the human system, tends to increase the beating of the heart; which in turn increases the rapidity of the circulation of the blood and of breathing. This causes the body to become warmer and more exhilarated" (see Teachings of the Presidents of the Church, David O. McKay, Chapter 11: Living the Word of Wisdom, Intellectual Reserve, Inc., 2003, 2011, punctuation added). More to the point, Elder John A. Widtsoe, who was an educator in biology and agricuture (and I might add that he is one of few Church members who have been able to make the goatee look distinguished), taught:

Caffeine is not in any sense a food, but, as a stimulant, must be classed with tobacco, opium and other similar substances. Owing to its action on the heart and circulation, the body becomes heated, and in that sense a solution of caffeine is a ‘hot drink’. (John A. Widtsoe, Joseph Smith as Scientist, 91-92)

What are "hot drinks"? Today, they happen to be served up cold!

In February 1834, at one of the earliest meetings of the High Council over which the Presidency of Church presided, the question was addressed "[w]hether disobedience to the Word of Wisdom was sufficient to deprive an official member from holding office in the Church after having it sufficiently taught him?" After a free and full discussion on the matter, Joseph Smith rendered the following decision:

No official member in this Church is worthy to hold an office after having the word of wisdom properly taught him; and he, the official member, neglecting to comply with and obey it. The High Council of the Church then voted unanimously to accept this decision (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 117).

This decision, although included in the minutes of the meeting and unanimously accepted by that Council, was neither included in the revelations given to the prophet nor accepted by the sustaining vote of the Church's members as scripture that now governs who should hold an office in the Church. This is an important point to make inasmuch as ample opportunity existed to include this decision in the Church's canon of scripture now known as "the Law of the Gospel" (see D&C 42:59)--and this opportunity still remains. Today, drinking a caffeinated soda should neither prevent a member from holding an office in the Church nor is it an infraction that warrants the withholding of a temple recommend by a member's Bishop or Stake President. An ecclesiastical leader may provide appropriate counsel to one who consumes caffeinated sodas, but should not presently consider such conduct in determining a member's worthiness. I know personally so many good members who occasionally ingest a caffeinated soda to eliminate a serious headache or prevent them from falling asleep during a crucial activity (such as the driving of a vehicle).

Hence, so as to prevent some from thinking that this blog is an attempt to "steady the ark", I reiterate the official position of the Church regarding the definition of "hot drinks" as it applies to the Word of Wisdom:

The only official interpretation of “hot drinks” (D&C 89:9) in the Word of Wisdom is the statement made by early Church leaders that the term “hot drinks” means tea and coffee.

Members should not use any substance that contains illegal drugs. Nor should members use harmful or habit-forming substances except under the care of a competent physician.

In conclusion, although the term "hot drinks" should be interpreted primarily in context with the excitement, or hot feeling, created when they are ingested, it is interesting to note that a recent report issued by an international panel of 23 scientists from the World Health Organization concluded that "people who drink their coffee or tea at higher temperatures are more likely to get esophageal cancer than people who take their drinks less hot." "Hot beverages could as much as double your risk for esophageal cancer," stated Mariana Stern, Ph.D., a professor of epidemiology at the University of Southern California and one of the members of the international panel. More specifically, the panel concluded that "drinks above 149 degrees Fahrenheit are in the danger zone."

Inasmuch as the industry-average temperature of coffee is 140 degrees, the risk that "hot drinks" will cause cancer is ridiculously small. But a Mr. Coffee spokesperson says their machines heat water up to 177 to 185 degrees, and that temperature will drop only a few degrees by the time it hits your mug. So if you’re drinking your coffee immediately, it’s possible that it’s still in the red zone. For Latter-day Saints, this does not pose a problem, However, some Mormons like to drink a piping hot cup of Postum, Hot Chocolate, or Herbal Tea in the morning. For such individuals who like to live on the edge, Men’s Health Nutrition Advisor Mike Roussell, explained that the "important information for us to glean from this report is that potential cancer risk from drinking hot beverages . . . has little to do with the beverage itself, but the temperature of the water when you are drinking it." Thus, in the final analysis, it seems as though everything--including water--can cause cancer--especially if you drink it while living in, or visiting, California.