1

OK, you guys stop that 'having fun' right now! What would your mothers say if they read all that nonsense?

You'd sure be in a heap of trouble.

But, thanks for the laugh. And ain't it nice that so many denominations actually fit under the "baptist" umbrella? From Mennonites to .... well, you know.

2

I think this discussion is hitting on a very important issue that unfortunately is a taboo in the contemporary evangelical church. Many evangelicals are convinced that drinking (any amount) is simply wrong. I do not see how this can be the case through either Scripture or logic. Jesus drank on many occasions with His disciples, tax-collectors, and religious leaders of the day (I would provide citations but there are too many references). He made wine at a wedding in Cana (Jn. 2). Paul tells Timothy to drink wine because Timothy wasn't feeling well (I Tim. 5:23). We are even told that God made wine to make our hearts glad (Psm. 104:14-15). Now don't get me wrong, the Bible clearly condemns drunkness, but light-social drinking is far from that. I simply do not understand why so many evangelicals have a problem with it. I wish more people would take GK Chesterton's advice and "Thank God for beer and bergundy by not drinking too much of them."

By the way, I must say, the four point thesis for why one should stay a Baptist is hilarious. Well-done.

3

I think this discussion is hitting on a very important issue that unfortunately is a taboo in the contemporary evangelical church. Many evangelicals are convinced that drinking (any amount) is simply wrong. I do not see how this can be the case through either Scripture or logic. Jesus drank on many occasions with His disciples, tax-collectors, and religious leaders of the day (I would provide citations but there are too many references). He made wine at a wedding in Cana (Jn. 2). Paul tells Timothy to drink wine because Timothy wasn't feeling well (I Tim. 5:23). We are even told that God made wine to make our hearts glad (Psm. 104:14-15). Now don't get me wrong, the Bible clearly condemns drunkness, but light-social drinking is far from that. I simply do not understand why so many evangelicals have a problem with it. I wish more people would take GK Chesterton's advice and "Thank God for beer and bergundy by not drinking too much of them."

By the way, I must say, the four point thesis for why one should stay a Baptist is hilarious. Well-done.

4

I think this discussion is hitting on a very important issue that unfortunately is a taboo in the contemporary evangelical church. Many evangelicals are convinced that drinking (any amount) is simply wrong. I do not see how this can be the case through either Scripture or logic. Jesus drank on many occasions with His disciples, tax-collectors, and religious leaders of the day (I would provide citations but there are too many references). He made wine at a wedding in Cana (Jn. 2). Paul tells Timothy to drink wine because Timothy wasn't feeling well (I Tim. 5:23). We are even told that God made wine to make our hearts glad (Psm. 104:14-15). Now don't get me wrong, the Bible clearly condemns drunkness, but light-social drinking is far from that. I simply do not understand why so many evangelicals have a problem with it. I wish more people would take GK Chesterton's advice and "Thank God for beer and bergundy by not drinking too much of them."

By the way, I must say, the four point thesis for why one should stay a Baptist is hilarious. Well-done.

5

I haven't laughed this hard all week. Thanks, Joe.

My wife was raised Southern Baptist in Oklahoma before I corrupted her. She'll get a kick out of this, too.

6

Joe, I go to a PCA Church too, at the advice of my Baptist preacher. At least now I can have my beer without too much shame.

The PCA is just Southern Baptists who didn't have room for a baptismal pool.

7

A more important question might be why we place such value on drinking. I can think of no redeeming quality to drinking and a whole host of ills. Before becoming a Christian, I drank fairly infrequently (although the volumes were much higher in high school and college). Having stopped a long time ago, I somehow am able to make it through a weekend without slugging down a Budweiser, although if I did drink I wouldn’t be caught dead drinking that swill. At parties and sporting events, I have a good time (and save a ton of money) despite not drinking. If you need alcohol to enhance your fun, that points to a more serious issue.

I think it is more than a bit disturbing that people would consider changing denominations over something like not being able to drink. Who cares about theology, I needs me my liquor!

Christ did indeed drink wine, but He was also perfect in all ways and not given to sin. We are far from it. Drunken driving, alcoholism, health problems, socially destructive behavior are the legacy of drinking. People don’t wrap their cars around telephone poles because they have had too much Pepsi that evening. Is your occasional beer worth all the ills that come with it?

Paul writes in Romans 14:21 "It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak."

You may be able to drink in moderation, but there are far too many who cannot, so why cause your brother to stumble? Rather show that you place higher stakes in the things of Heaven than the alleged pleasures of this life.

8

Just curious, how do you feel about the PCA supporting the Palestinian side of the Israel/Palestinian conflict?

9

Arthur,

There are many who cannot deal with a lot of things because they refuse to take responsibility for their actions. I come from a family of alcoholics, and I mean some pretty hardcore alcoholics, but I can limit myself to only a few drinks a week, all of which are weak like wine coolers. I probably have even a genetic disadvantage at this point, and somehow I don't drink myself into oblivion like some of the formerly tee-totalers I have seen.

Maybe if we started severely punishing drunken offenders, people would be inclined to drink responsibly. Your argument quite easily applies to guns. Taking your arguments to their logical end, private firearm ownership is as bad or worse than alcohol. Clearly if booze makes people irresponsible sexually, guns give every wannabe bad ass more freedom to be violent.

Yet the only countries that have gun problems are the ones that don't let people ever get away with violent crime. The one at the top of that list is Switzerland. The Swiss are probably more heavily armed than us, and even have a quasi-militia-based army, yet have one of, if not THE, lowest violent crime rate in the West. And it's because they don't restrict the rights of those that can handle freedom for those that can't.

Be your brother's keeper, not his nanny, unless freedom means nothing to you. Maybe if evangelicals' hearts bled more for the victims, than the perpetrators there would be fewer perpetrators. I grew up with an alcoholic, verbally-abusive father who a few times nearly got physically violent with me. Alcohol wasn't the problem with my dad, the problem was his inability to take responsibility for himself.

10

Mike,

Just curious, how do you feel about the PCA supporting the Palestinian side of the Israel/Palestinian conflict?

Though I could be wrong, I think you are thinking about the PC(USA) rather than the PCA. I haven't heard of the PCA taking an official position on that conflict.

11

Arthur,

I completely respect your viewpoint and understand your reasons for it. But I am not in whole agreement of it for several reasons.

You ask, "Why do we put such a high value on it?" Well, I currently am unable to drink because of my seminary contract, but prior to that I would go out with my buddies every Wednesday night and enjoy a beer and appetizers during happy hour (now I enjoy soda even though I disagree with my contract). We all enjoy the taste of beer. We all have a good time when we would drink and spend time together. Granted, we don't need it to have a good time, but we also don't need to deprive ourselves of it either. It is our freedom to choose and my group of friends and I conclude it is a wonderful part of God's creation that we want to enjoy (so long as used under the morally right circumstances).

You are right, there are a lot of alcoholics out there and drunk drivers. I don't understand how that would lead me to think I should not drink though. There are many adulters, homosexuals, and even couples having pre-marital sex who have misused God's intended use for sexual relations. Does that mean Christians should stop having sex with their spouses because so many abuse a gift God has given us? So to answer your question, is my occasional beer worth all the drunk drivers and deaths due to liver disease? Well, I suppose as much as a married person's sexual relationship with their spouse is worth it despite the fact there are so many adulters, homosexuals, and people having pre-marital sex.

Regarding "changing denominatios" because they oppose drinking: It isn't that I would change a denomination because they think drinking is a sin. But rather, that I would never in a million years join a denomination because they (legalisticly) view drinking as a sin. Nor would I join a denomination that thought dancing, listening to secular music, or seeing R-Rated movies (which by the way would include movies such as _The Passion_ and _Saving Private Ryan_) were sin. I value freedom. And I also value the fact that we are called to be in the world and not of the world. With that, I say, "Cheers!"

By the way, as a current seminary student and someone who hopes to aspire to a Ph.D in philosophy some day, I do care very much about the theology of my church. It is just that good theology doesn't lead to legalistic views.

I am glad you acknowledge the fact Jesus engaged in drinking wine. But you so quickly point out that He is perfect and we are not. What are the implications of that? What about the disciples? What about Timothy? They were not perfect and they engaged in drinking wine? I think I am therefore in good company.

Romans 14:21 "It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak." First off, I gave a number of references (and there are far more availible) that would give me reason to think that I should engage in my freedom to drink if I want. Second, there are by comparison far less (and more ambigious and unclear) passages like the one you mention and I Cor. 10 that state I should give my liberty up to prevent a weaker brother to stumble. How does one really interpret those verses though? Paul was writing to a specific group of people at a specific time. Do you think there might have been distinctions which make applying those verses to drinking a beer quite a stretch? Were there certain religious aspects that went along with meat sacrifice to "idols" that make it not analogous with having a drink? Or might there be certain social and cultural aspects with the fact Jews and Greeks were for the first time in history sharing a common religion that makes the statements Paul made not applicable to our situation? Do you think Paul might be telling the weaker brother in those passages to grow the heck up? Do you think not causing a brother to stumble in this context might more likely refer to me not drinking around a recovered alcoholic or perhaps a minor, rather than my friends at our Wednesday night gathering? These are all considerations to take into account. But regardless of the correct interpretation and application of these less clear passages, it is lucid that Jesus, the disciples, Timothy, (one can then infer probably Paul), the writer of Psalms 104, and many people in the Bible had an occasional drink to celebrate or spend time with good company and they never thought it to be a sin.

The reason this is so important to me is because it really is an issue of legalism. I knew of a Junior High pastor at a neigboring church who had an accountability time with his friend once a week. They went to a restuarant/bar and had a drink and shared their lives. They even led a bartender to Christ during this time. When someone at the church found out, he was instantly fired. No warning. No second chance. No discussion. Just fired. I vehemently hope and pray evangelicals will start kindly discussing this taboo issue and give grace to one another in whether or not they decide to drink.

12

Sorry, I forgot to put my name on the last one. It was from Scott.

13

Methinks legalism is the root of the matter. I've only recently aquired an alergy to legalism. If you ask any Evangelical or Fundamentalist whether works can get you to Heaven, you'll get a resounding NO. Quitting smoking, drinking, chewing and going with girls who do are all works and no true Christian will prescribe those works to warrent inclusion in Christ's kingdom. In theological terms, Justification is purely a matter of grace through faith. (Unless you're Catholic and that smooshes together Justification and Sanctification and we get into all that anathematizing of the Canons of Trent.)

However, my alergy has come after asking the second question about Sanctification. Particularly, as it relates to what Paul (who uses that anathema word) in Galatians. Are we to finish our redemption through legalistic works (of Budweiser abstinence) what God has begun through the life of Christ imputed to the sinner thru faith? The WWJD wristband is better WDJD (What Did Jesus Do?) and/or What is Christ Doing In Me Now?

I think it wrong to justify drunkness saying "I led the bartender to Christ." I also think it horribly ugly and sinful to fire a man who consumes a social drink when your Savior and Head commanded his Bride drink a cup of wine in the Lord's Supper and whose first miracle was to turn water into wine. (Maybe Christ created Welches grape juice at Cana, but the arguments for that have never convinced me.)

I'm not going to drink alchohol. I was raised that way and there's not enough call to undo that social inertia. But I'm not going to think drinking indicates either spirituality or unspirituality. (Drunkenness is another matter.) The Pharisees could not keep the law of God so they substituted their own moral codes and Christ's problem with them came as a result of ignoring their traditions.

14

What is it about alcohol that drives someone to drink one beer- or ten? If you want to 'free' your mind from the daily grind by drinking a couple and watching monday night football, could you not do the same by ingested any number of other government-sactioned mind-altering prescriptives? If you lived in a state that sanctioned other drugs to ingest, would you still be open to 'moderate' drug intake?

I watch football as long as there are plenty of beer and viagra commercials and skimpily-clad women cheering us to support the bread/circus show (I don't watch Bears home-games because they miss out significantly on what comprises good football-entertainment). If anyone takes away my rights to legally watch, enjoy, and imbibe government sanctioned fun, I don't know what would happen. Thank jah and the state for that!

15

Old Joke Alert:

Jews don't recognize the divinity of Jesus, Muslims don't recognize the authority of the Pope, and Baptists don't recognize each other in the Liquor Store.

16

Hey! How is this that you get to boss us Methodists around in paradise? Are you just refering to the many liberal leaning UMC'ers as former Texas governor Ann Richards was? (so liberal she ended up Unitarian) Or, all of us that are in the UMC? Or are you just saying we're namby pambies, who would easily be bossed around, because I could buy that one.

17

Personally, I interpret the "law of love over liberty" issue to mean that even if I have a friend who thinks putting salt on food is a sin, then my love for him should cause me to keep the salt away from the table during his visit.

I do not think it is my job to convince him that using salt does not make me a bad guy (per the original question), nor to try to change his convictions.

Love is defined nicely in 1 Cor. 13 and I think that definition addresses some of these issues.

Jesus gave up EVERYTHING for me...I think I can pass on salt, beer or anything else for a hour or two out of love for my weaker brother. There is a reason the Scripture calls such a one the "weaker" brother.

The thing about the food offered to idols is that since idols are not really gods, such an offering was meaningless, yet could still cause a converted pagan some trouble.

Meanwhile, alcohol DOES cause real problems in society..and there are simply too many people who cannot drink even one beer safely, without desiring more and leading to drunkenness.

If the casusal drinking Christian was asked "What keep you stopping before gettting drunk and sinning?"...I wonder what the answer would be.

Self-control (Quite a theological problem there)

Christ? Maybe a decent answer.

However, give that answer to the former alcoholic who just got saved, and you just might embolden him to try one drink..trusting Christ all the way. This is the textbook example of causing a brother to sin. A weaker brother.

18

"Idolatry is committed, not merely by setting up false gods, but also by setting up false devils; by making men afraid of war or alcohol, or economic law, when they should be afraid of spiritual corruption and cowardice."

--G. K. Chesterton

19

Why does self control pose a theological problem?

20

>>>"Idolatry is committed, not merely by setting up false gods, but also by setting up false devils; by making men afraid of war or alcohol, or economic law, when they should be afraid of spiritual corruption and cowardice."

--G. K. Chesterton

21

Steve In Corona,

You said "I do not think it is my job to convince him that using salt does not make me a bad guy (per the original question), nor to try to change his convictions."

I disagree. If he is the weaker brother, shouldn't you want him to reach have a stronger faith in God such that he can engage his Christian liberties with a clear conscience?

Maybe it's just me, but I think we should be trying to cure our brothers and sisters of weakness. There is no honor in allowing the weak to be weak.

If I was having a recovering alcoholic over for dinner, of course I wouldn't serve wine. I wouldn't just be in violation of Romans 14, I would be in violation of the bounds of good taste and good friendship. However, even though I wouldn't serve wine to a recovering alcoholic or someone who thought it was a sin, if they thought it was a sin, you can be sure we would be having a discussion about it. Again, there is no honor in letting people bind themselves to sins that don't exist. If I came up to you and claimed that I though drinking things containing high fructose corn syrup was a sin, would you not want to help break me of that erroneous idea? Wouldn't you, as my stronger brother, want to help free me?

Furthermore, am I going to give up drinking in my entire life because alcoholics exist? Of course not. Why not give up sweets because gluttons exist? Why not give up driving because some christians get road rage? Why not get rid of your computer because some people have pornography issues? We're not called to live in constant fear of weaker brothers, it's much simpler than that. Use your head, be respectful of other people, and don't flash people's sin issues in their face. Beyond that, there is no need for this over-cautious tip-toeing around real life.

-Phil

22

DO NOT GET THE PCA CONFUSED WITH PCUSA

Also, let's not forbid (alchol) what the Lord hasn't ok? By the way, that wasn't grape juice at the 1st Lord's supper either.

23

Arthur,

A quick response to you - What is the inherent value of drinking? It tastes good and people like it.

To ask the inherent value of alcohol is to ask the inherent value of any of life's little pleasures. A glass of brandy, a fine cigar, an enjoyable film, a strain of music, a nice comfy chair by a fireplace, a delicious gourmet meal, any of those things we can live without, but they are part of what makes life enjoyable. I firmly believe that God has blessed us with a capacity to enjoy these things, to find rest and pleasure in the little things of life. For me, a fine cigar can be a spiritual act of worship because I cannot enjoy it without thanking God that I have the money to buy it and the ability to enjoy it. Cigars turn my mind towards higher things, as can a glass of wine, a moonlit night, or anything else.

Benjamin Franklin may have been joking when he said "Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy" but I think he may have hit on a subtle point.

-Phil

24

Phil, I offer this in clarification of my earlier point and to hopefully address your question to me. This is my last post on the subject. So there is no confusion, I do not think your drinking a beer in private is a sin. I don't care if you do so. I think to do so in public is a bad witness, and uncharitable. I think to spend time trying to argue with another's convictions is unScriptural.

I notice your view is absent any Scriptural support. It is true I want to see all Christians grow in grace and the knowledge of the Lord. That growth for the weaker brother must come from the Lord's Spirit and through the Scripture.

I think Romans 14 is quite clear in this regard. At least it certainly seems to counter your view that you should seek to help him see the light a little brighter. The weaker brother is not my servant.

I also would find it impractical to ask every Christian if they were alcoholics in their pre-conversion life. Do you do so? Since you admit that having alcohol available for an alcoholic is not proper.

You said that there is no honor in allowing people to be bound to something that is not sin - except the Scripture is clear that whatsoever is not of faith IS SIN (to that person). I use the KJV for ease of copy/paste but other translations are quite similar. Please note verses 21,22. If my liberty offends a Christian, the Scripture tells me to use that liberty in private only. THAT is love.

Maybe each of us can prayerfully spend a week reading and rereading this passage and asking the Spirit for proper guidance in how to apply the passage to our lives today - if one comes to a different view, so be it. I think it is quite clear though. It is a fascinating balance of support that some things (like drinking an alcoholic beverage) are not what the kingdom is about and is fine in and of itself ....yet, to do so in the company of others is still uncharitable.

1: Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2: For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3: Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4: Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
5: One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6: He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7: For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8: For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
9: For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10: But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11: For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12: So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
13: Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14: I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15: But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16: Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17: For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
18: For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.
19: Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
20: For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21: It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
22: Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23: And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

25

Joe: Maybe you've heard this one:

Q: "What is the difference between a Presbyterian and a Baptist?"

A: "A Presbyterian is a Baptist who can read."

Maybe we could modify it to "A Presbyterian is a Baptist who can write satire."

26

Russ,

I am pretty sure Charles Spurgeon was a Baptist and I am quite confident that he could read. The original post may have been satirical, but this seems a very valid discussion on a serious topic.

Phil,

You say the rationale for drinking is " A quick response to you - What is the inherent value of drinking? It tastes good and people like it."

Sounds an awful lot like "If it feels good, do it". Smoking pot apparently makes people feel good and some people like it, so is that OK? Some people enjoy licentious sex, even homosexual eroticism, and some people like it. Is that OK? If your standard is "I like it and enjoy it, so that makes it OK" that is a pretty low bar (no pun intended). I really don't think your life would be less rich if you had a cup of tea after dinner instead of brandy.

Cdm,

It was indeed wine at the Lord's Supper but let's not forget that while Christ does not forbid alcohol per se, the Bible does prohibit drunkeness. It doesn't take much alcohol to impact a person's behavior and reaction time, so "drunkenness" is a hard standard to pin down. Short of giving a breathalizer, it seems better to avoid social drinking at all.

Everyone,

It is a blessing how God speaks to us via His Word in the most opportune times. I was doing my daily reading of the Word last night and started reading where I had left off and came across 1 Peter 4:1-5. This spoke quite eloquently to the debate at hand…

1 Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;
2 That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.
3 For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
4 Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:
5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.

Food (or drink in this case) for thought…

We are not saved by drinking or not, and being saved from our sin does not mean we are free from committing sin. When we are saved by the Grace of God, we do not cease to be sinners but rather we cease desiring to sin. We cannot avoid sin altogether but we ought not seek it out. I also enjoy good music, good company and good food. Honestly, no one starts drinking beer or wine or liquor because they like the taste. Let's be truthful. People drink because they like the buzz it brings for whatever reason. You may acquire a taste for it later on, but the root cause of drinking is the mood altering nature of alcohol.

27

Arthur,

Your points about drinking are valid and may apply to you but a general bar against drinking is not biblical or Christ like. Turning water into wine at a wedding (he might have constructed a dance floor too) should be proof enough. He did not change it for himself.

All,
It was the PCUSA that took a stand for our Palestinian brothers (remember our Lord was a Palestinian living under occupation). The PCA (I go to a PCA church)would never have the stones to stand up to the lock steppers among us evangelicals led by our fearless President.

28

Dan: You might be interested in a statement made by the faculty of Knox Seminary, An Open Letter to Evangelicals and Other Interested Parties:
The People of God, the Land of Israel, and the Impartiality of the Gospel, written by PCA theologians and biblical scholars, and endorsed by dozens of PCA pastors.

29

Thanks Russ.

Well written and thought out...

but not endorsed by the PCA. As I said, no stones in the big church and the PCUSA can tell you why.

30

Dan,

“Your points about drinking are valid and may apply to you”

That is the height of postmodernism. What is true for me is not true for you? Truth is truth, and the source of truth is the Bible. The Bible DOES prohibit drunkenness. You are still missing the point. If you have two glasses of wine and are slightly impaired, is that drunkenness? Maybe three? Why run up to the point of ungodly behavior to see how close you can get. There is NO redeeming quality to drinking alcohol, so why not choose something else? I will ask again, if beer tastes so dandy, why not drink non-alcoholic beer? Ever wonder why there are so many fully alcoholic beers sold and so few nonalcoholic? Because taste aside, people drink beer and other liquors to reach an inebriation level. It may be low, but the buzz is the root cause behind drinking. I just think that as Christians we should not need booze to mellow us out or enjoy ourselves.

31

Art,

You either desire to live under the false security of the law or have truly been injured by an alcoholic or by alcohol itself. If you have been so hurt, I am truly sorry for that. Alcohol (and drugs) can ruin lives and families. I will pray that you can find freedom by living under the Spirit through the great gift of grace.

The bible is very clear that alcohol is not a banned substance and it is even encouraged (publicly, mind you) by our Lord.

You are correct that drunkenness is prohibited.

The line for drunkenness is different for different people (this may be too postmodern or scientific for you but if you weigh 200 Lbs. and have....)

The danger of alcohol is different for different people. Alcoholics (I have two in my family) should avoid alcohol altogether. The rest of us should avoid drunkenness.

Hope this helps. Grace and peace

32

Arthur-

As a non-drinker, you may not know this about non-alcoholic beer: that swill tastes like lagoon water! :-)

I understand all your arguments against drinking, and they certainly define whether or not drinking is sin for you. But the fact is that no amount of conviction on your part has anything at all to do with whether or not drinking is OK for me. This is not the result of moral relativism, as your last post seemed to indicate, but is instead the result of the fact that there are large gray areas of life that are not clearly defined by scripture, and in which it is indeed true that what is sin for some is not sin for others. See Romans 14, et.al. This does not mean we subscribe to a "malleable truth," but instead reflects that well-meaning Christians arrive at different conclusions on peripheral issues and God explicitly says he is OK with that by having Paul give us instructions for how to deal with each other in regards to our differences of opinion/conviction.

You wrote: "I just think that Christians should not need booze to mellow us out or to enjoy ourselves." I agree completely. Who said anything about "needing" to drink? If a person "needs" to drink, then yes there is a problem. That is NOT the type of drinking that we are saying is an individual conscience issue. But it is not logical to assume that it is wrong for everyone to do something based on the fact that it is a problem for some. Nobody is allowed to have a fireplace because many people's houses have burned down due to fireplaces and some people simply aren't capable of safely operating fireplaces. Sounds silly when you transpose another subject into the same logic, doesn't it?

You also wrote: "Ultimately, alcoholic beverages are not merely another refreshing drink. The alcoholic component of them adds a mood altering component to beer, wine and liquor that is at its core just another drug." Arthur, do you drink soda? Coffee? What about tea? These things contain caffeine, a physically addictive mood-altering component that is at its core just another drug. If you don't drink those, do you know people who do? Do you disapprove of their caffeine intake? If not, why not, since mood-altering effects are present in these drinks as well?

33

Here is an interesting thought to go off of what DracheCool just said. In the past 2 weeks I have had three kidney stones and just started seminary. Due to my kidney stones I decided it is best for me to quit drinking caffeine (primarily coffee and tea which I previously drank a lot of). Due to my seminary contract, I have to quit drinking alcohol, which I previously would have a couple drinks a week on average. What I have found is that I consistently crave coffee but havn't once found myself craving alcohol. This is an interesting observation to plug into the discussed logic.

And by the way, alcohol does have redeeming quality. Just as the pleasure of sitting in a spa, getting a professonal massage, laughing with friends, having a stimulating conversation over a cup of coffee; are all wonderful pleasures that God CREATED for us, so too is the pleasure of having a drink with friends and celebrating good times also a creation from God which I will choose to enjoy again once the semester ends.

One more thing, the Bible is not the Source of Truth. God, Himself, is the metaphysical ground (or source of truth). The Bible is the written Word of God which contains truth. Evangelicals needs to think more critically about this. (Example, is the Bible the metaphysical ground that fact that 2 + 2 = 4 or is God the metaphysical ground for that fact.

Arthur, I am sure you are a wonderful man of God. But you are simply dead wrong. Could you please address the point I made earlier about the fact there are so many Scripture references that are very clear that Jesus and many other holy characters in the Bible drank wine, yet there are so few verses that are arcane and obscure b/c of different hermeneutical issues I mentioned in my previous response that Evangelicals try to use to support that Christians shouldn't drink. Whenever there is a disagreement like this and I look at Scripture, I tend to side with the position that has more Scripture references, and more clear references than that which has less references, and less clear references.

But that is just one man's opinion.

34

Joe, this is why you are one of the leading bloggers out there. Even your comedy/satire posts lead to serious discussion. I took the whole thing as you just having some fun. Which reminds me of a joke.

Q. Do you know why Baptists are against pre-marital sex?

A. It could lead to dancing.

P.S. I used to be a Baptist myself and I still love 'em.

35

Arthur:

You are absolutely right that "Truth is truth." But it is absolutely NOT true that what is sin for you is sin for me. That is not postmodernism. Go back and read ALL of Romans 14, not just verse 21.
Specifically, have a look at verse 14 (I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself. Still, to someone who considers a thing to be unclean, to that one it is unclean.)
If you do something contrary to what God is telling you to do, you are sinning. But just because the Holy Spirit convicts you on the issue of alcohol does not mean that all of mankind is similarly convicted.

I've done quite a bit of reading and study on the issue of alcohol and what the bible has to say about it. The best self contained article that I have come across is at: http://chetday.com/alcoholandthebible.htm It gives a well reasoned discussion on the subject.

It is my experience through study of this subject that those who wish to condemn all use of alcohol rely fairly consistenly on Ro 14:21 as one of their justifications for doing so. But they also fairly consistely take that verse out of context of all the surrounding text.

I respectfully ask you to read the article I mentioned above and then prayerfully consider Ro 14:2-3 (One person believes he may eat anything, but one who is weak eats only vegetables.
One who eats must not look down on one who does not eat; and one who does not eat must not criticize one who does, because God has accepted him.)

Wine is a gift from God! So is sex! Both are tremendous blessings when used as God intended and cause great harm when abused.

In Christ,

David

36

Oops! There appear to be 2 David's on this post.

My post was to Arthur.

I'll go by DavidJ now.

37

Re: The PCA and Palestinians

My husband is a PCA TE (pastor) and he is NOT in lock step withe the evangelicals who love our Prez. I wish he was. He's kind of not a capitalist - reads Wendell Berry when he should be reading Adam Smith. And he's kind of not a zionist - kind of in a reaction against the left behind rebuild the temple mentality, he forgets that Israel is the only US ally in the middle east, the only western style democracy in the middle east. So I'm trying to move him to the right, but I promise you I haven't gotten him there yet. -- Jody

38

Jody,

Good luck with the husband.

Israel is not:
a) a democracy
b) an ally of the US

Israel is:
a) a state that gives special privileges to certain citizens
b) a brutal, oppresive occupier of the Holy Land

(This is not a multiple choice test)

39

Dan - you sound like you're on the wrong side, along with my husband. Whaddaya mean Israel is not a democracy or an ally of the US? They may not be the best friend we ever had, right now I'd pick Tony Blair, but they are an ally and they are a democracy. --Jody