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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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!

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.

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.

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

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

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?

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!

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?

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.

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