Drinking Question......

Amen and amen B4L! :thumbs:

Ditto!

 

If anyone thinks it is ok to drink alcohol, just take a bottle of beer (or wine) into the pulpit instead of water and see how the congregation reacts!!!!

Cheers,

Jim

 

That is one foolish remark and doesn't compare to drinking. Don't be so dumb in public!

Cheers,

Jim

 

So, why do it?

 

You are being inconsistant.

You seemed to be saying earlier that a person who drinks in moderation is not a drunkard. Yet someone who simply smokes a simple little joint is automatically a "drug abuser"

The truth is that someone smoking one reefer joint is not neccesarilly a "drug abuser".

 

HavensDad...

Where in the scriptures is it specifically forbidden?

I recall in Genesis where God specifically mentions that He has given us....

That would include reefer.

 

I hope nobody misunderstands regarding my posts.

I was a big reefer smoker, along with much stronger recreational drugs, back in my lost years. But when I was born again all of that stuff fell right out of my life. Permanently. No difficulties, cravings, etc. The desire for all that stuff was gone. That was 28 years ago, and I have had no recreational drugs, nor desire for them, or alchohol since 1982.

But I just feel that we should be accurate when we discuss something like reefer. Moderate use should be no different than moderate use of alchohal

And it it should be LEGAL for serious nausea control. It is an AMAZING severe nausea remedy

 

Your logic is faulty. Follow the following anecdote to see how.

There is no good that comes from going to the movies. It doesn't build character, it helps no one in Christian virtue, it doesn't promote the Kingdom of God or the Gospel.

But the damage that has been done by something that so naturally lends itself to abuse is unquestionable. What's worse, those who've been saved out of it, and testify of it, and will no longer touch it are marginalized as unspiritual, legalistic, ignorant and superstitious.

Now tell me again how holy and righteous your movie going is...


You could replace the word wine with a plethora of different things that bring us pleasure and make the exactly the same faulty argument.

BTW, movie going is abused- look at the horrible, blasphemous movies that people go to every week. If you would never go to ANY movie you would never be tempted to go to a bad one. And it is abused by people going to often, spending money that should be going to the kingdom, spending time that could be spent doing beneficial things, etc...

And there are MANY IFB type people who testify to being saved from going to the theater. Some of whom give testimonies about the negative effect it has had on their minds and their families, etc...


With all things that Scripture does not condemn we should be cautious and moderate. That is the sensible position on wine.

 

Jim, this same kind of argument could be made about a ton of things that we don't carry to the pulpit but that we lawfully enjoy in a host of other areas of our lives.

Like guns, sports mags, or dozens of movies we have in our cabinets that we would not show in our sanctuaries, and the list goes on and on and on...

Just because people don't want to see it in the pulpit does not mean that we should never enjoy it anywhere else in our lives.

This is not a good argument.

 

It is NEVER forbidden... In fact, it is commended in Scripture.

Scripture says that God made the wine that makes merry the heart and several other positive remarks about wine.

I think it is noteworthy that this tee totler position is a relatively new movement in Christendom.

Spurgeon drank beer.

The Puritans drank beer and wine.

So did the pilgrims. They brought beer over in great barrels on the Mayflower.

Martin Luther drank beer.

The church for hundreds of years embraced the moderate use of alcohol.

The Bible says to.

Like the KJVO position- this teetotler business is a new movement.

Howeve, having come from a drunkard home, and having for years fervently preached against alcohol, I can understand the hearts of those who hold this position.

But the fact remains that it is not a biblical nor a church historical position. We need to trust God that he would have promoted the teetotler position in His word if it was the right one.

 

You nailed it.

 

If God's word does not tell us to abstain then you can't either- period. And you can't come over the top of God's Word and say, "Yea, the Bible doesn't say it but the Holy Spirit does."

If you admit the Bible doesn't condemn it, as you wisely do- then that is the end the argument. All you can say beyond that is that it is your personal preference to personally avoid it.

You can no more condemn alcohol than someone can condemn interracial marriage. You may not like it. You may have seen plenty of instances where it caused great difficulty. You may declare that it will hurt your testimony in a whole lot of places in this country. But you CANNOT preach against it without the word of God.

 

Well, mess with the bull you're gonna the horns. Here goes.

Alcohol does not ruin lives any more than guns do. Guns don't kill people- people kill people. Sin is in the heart of man not in a bottle or the barrel of a gun. What people hold in their hands is not what is dangerous- it is what they hold in their heart.

Alcohol does not ruin lives- the abuse of alcohol ruins lives.

Furthermore, when you admit that the bible allows for the moderate use of alcohol as you wisely did- your position is moot. What you think and feel and believe does not amount to a hill of beans. Neither does what I think. What God SAYS is what matters. If God has said that the moderate use of alcohol is fine- then who are you to say it is not? That question really deserves an answer.

All you can say beyond that is that it is your personal preference to personally avoid it. And even then you have to admit that your personal preference is very potentially flawed since God has indicated that moderate use of alcohol is OK.

You can no more condemn alcohol than someone can condemn interracial marriage. You may not like it. You may have seen plenty of instances where it caused great difficulty. You may declare that it will hurt your testimony in a whole lot of places in this country. But you CANNOT preach nor campaign in any spiritual manner against it without the word of God.

 

Very good post.

 

Very good and very true.

 

While it is spoken of good terms at times it is more often acquainted with harm, folly, judgment, and sin.
It seems prudence should be used when in determining if drinking is potentially a good idea.. even if it is allowed.

I'm not against drinking.. but there is more to the argument for abstinence of wine, beer, or strong drink that just being allowed or not.

This is a false statement as the position against alcohol as a drink goes all the way back to the apostles. There we have Paul's own disciple or at the very least fellow laborer under Paul, Timothy, Not Drinking it.. and so Paul tries to encourage him to do so.. but NOT for a drink but medicinal. We also have Paul writing about to drink or not elsewhere because it was a position that was just as prevalent then as it is today.

So?

So? Both hold to some views I think are incorrect but that does not make drinking beer, wine, ect.. acceptable.

Again so what?

again So what.. Timothy in scripture abstained as did others apparently.
And they seemed to think it was the most biblical position as well.

Yes. the Catholic Church did many godless things for hundreds of years. (yes.. that was being funny)
However, just because the church for hundreds of years held to salvation through works.. should we continue there in?

No it doesn't. I say one 'can' there is a difference.. and there are reasons.

Your lack of knowledge on this is somewhat disturbing.. Timothy in scripture is a case in point.. one who learned or continued his learning under Paul the apostle and still abstained.

I can understand it coming from a biblical position.

Again, you are trumped by scripture on the biblical issue.
Ummm...Which part of church history.. or are you simply being selective here.
I have already shown it was a view held during Pauls times via Timothy.. that is part of church history..

It seems you have not kept up on your scripture readings.
While I do not deny we 'can' drink alcoholic drinks.. there are many things that scripture tells us can and do prohibit us from doing so.
1. reason for drinking
2. Times you are drinking
3. Oaths or service which are prohibited from us doing so
4. positions which should prohibit from us doing so
5. our christian brothers and sisters in our sphere of influence and how they see it
6. our witness before the world.

Below is a post I posted earlier in this thread and give some interesting insights into times and aspects where it is forbidden. with a bit of added info to it in places for clarification.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

It [drinking] wasn't permitted at times nor to all people.
Priests were forbidden to even have any [amount] before or during their ministering/service and if they did God would kill them. Granted that after their ministering was up they could partake, just not ANY before they showed up for ministry or during. The Nazarite was forbidden to even touch the very grapes, ripe or dried at all, till his vow to God was fulfilled.

We also have Proverbs stating it is not for Kings or princes to to drink wine or strong drink.
and to be given to those who are dieing or who are in bitter distress of the soul.

So it seems that if
1. one is under a vow,
2. in the service/ministry toward God and/or His people, or
3. watching over God's people, they should cease from such drink so as to not even potentially pervert the things of God.

That is not a declaration but an interesting observation of and from those who were not to drink or not to drink at certain times.

It is interesting that Timothy (a disciple of Paul) chose not to drink at all, and to the extent that Paul tried to encourage him to take a 'little bit' for his stomach problems. So the issue regarding christian should or should not drink is as old as the early church. Even Paul had to deal with other Christians, and not just Timothy, about drinking or not.

Paul's answer to the issue was that if drinking or eating was a stumbling block or considered a sin to another brother he was in contact with, then he would cease to continue doing that thing till the world ends, for their benefit.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That last part is the key. It is funny how those who drink will scream 'we biblically can' and yet ignore scripture where it tells us why we biblically should not. - Not that we 'can not' but 'should not'.

Our freedom in Christ is not that we can drink.. but that we can abstain out of love for the brethren and the desire to help THEM grow no matter what the cost.

 

Thank you for your service.
The times I drank in a fraternity (about 5 years ago) I never saw a male's judgment significantly impaired by two drinks. I've never seen a male rendered unable to walk after four drinks. So, it seems like you were being served triples...or someone was dropping you roofies.

I'm not going to get into an argument over something so trivial, but what gives you the authority to make this statement?

If I drank 2 beers*, in one (1) hour, my blood alcohol content would be ~.0266**
After having said drinks, I could get on the road and drive and be well under the legal limit of .08

Again, I don't condone the abuse of alcohol. If you don't want to drink...more power to you. However, please, remove yourself from a pedestal of assumption before casting judgment.

*assumes a volume of .54 ounces of alcohol (one shot of distilled spirits, a glass of wine, or 12 ounces of beer)
**The basic formula for estimating a person's blood-alcohol concentration comes from The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.