I have never, ever heard of anyone being disfellowshipped for it--nor can I imagine such a thing being done. The church in business meeting wouldn't stand for it. If a small group tried to ramrod it through, it would split the church if the pastor were to support them, and he would end up being transferred. As for baptismal prep, I dont think it is mentioned that often.

Dave

What about Mountain Dew or any other caffeinated beverage?

What about chocolate - how does theobromine differ spiritually from caffeine? http://www.xocoatl.org/caffeine.htm

/Bevin

I was at an Amnesty meeting last night where people of all religions (and many with no religion) spent hours talking about ways to relieve human suffering and stop people from being persecuted, oppressed, imprisoned for their faith or political views, tortured etc.

Now this morning I turn on my computer and open up the forum and read that drinking coffee is a sin that harms the soul, on a par with adultery.

Is this for real? Are there really people who serious think like that? At least when the early Quakers boycotted sugar and coffee, it was because of the suffering experienced by the slaves and low-paid farmers who labored to bring these products to the market.

I keep thinking back to my student days, talking to the president of the local branch of the Vegetarian Society, who said (on finding out I was an Adventist), "I'm surprised you are bothering to get involved with our organization. Most Adventists I know are totally focused only on the benefits of vegetarianism on their own health, and don't care about how it relates to the environment, or cruelty to animals, or fair distribution of resources."

How long can I continue to belong to this organization without having to give myself a lobotomy?

aldona

Aldona,

I live in a large SDA medical community and I see active involvement with radio programs, TV programs, classes, mission work, volunteer work in the community etc. I am sure that there have been and continue to be people who are SDA who do not care about anyone other than themselves, but there are many of us (including you) who are not like that. There are many SDA who are into protecting the enviornment, lobying for children and families, involved in humanitarian work etc. Unfortunately, the bad news always hits the news before the good news does. You will always find "strange people" with "strange attitudes" in every organization but you can also find incredible examples of genuine caring and passsion for issues that affect humanity around us. I pray you can meet more people like that who happen to also be SDA.

Let me tell you about a fairly recent event while I was on our local SDA church board.

The Board had approved a request to have our local Red Cross emergency community support meeting at our church. But then some loyal works oriented member made a stink about allowing the group to serve Coffee in our fellowship hall and kitchen.

You guessed it. We had to cancel our involvement with the Red Cross Emergency Team due to the COFFEE issue. I had to inform them that they would have to go elsewhere if they served coffee. And they did go elsewhere. What a witness !!!

We have SDA churches in our area that would not have a problem with that.

50 cents of one, half dollar of another.

I'm sure that other SDA churches would have taken a stand against.

Personally, I can see both sides to the issue. I don't know if the churches that would serve coffee are promoting it (that can be debated, I guess) but just serving a hot drink that is customary. I think that is how they view it.

When I get a migraine I drink whatever has the most caffeine in it. Although, I don't drink coffee ONLY because it tastes nasty to me. I have also heard from friends who have asthma that hot coffee eases tight lungs.

The way I read it .... I don't think Ellen White has made any exceptions to her "sin" statement. But I could be wrong.

If the grounds (no pun intended) on which EGW made her statement were health grounds, and new medical evidence suggests that it might (in moderation) be *beneficial* rather than harmful to health, does its use remain a sin? In other words, how much conceptual inertia is there, and does the evidence matter?

Good Question Bravus.

Do we rely on medical science or Ellen White?