Alcohol and Anguish

But the human tendency to ‘deal’ with it is to eliminate the option of any alcohol, even though it may deprive us of something God created for our enjoyment.

God created alcohol? Where in scripture do you find this? I’m inclined to think this is something God allowed man to invent - like He allowed man to come up with pepperoni, cheese, methods to abort babies, make telephones, and on and on the list goes.

I understand that God doesn’t say specifically “Thou shalt not drink alcohol.” But he definitely commands against being under the control of alcohol.

Three questions:

1. Why are people so defensive of something that takes control over the body and mind to the point that individuals abuse others, don’t provide for their families, and even kill others (intentionally or unintentionally)?

2. How much is too much? Where do you draw the line saying that alcohol is now in disobedience to God’s commands?

3. What does alcohol do for a person even in small amounts that makes it so important? Why not just drink tea, juice, water, etc if its only about flavor and not about something more?

1. Why are people so defensive of something that takes control over the body and mind to the point that individuals abuse others, don’t provide for their families, and even kill others (intentionally or unintentionally)?

Defensive? I hope I didn’t seem so. In fact, I agree that the loss of alcohol would be a small price to pay for the reduction in risk to society. I’m just arguing that doing that is not Biblically commanded. Further, since it is monk-ism and false mortification it can be dangerous to the soul.

2. How much is too much? Where do you draw the line saying that alcohol is now in disobedience to God’s commands?

Good, tough, necessary questions.

3. What does alcohol do for a person even in small amounts that makes it so important? Why not just drink tea, juice, water, etc if its only about flavor and not about something more?

Sure, ok. Again, small price to pay, I suppose. But God through nature makes more delicious juice than Welch.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I also received an email challenging my observation that Scripture calls alcohol a gift from God. I won’t debate that here. Maybe it’s better to warn both sides of that one that each might be biased and to be careful with the Scriptures.

My main point was to say that for most sins, there is a human method for restricting temptation. Some groups employ strict methods, erecting barriers and buffers between them and temptation. That I am calling monk-ism and I’m warning that it does nothing to kill the flesh.

“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

-Col 2:21-23

Even if you disagree with me (as the emailler did) that alcohol is God’s gift, be careful in your abstinence.

Dan:

There is so much I could say, but just a few things that I’ll finish up with.

1. You are being defensive when you start calling names - abstinence as “monkism.” Until I read your comments, I didn’t know my soul was in danger because I don’t drink alcohol.

2. No one has or ever will answer these questions legitimately because each person’s body handles alcohol differently. I think we really don’t know when we reach the point of intoxication and quite often aren’t really honest with ourselves about this. It is more like every man doing what is right in his own eyes and we see where that got the children of Israel.

3. I suppose then you drink spoiled milk. After all, spoiled milk comes about the same way wine does - a product taken from nature and then allowed to sit until it becomes something other than what it was originally. Of course, spoiled milk doesn’t give the same “buzz” that I understand alcohol does.

Several years ago, I came off of a pain killer that I was on because of knee surgery with complications which had caused me to be on it longer than usual. It was no fun. On it, I didn’t think I was addicted. I really don’t think I need to tempt myself with something else that is so easily addicting. In addition, what kind of testimony would I be to those of my acquaintances who know what it means to be drunk and the damage it does to lives - especially those who have broken the addiction and now have nothing to do with it. What kind of relationship and testimony would I have by throwing my “liberty” in their face and drinking even one drink. The spiritual needs of these people is too great a cost for me to do my own thing - especially when there is absolutely nothing in the Bible that says “thou shalt drink alcohol or you’re a sinner and putting your soul in danger.”

Partial response to Michelle who said …

After all, spoiled milk comes about the same way wine does - a product taken from nature and then allowed to sit until it becomes something other than what it was originally

Comment: There are a lot of products that employ fermentation as a process step: Bread, sauerkraut, cheese, yogurt, some pickles, salami, pepperoni, worcestershire sauce, buttermilk, et cetera. Not trying to make the pro-wine argument but it is dangerous to use the “fermentation is bad” argument unless one is consistent and eschews all fermented products.

And if you’ve tried to make any of the above from scratch (eg bread or yogurt as we have), one can attest that some craft and science are involved.

1. I guess I understand how you took “monk-ism” as an insult. I didn’t mean it like that. I’m sorry to have come across that way.

I think of monk-ism as the method of avoiding sin by radical avoidance of temptation. Applied to the logical extreme, this is a monastery (at least in the very early days). But we also apply that type of thinking without going that far.

That is why whenever we say that [something] is mandatory because it helps us avoid some sin, and that [something] is not forbidden in the Bible, I call that monk-ism.

2. No one has or ever will answer these questions legitimately…

Yeah, like I said above, these are admittedly tough questions. But important ones. When Christians live in community and talk to one another, this is really not that difficult in real life.

3. Spoiled Milk? Yeah - When done well, I call it Greek yogurt. It’s really yummy with honey.

Seriously, I did not mean to imply that abstinence was dangerous per se. But it can be attended by dangers. Keep your abstinence and watch for the dangers, if you understood them.

I think both of you know exactly what I was talking about, but in case there is some confusion - I was referring to milk that is allowed to sit and go bad on its own. That stuff will make you sick!!! I was not talking about yogurt, cheese, etc where processes are used to manipulate the milk into something else that might include added bacteria, etc. I love that stuff.

As I said before, God doesn’t come out and say that you can’t ever touch alcohol. Good thing since cold and flu season is upon us and we’d be in trouble without cough syrup. I just believe that because of the addictive nature of the drink and the problem that it brings - all of which God directly commands against - the best use of my freedom and liberty is to choose to be freedom from any possible consequences by not partaking. I personally know people who have been adversely affected by it and I certainly don’t want to go there either in my life or by being a bad testimony and perhaps damaging the name of Christ. Only eternity will tell what God really meant for us to do and we’ll each give account of ourselves.

Points of agreement:

• Who said: “God doesn’t come out and say that you can’t ever touch alcohol”. My response. I agree
• Who said: “the best use of my freedom and liberty is to choose to be freedom from any possible consequences by not partaking”. My response: I agree it is a liberty issue. I’m glad you have made this choice - it is a commendable one!
• Who said: “the addictive nature of the drink and the problem that it brings - all of which God directly commands against”. I agree that alcohol abuse is a major problem in and that drunkenness is sin. Here’s an example from La Crosse Wisconsin: Oktoberfest in La Crosse: A party town tries to sober up (this is a really good read)
• Who said: “I personally know people who have been adversely affected by it and I certainly don’t want to go there either in my life or by being a bad testimony and perhaps damaging the name of Christ”. Agree on all points. I can add to that: cocaine, marijuana, quaaludes etc (of course these are illegal)
• Who said: “we’ll each give account of ourselves”. Agreed

Possible points of disagreement:

• I would not forbid another to drink. My view: It’s between them and the Lord. If another abused it and I were in a position to intervene, I would
• I wouldn’t use the fermentation is bad argument. Sounds like perhaps we agree on this
• I don’t believe that Christians who drink in moderation are necessarily a bad testimony. In fact they may be a good testimony by their moderation

First, up the thread the remark was made that total abstention as the default position for Believers is an uniquely American position. Secondly, the question came up as to why.

I’ll attempt to speak to these two concepts. I can’t be exhaustive but here’s a start.

In my experience, yes, total abstention as a default position is uniquely Anglo-American position . In other countries, the acceptable position ranges from moderation on a daily basis to only wine for the Lord’s Supper commemoration. In no country, that I know of, is drinking to even modest impairment considered acceptable.

Now, as to why, for a long answer I suggest a viewing of Ken Burns’ PBS series Prohibition. In the series, you’ll find total abstention and Prohibition came about from a variety of sources. Two made the biggest impact. One was the shift on the American frontier to distilled spirits among the working class. So, Americans took to drink various brands of whiskey. In other countries, beer and wine were/are the beverages of choice. Distilled spirits are expensive enough to be drunk only on a special occasion. The other source was the American saloon system. Saloons were fairly unregulated by modern standards. For the most part, there were no minimum age limits or mandatory closing hours. In many places, saloons, became the 19th century of modern crack houses. In other words. saloons were not anything like the modern bar or night club.

The following is definitely my opinion. What gets lost in this discussion is the why question. Why do people drink to moderate impairment and beyond? Years ago, I sat in a alcohol abuse education class. The teacher’s basis was there’s only a couple of atoms difference between the anesthetic ether and beverage alcohol. His point was people who abuse alcohol are trying to escape reality by self anesthesia. For some, the level is the minor numbing of Novocaine. Others seek complete oblivion.

[Charlie] SNIP

Considering that in the entire history of the Christian church, the only prohibitions against alcohol occurred in the English-speaking world in the modern era, and gained the most momentum in history in the United States, I would say that the prohibition rather than the liberty is conspicuously American.

Keith,

The abstinence argument routinely argues against straw men, as you have done. None of those arguing against total abstinence are arguing in favor of “moderate impairment.” It’s a straw man. This is not an either/or discussion. One swallow does not moderately impair, so there has to be some middle ground between total abstinence and impairment (which everyone agrees would fall under the biblical prohibition of drunkeness).

You misunderstood my post.

I wasn’t arguing for total abstention (TA). I was arguing for TA being uniquely American. I was trying to give reasons for why it is so. Under other circumstances, I would say there’s nothing wrong with

• a half cup of zinfandel with a spaghetti (pasta) dinner or steak or roast beef.
• a bottle (preferably Guinness stout) or pint (preferably half Guinness stout and half ale) of beer.

But, this world is at it is.

Sorry Keith. Your last paragraph particularly made it seem like you were providing an either/or scenario.

Sorry for the fat finger.

Sorry about that, That’s what I get for trying to reduce a one hour class from thirty years ago into one paragraph. What I was trying to say is: it takes somne deliberate thought not to self medicate.

[Chip Van Emmerik]

Sorry Keith. Your last paragraph particularly made it seem like you were providing an either/or scenario.