Riffs: 11:03:07: Missouri Baptists and The Battle of the Booze
November 3, 2007 by iMonk
UPDATE II: Daniel Whitfield’s comprehensive survey of the Biblical teaching on Alcohol use is a must have resource. Top notch. Distribute widely please. My own journey through the hypocrisy of Southern Baptists on this issue was written in One Big Happy Lie.
UPDATE: Please read the comments on this post. Sad, sad, sad. The traditions of men doing exactly what Jesus said they would do.
Missouri Southern Baptists- 600,000 of them- are being torn apart by a battle indicative of what the current Southern Baptist Convention faces.
Alcohol- specifically what position regarding moderate, temperate use of alcoholic beverages churches are obligated to endorse- was the big issue at the recent Missouri Baptist convention meeting. Alcohol fundamentalists are well aware that the Bible is not on the side of their teetotal position, but that isn’t stopping them from insisting that Missouri Baptists must be united on this issue.
In other words, Biblical authority takes a back seat to the authority of culture and opinion. These are the same people that wanted any SBC professor fired who didn’t say he/she believed the Bible was without error in all that it affirms.
This issue, if not resolved, will cost Southern Baptists a bunch of future church affiliations and the already precarious interest of thousands of younger pastors. This issue needs to be shelved and soon. This will strangle cooperation at a time it is most needed.
Neither the SBC’s Cooperative Program mechanism for funding mission work or the Baptist Faith and Message doctrinal statement require the position of the alcohol fundamentalists. Everyone is aware that this isn’t about the abuse of alcohol, and a fair number of the people getting red-faced over the issue show evidence that if the bar in question were a buffet, they’ve been frequenting it more than once a year.
Unite around the Gospel essentials that will support cooperative missions. The path of wisdom is obvious. Ramming this non-Biblical binding of conscience down the throats of Southern Baptists is going to be a disaster for the SBC’s connection with future generations.
Your comments welcome, especially if you are a Southern Baptist.
I was “converted” from teetotalism when I was in my 20’s.
Mr Anton: Anything can be abused. Why, since abuse is a problem, has the eating of say junkfood, drinking of soda etc not been banned by the same churches? The bible has much to say about gluttony as well. You know how many people die, and are influenced by overeating? how much it costs the US economy?
No, I’m not advocating the banning of anything (except McDonalds..lol). But arguments based on the misuse of anything will have us all abandon cars, the internet, etc etc.
I can’t remember which of the church fathers it was (somebody help?), but he recommended that any body whose conscience was troubled by the use of alcohol, should not be preaching the gospel.
What I find interesting are the rationalizations for why, when the Bible speaks approvingly of wine, we should understand that it doesn’t actually refer to wine. We must, we are told, understand the culture of Biblical days and put the scriptural texts in context, realizing that the modern context is different and so we must interpret and adapt scripture to the modern context. Oddly, this seems only to apply to discussions of alcohol. To apply it to anything else is rank heresy, twisting the plain words to mean what you want them to mean. Yup: we wouldn’t want any of that!
Do we have a newe covenant of not? Is John 2 in the Bible? Is that wine in the LS or are we Muslims? — Internet Monk
IMonk, have you ever noticed that when Christianity goes sour it starts resembling Islam?
And does anyone on this list know how Welch’s Grape Juice really got started? Reverend Welch was one of the major “Temperance” (i.e. Prohibition i.e. Teetotaling) preachers of his day, and when he discovered how to pasteurize & preserve non-alcoholic grape juice, he made a lot of scratch on the side selling Certified Non-Alcoholic Grape Juice for teetotaler Communions.
Speaking of Teetotaling, doesn’t tea contain caffiene (”Low end of the speed spectrum” which gives you withdrawal headaches) as well as trace amounts of other plant alkaloids?
Flat out, I’ve seen Geisler’s study and others who took a similar stance on wine in the Bible. I think he’s wrong to make the distinction between wine and strong drink. The issue with consuming alcohol is being drunk just as the issue with consuming food is gluttony and the issue with watching TV or movies is viewing inappropriate programs and the issue with taking painkillers is becoming addicted to them and the issue with…well, you get the idea.
It is clear that wine and beer were things that could get one drunk from Scripture as we are told not to be “drunk with wine,” so however strong it was in terms of percentage of alcohol content (no one really knows for sure), it was a beverage that apparently people became drunk on if used to excess. I no more plan to abstain from alcohol based on its potential for abuse than I am to start expecting the church to prescribe specific caloric intakes for its members or ban the viewing of television.
We’ve got to stop turning good things that God gave us into man-made taboos.
How ironic that I found this today. Yesterday evening in church, we were informed that Nehemiah most certainly didn’t serve real wine to the king, and by the way, Jesus didn’t drink alcohol either, you wineheads. (Not sure what a winehead is.) And it was our night for the Lord’s Supper, too (first in four months, naturally). *sigh*…
So here I am with my newfound understanding of what the Bible (doesn’t) say about alcohol, and hoping the issue doesn’t come up with my family or my church. I don’t drink–my wife’s still uncomfortable with the idea; I have no idea what I could tolerate, even if I desired to drink; and I’m frankly at a loss as to how one would go about acquiring a comfort level with moderate drinking. With my first child on the way, I’m also a bit unsure how to help my kids know how to deal with this…it’s not likely they’ll be exposed to alcohol in our home. How do kids learn whether they need to avoid the stuff because they have a tendency to abuse it? Such has been the conversation in our house over the past few months.
Hey I’m all for strong drink. Especially if it comes in the form of single malt scotch!
When I became a Christian, or at least a protestant version of one, the group I was around didn’t much go for drinking. It took me many years to see how this constricted view of life applied to almost everything they did. Books, music, art, food, money, everything. I found it to be a faith of negation, and extremely unattractive. Yet I wasn’t giving up the Christian faith. Fortunately I came across someone who introduced me to the Reformed tradition, which was much less hung up.
Nicholas,
You said “Though the Bible does not speak specifically against slavery, the principles as taught by Jesus Christ will ultimately lead to the freedom of all slaves.
Likewise, though the Bible does not speak specifically against social drinking, the principles as taught by Jesus Christ when applied in our society will ultimately lead to the abolition of social drinking and smoking.”
Could you provide your exegesis for both your assertion on slavery and your assertion on social drinking.
Grace
BCR
I’ve spent half my life in SBC churches, and grew up in a home where I saw moderate and excessive alcohol consumption.
I think Matt P. is on to something in his household discussions. Is it beneficial to prohibit and condemn drinking so strongly? What do our children learn from this?
A summary of last Sunday’s sermon in my church is “a little sin leads to a lot of sin.” Thus, if drunkeness is sinful, don’t drink at all. But it seems to me that the average person can look around and see that most of the sinners around him are not drunkards, compulsive gamblers, or gluttonous thieves.
Unfortunately, we’ve found in our congregation that the response of a sizeable group of young people has been to not only reject the prohibitionist stances they have grown up with but to also embrace alcoholic consumption that goes beyond the bounds of moderation.
At our monthly Men’s Breakfast on Saturday at my little SBC the subject of alcohol did not rear its head. On the other hand though, it was determined that all the prblems in the world today can be attributed to those “Catholics” and homosexuals. Imagine if I had introduced the topic of alcohol. Hilarity would have ensued above and beyond the above tragedy.
It seems to me that the “principle” of Paul’s teaching on not causing another to stumble is an “absolute” in each and every situation.
However, the “application” of Paul’s principle seems to me to be relative to the situation the Christian finds himself or herself in.
Therefore, to impose an “absolute application” on other believers [no matter what situation they are in] is to cross the line in imposing a law upon others that is not a part of the law of Christ it seems to me.
I think this issue boils down to one thing–Are Christians under the law of Christ or under the law of Christ PLUS some other law(s)?
I say Christians are under the law of Christ.
P E R I O D
One might could put it this way:
If you, as an absolute abstainer from alcohol, have not caused another to stumble, then you have not sinned against Christ.
If you, as a social drinker, have not cause another to stumble, then you have not sinned against Christ.
I seriously would like to see someone challenge those two sentences immediately above this sentence.
If you are going to be all big and bad about alcohol being “worldly” or a “sin”, then prove your point.
And if you can’t prove your point, then be humble enough to get out of the way of being part of the hindering force that keeps people from hearing the gospel of Jesus Christ.
And if the social drinkers cause people to stumble, then that will be on them.
Not you.
Grace
BCR
Responding to the two Matts, P & A:
I too have my first child on the way. A real worry is the young adult culture of excess. In its most extreme form this is the person who walks into a bar on his 21st birthday, downs 21 shots, and drops dead from alcohol poisoning. More common is binge drinking: parties where the expectation is that the participants will drink until they vomit.
I come from a culture that accepts moderate drinking. As a teenager, if there was wine at dinner (not normal, but not extraordinarily rare in my household) I would have half a glass. And in church real wine at communion was normal, with me taking it from about age 14 or so. The happy result is that when I went off to college, alcohol was not some mystical rite of manhood for me. I sometimes drank, but not to excess. I remember having to step around guys in the bathroom the next morning who were dry heaving. I just didn’t get why they thought they were having a good time.
So what to do with the child? Teach her, when she is old enough for this to be appropriate, that moderate drinking is fine but to beware of excess. In this, alcohol is no different from any number of other things.
Which brings me to the idea that drunkeness is bad, so avoid alcohol entirely. Gossip is bad, so should we never speak? This is not an empty comparison. There are religious traditions that do just that. Gluttony is bad. Does this mean we should eat only barely enough to survive? And so on. The logic of this just doesn’t work.
That joke about taking two Baptists fishing because they won’t drink your beer is truly funny.
Some of the best times of my life have been spent fellowshipping with other Christians over fine Kentucky straight bourbon(Maker’s Mark is my first choice) and a good cigar, talking theology and bearing one another’s burdens. When we all get together our fist toast is to baptism -” To that washing that declares us blameless and pure, that will cause us to stand without shame on that Day..”
My wife says that the aroma of whiskey and cigar smoke is exhilarating.
I understand issues of conscience, and if other Christians wish to abstain, that is their right in Christ. I also ask that they do not bind me with their conscience or elevate personal conviction to the level of the Word of God. We can share a drink and have a good laugh when we meet at the Marriage Feast of the Lamb.
One more reason why I could not be part of a SBC church if I lived in America.
Anyway, I’ve known a bunch of SBC missionaries working in Europe. How many do you think really do follow the guidelines of their denomination?
Sordid evangelical hypocrisy. So glad I am out of all that…
It’s funny that you talk about your best times of fellowship being over a bourbon, Patrick. I’ve shared my faith in varying levels of detail and length to a lot of people over the last 20 years. Sometimes it was in school, sometimes at work, sometimes at a social gathering or over dinner.
But of all the times, the best time where it was the most natural, where the person listening was the most engaged and interested and asked the most follow up questions was over a couple of beers after work. I’d been working at a retail establishment during the Christmas season and had sort of hit it off with a coworker who had a similar sense of humor and so on. After I’d been there a few weeks, he asked me if I’d like to go grab a beer after work that night and I accepted.
Once we sat down, he began to talk about the job and the people we worked with and then pointed out that he appreciated how I wasn’t like most of the guys we worked with who were always putting people down, making sexual comments about every good-looking woman who came in the door, and acting like their little group was the only “cool group” there. I thanked him and he asked a few more questions and I began to tell him a little about how I was several years before when I wasn’t a Christian. That just prompted more questions and we talked for about 2 hours that night over Sam Adams. I don’t remember all the details of the conversation, but I remember that he was really intrigued though not ready to make any such commitment himself yet.
We lost touch after he moved out of town and then moved from the address he gave me a few months later. But I can tell you, that opportunity would have been lost if I had refused to go to a bar and I doubt he would have felt the same level of comfort to ask all those questions if I hadn’t been willing to share a beer with him or made some big deal out of not believing that it was right to drink.
“It makes my complaint odd, since I’m advocating for a freedom I don’t personally have.”
K.W. Leslie, I’m in the same boat with you. I don’t drink but have no problem with Christians who do. I’m a member of a Baptist message board (NOT the Fightin Fundamentalists) and debates about alcohol go on for pages and pages (the most recent one lasted 45 pages until the moderator had enough of the debate). The claims that are made in the debates are ludicrous.
My favorite part of the debate is when the teetotalers say that the word “wine” in Proverbs means “wine”, but the “wine” in Matthew and 2 Timothy doesn’t really mean “wine”. It makes zero sense.
I think I need a drink.
I’m a new Southern Baptist — 9 months now. The older portion of my congregation believes drinking is okay and the younger portion believes it is not okay — which is the opposite of what I would have expected. If we couldn’t “agree to disagree”, we would cease to exist as a congregation. There are hundreds of issues Christians can disagree over — yet we all are Christians because of Christ. That’s what is important! The main reason my nonChristian friends give for rejecting God is how much we fight with each other. How God’s heart must ache over His family of squabbling children.
I remember the day where one of my good Southern Baptist friends suggested I should go to one of their seminaries in the US.
It was a nice way to encourage a national worker, but the stance of the denomination on alcohol was enough to prevent me from even considering the option…
Well, now, I am a very happy, poor and free Lutheran vicar…God must have had other plans
I remember having to step around guys in the bathroom the next morning who were dry heaving. I just didn’t get why they thought they were having a good time. — Richard Hershberger
Have you ever seen the classic Bill Cosby tape/DVD “Bill Cosby: Himself”? In it, there’s a sequence where he describes “drinking yourself sick” in great & gruesome detail (including “You are about to put your face… into a place… that was never meant to hold your face”) until “You would not be surprised to see your SHOES coming up into the toilet-bowl”.
After ten minutes of such gruesome detail, he caps the sequence with “This is called — Having a Good Time.”
P.S. I have found one college subculture that doesn’t go for binge drinking: D&D gamers. They’ve got their own problems, but spending three days a week falling-down-drunk like the “cool crowd” isn’t one of them.
“It makes my complaint odd, since I’m advocating for a freedom I don’t personally have.”
Chris & KW Leslie, if I might split hairs with you both, I would contend that you DO have the freedom; you just choose not to exercise it.
And might I add that while I also abstain, I don’t get any brownie points or higher standing with God for doing so. That whole freedom-in-Christ thing…
While moderate drinking may not physically harm you personally, is it worth the risk in our society?
Be careful how you use statistics, or the fact that most people in Jesus’ day used wine. Many factors have changed.
1) Wine is no longer needed to purify water.
2) Fortified liquors did not exist in Jesus’ day.
3) Most wines were diluted in Jesus’ day.
4) Use of liquors as a beverage has been frowned upon by the Evangelical church for centuries. (Why change it)
5) High speed vehicles did not dominate the roadways in Christ’s time.
Again, look at the death and deprivation that alcohol has and is causing in our society. Therefore, why entice those who might not be able to handle liquor by your example? Yes, we have freedom in Christ, but we also have responsibility, and Christ will hold us responsible for our example. In three places in Scripture Jesus has been quoted as saying, Mat 18:6
“But whoso shall OFFEND one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”
According to Strong, “offend” means;
To “scandalize”; from G4625; to entrap, that is, trip up (figuratively stumble [transitively] or entice to sin, apostasy or displeasure): – (make to) offend.
It might be time for the millstone manufacturers to go back into business.
Someone on the net has stated;
“The bottom line? If you don’t drink, don’t start. If you drink excessively, stop. And if you drink moderately, you may continue to raise your glass and proclaim…” to my health!”
May I add, “don’t by your freedoms entice another to start.” While moderate drinking may not harm you personally, it will set an example for those who follow you. Statistically, the risk of problem drinking is quite high for those who drink. Look at one statistic;
“Ellen Sorokin, THE WASHINGTON TIMES An estimated 1,400 college students die each year and another 500,000 are injured in alcohol-related accidents, according to a National Institutes of Health study released yesterday. The study also estimates that alcohol consumption by college students contributes to 70,000 cases of sexual assaults or date rape annually.”
Why take the risk.
I will repeat; “… though the Bible does not speak specifically against social drinking, the principles as taught by Jesus Christ when applied IN OUR SOCIETY will ultimately lead to the abolition of social drinking and smoking.”
One issue highlighted in several of the comments here is the danger of young people binge drinking. It is much less the case in Europe, especially Italy, were there is no minimum age for alcohol consumption. Whereasdrunk students have been a phenomenon throughout history, it seems to be much more the case now, especially in North America. I have a strong suspicion that it is a cultural construct, flowing from a combination of events, one of which was the advent of prohibitionism.
The culture often construes the drinking habits of the people, and where the culture does not run deep, limitations are often transgressed. This is obvious in all frontier cultures, such as the Old West, Gold rushes the world over, (Barberton, the Klondike, the Australian goldrushes etc) and other events. It is also evident in the dying throws of a culture, such as Rome.
And as an aside, the Israelites were told to celebrate with wine AND strong drink, both which were seen as part of their offerings.
If children are brought up with the responsible use of alcohol the chances are much less they will end up abusing alcohol.
Have we learned nothing from Prohibition? Apparently not. Look at the failed war on drugs. In Los Angeles, right now, today, there are streets lined with drug dealers flagging down cars to sell any drug you can think of.(Check out skid row or the neighborhoods around MacArthur Park) They are literally drive through pharmacies. The Mexican army fights pitched battles with drug cartels just yards from our borders. The murder,corruption and graft caused by the profits of the drug trade have penetrated our law enforcement organizations and some politicians. Alcohol prohibition gave rise to so much violence and corruption that it was repealed. Prohibition only exascerbates the situation. Its not the job of Christians to go around and make sure unbelievers don’t sin. Furthermore, the apostle Paul states ” If you have died with Christ.. why do you submit yourselves to decrees such as ‘Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!’…These are matters, which to be sure, have the appearance of wisdom in self made religion… but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.” Col.2:20-23 There are better ways to handle alcohol and drugs and the problems they may cause than to worry about someone somewhere abusing them at sometime, and binding all our concsiences to that burden, which is impossible to carry. I worry when the Scriptures are reduced to ‘principles’ then ‘applied IN OUR SOCIETY’,- thats how the church goes wrong. Its bad theology, bad practice and makes for a church centered on something other than the Gospel.
Hey guys,
I roared laughing at the earliest comments but became more and more disappointed the more I read on .. and here’s my reason why: no-one has yet made mention of the fruit of the Spirit that is “self-control”.
The moment we legislate morality, self-control can no longer be exercised because the right to choose is removed from us.
God alone legislates morality. Why is it then that we spend so much time shouting about the things He’s whispering, and all the while we’re whispering about the very things He’s shouting!?!
Romans 14 says two very interesting things on this matter.
1) “.. the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.”
2) “..whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves.
What I hear Paul saying is “don’t get hung up on the finer details but go after God’s Kingdom first and foremost” and “if you choose to do drink (or eat meat sacrificed to idols etc), do it discretely so that others won’t condemn you”.
By way of illustration, I was at a lunch meeting with a Norwegian Pastor. When the waitress came to take our drinks order, I jokingly pointed to the beer special and said “I’ll have two!”.
He went on to ask whether ministers in Australia drank alcohol. I replied that some do and some don’t and that their position mostly depended on their faith tradition rather than the Scriptures.
Well, his answer blew me away! With a twinkle in his eye, he said, “yes, we Norwegians thought that you Australian pastors who do not drink were weak of faith”!
Ouch! But what a spectacular answer!!
And that was Paul’s point. To argue that you should or shouldn’t drink, or eat meat sacrificed to idols etc etc, is to demonstrate that you are weak of faith. But the one strong in faith is the one who has developed the fruit of self-control and has no need of vain arguments.
In closing, my friend Graham Cooke was once challenged on his drinking of wine while with a group of Pastors from Georgia. He was asked why he would sin by drinking. To which he replied, “why would you sin by being 100lb overweight for your height?”
That same Pastor, realising his hyprocracy, went away and demonstrated self-control by losing 120lb over the next six months!
Self-control is a much more important issue and one about which the Bible has MUCH to say.
Grace and peace!
Perhaps it is coming from the home of Beer and Brandy, but our Pastor does not frown on moderate drinking (SBC, Wisconsin)
In fact, there is a group of us that are known for going golfing, smoking cigars and having a couple of beers afterwords.
I like the Norwegians. Always a good sense of humor…
Quoting Nicolas Anton:
“Be careful how you use statistics”
and then,
“Ellen Sorokin, THE WASHINGTON TIMES An estimated 1,400 college students die each year and another 500,000 are injured in alcohol-related accidents, according to a National Institutes of Health study released yesterday. The study also estimates that alcohol consumption by college students contributes to 70,000 cases of sexual assaults or date rape annually.”
I too can toss around numbers to support my case. I too can find cultural differences in today that differ from Biblical culture and thus paint my position as truer and more sane. But if I did, I would be dwelling on trivial irrelevancies because I would be avoiding the heart of the issue: SIN(alcohol misuse and related rape, car accidents, etc) is not eradicated by abstinence from behaviors. It is eradicated by the Cross. Therefore, prevent drinking and you have a world full of destructive, lustful, violent, criminally negligent and yes, very SOBER people. A handy mechanism for people who are mainly interested in a very holy-LOOKING Christendom.
If you want the pseudo-kingdom many Christians build that is marked by well-scrubbed appearances and complete lack of honesty, continue trying to frantically manage the world into a righteousness defined the by the personal whim of the moment.
But if you are tired of Christian fakery and sin-management, preach Jesus and the cross please, not behavior reform, and join Him in the Kingdom that marked by having a right SPIRIT as well as right BEHAVIOR.
It’s a difficult path to give up your objections to everyone else’s sin. But it’s the path of the Cross, and it’s the only path to the Kingdom.
Having actually attended and participated in this year’s MBC (as I have for the past 13 years I’ve pastored in the MO), I once again stand amazed at the things which catch people’s attention, get their blood boiling, and start the neighbors chattering over the proverbial back fence.
That this one, non-binding resolution, becomes the topic of such spirited debate while the election of a slate of officers who have a desire to lessen the choke hold of legalism on the MBC so that we can get back to the business of evangelism, church planting, discipleship, and strengthening existing churches is a bit puzzling to me.
In many ways, the “tone of voice” I hear from the proponents of alcohol use is not much different than the tone of those speaking so vehemently against alcohol use last week.
I’m having a hard time differentiating between those who brag because they don’t drink vs. those who brag because they do. Admittedly, it may be more a matter of they way I’m hearing or reading the comments than what people are actually saying.
I’m new at this blogging thing, so I probably need to learn how to read between the lines a bit more. Just thought I”d put in my two-cents. If I’m going to read these blog things I ought to particpate in the discussion from time to time.
Hi, Tmac,
Let me share my interpretation of some of the earlier comments. I don’t really hear bragging on the part of those who do drink adult beverages, but either a sad sigh or hurt over the legalism involved.
I do share their concern over the legalism, because that is one of the more popular ways of Christians hurting Christians.
Hi Anna,
I too have a deep concern regarding legalism (as should we all). My copmments were was based on how many times I’ve encoutnered two groups of people in regards to Christians and alcohol.
Group One utilizes ridiculous, interpretive gymnastics to proclaim abstience as the only Biblical standard possible.
Group Two consisting of those who seem to be looking for a fight or at least hoping to get a rise out of me when they speak of their drinking habits.
Neither side gets a very sympathetic hearing from me.
I’ll say a hearty, “Amen” to the criticism of those who decry alcohol use while practicing it behind closed doors or on vacation (where they think no one will see them). Hypocrisy stinks! Of course, hypocrisy isn’t limited merely to those who preach against alcohol. I especially hate it when I see it in the mirror.
I have often wondered where the SBC would stand today on many issues had her origins been in Napa Valley as opposed to Tobacco Row.
With that being said, MBC is going to be an anti-alcohol group for a long time. She is also going to be anti-cloning, anti-gambling, anti-abortion. However, she is also encouraging missions partnerships in El Salvador, Colorado, and to the Kurdish people. Who knows, some may even come to know Christ through the cooperative efforts of this parachurch organization linking congregations together for the Kingdom. I wonder if God can actually use flawed, faltering, non-perfect people banded together for His purposes??????
Tmac,
I sure hope that God can use us. I know that I am far from being perfect. (And I do agree that we frequently major in the minors.)
Anton,
I’m a Christian. I drink alcohol. I’ve never been drunk.
Psalm 104 says that God gave me wine to gladden my heart.
Deuteronomy 14.26 shows that God allowed the fermentation of drinks other than wine to be consumed by Israelites.
In John 2, Jesus turned water into wine. He didn’t magically add wine to water. The wine was so nice that the guests at the wedding were very pleased, so the taste was quite discernible.
As for me, Anton, I follow what the Bible says. If you want to contradict the Word of God or add to it, just realise God won’t be happy.
Kerry,
That was great!
Larry ky
Kerry,
A fiend of mine and I were discussing this, he’s presently non-SB baptist, I use to be. There’s two legalisms in this and similar arguments:
1. Is the obvious drinking is a sin, or somehow you are less spiritual non-sense (ala P. Patterson).
2. If you don’t drink you prove you are not in the faith.
In reality its a non-issue, Pauls warning of the kingdom of heaven not being about food or drink cuts both ways.
If you drink a beer, wine, whiskey, drink it because you like it and for joy, only remember your strength in the “how much” and that varies from person to person. If you don’t drink because you simply don’t like the taste, much like I don’t like the taste of milk, then do so simply because you just don’t like its flavor. Enjoy if you like, enjoy if you don’t.
If you do drink and you can enjoy the company of a brother that doesn’t, then enjoy each other and vice versa.
I was with my brotherinlaw who is a SB pastor once, he loves a good cigar, I particularly don’t care for them just because I don’t no spiritual reason. But for christmas I got him some good ones. He offered me one on the porch that Christmas in the cool of the day. It was wonderful for once, just two Christian brothers, and brothers by marriage just enjoying each other’s company and the moment of the day – no pretense – no judgmental spirit – no “I need to put on my mask of piety”. Just plain simple enjoyment of each other over that time period.
THAT is missing in the church today!!!
Larry KY
PS: I meant “friend” not fiend.
Anyawy, guys, do you realize that this issue is now almost uniquely an American (maybe “anglo-saxon”?) one?
It would seem to me that the supposed concept of Christian freedom as expressed by the responders to this page, seems to be more a form of unbridled, unabridged personal hedonism rather than Christian freedom. More a freedom to do whatever I DESIRE, irrespective of its consequences on others, than to do what Christ desires and to be my “brother’s keeper”. More to be free outside of, alongside of, rather than free IN Christ. If I were to regulate myself according to my knowledge of what Christ taught and my social conscience, I would not be free to follow my hedonist ways, would I? It seems to me, like many FASD patients, who are the product of alcoholism, many advocates of social drinking tend to lack a social conscience as well.
What most responders on this page do not seem to understand in their shots at my statements is that I never advocated the legislation of abstinence from liquor. I simply advocated Christian responsibility as expressed by the individual, the church, and the entire church conference. Because of the problems that alcohol presents in our society, not only to those who consume it but to those damaged by it through no fault of their own, I am obligated to suggest the putting aside of habitual social drinking, for the benefit of my brothers and sisters in Christ. By “habitual”, I am referring to something that is done and accepted as normative, rather than something exceptional over which one is occasionally forced to make a wise decision. For instance, washing one’s hands before a meal should be normative. Not washing them should be exceptional. To legislate the use of liquor as unacceptable in every situation is not wise. However, to strongly discourage its use as an acceptable social beverage within our society, is wise! Why? Here are some statistics from a country in which social drinking is normative;
… drink is the third greatest cause of avoidable deaths in France.” … alcohol was directly responsible for 23,000 deaths a year in France, and indirectly responsible for a further 22,000.
“A third of all custodial sentences in this country, half of all domestic violence, a third of all handicaps are due to alcohol,” he said. “One French person in 10 is ill as a result of alcohol, and every day five French people die after an accident linked to alcohol.” … 5 million drank too much, and 2 million were dependent on alcohol.
The healthcare system was incapable of dealing with the plague. In greater Paris there were 245 hospital beds in specialist departments for alcohol-related problems, compared with more than 550,000 confirmed alcoholics… …the “enormous strength and economic clout” of the alcohol lobby, where MPs leap to the defense of an industry that employs 500,000 people.
A French study has found that in the land of Burgundy and Bordeaux, which boasts a low heart disease risk, despite a high fat diet, the total cost of alcohol use and abuse beats tobacco and illicit drugs.”
“Approximately 78% of Canadians consult a physician each year. Of these 6% are heavily dependent on alcohol, and up to 25% have or are at risk for alcohol-related health problems. About 10% of premature death in Canada is caused by hazardous drinking, and more than 50% of fatal traffic accidents involve alcohol. The health, social and economic costs of alcohol abuse may be as high as $8.6 billion, of which $1.3 billion is spent on direct health care costs.”
Of course the US of A is exempt from such problems, or is it?
James states; Jas 2:18;
“Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.”
Every social drinker contributes to the above problem, therefore social drinking should not be normative among believers.
What faith do you and I show by promoting social drinking among believers in our society?
I find it interesting that every argument that’s proffered for believers abstaining from alcohol takes the tone that it is what “mature” believers should do. Implied in that is the converse: that only immature or self-centered Christians would continue to drink in moderation once given the statistics and arguments about causing a brother to stumble. Usually the passages from Corinthians and Romans are brought up and applied to our modern day taboos and issues with alcohol.
However, in those passages the Apostle Paul’s concern was not that the weaker brother would merely be “offended” or “distressed” but that the weaker brother would be scandalized, i.e. encouraged to sin and/or violate his own conscience. Only by encouraging a brother to sin or violate his own conscience could you “make another stumble” and “destroy the one for whom Christ died.”
The specific example Paul uses makes this clear: meat sacrificed to idols. If a weaker brother concludes from your eating that he may either worship idols and/or violate his (weak) conscience, then you have harmed your brother.
It is also worthwhile to note that the weaker brother is actually called “weaker” and “ignorant.” This is important. Just as we must not encourage the weaker brother to sin or to violate his conscience, we must also not allow him to remain weak and ignorant. Paul is not suggesting that Christian behavior should be held hostage to the ignorant. The weaker brother, like all of us, must grow up. We also have an obligation to educate him regarding the truth about idols, namely “that ‘an idol has no real existence,’ and that ‘there is no God but one.’” Then he too will be able to eat the meat without sinning.
We must also understand the context in which these passages were written. This will help explain why it was easier to cause real scandal in Paul’s time & location than it is in our own.
Christianity was brand new on the scene in Paul’s day, and newly opened to Gentiles, so Gentile inquirers and new converts were not very familiar with what Christians actually believed. Christianity is a foreign worldview to them.
In these circumstances, it would be very easy for a new Gentile convert or inquirer to see you eating meat and, knowing that the meat had been sacrificed to an idol, conclude to himself “Oh, so it must be OK for Christians to worship the old gods too! Praise Aries, Aphrodite, and Jesus!” That’s real scandal.
We must also consider the situation of early Jewish converts. A staunch Jew would never eat meat sacrificed to idols. Even if the meat wasn’t associated with paganism, it would not be kosher. A new and therefore weak or ignorant Jewish convert or inquirer to Christianity might not yet understand the Christian’s liberty to eat such unkosher food. But if you really cajoled and pressured him, he might eat it in violation of his conscience. That would be real scandal too.
It is much more difficult to truly scandalize people, as Paul explains it, in our own day and age.
No one who’s grown up with any significant exposure to the Christian faith could reasonably conclude from your behavior, for example, that pagan polytheism is acceptable among Christians. Even non-Christians know we are monotheists who don’t allow worship Thor, Osiris, or Siva. But if you find yourself living among people who know so little of Christian doctrine and morality, do be attentive so you can avoid giving scandal.
It is also unlikely, for better or worse, that you will find someone with a conscience too narrow or delicate for Christian liberty. So many in our culture have lax consciences. But even if you do find one, e.g. a new convert from Hinduism who’s still touchy about beef, you can avoid scandal simply by not pressuring him to violate his conscience on the matter. Don’t order him a steak, and don’t cajole him to eat a bite of yours, until he is fully convinced that he may eat steak without sinning. This way you can avoid giving scandal.
Similarly with drinking, though it is in no way associated with worshipping pagan gods to the vast majority of Americans, should not be something you force on someone who does not drink and thinks it sinful to do so. You shouldn’t pressure or cajole them to violate their conscience and go ahead and drink while they are still troubled by it. HOWEVER, it is your Christian duty to help your brother or sister understand Scripture better and to have a properly formed Christian conscience. And that involves no longer being ignorant that even alcoholic beverages fall under the category of “the earth is the Lord’s and everything in it” and it to be given thanks for, not superstitiously avoided as if that which a person puts into their themselves is sinful rather than that which comes out.
I’m late coming to this little party, and to be honest I don’t really want to engage in the main point. I just want to share my favorite quip that fits more at the beginning than the end of the comments.
“Whenever 4 Presbyterians gather together, there’s always a fifth.”
Isn’t it something how things have changed so much that now the folks who dare to be against drinking are considered to be the nutjobs?
It’s not a change. People who are against drinking have always been nutjobs.
As someone pointed out earlier (God bless this person abundantly!) all of this is based on free will. Free will is based on the notion that when all is said and done, a person still has to make up her/his own mind about how s/he behaves. Mankind’s covenant with God is first and foremost a covenant based on free will. That is, we must be free to decide how we are to behave ON OUR OWN. Good intentions be damned, nobody has the right to make up his mind for someone else.
Rejecting someone over such a trivial matter smacks liberally of “I thank you, God, that I am not like that tax collector over there.”
I don’t feel like judging anyone. I’m not big enough to fill God’s britches, nor do I have any particular desire to try. As worthy a compendium as it is, the Holy Bible isn’t the last word of God; the last word has yet to be written.
Anyone here familiar with a book called Das Energi, by Paul Williams (not the singer)? I recommend it heartily. One line out of it, which I wish I could remember better (the copy of the book I had was lost by a friend) went something to the effect of this:
“Don’t think you know what’s best for the next guy. He might just think he knows what’s best for you.”
Anton,
I quote the Bible and give verse references. You quote statistics without giving us links or references as to where they’re from.
I think wine is a blessing from God (as per Psalm 104). You liken it to not washing your hands before eating.
Let me outline this quickly for you:
According to the Bible:
* Not drinking alcohol is okay.
* Drinking alcohol without getting drunk is okay.
* Drinking alcohol and getting drunk is not okay.
According to you:
* Not drinking alcohol is essential.
* Drinking alcohol is sinful.
Millions of people are addicted to some kind of sexual sin. Causing untold damage to families and society. And the bible has far more warnings about sex than alcohol. Shall we also abstain from sex? Statistics don’t trump scripture.
People in the bible drank alcohol because they liked it. You can talk all day about using it to purify water but you don’t get that from scripture. (I don’t deny that it might be true) They liked it. And they thanked God for it. And God told them it was one of His blessings. And yes, people sometimes overdid it. And God told them not to.
It is my firm conviction that the primary responsibility of all Christian leaders is to train believers how to live their OWN lives under their OWN CONSCIENCES before God.
To do anything less is to deny the Church the ability to mature to the place where it can finally “build ITSELF up in love”.
Why then is alcohol use the big issue, when America has the highest incidence of morbid obescity of any nation in the world and nowhere in any denominational convention do we see the use of food being legislated against? But, according to US statistics, poor diet and physical inactivity cause almost 500% more deaths than alcohol consumption.
The actual figures are:
Poor diet and physical inactivity (400,000 deaths per year, or 16.6 percent of all deaths)
Alcohol consumption (85,000 deaths per year, or 3.5 percent of all deaths)
In fact, motor vehicle crashes constitute an average of 43,000 deaths in the US each year. Shouldn’t we then be outlawing GM? Maybe the Amish are onto something!
Further, if sexual behaviors cause 20,000 Americans to lose their lives each year, perhaps we should be legislating against sex between married adults. (Notice the stats don’t say aberrant or perverted sexual behaviour, just sexual behaviours in general).
Of course, all of those statistics change markedly if you are overweight and die of a heart attack while in the throes of sexual ecstasy with your wife in the back seat of your car .. but I digress ..
Regardless, Anton, our reason for challenging you are the same as yours are in challenging us. We are trying to be our brothers keepers by rescuing more people from coming under the bondage that legislated morality always leads to.
You see, legislated morality is a manifestation of fear deceptively clothed in righteousness. And it empowers weakness and spiritual immaturity.
Those who vehemently fight against the thing they fear usually do so because they have either been delivered from it and are freaked out about returning to it, or they still secretly struggle with it ..
.. but that is no reason to impose their personal conscience on the general body.
It is, however, a very good reason to bring their struggle into the light and to get help.
Grace and peace!
Ragamuffin
re; “And that involves no longer being ignorant that even alcoholic beverages fall under the category of “the earth is the Lord’s and everything in it” and it to be given thanks for, not superstitiously avoided as if that which a person puts into their themselves is sinful rather than that which comes out.”
Would that include eating Kufu with your Japanese friend, having a drink of hemlock with Socrates over a discussion on philosophy, having a Coke laced with cocaine with a friend, enjoying a heroin poppy seed sandwich with a Chinese acquaintance, playing Russian roulette with your former Soviet comrade to show him how sufficient Christ is in such situations, or perhaps simply streaking through your village in the nude on a blustery day as the Doukabors and some early Quakers practiced? After all, isn’t that part of the package of Christian freedom? Doesn’t your Bible say;
Heb 12:1;
“… let us lay aside every weight…”.
as well as;
Mar 16:18;
“They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”
Actually, the Bible not only teaches us to lay aside many things for the sake of our Christian brothers and sisters, but also not to tempt the Lord our God.
As for the Methodists putting on ads like:
“The United Methodist Church: Where You Don’t Go To Hell for a Beer.”
LOL. It was a Methodist doctor named Welch who invented the process of pasteurizing grape juice and stopping the fermentation in its tracks…making the Baptist non-alcoholic communion service (and in all fairness, the United Methodist version as well) possible.
Beer is another story and you’d be hardpressed to find a United Methodist that gave a rip…
It’s not an issue of “hedonism” as some sophist and protestant Judiazers seeking out to crush our liberty in Christ would propose. And such accusations are merely a violation of the 9th commandment to not bear false witness against your neighbor by trying to play God (a violation of the first commandment) and “read the hearts and intents of a man’s heart. The issue is the Gospel. My wife has had MORE opportunities to present the faith regarding a glass of wine than any other means.
There are more ways than one to deny and hide the Gospel and deny Christ. And one of them is to pretend that “not drinking” is ANY one of the following: “sin”, “more holy”, “more mature”, “more spiritual” and the like. For such scream that Christ is not nearly enough.
Second, God gives good gifts. His creation, including ALL alcohol are good, He said so, it is man who sins and abuses it by religiously abstaining (doctrine of demons) or openly over indulging. At the end of the day both religious abstainers and open abusers are EXACTLY the same, both find, make and hone their god in the thing they abstain from or make abuse. Thus, violating the first commandment of “I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt, out of the Land of Bondage, you shall put no other gods in front of ME.” This is not often seen in the giddy concept of religiously abstaining. For the religious abstainer and the abuser have this in common and both, not just the later are obsessed with the same object. There is a dry drunk (the abstainer) and a wet drunk. We see this more easily concerning gluttony. C.S. Lewis makes this point very well. There’s the open glutton who is “socially” unacceptable. But then there’s the “dry” glutton, like say an Arnold S. or body builder or such. The later is JUST as much obsessed with food as is the former, one might even say more. But the later is socially acceptable according to the fallen religious wisdom of man, he/she appears to be successful at his/her works. And so men glory in them and spurn the open glutton (or drunk). A teetotaler is quite puffed up with his/her works and quite gloried in among the religious (even pretend Christianity), but his/her puffed up works will never stand before God’s holiness and he/she is in most danger of in reality, not hypothetically, being fallen from Christ (Paul’s point in Gal.).
Third, unbelieving societies abuse of things is NO guide whatsoever for the believer. Men abuse sex and women, should we head back to the whore of Babylon and stop marriage? Men worship the sun and the moon, should we abstain from looking upon them? Men abuse worship and worship false gods, should we end church? Food, gluttony, causes more death per year by far and large than alcohol every thought of, should we abstain from food or reduce it to merely tasteless calorie pills passed out by the fruit police? To abstain from a thing because it is abused only serves to promote the problem. A Christian who can moderate is a FAR greater witness of Christ for they must ask themselves, “How can he/she drink without the necessity to abuse”. The same with all kinds of things, TV, food, work, etc…
Fourth, those who reduce proper use to only those things of necessity like food and air deny God and Christ flat out. For God is not just a Creator of bland bare necessity (as Jesus clearly examples), that is Allah or Baal or Moloch. God creates good things that give JOY, like a good Father. Treat your children like a necessity Nazis and they will grow up to hate you.
“So called Hedonist arguments” are nothing but hidden bush traps best waived off as too puerile so as to deserve much attention and that are in fact guilty of what they accuse others of.
Finally, no one might understand that a man freed from the bondage of religious legalism might manifest fruit of the faith by enjoying wine or beer he/she heretofore denied themselves. A Mormon for example who drinks neither beer nor coffee is liberated by the grace of Christ from that demonic religion. He knows Christ alone is his righteousness. He then manifest this great joy in ordering a cup of coffee, guilt free, his conscience cleansed by the blood of the Lamb. Then he does the same over a beer. God and Christ are glorified, God is pleased because it was His Son’s blood that did that good work.
In the total sufficient imputed righteousness of Christ alone,
Larry KY
I should have put this fine point on the abuser’s and abstainer’s common link: Both are seek life (and by extension eternal life) in what they are doing, that is to ‘put another god in front of god’ Who alone can give life. Both think in some way this “gives life to them”. Thus, the honed god in front of God. Both are also as the extension travels down the commands, a taking of God’s name in vain, since part of His name is Jesus and that name means “He will save His people from their sins” (eternal life); then it denies the keeping of the Fulfiller of the Sabbath and thus the Sabbath, that is resting in the Lord of the Sabbath Whose righteousness is imputed to us and gives us REST, what the Sabbath POINTED TO. Then pretty soon the abuser and abstainer are violating the later Table and not loving their neighbor, slandering them, bitting and nipping at them like wolves, gossiping over them, falsely accussing them, murdering them in their hearts and so forth for their “less spiritualness”.
The call to repent is a call from ALL that, stop trying to seek life by your own means and strength and nakedly trust in Christ alone so that it is literally finished and there’s NOTHING left for you to do.
That’s to be had by the Cross, owned by it, and that is faith.
L KY
Nicholas,
This is crossing into the territory of the absurd. As the article that iMonk linked to at the very top of this post shows, wine and “strong drink” is something the Bible affirms as a good thing…something that even indicates God’s blessing or that He gave us to “gladden the heart.” Drinking hemlock? Come on. Why not take it to the most illogical extreme and just ask if we should gargle Drano for the sake of Christ?
You’re simply not thinking Biblically here. You are shoehorning your personal view into the Bible and like the ugly stepsister’s feet and the glass slipper, it doesn’t fit because in this case you’re not taking the whole of Scripture into account. You’re playing hopscotch with the Bible to hit on the loosely (at best) connected verses that you think bolster your case.
Perhaps we should ask Nicholas straight up.
Is drinking alcohol unequivocally a sin? If so, when did it become a sin?
Also, is it possible that you yourself engage in activities that other Christians stricter than yourself consider sinful, such as playing cards, dancing, watching television, etc? If so, how do you answer their objections to your behavior?
That’s exactly the point. This kind of pietism will strangle and strangle and strangle back to works righteousness over time. These kind of fallen human “laws”, or doctrine of demons, over time constrict and constrict, the kind of thing you saw with the Pharisees over time. Not, as Dr. Rosenbladt once said, “…like the relaxation that one finds with the Gospel”. Calvin made this very point that over time this yeast grows and grows until one can hardly tell how to move. This is what a hidden works righteousness principle does and the key is it is hidden and implied even while a verbal affirmation of “faith alone” is made (James’s ENTIRE point). A principle of works righteousness shows itself over time as both explicit and implied spiritual pressure is made upon people. Slowly, they curve inward (original sin). As they curve inward they measure themselves and others spiritually pleasing to God (so they think) by these “laws”. They become more and more closed off, less true fellowship as more and more “masks” and facades are worn. Simultaneously, they judge others. The judgments can be overt such as “I wonder if he/she is a Christian because they are or are not doing ________”. Or more subtle, “Well it’s no ‘sin’ but the more spiritual Christian will do/don’t do _______”. Right there they don’t see, their eyes are seared shut, the Gospel is gone and so is Christianity. Then the name “Christianity” becomes associated with these law measures or metrics, which is completely opposite of Christianity. Christianity is NOT a move from “vice to virtue” but from “virtue to grace”. Christ ONLY indwells REAL sinners, not pretend sinners and NOT the righteous (which is another way in Scripture of saying self-righteous). To put a sharp edge on it, either you are a real sinner or you have not Christ.
Luther said it similarly that all these superstitious manmade laws that have the ‘appearance of wisdom’ by fallen measure eventually make a man so scared that he panics at the very rustling of the leaves as if wrath is coming down upon him.
L