“In my nearly 4 decades of ministry I’ve seen too many families torn apart, marriages disintegrate, children hurt, and untold damage caused because of the exercise of this 'freedom in Christ'”

Now see, this is my problem with this whole debate. Somehow, when it comes to this issue, theology, history, and hermeneutics go out the window, and very smart people start making silly arguments based on anecdotes, personal experience, tradition, and terrible exegesis.
See above for several examples.

Here is where I come down:

1. Bible teaches you may drink
2. Bible teaches believer must be holy
3. Drinking to excess violates holiness

So:

1. You can drink responsibly if you wish
2. But, depending on who you are and what your weaknesses are, it may not be prudent.

People are, by and large, not “ensnared” into alcohol addiction. We really need to jettison this idea; with very rare exceptions, as we all learned in health class, and as we can all infer from CDC guidance regarding binge drinking (> 4 drinks in a few hours for most adults), alcoholism arises because the drinker drinks heavily, repeatedly. Even in populations or families genetically predisposed to addiction, this is how it happens.

Really, this is one of the key mistakes most fundamentalists make regarding the issue. A lot of the “it’s wiser to abstain” flows from this notion, and if it were true, we would find Scripture saying exactly that. On the flip side, if addiction flows from repeated drunkenness, we would expect Scripture to proscribe drunkenness, but support moderate enjoyment of wine.

Which is exactly what it does, of course. Not that everyone must imbibe—one’s free to abstain for reasons of alcoholism, taste, cost, culture, or no particular reason at all—and those who do choose to imbibe do need to consider what limits they want to have in place, just as with food. But please, let’s not pretend that the only thing Scripture says about the subject is the proscription of drunkenness, or that drunkenness and alcoholism somehow “sneak up” on people. It’s just not true.

Berry,

The standard for being drunk in Michigan is .08. Some states are lowering it to .06. With 10% beers on the market today, wines between 14 and 21 percent today, not to mention hard liquor over 40%, it doesn’t take much to be mentally and emotionally affected by this unnecessary drug, the main purpose of which is to alter a person’s mental state of being. Wine in biblical times was 8-10% and normally reduced by dilution 2 to 1 (water to wine) to 2 to 3 percent alcohol. Read Randy Jaeggli’s updated book on the subject regarding the Christian and Alcohol for his careful and thorough documentation on what I just said. Beer in biblical times was very low, much lower than today’s beer. Distilled liquors and sophisticated breweries were entirely unknown and unavailable at that time. I understand why it was necessary to drink to some degree in biblical times. Paul’s position was “not beside wine”, “not much wine”, “mix water and wine”. This was extremely conservative considering the times in which he lived. Since alcohol is not necessary in a modern society, poses more dangers in a modern society, much more toxic in modern beverages, causes many people to stumble, causes untold tragedy in millions of lives, offends countless others, does not contribute to living soberly, and can easily damage one’s testimony, prudence would suggest abstinence today. Personally, I hate the stuff for the untold damage it did in my family growing up. Nothing but death, hurt, grief, sorrow, pain, bankruptcy, abuse, hate, anger, and destroyed relationships. I saw it first hand hundreds of times. Feel free to drink if you want and encourage others to drink if you choose. Not me!

[Mike Harding]

With 10% beers on the market today, wines between 14 and 21 percent today, not to mention hard liquor over 40%,

According to this source, they range from about 5.5% to 23% (with the highest percentage wines usually/often fortified):

https://winefolly.com/tutorial/the-lightest-to-the-strongest-wine/

[Mike Harding]

Wine in biblical times was 8-10% and normally reduced by dilution 2 to 1 (water to wine) to 2 to 3 percent alcohol.

A question I’ve raised before on SI (always previously ignored) is this: Joe Christian walks into a restaurant and orders a sirloin dinner. Thinking it will compliment the flavor of the meat, he also orders a glass of wine (a typical 5 - 6 oz. serving). During the meal, he also sips from & finishes the glass of water (18 - 20 oz.) that is on his table. Here’s my question: has he not therefore diluted the wine by a ratio of at least 3 to 1? If not, what’s the difference if wine is diluted pre- or post-ingestion?

Mike, pretty much everything you’re saying is false. For starters, actual wine—as opposed to fortified (distilled spirits added) wines—tops out at about 16% alcohol because more alcohol actually kills the yeast. Was wine weaker back then? Well, brother, it was the exact same species of yeast back then that it is today working on the exact same species of grape. Hence, any increases in alcoholic % are going to be marginal.

Along those lines, you’ll find weaker whites at around 8-10%, and reds range from about 13-15% for the most part. It’s only when you get to port (distilled spirits added) that you get up around 20%. We are not talking about night and day differences in alcoholic % here.

Is it “easy” to get to the level Scripture describes as drunken, for example in Proverbs 23? Well, if you look up the symptoms there, those occur at about 0.15% to 0.2% (which is also the average BAC for DUI arrests), and to get there, you need about 3 quarts of average beer, 1.5-2 bottles of average wine (more if it’s a weaker white), or ~ 12 ounces of distilled spirits if you’re an “average” 200lb man. Even the legal limit for driving—about half that—is a hefty amount of liquor for most of us, so let’s dispense with the notion that it’s “easy” to get drunk. It’s not. One rather decides to get drunk in almost all cases.

Regarding the notion that the Hebrews mixed wine with water, there is precisely one reference to that in the Scripture, Isaiah 1:22, and that refers to mixing wine with water as a symbol of spiritual and physical degradation. To put things mildly, using Jaeggeli’s book as a reference is a really bad idea, because BJU Press took the first edition off the market and removed everything that wasn’t completely in keeping with BJU “orthodoxy”. That reeks of propaganda.

Regarding the notion that there is nothing but death and grief and the like, about 95% of drinkers do not experience anything like what you say, Mike, and the Bible tells record of the joy of the wine harvest, the way wine rejoices the heart, and more. We fundamentalists need to honor all of what Scripture says here, not just when it conforms to our culture.

Have the book. Actually, had it for several years. Need to read it.

[G. N. Barkman]

Christian integrity demands that we interpret the Bible accurately, not try to make it say what we think it ought to say. In the case of wine, the Bible allows moderate use, but forbids drunkenness. I cannot forbid what the Bible allows. I can and should issue Biblical warnings about the deceptive nature of wine and the sin of drunkenness.

…Drunkenness is a grievous sin. Moderate use is an allowable liberty.

…

Prov. 1:1-7 “¹The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel; ²To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding; ³To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity; ⁴To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion. ⁵A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:…⁷The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”

Prov. 8 “¹Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice? ²She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. ³She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors. ⁴Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of man. ⁵O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart. ⁶Hear; for I will speak of excellent things; and the opening of my lips shall be right things. ⁷For my mouth shall speak truth; and wickedness is an abomination to my lips. ⁸All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them. ⁹They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge. ¹⁰Receive my instruction…³⁵For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the Lord. ³⁶But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.”

If wisdom is right and playing the biblical fool is wrong, which the Book of Proverbs gives every indication is true, then the matter of alcohol as presented in Prov. 20:1 among other places is a simple matter of right/wrong. “…whoever is deceived _{[errs; is lead astray]} thereby is not wise _{[ ‘…wrongeth his own soul’]} .”

Lee, the trick regarding your argument is whether the original readers would have read things that way—this would be the original readers who celebrated as the grape harvest was brought in, pressed the grapes into into must/new wine, and who rejoiced as the wine fermented and aged into old wine. To pose the question is pretty much to answer it, but in your first comment, you’re assuming that calling wine a “mocker” (though it is an inanimate substance) is the same as calling people mockers (big stretch of exegesis IMO), and in your second, you’re simply ignoring the rest of the counsel of Scripture.

Again, I’ve provided a list of verses which show that the Bible repeatedly and consistently describes wine as a common fixture of Hebrew life, one which was used in Temple offerings, one which was a sign of blessing from God, and one for which the recipients rejoiced and praised Him. If we are going to call ourselves “fundamentalists”, holding to the authority and inerrancy of Scripture, we ought not be cherry-picking (and misinterpreting) the verses that rightly denounce drunkenness while ignoring the verses which praise God for His good gift of wine.

I respect Mike Harding and understand his call to “prudence.” However, it’s not true concerning alcohol that “the main purpose of which is to alter a person’s mental state of being.” That may be true for some. I’m a certified addictions therapist and have worked bi-vocationally for years with addicts of different substances. Many seek to alter their state of being due to trauma, abuse, abandonnment, etc. It might also be true for those Mike knows. It’s not true for the majority of people I know who enjoy a beer with pizza or a glass of wine with certain foods in moderation. The last church I helped plant in France in 2008 had bottles of wine on the table for church meals. I don’t expect that in the US and don’t practice that in our Philly church plant. I neither encourage others to drink nor condemn those who enjoy God’s gift of wine with thanksgiving.

Steve Davis

I follow the discussion here with interest. For me, studying Scripture caused me to actually go through the work it took to gain an appreciation of wine and alcoholic drinks. Coming from a teetotaler position (no alcohol at all) I had no knowledge or even desire to do this, but Scripture pushed me to appreciate what God praises as good.

In a post summing up my position on wine, I summed up my thoughts like this:

I believe that Scripture praises wine, with it’s joy-producing qualities (a relaxed, calmed mind and uplifted heart) as a good gift from God for mankind. God gave us this for our good, but like many of God’s other gifts (food, sex, etc.) we abuse it and suffer the consequences. We can enjoy the gift of wine without sinfully abusing it and becoming intoxicated (or drunk). Drunkenness is sin, not a disease; but Christians can responsibly enjoy wine without getting drunk (which is sinful and wrong).

(By the way my post responds to Aaron Blumer’s response to my initial post detailing my position on this.)

I made a lengthy argument (16 page single-space) on our church website concerning the case for abstinence.

fbctroy.org. Go to Resources then Documents then The Christian and Alcohol. Feel free to download and/or print this for your own personal or church use.

[Mike Harding]

I made a lengthy argument (16 page single-space) on our church website concerning the case for abstinence.

fbctroy.org. Go to Resources then Documents then The Christian and Alcohol. Feel free to download and/or print this for your own personal or church use.

From your article (and thanks for it … I read it all!):

The Lord Jesus Christ miraculously created wine for a marriage feast. This wine was deemed “good” by the headmaster of the feast (John 2:10). Christ commanded the containers to first be filled with water thus eliminating any possibility of the concept of an undiluted wine. Second, the wine was fresh. (cf. John MacArthur’s rather thorough treatment in his Ephesians commentary [5:18a] )

I am reclined and ready for bed with no library to reference. But note the MacArthur Study Bible (screen snaps):

Thanks for sharing your challenges. I hope you get your prescription covered, and relief! I pray for you brother.

If you’re mixing wine with water to reduce the risk of infection, you’re typically going to be drinking half a gallon to a gallon per day at about 3% alcohol. That’s equivalent to 3-6 beers or 5 oz. glasses of wine, a fairly hefty dose. Long and short of it; saying the ancients mixed their wine with water doesn’t really demonstrate that people back then drank a lot less.

Joe, perhaps point your insurance company’s attention to CDC guidance since at least the 1990s, which states that the best sign of problem drinking is four or more drinks in the space of a few hours. Mayo also has some excellent guidance on the topic.