I was born and raised in the church. I served a mission. I was married in the temple. I always did what was "right." For a long time, I wasn't afraid asking hard questions, but I accepted easy answers and didn't do the research myself. Questions like, why does the temple ceremony have so many parallels with the Masonic Rituals? I accepted the answer that mason's were the builders of the Temple of Solomon, so they saw and changed the ceremony. It had survived but been changed, and Joseph Smith restored it.

My wife never understood the Word of Wisdom. She didn't understand why she couldn't drink coffee or tea. I explained to her how it supposedly happened:

"Joseph Smith didn't receive the revelation as a commandment. Brigham Young upgraded the Word of Wisdom to a commandment later. He also interpreted hot drinks to mean coffee and tea. So we shouldn't drink them, because a prophet said so. Besides, you're probably better off if you just don't drink them anyway, so what's the problem?"

Eventually, I actually did some actual research, and I found some major red flags with the Word of Wisdom. There were some major other issues that I found later. The major issues were these:

1. Joseph translated the Book of Mormon using a seer stone he found while digging a well even though he had the urim and thummin given to him with the purpose of translating the book.

2. The church is not honest about the method of translation. Joseph Smith only stated he translated by the gift and power of god, but eyewitnesses say he put the seer stone into a hat. He didn't even have the plates open in front of him.

3. I wondered, why was Joseph Smith in carthage in the first place. It turns out, he had the Nauvoo Expositor press destroyed for accusing him of teaching plurality of gods, practicing plural marriage, and several other things which turned out to be true. Joseph then had the Nauvoo legion protect him from being arrested under the governor's order, so the governor eventually had him arrested for treason. This wouldn't be so bad, but Joseph Smith violated the first amendment while he was running for president.

4. Adam-god theory. The problem here is that Brigham Young clearly taught this as doctrine, and later prophets declared this a false teaching. That just doesn't work.

5. I realized that if I had been part of the early church, in the inner circle, I probably would have been excommunicated. If the prophet today asked me to secretly (or openly) practice polygamy I wouldn't do it, and I would likely speak out against it. Many of the early church members were excommunicated for this very reason. So, even if the church were true I probably would have been kicked out.

It has been difficult on one hand, but liberating on the other. I remember as a member believing that most people that left the church did so because the had 'transgressed or sinned.'

The church has set a high standard for itself. It is either true or it isn't, and there is significant proof showing it is not. I still believe the church does many good things, but I have to take all of it or none of it.

It is important to study all things and then make decisions of truth, good, bad, right, or wrong. Below I've included some of my research about the Word of Wisdom. It is still a work in progress, but I hope it may help give some extra information about how the church incorrectly imposes its will on its members. It is written from the perspective of a member, and what I mean by that is, that I assume the church is true, and show how the church goes directly against its own teachings:

Word of Wisdom

Current enforcement of the Word of Wisdom is wrong according to scripture and church policy. The Word of Wisdom was not given as a commandment nor has it ever been upgraded to commandment status. Therefore, the current teachings and restrictions of priesthood callings and temple recommends is against God’s law. Further, this proves the church is not being led by Christ but by man.

The first question that needs to be resolved is whether the Word of Wisdom was given as a commandment. The original revelation reads, “To be sent by greeting; not by commandment or constraint… Given for a principle with promise…" (D&C 89: 2-3). God explicitly stated that the Word of Wisdom was not being given as a commandment. Like a judge, sometimes prophets are required to interpret God’s laws and determine how His laws should be applied today. Unfortunately, it is impossible to interpret the Word of Wisdom to mean the exact opposite of what was stated. A prophet cannot interpret something to be a commandment when God definitively states it is not a commandment.

The revelation continues in verse 3 saying it was, “adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.” Some argue that the Word of Wisdom was not given as a commandment at the time, because the church was not ready for it, or that if it had been instituted as a commandment, nearly the entire church would have been under sin at that time.

Even if this is true, it makes no difference. The law of Moses was given as a lesser law. The people were not penalized for only living up to the law as it had been given. Withholding full participation in the church for failing to live up to the Word of Wisdom is like restricting access to church members that pay tithing, but don’t live the law of consecration (the higher law).
Moreover, the revelation was given in 1833. Eleven years later, While Joseph, Hyrum, John Taylor, and Willard Richards were incarcerated at Carthage, they all drank not for a sacrament but to revive their dull and heavy spirits (Smith, 1950). Are these men to be considered among the weakest of all the saints? On the contrary, they were the leaders of the church, and are considered to be among the strongest of all saints that ever lived. This further proves that the revelation was not intended as a commandment. Joseph Smith, the prophet that received this revelation, still did not keep the Word of Wisdom eleven years after the Word of Wisdom was received. Clearly, the Word of Wisdom was not given with the intention of being a commandment.

The next question that needs review is whether the Word of Wisdom was ever upgraded to commandment status. The church states the revelation became a binding commandment in 1851 (Benson, 1983). The patriarch of the church, John Smith, had delivered a speech at conference about the Word of Wisdom. Following the discourse, Brigham Young rose and asked the women and then the men to commit to living by ALL things mentioned in the Word of Wisdom (Minutes of the General Conference, 1852). Does this vote constitute a change in policy, a change in commandment, or both?

The policy was not changed at that time. If it had changed the church would have begun enforcing the policy immediately after. However, full enforcement of the policy did not occur until almost 80 years after the members voted, in 1930 (Lyon, 1992). Further, when enforcement did begin, it did not include limiting the amount of meat consumed by members (unlike tea and coffee, meat is specifically mentioned in the Word of Wisdom). If the policy change did occur in 1851, then why doesn’t the church enforce the entire word of wisdom, including not eating meat?

Commandments are unchanging (Perry, 2013) (Nelson, 1993). They are given to prophets by God through revelation. God’s government is a monarchy not a democracy. His children don’t get to vote on commandments. These are eternal laws that cannot be changed. Simple commitment of a group of people does not create binding commandments for the entire church. This is like a bishop asking the elders to commit to home teaching, then restricting temple recommends for those not completing their assignments, whether or not they were in attendance at the meeting where the commitment took place.

New doctrine, commandments, and teachings need to be verified and proven with the scriptures. This is especially the case for Brigham Young’s teachings. Leaders of the church acknowledge that Brigham Young taught and believed in the Adam-God theory (McConkie, 1981). Even though Brigham Young placed the teaching in at least one temple (Nuttall, 1877), the church later rejected this teaching (Kimble, 1976) on the basis that it could not be backed up with scripture (McConkie, 1981).

Even if it is assumed that Brigham Young’s call for a vote in 1851 constituted a new commandment the scriptures don’t back it up. The revelation itself explicitly states it is not a commandment. Christ turned water into wine (John 2: 10-11), and this was considered a miracle. Isaiah does condemn those that rise early and drink all day every day, but there is no scripture, including the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants, that completely condemns alcohol, tobacco, coffee, or tea.

The church is completely within its rights to encourage its members to follow the Word of Wisdom, but it cannot use coercion, force, or fear of penalty. The church can only encourage its members “by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned” (D&C 121).

The Word of Wisdom was not given as a commandment, nor was it ever upgraded to commandment status. This creates quite a conundrum and begs the question, could the only true church be enforcing a policy that is directly contrary to the word of God?


Bibliography
Benson, E. T. (1983). A Principle With a Promise. General Conference, April. Salt Lake City.
Kimble, S. W. (1976, November). Our Own Liahona. Ensign , p. 77.
Lyon, J. L. (1992). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York , NY: Macmillan.
McConkie. (1981). Letter Written in 1981. Retrieved from http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Repudiated_concepts/Adam-God_theory
Minutes of the General Conference. (1852, February 1). Millenial Star , p. 35.
Nelson, R. M. (1993). Constancy Amid Change. General Conference. October. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Nuttall, L. J. (1877, February 7). Personal Journal.
Perry, L. T. (2013). Obedience to Law is Liberty. General Conference. April. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Smith, G. A. (1950). History of the Church (Vol. 7), p. 101, Salt Lake City , UT: Deseret Book Company.