Is Drinking a Mixed Drink a Sinful Compromise?
Sitting out on the back porch this evening with my mother, we watched a popular Baptist radio and television preacher teach on compromise. His lesson was a good lesson in principle. The basic thrust was taken from the story of Solomon. Solomon was given a promise that if he followed the Lord as his father David he would not lack a descendant on the throne of Israel. Yet Solomon compromised by disobeying God’s command and took many wives.
The preacher used this story wisely to explain the danger of compromise. Like any preacher, he had examples that would take the eternal principle of compromise and contextualize it for our day so that we might see the immediate danger that we face (since most of us don’t have the temptation to take too many wives!). Yet, the examples he gave evidenced the misplaced priorities of many in the church to misdirect the application of the principles to acts that in-and-of-themselves did not represent compromise.
Here is the list of examples of compromise he gave and expounded upon for nearly thirty minutes:
1. Going to the movies with an “R” rating.
2. Listening to a dirty joke at work.
3. Accepting a mixed drink at a party.
This preacher focused on the pressure that often comes to participate in these actions. He said that others will think you are a “goody-two-shoes” if you don’t participate, but if you do you will have crossed the first line compromise which is the most dangerous line to cross. Following up these examples, he encouraged the listeners with these exhortations: “We must obey God’s word,” “God’s word is not about not having fun,” “God knows best, and if he says don’t do these things, then we obey without question.”
While I agree with what this preacher said about compromise, its danger, and about God knowing best, I felt that the examples he gave were irresponsible, representing a legalistic folk-theology which is more destructive than constructive. Not only this, but as I sat there and listened, I found myself thinking This guy has compromised by giving these examples without qualification.
I want to focus on the example of drinking for just a moment to illustrate what I mean. Let me loosely quote how the illustration was laid out. “If you are at a party and someone tries to give you a mixed drink, what do you do? You say, ‘I am a Christian and I don’t drink.’ But what if the person says come on, just one. You say ‘I really can’t.’ Then the person just tells you to hold the drink and you do. This is compromise.” From the preacher’s point of view, the the person crossed the dangerous line of compromise by even holding the drink. Holding the drink will cause you to take a drink and then, as the preacher said, say “Give me another.”
The assumption behind this illustration is that drinking an alcoholic drink–especially a mixed drink–is the sin that we must avoid at all costs. This is where I think this preacher has compromised himself. He has given in to the temptation of setting up a legalistic standard. He has built a wall of protection around a sinful act and the wall itself has become the object of sin.  Drinking an alcoholic drink–even a mixed drink–is not in any way a universal sinful act, much less holding a drink - compromise. I sat at a friends house the other night and had a glass of Cognac and a cigar (they are supposed to go good together). While I don’t really drink often, I have no problem having a beer or even a mixed drink. It does not matter whether it is vodka and tonic, Jack and Coke, or a margarita. This issue is not drinking, but getting drunk. Even then, the issue is not simply that God does not like an altered state of consciousness that drinking too much causes, but it is being out of control.
Ephesian 5:18 “And don’t get drunk with wine, which leads to reckless actions, but be filled with the Spirit.”
Notice, the emphasis is on the “reckless actions,” not simply an altered state of consciousness. The encouragement of Paul is to be “filled with the Spirit.” This does not refer to an esoteric state of mind, but one of perpetual control being given to God, not alcohol. The Bible speaks much about drunkenness (i.e. being controlled by alcohol as a lifestyle) because it encourages a state of being where your actions are perpetually in your own control so that you might yield that control to God.
We must balance the warning passages in Scripture with those that speak positively about alcohol. Some encourage its acute celebratory, medicinal, and emotional purposes and effects.
John 2:1-11: Christ turns water into wine (”the best wine”) so that the marriage celebration could continue. If holding a drink is compromise, how much more so was Christ’s actions?
Psalm 104:14-15 14: “He [God] causes the grass to grow for the cattle, And vegetation for the labor of man, So that he may bring forth food from the earth, 15 And wine which makes man’s heart glad, So that he may make his face glisten with oil, And food which sustains man’s heart” (emphasis mine). Here, “wine which makes man’s heart glad” is spoken of as a gift from God.
Proverbs 31:6: “Give strong drink to him who is perishing, And wine to him whose life is bitter” (emphasis mine). Here, strong drink and wine are encouraged to be given to those who are in pain.
1 Timothy 5:23:Â ”Don’t continue drinking only water, but use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses.” Paul encourages Timothy to drink wine for his ailing stomach.
The sin of drunkenness in the Scripture is serious and many people are effected by this. Alcohol can control people and cause them to be someone who they are not, thereby dishonoring God and His image which they bear. We must be in control of ourselves if we are to have a consistent witness. But drinking itself is not the sin.
Please know that I understand the dangers of alcohol . . . Believe me I do. Both sides of my family have members who are totally controlled by alcohol. My sister was controlled by both alcohol and prescription drugs before she took her life. On my wife’s side of the family there is a family member from whom I am estranged because of the boundaries that I have set for her interaction with my children due to her addiction. For them and others with this problem, the simple act of holding a drink might be compromised were they attempting to overcome their addiction. However, this compromise would not be unlike the glutton who eyes a chocolate bar, the sex addict who watches a movie filled with sexual provocation, or the person with anger problems owning a gun. If you have a particular bent to certain sins, you must know yourself well enough to act wisely with regards to its provocation, but this does not mean that assumptions must be made about everyone’s ability to handle the same circumstances.
In the end, these things must be dealt with carefully and with much wisdom. We must understand that focusing the sin on the possible abuse of something neither makes the abuse necessary or even likely. Most importantly, we must recognize that it is a sinful compromise to deem that which is not sinful sinful, due to misapplied folk theology, no matter how good our intentions are. Drinking alcohol is not sinful. Let us get over this legalistic fascination and represent the principle truly and with perspective.
Our ministry is a partner based ministry. This means that the majority of our support comes from people like you. Please consider supporting Reclaiming the Mind Ministries as we make theology accessible. Donate today.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
- Is Drinking a Mixed Drink a Sinful Compromise?
- The Premature Funeral of the “L” Word
- Compromise is not a Four-Letter Word
- Does Christian Activism Actually Encourage Immorality?
- How Sinful Can a Christian Be?
richards on 26 Aug 2007 at 4:56 am #
You’re going to hell for this post, you know that, right? As a Baptist, I can certainly tell that you are not Baptist.
But, if this sort of thing is what it means to be saved, then save me a seat in the Hot Place. Unfortunately, this tv preacher articulated quite well what I normally hear expounded not just by other pastors, but by Sunday School teachers and laity.
By the way, I saved my cigar label and use it as a bookmark in my Bible. That’s why I didn’t let the dog eat it!
Sean on 26 Aug 2007 at 5:33 am #
‘Tis a subject that sure gets folks riled up to even touch. Many people feel strongly about this one, one way or the other.
Some Christians seem to enjoy, and some (folk) traditions seem to encourage enjoying, having what I call a “hell list.” Commit a particular sin? “Aha! You’re on the hell list!” (And I’m not.) Drinking and smoking seem to be ones that especially land you on this list. Other sins, not so much. 350 lbs.? “Praise the Lord, Sister, and pass the casserole.” (And no, this is not a Calvinist versus Arminian thing, nor a Baptist versus Pentecostal thing.)
Insistence on complete abstinence from alcohol as a prerequisite of living a regenerated or holy life cannot be supported exegetically. (All the good stuff Michael noted.)
Beyond biblical sins, however, there are also cultural sins. These need to be respected. There are things that the Bible says is o.k. (or says nothing about) that our cultures say are not o.k. Just because we have liberty does not mean it is always wise to use it and potentially cause another to stumble (see: Rom. 14), unless forgoing the liberty causes the greater harm. In most of Europe, it is perfectly acceptable for the pastor to go to the pub for a beer after church. In the U.S., in most conservative Christian circles, it is not. In parts of Asia and the Middle East it is definitely not. In such places, it is often the better part of valor and love to forgo the liberty rather than prove what a radical biblical literalist one is.
Hence, I choose to abstain, and encourage others living in contexts where any consumption of alcohol is a cultural sin to also abstain.
kolabok21 on 26 Aug 2007 at 6:58 am #
Wow, I’m not sure what to say here. Though I can agree with what you say, (for the most part) I would argue what is the difference if the mixed drink & cigar was replaced with a puff of marijuana?
Surly we have to look at your statement with 21st glasses, (ok mid 70’s 80’s version) since anyone of these instruments can cause one to step beyond the line and fall deeper into hole and cause a stumble in our walk, witness and obedience “duty†to God.
I’ll admit I am weak and could not do what you did with the gathering of a friend or two for “A†drink.
For me it is enough to be with the wife in the privacy of our home and sip a glass or two of good wine as we enter the path of intimacy. I could not handle the same in the company of others for obvious reasons, though it is not the act in and of itself, but rather the thought of OK one will not hurt.
And I believe if I were to do this same that is have a drink with a/or friend(s) I will fall not because of whether it is a sin to drink one, but rather a fall from a belief that tells me “it is no good†and will only encourage it again and again.
If this were not true to me I would be out witnessing to my child hood friends as we partake in a “bong hit, joint, etc†where is the difference?
Probably the preacher is right; temptation is the mother of all evil.
stevemoore on 26 Aug 2007 at 7:44 am #
Well, for starters, drugs are clearly illegal. Alcohol is not. That’s a big difference as breaking the law is, well, by definition, illegal. ;^)
I think if you’re in a place where it is illegal to have a drink (maybe this is the situation Sean refers to in some of the middle eastern locations?) then it would be wrong to have one. It would be wrong to have a drink in your kids elementary school. But that’s a far cry from saying that drinking is sinful when the Bible is so clearly not opposed to it (but clearly it speaks out against being drunk.)
The preacher has effectively said that God is not right. Even if God says that drinking is ok, this preacher has said in effect ‘no, I dont care what God has said, I know better’. That’s what’s really scary for me when I hear of statements like this.
Along these lines there are two things that Paul does when he presents his “weaker brother” argument in various places:
-instructs the stronger brother not to cause the weaker brother to go against his conscience
-instructs the weaker brother that he was incorrect in his thinking (implicitly)
I rarely see the latter point made when these topics are covered, but it is clearly there. Why not? There must be a motive of those preaching this sort of message and they dont wish to deal with the issue, but really just wish to motivate people to live to a certain false standard. (Can we say ‘Christian sub-culture’ anyone?” ;^)
I’m completely fine with folks who choose to abstain altogether or at various times, so long as they dont feel they are doing so as it makes them more holy before God. There are clearly right reasons, as Michael and others have pointed out, and I do not wish to diminish those in any way. I merely am wanting to point out the trouble(s) with the Preacher’s argument in agreement with Michaels comments.
hth,
-steve
Chad Winters on 26 Aug 2007 at 8:06 am #
Sean…but if it is a a cultural sin because of a misunderstanding of Scripture and the application of Folk theology then I don’t think I am bound to abide by it.
Sean on 26 Aug 2007 at 8:20 am #
Chad, I’m referring primarily to non-Christian cultures, where Christians are in a minority, that view drinking as sinful. One’s appeals to a Bible aren’t necessarily going to get a hearing there. To illustrate: in India, Christians are only about 3% of the population. Both the Hindu majority and the large Muslim minority view drinking as sinful. (Actual practices are otherwise.) Christians who drink will be viewed as sinful by the others. This is in fact a common stereotype there; in films, the drunkard is often someone named “Michael” or “Johnny” who sports a large crucifix.
In the solipsistic U.S., perceptions of the issues are not so starkly obvious, but the situation is not fundamentally different in many Christian sub-cultures.
I agree that you, as an autonomous individual, are not bound before God by the misunderstandings of others. However, that liberty won’t necessarily keep you from the consequences that arise from those misunderstandings. For many, it is wiser to err on the side of caution.
Vance on 26 Aug 2007 at 11:47 am #
I am with you entirely on this, Michael. As one who has never drank any alcohol at all (due to upbringing, then out of habit), I can still say that the only reason NOT to drink alcohol is either to avoid the dangers (akin to putting a “hedge” around the law, like the pharisees), or to avoid being a stumbling block to a fellow Christian, or potential Christian.
I think in general that the puritan ethic in the US history of religion has a lot to answer for. Jesus gave us two “DO’s”: love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.
These “DO’s” are very difficult. It is much easier to establish a series of “do’s and don’ts” dealing with outward daily living, and then use that as a standard for righteous living. Don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t go to the wrong movies, don’t swear, don’t wear certain clothing. Then do go to church every Sunday and Wednesday, use religious sounding language, wear a cross, etc. How is this NOT Pharisaic? All good living suggestions, to be sure, but to make them the standard of “right living” simply detracts away from the REAL standards Jesus set for us.
And see how these shift! Consider what would have been considered “essential” for right living just 60 years ago. No make-up or short hair for women (much less PANTS!). Seeing ANY movie.
Not to mention all the other aspects of right living that are also simply too hard, so that we may mention it, but never really put on par with those chosen bugaboos. Things like pride, gossip, lack of compassion, anger. I am convinced that these are DRAMATICALLY more important to God than having a drink, but which do you think would cause more scandal in most evangelical churches today: the sight of their pastor having a cocktail or their pastor gossiping?
kolabok21 on 26 Aug 2007 at 12:41 pm #
Drugs are illegal yes they are thank God, but you need to define drug, yes alcohol is a depressant, which is labeled a drug an induced state out of normal.
That being said it is what it is in this country. As some one pointed out the example in India it is a cultural issue that is relative to the situation and in some sense not approved of or disapproved of, based on a religous doctrine?
We can read a lot into this by the text of scripture, for example I think of Noah’s drunkenness. Did God say no don’t grow the vine that produces the sweet berry (I think some of the hippies of the 60’s got the idea of every fruit bearing plant and HERB enjoy, get the picture)? No but the implication of continuance in this indulgence brings its own problem, namely the need for a reality check, is it pleasing to God.
I do not disagree with the argument, because it leans to a legalistic problem. The problem I have is with me, do I have control or does God. The implication is, is it pleasing to the Lord. If my body is to be the temple of God (Holy Spirit indwelling) do I do that with a drink in my hand or with the bible?
It is a definitely a cultural issue, going back to the statement of illegal drugs or drink in hand, yes it is here but in other places and cultures it is part of the religious practice and not condoned at all. Yet if we take this path we quickly leave a Christian view of religion and embrace all cultures to find an answer.
We each have to live with the choices we make and ultimately we will be judged for our choices.
Again maybe the point of the preacher’s message is do not do it, even if you are only handling the mug, since this will cause the sin. Yes legalistic, but effective deterrence, is not the Devil in the bottle? One more and that’s it I’ve reached my limit!
Lisa R on 26 Aug 2007 at 1:24 pm #
LOL…I heard the same message this morning and had the same thoughts. All
I kept thinking about was the christian who was new to the faith and really
hadn’t come to definative conclusions that they should not drink. Isn’t that what
Romans 14 and I Corinthians 8 addresses? The whole point is so they won’t
stumble. But telling a christian that drinking is an outright sin, when the bible
makes no such claims, IS a stumbling block.
Oh if the magic sanctification wand could be wave and POOF! we all behave
christianly and avoid those things that those preachers say we should avoid.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. It is the job of the Holy Spirit to
convict, particularly in these gray areas.
The funny thing, as another blogger accurately mentioned, there are a whole
list of sins that the bible DOES specifically speak on, that we should not do,
such as anger, gossip, back-biting, covetousness. Yet isn’t it common that
these actions are not only prolific, but are met with indifference at best and
prayer slaps at worst?
stevemoore on 26 Aug 2007 at 1:30 pm #
Let’s start with what we can know conclusively from Scripture and then work on that platform:
Since God speaks of the pleasures of an alcoholic drink, but condemns drunkenness - it’s pretty simple and straightforward. In fact, in places He even tells people to enjoy an alcoholic drink. So He clearly is not against it if He is explicitly for it! An alcoholic beverage, when used appropriately, is therefore pleasing to God as He’s declared it so. Thus it can’t be sin as the preacher has misled people to believe, so we must look further to find our answer. Again, being drunk is sin. It’s clear. An underage drinker would be breaking the law and thus would be, I believe, sinful, etc.
I’d argue the preachers logic isn’t even an effective deterrence. It’s legalism, plain and simple, and Paul speaks of it and its’ dangers all over the new testament. If legalism is the proposed solution to the problem, it’s time to take a closer look at the problem because I think we’ve missed it. The whole point of Romans 5, 6,7,8 and Galatians is that the law is powerless to save and sanctify. Creating more laws to try to solve this problem is a losing proposition - pragmatically and categorically.
Either way the preacher has mislead his audience. He’s first mislead them in an attempt to have them think that a mixed drink is wrong. Then he’s tried to have them think that holding a drink is wrong, because somehow it will magically and supernaturally overcome the holder because alcohol just isn’t wrong, it’s somehow supernaturally wrong. Then, for the trifecta he tried to assert that legalism was the solution.
Again, at the risk of being misunderstood, I wish to echo Michael’s sentiments about the dangers of alcohol, and many many other fine things when used inappropriately and outside of God’s design and intent.
Here’s my question to everyone: Why did the preacher feel it was necessary to mislead his flock? What did he hope to accomplish by doing so? What was the intended gain? What does it reveal about his theology?
-steve
stevemoore on 26 Aug 2007 at 1:32 pm #
Lisa, and the others -
I agree, I think it would be far more scandalous for a preacher to be ‘caught’ having a drink than being caught gossiping or something that is actually a sin.
What does this reveal about the Christian sub-culture, and our handling of scripture?
-steve
Lisa R on 26 Aug 2007 at 2:03 pm #
My personal opinion is that it may be a form of pride. It’s saying you MUST align
with my dogma.
But let me further say that our priorities meet God’s priorities at Romans 12:1,2.
Our life transformation is a result of 1) yieldedness, and 2) mind renewal.
It has been my experience, both directly and observationally, that when we
do this, everything we do is sifted through the colindar of “Lord, will this
please you?” And this usually results in a progression of changing priorities.
So that things we were asking this question about now, weren’t necessarily
what we asking about 1, 2 or 5 years ago.
I may have come to the conclusion for where I am in my life that drinking does
not please God. But that may not be where somebody else is. And there’s
where we allow grace.
kolabok21 on 26 Aug 2007 at 4:44 pm #
I had to come back one more time! If you had ever watched “The Outlaw Joséy Wales†with Clint Eastwood I believe it was r-rated gee, I think one of the best westerns he has ever done. Rush up towards the end, The bounty hunter comes in and Josey Wales said “you don’t have to do this†and the bounty hunter steps outside only to come back in because he had too and Josey Wales said, I know you had too.
Any way, I felt compelled to say I believe the situation the preacher engaged in had become legalistic with the intent of condemning any sort of individual with a trip to hell if one partakes.
Well that’s not the way it works in the 21st century maybe in my parents generation and to some degree I remember the same tone as a youth years ago.
I do not judge this preacher for it is not my place to do so, whether his theology is right or wrong, that is up to the H.S. whether he is within the essentials.
I had to come back and reread Michaels post and it was not just the drink but other situations that were questioned. If I remember correctly the term here is True Relativity or a situational relativity. I have to say this is where it leads to and whether we call it legalism or another name makes no difference.
Though I still believe we have to walk the walk whether we chose to accept it or not. Its not Christian proper, we should be in the world and not of it.
Another thing though I am not sure if we are all possibly forgetting something here with regards to wine specifically, yes strong drink is well high test wine, let me explain.
The wine was used to purify the water and accordlying to Jewish traditions you could make it in portions for example 2 -1 3-1 1-1 etc… We should then interpret the many references to wine and strong drink with this in mind. Another thing wine was part of everyday culture not unlike some places in the world today. As an example in my wife’s home city of Odessa Ukraine, children often drink a beer with meals of course, teenage years to be clear here and only with the meal.
I still think it is wrong spiritually and should be refrained upon in public. If I did not believe this I would go to my child hood friend’s house and light one up with him and tell him about God, oh and have one cold beer. It definitely is tough being a sinful human being by nature. I think John Owen said it this way “be kill’n sin or it will be kill’n you, choose as you please you can always explain later your actions.
Vance on 26 Aug 2007 at 6:17 pm #
I think there are two factors. First, whether something is a sin. Second, whether this is something we should avoid for cultural-witness reasons. To be a “separate” people, to NOT be a stumbling block. I can see the second being a legitimate reason to avoid alcohol in public, but the second is a bit more nuanced.
Self-destructive action is a sin, so we must consider to what degree various actions are self-destructive. Most would agree that drug use and smoking are self-destructive, and most would agree that having a cup of coffee each day is not (in fact, it is now considered healthy). But there are a series of activities in between that are only self-destructive in a case-by-case basis. Eating too much, FAILING to exercise, drinking alcohol, etc. If a person is prone to obesity, then diet and exercise are issues that could lead to serious self-destructiveness, and thus, sin. For some drinking even one drink causes a lack of control or could lead to dependence, which are sin.
I don’t drink for the first reason, but it really annoys me when people consider alcohol inherently evil while they are downing the pie at the Church Social and have not exercised in years!
Chad Winters on 26 Aug 2007 at 6:37 pm #
Interesting Vance, how does the fact that moderate alchohol intake (2 drinks or less per day) has been proven to be medically beneficial in many ways and not harmful?
Vance on 26 Aug 2007 at 7:31 pm #
Chad, exactly, so the negative factors have to be balanced against the positive on a case by case basis. For some who have a history of alcoholism in the family, or who have an addictive personality, etc, would have to weigh that against the possible health benefits.
Lisa R on 26 Aug 2007 at 7:52 pm #
Vance,
LOL…I love your perspective on things! BTW, I left my first comment not really reading yours and was later struck by the similarities. It’s true, we can get real selective.
And to add to Chad’s question, I am reminded of what Paul says that all things are lawful but all things are not profitable. Just because we can, or just because a report says that a little wine is good, doesn’t mean we should drink it. On the flip side of this argument, consider the number of deaths that occur just in this country every year due to alcohol. Not to mention the AA mill that keeps churning because what is socially acceptable and accessible has now turned into an addiction.
Chad Winters on 26 Aug 2007 at 10:51 pm #
hmmm…..but it is quite possible that the underlying cultural idea that it is sinful actually causes the risk of alcoholsim. Cultures like Italy where wine is a staple with meals and does not cause a subconscious “people may think I’m doing something bad” have lower alcoholism rates than the U.S. Making it a “sin” likely causes overindulgence instead of moderation
murmex on 27 Aug 2007 at 12:46 am #
On a topic like this, emotions can really play havoc with us. I have done jail ministry and seen what men do to themselves with uncontrolled drinking. Emotionally it tears you apart, but Biblically one knows the Bible does not forbid the enjoyment of a drink. If we just didn’t use our minds sometimes, life would be easier on us to live, especially when we have so many others to tell us what and how to live.
I know drinking is okay, because Pastor Eastwood drinks in his movies. We get theology from movies all the time in our church. I know he is a Calvinist because when a body was being examined the the ME one time, the ME said something like “wow, he died a very painful death. He didn’t deserve that!” Pastor (aka Dirty Harry) said, “we all deserve it.” Proving he believed in total depravity.
People drink, smoke, dance etc. because they enjoy doing so. People pray, study the Word, witness etc. because they enjoy doing so. I even know some who do all the above .
I don’t drink. Maybe because of mom. But, really, when I tried beer I thought it tasted awful.
I have been judged because of wine coolers in my refridgerator that belonged to my daughter.
Am I out of focus, or is the real problem that we (the church in general) do not like to think for ourselves? And is it a secondary problem that we want to impress other people more than God?
Just remember, if you are going to drink, smoke, or watch any movie; just do it. Because from my experience it is easier to ask forgiveness than to get permission.
nathanimal on 27 Aug 2007 at 12:53 am #
Did you hear the one where Jesus walks into a party and it turns out there is not enough wine, so he says “this stinks, I’m going to turn a ton of water into the best wine this side of Kentucky!” So all the folks get to drink’n the wine and boy is it good.
I think when I was growing up I would have snapped at Jesus for doing such a thing. But now that I’ve grown up, I realize that my culture created my moral compass and it was almost impossible to be delivered from it. Praise be to God for my new found joy in the Lord which makes want to do everything in my power to reach the lost. Not to meet my Christian sub-culture’s status quo.
Each situation we come in contact with in our lives is unique and each has to be calculated differently. Sometimes I’m with my weaker brother, and I love him, he is my brother in Christ, if he thinks drinking water out of a water fountain is sinful because unbelievers have drank out of it (bad example, i know :P) than by-golly, by the grace of God, I will not drink out of the water fountain. Even if I think his reasoning is like smoking stupid.
Then there are the folks that I work with that will bring a keg of beer to celebrate our recent success for winning a new client. The ratio of unbelievers to Christians at my work is like 100-1. I will go celebrate with them hoping to get an audience I would never get if I hadn’t gone. And wouldn’t you believe it, I’ve got tons of new friends who are unbelievers that will talk to me about the Lord. There are many that I’ve taken very calculated steps in order to reach them for Christ.
Then there is my wife and I who drink wine at home after a hard day. We enjoy our time together with or without wine. God is our strength and the source of our joy.
Personally, this issue can be complex, but it just shouldn’t be. There are dangers everywhere we turn, there are demons out to tempt us to be self-righteous, so that we think we are doing God a favor. Sometimes I think we need to quit loving our ideals so much and start loving our Jesus and the folks he died for. That’s means different love at different moments in time. Each moment is unique. Not all situations are the same. Love Jesus, our alcohol drinking God-man, more than you love your preacher.
So…You won’t make the dude wearing his Christianity on his sleeve happy, but you sure are going to impress your creator because your priorities are in the right place. Christ be glorified!
jaywuchner on 28 Aug 2007 at 3:44 pm #
The apostle Paul should of consulted this pastor before he and his friends stopped at the “Three Taverns” on the Appian Way as they made their way to Rome (Acts 28:15).
Living for Christ and being weird are two completely different things. I guess I’ll never qualify for a leadership position in this guys church.
Living “in but not of” ain’t easy but it is what we are commanded to do.
vangelicmonk on 29 Aug 2007 at 2:42 pm #
When I came to Christ I pretty much stopped drinking. Not that I drank
much before, but I did get drunk at times. After I limited myself a lot. However,
after a time I had a beer occassionally. I don’t struggle with alcohol at all. I
now have a glass of wine at times.
This idea of freedom we have in Christ is not all clear, but in Christ and the wisdom
of scriptures I have a better understanding. Nevertheless, I think some
Christians have taken this “freedom” a bit too far in the sense that they no
longer consider (in any respect) those who may struggle in certian areas. In
taking into consideration when around those who they don’t know well who may
struggle greatly with alcohol, lust, anger or even gambling.
I have seen this especially in my “emerging” circles where freedom is upheld to
the postmodern unbeliever, but I’m afraid that inconsiderate actions could be
harmful for some. It is something we need to be aware about.
eph314 on 30 Aug 2007 at 11:30 am #
Michael Patton,
I recognize the message and I know who the Bapist Preacher is that you were
listening to! You brought out a good point however inasmuch that we should
not expand upon the law or commandments of God in order to prevent sin.
The Jews of today have many many walls around the law so that they can avoid disobeying the law.
If God did not want us to drink then He would have specified that we are not to drink at all. I have no problem with a leader who qualifies the fact that they are not basing their theology on the
Word of God but trying to avoid the appearance of evil by avoiding certain
things as long as they don’t try to place that rule on others. We have liberty
now as we have been redeemed by God through the person of Jesus Christ.
We are no longer to be slaves to anything–including traditions of men!!!
Of course he meant well.
jamie on 26 Sep 2007 at 4:33 am #
There is an instance where Gods representative instructed jonh the baptists
parent that he was not to partake of fermented beveridges. Therefore it would
seem to indicate that if we were supposed to abstain completley we would
have been told as much and Jesus would not have turned water into wine.
David C. on 07 Oct 2007 at 3:28 pm #
This is a late contribution, but I just discovered this blog
Would you not say that adding restrictions that are not in the bible, and then stating they have the weight or equivelance of scripture to be the same as denying the sufficiency of scripture?
Either scripture is sufficient, and we do not need to add to it, or it is insufficient, and we must develop additional rules that God forgot.
I vote for the sufficiency of the bible.
Scott P. on 03 Jan 2008 at 4:27 am #
Im not a rock chucker…. I guess Im not a big fan of opinions ,even my own. Where do we (I)cross the line on Freedom?
Total freedom would have no peramiters at all. Meat sacrificed to Idols can be
just a good steak - Or cause someone to stumble(thats not just an opinion ). Do we have boundries?
A Drink at a Buddys house (with or without a cigar) isnt going to stumble me
(Im not sure about that really?) however if Im advocating freedom in Christ ,and need to define that freedom ,I think Ill have to walk around the rock and veiw it from all the angles to get the right picture in light of scripture.The two greatest comandments give the best veiw of how I should use my freedom. The real issue isnt “IF” I have it but “HOW” I use it -looks can be decieving……
What does freedom look like? It can look dangerously close to antinomianism for those of weaker faith……
Hey I love this website! Scott