Why So Many Christians Are Relaxing over Drinks - As colleges drop drinking bans, some see alcohol as a moral good.

Tyler,

Then why didn’t God make absolute prohibitions clearly in scripture? Why does is scripture so seemingly schizophrenic on the matter? It’s dangerous on the one hand and will lead to joy on the other. Isn’t that like so many other things? What God wants is our hearts. What we want is nice and tidy lines. It’s so much easier to obey lines and feel justified that we’re now obeying God than to truly be circumcised in our hearts. It’s not what goes into a man that defiles him, but what comes out. This is why allowing for freedom is so important to some of us. God made wine to gladden the heart of men, and he knew it would be “ripe for abuse” and made it anyway for our gladness. We shouldn’t be more holy in our pronunciations than God himself about how to deal with potentially dangerous things.

Let’s take the sword (e.g. the ancient version of a gun). Is it dangerous? Is it good? Is it bad? Did God make it? Will God use it? Will it kill? Yes to all of this, but we should sell our cloak and buy one Jesus says. Our attitude towards potentially dangerous things shouldn’t be first to ban them, but to really seek God’s heart on how to use it well to His glory and our good.

BTW I use the analogy of the sword because it’s the closest thing I can think of in scripture that has both positive and negative things said about it that is dangerous and good depending on how its used and who is using it.

[TylerR]

The depths of our own sin is on display in that there is a willingness to justify an activity (drinking alcohol) which we would all consider extremely ripe for abuse…. surely we can all see the real dangers of this activity? Surely basic standards of holiness forces us to admit it is wiser to abstain than imbibe?

Tyler you are using a slippery slope argument here. I would agree in the strongest terms that drunkenness and abuse of alcohol is a bad thing. I would disagree that drinking alcohol itself necessarily leads to drunkenness and alcohol abuse.

Your argument could apply to sexuality. Surely we can all see the dangers of sexuality - it turns our focus away from God, and leads us to crave more and illicit pleasures. The safest thing for a Christian would be to abstain from marriage and all forms of sexuality - it is a high road and a means of sacrificing and dedicating ourselves to God. But that argument doesn’t fly. God intended the joy of sexuality to be enjoyed - in marriage, and not outside of it. The power of sexuality is a strong pull toward sin - but God still made it for our good.

Same goes with alcohol. God created our bodies to respond to alcohol in a way that enhances pleasure, lifts the spirit - and if taken in too large a quantity, causes us to lose control. But God gave us this reaction for our good when exercised within the boundaries he intends - just like with the example above. Yes an inordinate desire for more and more, and a lack of self control can lead one to abandon restraint and become drunken and do the foolish things that go with drunkenness. But in both examples (alcohol and sex), there is a boundary and any abuse lies at the feet of the person who chose to violate the boundary.

With marriage and sex - there was a improper response to say “do not marry” (you see that in 1 Tim. 4). Also there were improper responses to the pleasures of food and wine that said “touch not, taste not” (Col. 2:21) and that forbid the eating of meats or other foods (1 Tim. 4). But those although they have an appearance of godliness (Col. 2:20-23) have “no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.” These man-made rules don’t work since the cause of sin is man’s propensity to violate God’s law.

With both sexuality and with alcohol, there is clear Scriptural teaching that God gave this pleasure for our good, and with both there are clear boundaries and limits.

So - yes we all agree drinking alcohol can lead to drinking too much alcohol and becoming drunk. But we don’t all agree that merely drinking alcohol is a slippery slope that will inevitably lead to drunkenness. In the history of the church, the drinking alcohol part was assumed (perhaps in less high percentages than we have today, but it was assumed for most of church history). It is only in the last 200 years that a secular humanistic rationale arose that said “alcohol is bad” and if we can only keep man (who is morally neutral) away from the bad liquor we can help improve society and curb its ills. That humanistic endeavor is by and large the impetus behind the prohibition/temperance movement and the Church jumped on board with that movement rather than the Church caused that movement. And it wasn’t until the pasteurization method led to the invention of modern grape juice, that any churches would have non alcoholic wine in their communion.

As for my position, some have called it pro-drinking, others pro-alcohol. I would call it pro-prudent enjoyment of God’s provision of alcoholic drinks.

You’ll have to trust my own testimony, but I have not ever become drunk - I have not lost control and done foolish things, and people who I am friends or family with who drink out of a conscience enjoyment of God’s good gift, do not lose it and become drunk either for the most part (there are some extended family members of mine I can’t vouch for). I am not encouraging people to jump on the road to becoming a drunk. If there are reasons to think that one will - I would caution you against partaking. But most Christians I know don’t drink because they are prejudiced against alcohol by misunderstandings of Scripture.

Are we okay with taking a harsher line that God does when it comes to alcohol? Are we okay saying something He claims is a gift to man to make our hearts glad, and saying it is a dubious provision at best, and was the best that you could get back in the day, but now that we have coke - thanks but no thanks God, we’ll abstain, thank you very much!

Bob, and others who are pro-alcohol effects, can you stop saying God created alcohol? Talk about ignoring reality. Is your knowledge of alcohol so stunted that you are unaware that an alcohol fruit doesn’t exist?

Maybe you drinkers could point out a place where the fermentation process is praised.

Your comparison of alcohol to human sexuality is fallacious. Scripture’s statements on the former are rather clear and overwhelmingly negative, though there are some difficult passages (e.g. John 2). As for the latter, it is explicitly an covenant relationship instituted by God. The complementary relationship between the husband and wife is even compared to the economic relationship between the Father and the Son (1 Cor 11:3).

I have argued, not that Scripture commands abstinence, but that personal holiness and basic prudence call for it. My arguments on the holiness demanded of believers has gone unanswered.

[Greg Long] Tyler, you are assuming what you are trying to prove. If alcohol is unholy, then of course 1 Pet. 1 would dictate we should abstain. But if alcohol is not inherently evil, then the conclusion does not automatically follow.

There’s the logical application of scripture. Great point Greg.

[James K]

Bob, and others who are pro-alcohol effects, can you stop saying God created alcohol? Talk about ignoring reality. Is your knowledge of alcohol so stunted that you are unaware that an alcohol fruit doesn’t exist?

Maybe you drinkers could point out a place where the fermentation process is praised.

Not pro-drinking but ….

Fermentation process alluded to in non-negative way:

• What made the wineskins stretch? Luke 5:37-39
• Or the scores of references to bread?
• Or cheese?

[Jim]

[James K]

Bob, and others who are pro-alcohol effects, can you stop saying God created alcohol? Talk about ignoring reality. Is your knowledge of alcohol so stunted that you are unaware that an alcohol fruit doesn’t exist?

Maybe you drinkers could point out a place where the fermentation process is praised.

Not pro-drinking but ….

Fermentation process alluded to in non-negative way:

• What made the wineskins stretch? Luke 5:37-39
• Or the scores of references to bread?
• Or cheese?

Jim, I was asking for any praise of the fermentation process of alcohol, not descriptions of it. I understand if can’t find any.

“Tyler you are using a slippery slope argument here.”

It sure seems like many of you keep appealing to your own logic rules so everyone will know how good you are at debate and argumentation.

Meh, shrug.

You reformed types use the slippery slope idea in arguing against anything but your view of salvation.

Questions for you pro-drinkers: is there a slope at all? If alcohol could be abused to the point of drunkenness, doesn’t that in and of itself indicate a slope exists?

[Greg Long] Tyler, you are assuming what you are trying to prove. If alcohol is unholy, then of course 1 Pet. 1 would dictate we should abstain. But if alcohol is not inherently evil, then the conclusion does not automatically follow.

Many important doctrines in scripture assume what it is trying to prove. Now maybe we can move on from THAT argument as well.

The argument is that God is indeed holy. Does partaking of alcohol in any way lead us into deeper holiness or a more mature faith? In other words, does it allow one to commune with God at a deeper level? If it does, then maybe the Greeks with Bacchus wasn’t that far off. They were just a little extreme about it.

[Greg Long] James, where did Bob say God “created” alcohol? He said it was God’s gift to mankind. And if you have a problem with that, take it up with the psalmist (Ps. 104:14-15).

The continued use of God giving alcohol gives the impression that He is the one who created it. Do you really believe God CREATED alcohol?

You assume what you are trying to prove. By your own standards, your argumentation is faulty. You assume that the “wine” in that verse MUST not can refer to alcohol.

The slippery slope fallacy isn’t always fallacious, so James has a point. It depends on how much one can prove causation of the first step inevitably leading all the way down the hill.

From Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

“In logic and critical thinking, a slippery slope is a logical device. A slippery slope argument states that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant effect, much like an object given a small push over the edge of a slope sliding all the way to the bottom.[1] The strength of such an argument depends on the warrant, i.e. whether or not one can demonstrate a process which leads to the significant effect. The fallacious sense of “slippery slope” is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. Modern usage avoids the fallacy by acknowledging the possibility of this middle ground.”

It is the assumption of the idea that drinking inevitably leads to drunkenness that is at issue.