Study: Most churchgoers still abstain from alcohol

If I say that I think it is wisest to drive a four wheel drive during the winter if you live in the upper Midwest, does that imply that I am trampling on other’s liberty to drive a front wheel drive? I understand that these are far different issues, but I am trying to get a better understanding of some of the concerns concerning Christians expressing their opinions about what the wisest decision is. For example, with the 4wd, even though I think it is wise to drive a 4wd if the roads are bad, I do not think it is a sin to drive a 2wd- in fact, I do it myself from time to time. Sometimes I even take the minivan on bad roads just to save some fuel even though I also have a 4wd, but that does not change my view that driving the 4wd is the safest and often wisest decision.

I am not trying to be confrontational with my question, I am truly trying to understand which issues Christians should refrain from expressing their opinions about wisdom and which issues we should. Is there is a proper way to do so and an improper way? I would like some Biblical parameters for this, but am not opposed to hearing good cultural reasons as well.

JD, the question is not about one person’s, or even one group’s, choices, but rather of a general principle. If I say, for example, that it is wiser for my family to have a large vehicle due to my six children, that is a different thing than me saying from the pulpit that God’s people ought to be driving SUVs. See the difference? This is especially the case when we know that in the case being discussed, the apostle Paul knew of situations that were roughly analogous to our modern situations, and did not choose the “fundagelical standard” approach.

So it’s not about whether one ought to, or ought not, comment on wisdom in individual situations. Nor is it really an argument against arguing for wisdom in more general arenas. Rather, it is simply a plea that when the Biblical writers are dealing with similar problems to those we have today, that our approach ought to as far as possible follow the Biblical approach.

I may drink a beer a year if it’s free. I grew up with an alcoholic father and around relatives who were professional drunkards. I think itsi a wisdom issue. Choosing to abstain is best. But choosing to drink in moderation does not mean you’re not wise. Eating donuts isn’t wise either.

Bert, thank you for your quick reply. I understand how positions and opinions can be abused from the pulpit, but what I was specifically interested in was your position on the statement that GN Barkman made when he said,

What I may do is choose to abstain. That’s my personal decision, and the one I believe is the wisest choice, given what we know about the effects and dangers of alcohol.

I feel like I am missing something in your concern about his statement. Perhaps I’m a bit slow today, but I am trying to better understand where you are coming from. If your reply that came right after the post with that statement was not directed at that quote, that would also bring clarification, but if it was, then please elaborate further.

Many years ago, a pastor in Florida was on something of a crusade to persuade Christians regarding the joys and benefits of drinking wine. One day, he posted something like this on Facebook: “You may be a Baptist if you believe drinking is a sin.” I replied with a statement similar to this: “You may be a Presbyterian if you believe Christian liberty is something which must be practiced by everyone alike.”

I’m happy to give Bert the liberty to drink in moderation. I hope he will be willing to give me the liberty to abstain.

JD, read the rest of the comment by GN. It’s a fairly broad argument, effectively stating that at least for Americans, Canadians, and “Europeans speaking Slavic or Germanic languages”, the wisest course is teetotaling. Hence I respond by pointing out that for something that crosses cultures like this, we ought to start with Scripture’s example.

You can argue some risks and benefits either way. Risk is obviously alcoholism and the vast majority of those 88000 deaths related to alcohol—the counterpoint is that the CDC and others point out the big risk is binge drinking, not drinking in general. Reward is the benefits of compounds in grapes as modified in fermentation, some beneficial cardiac effects of (moderate) alcohol, and the ability and tendency to nibble and sip one’s food and drink vs. “inhaling” it.

In a country that loses 7-8x more people to gluttony and sloth than to drunkenness, that last bit is huge. To draw a picture, upon seeing pictures of those working in the wine industry and those enjoying the fruit of their work, I was struck by how much healthier they all looked than the average person of their age in the churches I inhabit. Overall, the science is debated (and not just here), but here’s an example of what I’m talking about. Here’s another.

Now you might be able to get a lot of that goodness simply by adopting a Mediterranean diet and such, for sure. That noted, what if portions of the whole experience keep people “on the wagon”? It’s well-known (www.eatright.org,Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics) that a diet that’s not enjoyable won’t be followed in the long term, and that many eaters tend to eat until a certain amount of “taste” is enjoyed.

You might suggest that a glass of wine and a cheese/olive/bread/fruit smorgasbord pushes out the Super Big Gulp and plate of hot dogs.

A Christian who discovers that he has the liberty to drink alcohol and then declares that liberty a major cause of personal joy and praise is like a Jew who converts to Christ and perpetually rejoices that he can eat bacon!

Ron, I just had an insight! BBQ‘d pork ribs with a pint of beer… try that for your next community outreach! Come one and come all. Don’t do ice cream as well though, you wouldn’t want to cross the line into gluttony.

I still can’t get past this. Say I’m at that BBQ outreach, and there is a wife with her kids and alcoholic husband who has been off the bottle for a while. He sees you, the pastor, the head deacon, the elder, the choir director, etc. taking a big swig of brew… and he thinks. Why can’t I do that in Christian liberty? And he descends back into the hole he came out of.

My liberty should never be a stumbling block for someone else. You do what you feel led to, but that is what I am going to follow.

[G. N. Barkman]

I’m happy to give Bert the liberty to drink in moderation. I hope he will be willing to give me the liberty to abstain.

I’m going to abstain with or without his permission. :-)

[Mark_Smith]

Ron, I just had an insight! BBQ‘d pork ribs with a pint of beer… try that for your next community outreach! Come one and come all. Don’t do ice cream as well though, you wouldn’t want to cross the line into gluttony.

I still can’t get past this. Say I’m at that BBQ outreach, and there is a wife with her kids and alcoholic husband who has been off the bottle for a while. He sees you, the pastor, the head deacon, the elder, the choir director, etc. taking a big swig of brew… and he thinks. Why can’t I do that in Christian liberty? And he descends back into the hole he came out of.

My liberty should never be a stumbling block for someone else. You do what you feel led to, but that is what I am going to follow.

I don’t think that Ron or Bert are promoting beer at church events

“Show me the verse” excluding alcohol at church functions if everything else they have written is valid? Why not?

Once again, what I’m saying is that that everyone should drink, but rather that those who say that it is in general wiser not to drink simply do not have Biblical support for their position. You don’t want to drink for whatever reason, fine; just don’t tell the world things that the Scriptures don’t support.

(by the way, I’ve said this repeatedly in this thread, hint, hint)

Regarding Mark’s example, maybe consider the many churches that do have beer or wine served at social events where many sip (not swig) the beverages without causing the problems he suggests?

Really, the whole example pretty much assumes that the dry alcoholic hasn’t learned the self-control (Galatians 5:22-3) to know what his limits are with regards to alcohol, and that’s simply not how the “dry alcoholic” makes it through his day, when he’ll typically need to hear/see dozens of advertisements and drive past (or go into) a similar number of establishments that sell or serve liquor. You may as well argue that those of us who have violated Matthew 5:27-8 (all of us, probably) are powerless at the sight of a pretty girl, no?

But to the main point I’m making, whether or not a church decides to allow wine/beer/whatever at events is not the point. The point is opposition to a blanket “wisdom” argument to be made for all Christians.

But to Mark’s question, a church may decide to allow, or prohibit, alcohol at church events for a variety of reasons. Ability, or inability, to monitor how much people are drinking is high on the list. You might also decide not to serve based on whether people sip, or guzzle, their beverages, or for other reasons. Just can’t go with a blanket ban, because that seems to be contradicted by the second chapter of John.

Your hypothetical scenario misses reality.

Those Christians I know who drink in moderation are highly respectful of those of their brethren who abstain. They usually pass on drinking in public gatherings other than restaurants. I’ve never heard them bring up the subject. If guests come to their home there are not wine and beer bottles on display.

BTW, I recently attended a Christian wedding where the couple had wine and beer available for the reception. No one got drunk or buzzed or whatever and I was there for the whole thing.

While I know that there are a few drinking Christians who flaunt their liberty there may be as many abstainers who long for the days of Carry Nation and Prohibition.

Bert, I was not making a Biblical argument for my personal decision to abstain. You are the one who seems to want to force it into a Biblical argument. You seem to want to promote alcohol consumption because Jesus drank, etc. I don’t need a Biblical argument to choose not to exercise a Christian liberty. All I need is a personal reason why I believe it’s better for me to not exercise that liberty. I may believe it is safer, or I may believe it removes a potential stumbling block for others.

Furthermore, I don’t need a Biblical argument to communicate my personal decision to others and tell them why I believe that is the wisest decision. Doing so does not prohibit anyone from exercising his Christian liberty. Like the Apostle Paul, it is simply my way of telling others why I made that particular decision. Paul says a whole lot more about refraining from exercising Christian liberties than exercising them. “If eating meat causes my brother to stumble, I will eat no meat while the world stands” etc.

[Bert Perry]

Once again, what I’m saying is that that everyone should drink, but rather that those who say that it is in general wiser not to drink simply do not have Biblical support for their position.

I assume there was supposed to be a not in place of the first that in your sentence?