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

[Brenda T]

Explains why …

dgszweda wrote:

… With that said, the focus on alcohol that we have seems to be stuck in an American bubble.

Explains why fundamental missions struggles in Europe … because we press them on a point that meaningless to them! (See the tertiary point above)
__________________

Information on Jim

“it does not follow, that a quality which attaches to an effect is transferable to the cause.” - David Hackett Fischer

Personal story (and I have more than a handful related to fundy missions to Europe):

• Guy graduates from well-know Bible college (think the dough boy) and seminary
• Goes to the Netherlands where
• Sunday night is an important family night AND where viniculture date back to 968 AND currently the country has 180 commercial vineyards. (source)
• Tries to impress upon the locals that assembling with their church on Sunday night takes priority over family and “thou shalt abstain”
• Returns to US

Instead of:

Personal story (and I have more than a handful related to fundy missions to Europe):

Stories such as that might show a correlation, but not causation.

[Brenda T]

Stories such as that might show a correlation, but not causation.

You’re right but I assert that there tends to be in fundamenalism a flattening of doctrine where questions become opinions and opinions become convictions and convictions become absolutes (the big red ball)

Have you ever wondered why Paul handled this issue this way?

• You have a severe issue with the Lord’s table at Corinth (1 Corinthians 11:20-22)
• Some are drunk at communion, “and another is drunk”
• He replies: “Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? “
• If there was every a convenient time to make a point about eschewing intoxicating drink, that was it. But he did not! And by eschewing I mean total abstaining!
• His response was “eat and drink at home”

“Even water must be drunk in moderation, lest you become intoxicated.”

Surely any reasonable person can notice a difference between alcohol, a hard drug, - and water!

Our government recognizes alcohol should be treated differently, and with more regulations, than water.
Even the alcohol companies recognize alcohol must be treated differently.

Would you rather be met in oncoming traffic late at night with a driver that had been alcohol, or one who had been drinking water? There is a difference, a big difference.
David R. Brumbelow

I get the point of the statement, but I have a hard time comparing the consumption of alcohol (especially here in the States, where alcohol abuse is rampant and is a leading cause of death) to a ‘moral good’ of any kind.

As Paul said:

“I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but not everything is constructive. No one should seek their own good, but the good of others.”

- I Cor. 10:23-24, NIV

[dgszweda]

[Jim]

The church is maturing and realizing that wine-drinking is a tertiary issue - not central to the gospel!

It’s out there in the “opinion” ring

I would say that it probably lies closer to the Convictions Ring. The problem with Alcohol drinking (compared to KJV, pants on women, padeobaptism…), is that it has the potential of physical abuse. We also know that some people may be more susceptible to certain type of issues (i.e. some people abuse alcohol or painkillers, and some don’t). I think we need to be careful with those people who may have a conviction around alcohol, but we should not force that conviction. I personally don’t drink alcohol because 1)I don’t like the taste of it, 2)abuse has been prevalent in my family and has resulted in deaths, 3)I don’t want others to stumble, and 4) I just don’t see any value in it personally for me that outweighs my personal concerns. With that said, I fully appreciate those of my friends and acquaintances that don’t drink. It shows that they respect me. But if they do want to drink it doesn’t bother me (it could for others). I would say that I only 2-3 friends in the US that may drink, but all of my friends outside of the US do drink.

that did not share my convictions. God bless you for your input.

In Christ,

Bert Baker, Ex.:15:2

Have you ever wondered why Paul handled this issue this way?

Just as Paul did not use that opportunity to teach abstinence, he did not use instances of master/slave improper behavior to advocate either abolition or slaveholding. Sure, in Philemon he made a case for freeing Onesimus, but he did not make a blanket statement about the institution of slavery. In Eph. 6 and Col. 3 he gives specific commands to Christian slaves and Christian masters. If he had given a clear command against slavery would we have even had antebellum slavery in America? Who knows? If he had given a clear command about abstinence in 1 Cor. 11 would we have ever had the temperance movement in America? Who knows?

No, I’m not saying slavery and drinking alcohol are equal. My point is that Christians in history have rightly used Scripture principles/passages (that did not directly address slavery) to come to a biblical conviction (which to them is absolute) that opposes slavery. Have you ever heard anyone say, “Well, it’s my personal conviction that slavery is wrong and I won’t practice it, but I won’t say it’s wrong for others”? As is the case with slavery, Christians have used Scripture principles/passages (that do not directly address drinking or even alcohol) to come to an absolute biblical conviction about abstaining. Paul allowed Christians to own slaves. Does that mean we should? Paul allowed Christians to drink. Does that mean we should? Again, I’m only using slavery and drinking to demonstrate argumentation methods, not to show that they are equal in offense to God or man.

Interesting discussion, by the way. Thanks for engaging with my comments.

[David R. Brumbelow]

“Even water must be drunk in moderation, lest you become intoxicated.”

Surely any reasonable person can notice a difference between alcohol, a hard drug, - and water!

Our government recognizes alcohol should be treated differently, and with more regulations, than water.
Even the alcohol companies recognize alcohol must be treated differently.

Would you rather be met in oncoming traffic late at night with a driver that had been alcohol, or one who had been drinking water? There is a difference, a big difference.
David R. Brumbelow

Obviously there is a difference. The point was moderation. Yes some items have an impact at a much lower level. Alcohol being one of them. But Oxycontin can be for good (done in moderation, in control and with a purpose), or in abuse. Obviously water is an extreme example, but the extreme was just to show that something as critical to our bodies as water, and as benign as water, can have the same affect as alcohol, including death, if it is abused. It just means that we need to be more careful with those items that have a tendency of abuse and have a lower thresh hold. I would argue that alcohol has a lower thresh hold than the .08 that is the legal limit. But it can still be done with clear sensibility and in accordance with Scripture.

I think as our culture changes and the impact of the ideas of the Prohibition and Billy Sunday wane in our culture, that individuals are 1) finding it more acceptable and 2) finally realizing that Scripture doesn’t teach a prohibition. Some people may cringe, but I liken this very much to interracial dating, and how the culture not only in Christian circles, but in the nation have changed.

Peter Green, whose PhD research at Wheaton focuses on the theological significance of wine and vineyard themes in Scripture, says the Bible presents alcoholic drinks as an indicator and facilitator of human and divine relationships.

“The Old Testament is unambiguous that wine and other alcoholic beverages are a blessing, and their absence is considered a curse,” said Green. He acknowledges the Bible forbids drunkenness and that some people should avoid alcohol due to addiction or family history. But he believes that most Christians should imbibe, not abstain.

Christians have always been concerned about drunkenness, but it wasn’t until the Protestant social reform movement of the 1800s that temperance was equated with complete abstinence.

• The article mentions the American oddity - the emphasis upon total abstinence not seen: a.) in recent church history (reformers); b.) among other evangelical Christians in other parts of the world (anyone who has traveled to Europe understands this!)
• And then there are OT verses that teach enjoyment of wine
• And then in the Epistles, drunkenness is clearly condemned but drinking is not (an example of “drinking is not” … Bishops are to abstain (“not given to wine”, 1 Timothy 3:3) … deacons not drink much (“not given to much wine” I Timothy 3:8).

Consider these excesses:

• Money is good … greedy getting and loving money is bad
• Sex in marriage is good … outside of marriage sinful (I observed that there is probably greater abuse of sex (sex outside of marriage) than right enjoyment of.
• Internet is good … abuse of internet (online viewing of porno) is bad (consider the pornography statisitics)

Is not:

• Rightfully using $$ a good testimony?!
• Rightfully enjoying human sexuality!
• Using the Internet appropriately a good testimony!
• And if the above three are correct, why not the rightful use of beverages of all kinds: in a way where one does not become drunk, and where one does not offend one who would stumble (say “eating and drinking” in the privacy of one’s home!)

[David R. Brumbelow]…alcohol, a hard drug…

I’m back and forth as to whether the hard drug/soft drug paradigm is helpful. On the one hand I think it is in that those who imbibe or might be thinking about trying it would be more aware of the potential of a physical addiction on par with meth and crack cocaine. On the other hand, my caffiene is ranked below booze/crack/meth but, along with Ecstasy, in a more dangerous slot than even LSD and marijuana.

You can have my coffee cup when you pry it from my clenched but jittery fingers!

Brenda, I agree there are some interesting parallels between drinking alcohol, and the issue of slavery.

While I do believe the Bible directly speaks against drinking beverage alcohol, even if it did not, biblical principles certainly condemn beverage alcohol (taking a mind altering drug for recreational purposes).

Also, how forceful would the following argument be? “I would personally never own a slave, but I will not be a legalist. If you think owning a slave it alright for you, who am I to say otherwise?” Yet, that is the weak argument many are using against alcohol.

Slavery is wrong.

Drinking beverage alcohol is wrong.

David R. Brumbelow

David R Brumbelow said “beverage alcohol [is] mind altering”

Questions?

• How is the mind altered?
• Is there any science behind this? (Can you provide support?)
• I mean … the person who may have a glass of wine with dinner or a beer with pizza … are you saying his mind is altered?

Slavery vs moderate beverage alcohol: There is this difference:

• Slavery involves the whole person (the slave) by someone else (the master)
• This cannot be said of moderate use of beverage alcohol

I lived in Spain for many years. It would be difficult to find a country where the people did not imbibe more than in that country, starting with pre-school children. There are government-run rehab centers for alcoholics as young as twelve years old. Spaniards show a difference in the use of alcohol by the way they refer to it. For example, the verb “beber” is used with alcohol to connote “drinking,” such as one does when one goes to a bar or has a social drink of hard beverages. Christians stand against this use of alcohol. In contrast, the verb “tomar” is used when one uses wine as a beverage with a meal. In the case of “beber” this kind of drinking leads to excess. In the case of “tomar” this use is never more than a glass with a meal. Thus wine is considered as “food” and not an intoxicant, and as such does not lead to drunkenness.

The use of the word “wine” in Scripture is not the exact equivalent as the wine known today. There it could refer simply to the juice of grapes, or it could refer to a juice concentrate mixed with water, or it could be more intoxicating, and in this latter sense it is condemned in Scripture. I believe it would be wrong to assume Jesus drank or advocated the use of intoxicating alcohol, since that would be a violation of the prohibitions of Scripture on this kind of use.

To equate the use of wine in biblical times with its use today is to draw an incorrect parallel. The forms of alcohol today are much more concentrated in alcohol content than in biblical times. Further, Christians are hard-pressed to justify the use of alcohol since so many are killed in accidents, so many are enslaved, so many homes are destroyed, so much crime is connected with it, etc., etc. Alcohol is a drug, and believers should avoid not only the damage it does to their “Spirit-controlled” body, but also the poor testimony it gives by being conformed to the world.

I think a moral case for abstinence can be made from Scripture. Schools like Moody should avoid lowering their standard on the use of alcohol by their faculty, staff, and board members. Think what this is saying to their young, impressionable students. This new accommodation will only encourage the use of alcohol rather than discourage it.