MacArthur on Beer, Bohemianism, and True Christian Liberty

"...no symbol of sin’s bondage is more seductive or more oppressive than booze."

Encouraging "the recreational use of intoxicants", in "church-sponsored activities" could hardly be called childish.

It is a mature evil.

Well, dear friends, you know that some men can do to the glory of God what to other men would be sin. And notwithstanding what brother Pentecost has said, I intend to smoke a good cigar to the glory of God before I go to bed to-night.

If anybody can show me in the Bible the command, 'Thou shalt not smoke,' I am ready to keep it; but I haven't found it yet. I find ten commandments, and it's as much as I can do to keep them; and I've no desire to make them into eleven or twelve.

The fact is, I have been speaking to you about real sins, not about listening to mere quibbles and scruples. At the same time, I know that what a man believes to be sin becomes a sin to him, and he must give it up. 'Whatsoever is not of faith is sin' [Rom. 14:23], and that is the real point of what my brother Pentecost has been saying.

Why, a man may think it a sin to have his boots blacked. Well, then, let him give it up, and have them whitewashed. I wish to say that I'm not ashamed of anything whatever that I do, and I don't feel that smoking makes me ashamed, and therefore I mean to smoke to the glory of God.

-- C H Spurgeon

It is puerile and irresponsible for any pastor to encourage the recreational use of intoxicants—especially in church-sponsored activities...

And if the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it; or if the place be too far from thee, which the LORD thy God shall choose to set his name there, when the LORD thy God hath blessed thee: Then shalt thou turn it into money, and bind up the money in thine hand, and shalt go unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose: And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household, Deuteronomy 14:24-26

I agree with the general gist of the article regarding the attempt to win the world be imitating it, but it seems the article is taking a stance on alcohol that exceeds the Bible.

For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil. The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners! Luke 7:33-34

Jesus wasn't labelled a "gluttonous man" and "winebibber" for eating oatmeal with water.

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. ... Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. Colossians 2:16-17,23

We should be known for the presence and fruits of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Man instituted ordinances will dry a man's spiritual life as quickly as an excess of alcohol (or food, electronic entertainment, etc)

PassingThru

* Edited: Corrected Typo.

Indeed we should always be looking to the welfare of others when it comes to our liberties and we should recognize and not neglect the problems of substance abuse around us. I should think the Spirit would lead us in that sensitivity.

We should also realize the enormous danger of a counterfeit righteousness. Being that which comes by way of the flesh promoting a law that is man made.

It would prove a great deception to deny the Lord's supper due to the contents of the cup that we should all drink together.

I think a quick look at the reasons for wine making in ancient cultures can be beneficial in understanding why God did not prohibit wine drinking and why today it should be considered a sin to drink.

Wine making in ancient times was for the use of preserving the juice. Just as the grapes and figs were preserved by drying them and making raisin and fig cakes, and meet was preserved by salting it, so also the juice was preserved by making it into wine ( the process of fermentation ). It was a principle of home economy rather than a way of indulgence. However with wine, since excessive drinking lead to loss of soberness God forbade drinking in excess.

With today’s life style it is hard for us to understand the limited options the ancients had with regard to preserving the juice which lead to wine making. Today we have freezers and refrigerators, and through trade we have access to fruits and vegetables year round. But that was not the case with them. Wine had to be made not only for the preservation of the juice but also for preserving of other fruits and vegetables in pickling processes. Their very life was dependant on wine making. Just as salt was so necessary to preserve fish and meat, fermentation and wine making was for preserving the juice and other fruits and vegetables.
If they did not, they would starve.
Furthermore, wine in this case was more important then salt because while they had a year long access to catles and fish and did not really need to preserve them , they did Not have the same access to fruits and vegetables year round due to their climate.
Also water was not always available and wine was a substitute for some of the lack of water.

To try to make an argument for drinking from the Old Testament or even the New Testament that was written 2000 years ago and is considered ancient world still would be similar to try to make an argument for incest or polygamy from the Old Testament. It was a necessity and God who does not burden man with more than what he can bear had allow it for a season.

Here are some valid points to someone who is considering a drink.

Unlike in the ancient time when wine was made in homes, today most wine is made by big corporations . Drinking in this case is supporting an industry that caused the destruction of many families.

Drinking today is costly, while the reason for making wine in the past was built on the principle of good home economy and stewardship.

Most addicts only wanted one drink, but sadly one lead to the other.

Wines and alcoholic beverages today are most likely to lead to addiction due to the high alcohol content they use today as oppose to what people used in ancient times.

Today we know of many other ways of preserving the juice besides fermentation.

Finally ask yourself why you want to drink. If drinking is risky, costly, not necessary, and may offend your brother, could it be that you are under bondage to the desires of the flesh.

I was listening to Dr. Brown the other day and he made the same statement that I noticed on my own. Nowhere in the Bible is their a call for abstinence regarding alcoholic drink.

There is a clear call to avoid 'strong drink' i.e. rum, vodka, gin etc. though.

As someone who had a major drinking problem I certainly don't advocate drinking if you have had a problem with it but overall there isn't a clear cut prohibition to alcohol.

Additionally, to claim that it was a cultural thing due to the lack of preservation is simply not true either. Look at Jesus' first miracle. The chief of ceremonies told him that usually the best wine was brought out first but this wine was better than the first stuff. People would bring out good wine and then bring out the cheap stuff after the people had already been drinking because people who had already been drinking could care less how good the wine was. Additionally, note that Jesus created more than 300 liters of it.

"Nowhere in the Bible is their a call for abstinence regarding alcoholic drink.

There is a clear call to avoid 'strong drink' i.e. rum, vodka, gin etc. though."

Although Ephesians 5:18 says do not be drunk with wine.

According to the greek dictionary, the word 'drunk' means 'to intoxicate'. Everything from beer to hard liqours are called intoxicants, because drinking them does exactly that, it intoxicates.

And the warnings that I remember hearing about drinking and driving say 'impairment' that is, intoxication, begins at the first drink.

This may be incorrect, so someone correct me if it is, but I also remember hearing that wine was consumed in place of clean drinking water also, that is as a substitute.

If that is the case, it would not make sense to tell people to avoid it altogether. However, for a person in the modern World, there is no normal nescessity to drink alchol of any kind, except by choice.

And the example of the Lord Jesus providing wine at a wedding is just that, God providing wine at a wedding. The peculiar and obvious occasion for providing wine(at a wedding) says nothing else about drinking it for recreation or for Christians in general.

At issue here is not whether anyone is at liberty to drink alchol in all its forms on any particular occasion, or as a matter of discreet and private liberty.

At issue here is whether this is somehtihng that Christians aught to be taking as a right.

Christian liberty is the freedom to be holy.

It is the capacity to do what is right by God and for others, out of love. That is Christian Liberty. And anything that distorts liberty defined that way into something that means freedom of choice or prefrence is just that, a distortion. Christians are at liberty, to choose what is best for others, above themselves.

Paul's injunction to let no one judge you in meat or drink has nothing to do with consuming alchohol at public gatherings. The passage there is clearly about the dietary laws and restrictions of the Old Covenant and it is those things that the Christian is free from and to let no one stand in judgement over them about.

But would Paul let others judge him as regards other things that he was free in his own conscience about?

Absolutely.

His rule, he said, was does it build up, and is it out of love.

Everything was lawfull to him. But not everything would build up himself and others.

And so, if what HE WAS EATING caused HIS BROTHER to STUMBLE...

HE WOULD NOT EAT IT SO LONG AS THE WORLD STOOD.

You folks know better.

As for cigar smoking and appeal of famous preachers that smoked them:

Tobaco is a weed.

Weeds are from the curse.

If one famous man was free in his own mind to smoke weeds to the glory of God that was his buisness.

If he felt the need to defend the freedom he had in his own mind publicly, it was no longer a liberty, he was fighting for his percieved right.

Liberties(I mean the word as it used by others, that is, personal prefrence or choice) that are contended for in public disputes are no longer liberties, they are heresies.

Hi Chris,

You wrote:

"According to the greek dictionary, the word 'drunk' means 'to intoxicate'. Everything from beer to hard liqours are called intoxicants, because drinking them does exactly that, it intoxicates.

And the warnings that I remember hearing about drinking and driving say 'impairment' that is, intoxication, begins at the first drink."

Why are you mixing secular definitions regarding what constitutes 'impairment' with biblical truth? There is no confusion in the scripture concerning this, it's very easy to spot someone who is drunk, there's no ambiguity whatsoever.

Yes, I'm very familiar with Ephesians 5 where is says "don't be drunk with wine" notice it does not say 'don't drink wine at all' in fact it doesn't say this anywhere in the Bible. There are many scriptures that speak of being drunk and abusing wine though (Proverbs "Wine is a brawler").

In 1 Timothy 3 Paul gives the 3 different standards that Christians fall into one way or the other, here they are:

"Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full[a] respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.

8 In the same way, deacons[b] are to be worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. "

Elder (overseer) = Not given to drunkenness
Deacon = Not much wine
Everyone else = No direction given except Ephesians 5 (don't be drunk with wine) and Thessalonians (nor drunkards) as well.

We would both agree on what a 'drunkard' is I think.

Additionally you wrote:

"This may be incorrect, so someone correct me if it is, but I also remember hearing that wine was consumed in place of clean drinking water also, that is as a substitute."

You are correct here, Paul told Timothy not to only drink water but to also drink some wine in what appears to be a chronic stomach ailment that Timothy was experiencing.

Hi Chris,

One more thing, you wrote:

"However, for a person in the modern World, there is no normal nescessity to drink alchol of any kind, except by choice."

Nor was there any "normal necessity" to drink wine at the wedding where Jesus turned the water into wine. It was already pure water, He's so wonderful.

"And the example of the Lord Jesus providing wine at a wedding is just that, God providing wine at a wedding. The peculiar and obvious occasion for providing wine(at a wedding) says nothing else about drinking it for recreation or for Christians in general."

Note what you said here:

"says nothing else about drinking it for recreation or for Christians in general."

What is drinking wine at a wedding? It's clearly for recreation, in fact it's almost the textbook definition of 'recreational use'. It wasn't grape juice either, look up the use of the word 'wine' there in Strongs or Vines, it means fermented grapes.

Brother, read the Word as it is, not through the lens of religious dogma.

I struggled with so much legalistic garbage that I believed due to the teachings of men who were in error and it bound me to the core, it's a curse. Thank God He did not leave me there, I had to go back to step one and let Him teach me from scratch, all of that other crap that I believed was rubbish.

Hi Martyr:

You wrote:

"Want to speak of drinking and driving? If my Christian liberty results in the causing injury to others where is this Christ centered?"

Most reasonable people understand the difference between drinking a glass of wine and getting into a car drunk which is clearly against the law. The book of Romans is clear regarding following the laws of the societies in which we live.

Hi Blaine:

"What of those delivered out of alcoholism? Are you going to drink a beer in their presence."

No, just like Paul says that would be wrong. Out of love this should never be done.

"You drink beer and wine that opens you up to the demonic. Even smoking can lead to marajuana and that to an altered state of reality and hello demonic."

Can you please do me a favor and quote me a chapter and verse for your belief here? (hint: there isn't one)

I work with medical marijuana patients that suffer from all kinds of pain, the plant helps them deal with the pain. Surely there are people who abuse the law and do it to smoke weed but there are also people who use it for legitimate medical purposes. After speaking with many of them, they feel unwelcome in ANY church due to this ridiculous fallacy. Many of them feel a tremendous amount of guilt due to their LEGAL use of a plant that God created (He created everything on the Earth and NOTHING that He created is unclean). The hypocrisy that amazes me is many churches could care less whether someone takes oxycontin, vicodin or any other hard core narcotic yet medical MJ users feel unwelcome. Amazing hypocrisy huh? Jesus talked more about hypocrisy than any other subject.

The ambivalent attitude of some towards alcohol consumption just about angers me....

Like JIG said, no one sets out to be come an alcoholic when they take an occasional drink...

I get angry because of what alcohol does to a pregnant woman's child. To suggest that an alcoholic female will give up alcohol to protect her child has absolutely no sense of reality!!!!!!!!!

My BIL and his wife adopted two beautiful little girls in the Ukraine years ago. They had them for several years when they became aware they are victims of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome!!! If you do not know what this is, I suggest you educate yourself before you come back here and justify alcohol use!!! Anyhow, my BIL and his wife have spent thousands to try to help these girls. The oldest has left home and for all practical purposes will likely be homeless for the rest of her life unless she can find a man to shack up with, and she goes through men like some do a gallon of ice cream. She is also suicidal, has attacked her mom with knives...her dad told her she had to leave, that his wife does not have to live with this fear.

These nieces carry a strong resentment towards their birth mom for drinking while pregnant with them because of the problems this afflicted upon them.

The younger girl will always be limited in how she can care for herself. She is very good with animals - they are her children. But she suffers from mental disabilities ALL BECAUSE HER MOM DRANK ALCOHOL WHILE SHE WAS CARRYING HER!

AND then there is drug use and what does it do to a fetus when the mother abuses them? A month ago my nephew and his wife adopted a baby boy who was addicted because the mom was a drug abuser. He had to go through withdrawal and be drug free before he was allowed to leave the hospital!

Let me tell you, you who work to justify alcohol use, go into the gutter, and check out these victims and the pain they inflict upon their families! GO! Alcohol use has caused more grief then anything else! Men abuse their wives and children, mothers birth children with birth defects and then the state has to foot the bill to care for them!! Get your heads out of the sand and get real!

Ya hear?

The level at which a person gets drunk differs from person to person as well. So, for arguments sake, lets say that someone has developed alcohol tolerance to the point that they can down a bottle of whiskey in an hour. (Maybe not possible, but this is hypothetical anyway.) Now since he can do that without getting drunk does that make it okay? From a health stand point the answer is clearly "no". If you did that often your liver would be shot real quick. So there comes a point when it doesn't even matter if you're drunk or not for it to be bad. Clearly that is abusing the body that God gave you. And ginnyrose brought up a good point about all the suffering it causes.

The thing that bothers me, is that everyone can get up in arms over alcohol and yet SUGAR does the EXACT same things to your liver. Because alcohol IS sugar. (Makes me wonder if Fetal Alcohol Syndrome could be caused by mass amounts of soda pop as well? If that's the case why doesn't anyone get up in arms over pop consumption???) And I know people who drink a 2 liter bottle of Mt. Dew EVERY DAY. THAT is ruining their liver. But that is more of a heath issue than a moral one, I guess.

I think it just boils down to addiction. You can rage all you want about alcohol addiction, but don't be one-sided. There are lots of addictions a lot of people don't even know about. Sugar being one of the main ones. IT is as addictive as COCAINE. So if we're going to condemn one addiction, lets condemn them all and at least be consistent.

"Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.
7 However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse.
9 But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12 But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble."(1Cor.8:4-13)NKJV

"1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2 For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 4 Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand.
5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. 9 For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. 10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written:

“ As I live, says the LORD,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”

12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.
14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men.
19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. 21 It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. 22 Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin."(Romans 14)NKJV

I hadn't read the article before, so I went back and read it and wanted to comment on one particular thing he said:

After all, in a culture where cool is everything, what could be a better lubricant for one's testimony than a frosty pint?

"What has happened to the church? Do the holy angels look down and sadly shake their heads to find us worshiping wantonly at the feet of culture instead of at the feet of Christ? The cool mind is a renegade running free within the modern church system due largely to the fact that we have lost our concern over what Heaven thinks. Instead, the bride of Christ is gazing longingly toward the world, toward its universities, toward its fashion magazines, towards its culturally refined personalities, as she asks with shifting feet and uncertain stance, "How do I look? Do you like me? Do you want me? Do you approve?" These seem to be the questions foremost on our mind. And like a lonely teenage girl hungry for love, it would appear that we are willing to do almost anything to get the answers we most want to hear.
We are supposed to be a people who live only for the adoration and attention of that One who loved us, even unto death." - Eric Ludy

(I don't agree that the bride of Christ is the one doing this, so much as so-called "christians". But this propensity to want the worlds approval is in all of us and we definitely need to be careful to guard against it.)

"And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold".
Matthew 24:12

Jesus-is-GOD said:

How many marriages have been broken up over soda?
Or folks that have lost their job or beat their wives or kids because of soda intake?
Or how many soda drinkers cause car accidents with multiple deaths every day?
Or lost all inhabitions and left a bar with a woman because they drank soda?
How can we get off on soda compared to the affects on a person who gets snared with alcohol?

I wasn't saying that soda was as bad "morally" (I don't know if that's the right word...) than alcohol. I don't touch the stuff. I don't like the way even a sip makes me feel and I would preach total abstinence. But alcohol isn't the problem!! Alcohol is a SYMPTOM of a deeper disease. Namely addiction which is idolatry. It doesn't matter how much you preach against alcohol consumption if you don't point them back to the ROOT, namely idolatry, then your not doing any good. It's like giving someone cough syrup, it treats the symptoms not the disease.
And even if we're talking about believers drinking alcohol once in a while, it isn't necessarily "you should be abstinent" but "are you willing to GIVE UP your rights for the sake of Jesus and others?" (Believers having "rights" is laughable because if you're born again you weren't born into a democracy you were born into a dictatorship, so to speak. So as believer you have no "rights." You either do what God says or you don't and get punished/disciplined. So why is it so hard to give them up, when you shouldn't have them anyway?) If they don't want to or refuse to give it up, then the issue goes back to idolatry and pride.

As I said before, my point wasn't to say that soda is as bad as alcohol. My point was that ALL addictions are bad (idolatry) and so we should probably "condemn" them all and at least be consistent.

The problem with these "pastors" in the article might not be addiction or alcoholism, but they are prostitutes. They want the applause of the world rather than of God. They love the world more than they love God, which is prostitution, which is idolatry. So I guess it all goes back to breaking that first commandment and not loving the Lord our God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength. But we all knew this was coming. Scripture said it would:
"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be... lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power." - 2 Timothy 3:1-2, and 4-5
"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." - 2 Timothy 4:3-4

I do not even know the meaning of mixed marital arts? This article speaks to things that may very well make a saint look like an unbeliever. This should never be so and we should not desire to be encumbered by the vices of the world that would draw us from God and compromise our witness. We do live in this world and we are warned not to conform to it. It is not the exercise of liberty that is at question, for then it would not be liberty. It is its abuse. Oracio offered 1st Corinthians 8 and Romans 14 to address the liberty one can abuse around the the weak in faith. We must, using the God given discernment we are given, know when to exercise refrain of liberty. To do this properly is to love our brother and God will test this as He does all things. We must however, be very careful that we do not set about composing rules of conduct which usurp the Spirits work and in turn fan the flames of dead works. This poses an even greater danger than the abuse of liberty and we should be most careful to not have part in it's cultivation.

Saints,

The reason that I posted in this thread was simply to point out the things that people believe to be true, but are not found anywhere in the bible. Again, there is NO SCRIPTURE IN THE WORD that points to total abstinence regarding alcohol, none. Additionally, I heard on Line of Fire from Dr. Mike Brown that he held the same position based on his own study of the word (which shocked me).

When we allow the traditions of man to 'make us even better' than what God's Word instructs, we are sitting in the same place that the Pharisees did. God's law was not enough for them, they had to make even more rules and codes for men to follow, while rejecting the spirit of the law. They had to perfect what God had given.

Look back to the first post that I made on this thread and you will see my personal struggles regarding the subject. HOWEVER, I'm not going to judge another person based on their use OR lack of use regarding alcohol.

It's also amazing to me to see people's position on the matter, no one here is condoning ABUSE (addiction) or LAWLESSNESS (driving while intoxicated) yet the topic is so caustic that we can't have a reasonable discussion on the matter. With some they have two extremes, abstinence and addiction bundled with extreme emotion.

Would I condone using alcohol at a church function? ABSOLUTELY NOT

Would I judge a man because he drinks alcohol in moderation?
ABSOLUTELY NOT

Additionally, what I am pointing out is the Pharisaical attitude that we see from many believers today, it's a stench in God's nostrils.

God made tobacco, he made grapes, poppies from which heroin is made, and so on...The carnal mind can say that if God made these things and that he gives us all things to enjoy we are at liberty to do so. But it is like a lot of other things he made: they are to be used with discretion and moderation.

Consider tobacco: it makes a wonderful pesticide. I have gone to the grocery store and purchased boxes of chewing tobacco for this purpose. I also made sure the people who sold it to me knew what I was up to.

Wine: Paul admonishes Timothy to take some for stomach's sake, implying it has medicinal uses. How much medicine does one take for sicknesses? A tablespoon at most. How many folks limit their alcohol consumption to one tablespoon?

Opiates: a very useful drugs to deal with pain. Dr. Dobson has said the best antidote to addiction to these substances is pain, implying that it can be used to deal with pain. It used to be even restricted in even giving it to terminally ill people because of fears of addiction...but I think this attitude is changing. It is helpful in dealing with pain but in limited and measured doses.

Recreational uses of these substances will result in mind altering affecting your treatment of others. You will become the purveyor of strife, conflict, abuse of others, lose moral restraints....all of this is sin and doom one to hell.

My husband used to hire a Choctaw male in his work. He was an excellent worker BUT he drank alcoholic beverages on weekends and his life as an individual is a mess. The saying is that American Indians are much more sensitive to the ravages of alcohol then Caucasians. One never knows who can take one drink and be hooked. Since it is not essential for life we do well respecting its potency and abstain except for medicinal uses.

(The mother of our nieces who are victims of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome will not allow ANYTHING in the house that has alcohol because of these girls' vulnerability - if they would just get a taste of it, it could pull them over the edge to alcoholism.)

"It is puerile and irresponsible for any pastor to encourage the recreational use of intoxicants—especially in church-sponsored activities. The ravages of alcoholism and drug abuse in our culture are too well known, and no symbol of sin’s bondage is more seductive or more oppressive than booze."

AMEN!

Hi Ginny,

You wrote:

"The carnal mind can say that if God made these things and that he gives us all things to enjoy we are at liberty to do so. But it is like a lot of other things he made: they are to be used with discretion and moderation."

This is a classic tactic, respectfully and humbly disagree with a person and you are carnal and immature.

I read the whole article and MacArthur comes across as smug, arrogant, and condescending. It certainly wasn't written in humility and grace like Paul wrote to Timothy.

While I agree with most of the points that he made regarding the use of alcohol at church events(alcohol free) it seems like he writes the way that he does in order to provoke people to anger. Then when he gets the response that he hoped to get he's 'absolutely shocked' by the response.

The golden rule is:

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" that's what Jesus said.

Speak down to your audience, letting them know how 'childish and immature they are' then expect a response, it's simple cause and effect.

What I would like to hear is a 'sola scriptura' response regarding what the Word says about alcohol, not what historians and forensic anthropologists have to say about it. It's funny how he uses 'well some people believe that wine was mixed with water, blah, blah...' to justify his opinions (religious traditions). The Word speaks for itself you don't come into studying the Word with your own preconceived notions and try to use the Word to back up your traditions, that's deception.

The issue here is not alcohol, it's judgement and self-righteousness.

Hi Krispy,

You are free to say whatever you want about me and my response will always be the same as Jesus on the cross.

I'm not putting MacArthur on a pedastol, but when you have spent half as much time studying the Word as MacArthur has in his life... then maybe you can offer him advice on how to study the Word.

No one gets the benefit of the doubt when what they teach and preach contradicts the Word, let God be true and every man a liar.

I can't find anywhere in the Word where the apostles talked down to the body out of a spirit of arrogance, I can find numerous instances where the Pharisees did though.

There's nothing wrong with my ability to read and hear the tone of an article. Go back and read it yourself and then come back and be honest and tell me that he didn't write it to provoke a response that he could be 'shocked about'.

Hi Learjet and others.

Learjet, about this:

"Why are you mixing secular definitions regarding what constitutes 'impairment' with biblical truth? There is no confusion in the scripture concerning this, it's very easy to spot someone who is drunk, there's no ambiguity whatsoever."

I'm not mixing anything. The word in the greek language according to the dictionary means 'to intoxicate.'. It is not always easy to spot people that are INTOXICATED. And there are varying degrees of intoxication.

Some people hold their drink better than others, and can also conceal their drunkeness. Even from their co-workers. They may even deny it to themselves and get behind the wheel of a car. How many hundreds of thousands have lost their lives on highways for that very thing.

They can also hide when they've got a slight buzz or even a strong one.

If an example from ordinary life holds true, is sound in reason and judgment, it is worth considering, whether it is found word for word in the Bible or not(Tit 1:12-13). All truth belongs to God, whether it is common to man or a special revelation from Scripture.

Learjet, also about this:

"In 1 Timothy 3 Paul gives the 3 different standards that Christians fall into one way or the other, here they are:"

I don't see the third set of standards in the passage. Because the group you suggested 'the everyone else' is not mentioned, or given a standard for leadership, doesn't mean they fall into their own group by default, and are somehow outside those standards. The particulars of the list are qualifications for leadership, not standards of conduct that apply only to those seeking leadership. It is conspicous that Paul mentions the use of wine in both cases.

About Paul's instructions to Timothy for the medicinal use of wine:

Take a little, as Ginnyrose pointed out.

At issue here is not whether alchohol can ever be consumed or even if someone can drink it for their own personal reasons.

The issue here as it came up in this thread is the use of alcohol and other things as a sort of symbol for being redeemed and free.

"One more thing, you wrote:

"However, for a person in the modern World, there is no normal nescessity to drink alchol of any kind, except by choice."

Nor was there any "normal necessity" to drink wine at the wedding where Jesus turned the water into wine. It was already pure water, He's so wonderful."

Actually there was, it was an occasion for celebration, and wine makes men's hearts glad(Psalm 104:14-15).

But as I said, this particular occasion, a wedding, is not perscriptive for recreation. A wedding celebreation is not perscriptive of RECREATION in general and it has nothing to say or do of how Christians are to conduct their gatherings, or to celebrate among themselves or among unbelievers. We are supposed to have joy from the Holy Spirit of God.

As I've tried to make clear several times, at issue here is not whether individuals can ever have wine or other alcohol with freedom of conscience.

It's whether that personal freedom of conscience should be made a public debate, contended about, or even a show of at Christian gatherings.

learjet,

Did you read carefully everything I wrote on this subject? EVERYTHING?

ginnyrose

"We must however, be very careful that we do not set about composing rules of conduct which usurp the Spirits work and in turn fan the flames of dead works. This poses an even greater danger than the abuse of liberty and we should be most careful to not have part in it's cultivation."

Hi lyewise.

I think you put some things well in your post about using or not using "liberty".

If I could suggest, I think the scripture indicates that harming the 'weak in faith' can be just as damaging.

Paul uses very strong language in the Romans passage, saying "But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died'

And also...

For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

According to Strong's the word destroy can be translated to loosen down (disintegrate), that is, (by implication) to demolish (literally or figuratively).

Demolishing the work of God.

If drinking alcohol is pure to the one drinking it with a clear conscience, then it is evil for the one who drinks it against his conscience, emboldened and encouraged to do so by those who he regards as mature.

Alchohol and beer have tremendous stigma attached to them and for good reason, because they have been a huge catalyst for societal decay and have caused untold misery, pain, and loss of life.

I've spoken to maybe hudreds of people over the years who were buried in misery by beer and alchohol and I've brought them to Church who went 'home' to abandonded homes to sleep in their own urine. Sleep after they sipped or guzzeled their way into the only rest they knew and only relief from their pain.

Encouraging people to drink in Church.

Childish?

I can't fathom how anyone could call it something so trivial.

Hasn't this issue been turned over enough times on this forum? And by many of the same people?

Pertaining to alcohol, it seems that, with the freedom given in Christ, a godly, well-intentioned person could privately enjoy an alcoholic beverage, being sensitive to the objections of others and the potential to sin against one's brother, not publicly shaming the name of Christ, without sinning, if this person's God-given and Spirit-breathed conscience allows.

It also seems that mature and intelligent people should be able to peacefully discuss the issue without offense being given or taken.

Missionary drinking is, of course, offensively absurd, but so are many strategies that evangelicals have used to try trick people into listening to their message.

Risking the accusation of being a troll, may I recommend that, for the sake of the discussion and discourse, that we all tone down the drama? It is clearly a more serious matter for some than for others, according to our respective experiences and traditions, but no one will be convinced to change their attitude here. It seems that we have to respectfully disagree. At best we can all express our opinions and comment on each other's words lovingly.

for what it's worth.

I use to be pretty anti alcohol all around, my only argument I said on is this, We are forbidden to be drunk in Scripture that is clear but where do you cross the line?

I have sense seen as Krispy pointed out that it can have medical benifit, though I myself don't drink because of my above reasoning also I enjoy being able to be self controlled.

I have not problem with the why, infact it is something that I am curious of. From my personal experience with family for the most part many where trying to cope with a pain they at the time couldn't mentally handle, one being my brother in law whose father died in a terrible accident. Healing must come from Christ otherwise we will look to the world for healing and only drink poison.

Who would defend insobriety which can lead to alcoholism and a great number of other things just as it would be to defend obesity which can lead to heart disease, diabetes and a great number of other things. I believe we are all past the foolishness of promoting anything without full disclosure that warns of the ramifications of abuse. A gun can be used for defense or murder. Food can be used to satisfy hunger/fellowship or gluttony. Likewise we should be able to fill in the rest regarding wine in scripture with both the benefit as well as the abuse ( I believe some of these verses were already listed in the thread).

There is much tradition and custom that has influenced us. We can spend years and years exposing it and still not fully bring all of it to light. We should be about exposing it and removing its affects upon us. I guess the reason the issue of wine bothers me so much is not the liberty aspect of it, but the abstinence from it as an accounting of righteousness. It is the religious poster child issue in the deep south that robs valuable time that could be used for addressing deep spiritual needs.

Just as scripture showed the Jews under the written law that should have had them crying out for a Savior, they added to that which was already an impossible burden to obtain righteousness apart from God. Why? So that they could author their own salvation. How? By works that we know as dead.

That is what bothers me. So many deceived by dead works. So what part should I play in validating them? This in no way diminishes the facts that cannot be discarded concerning any abuse, but I do not see these as the same issue.

The scriptures speak to babes offended by the consumption of those things that are offered to a god other than the True God they have just pledged their lives to. They are born again and have their eyes open to know the true God but they are infants in Christ. Do we not have sayings about the truth that comes out of a mouths of babes? Here are all these other gods receiveing glory from men. We should never down play the innocence and zeal that comes to them naturally when they are offended. What a great innocent love they have for the Lord. Their zeal should be celebrated for they see how offensive the offering is and what that meat and wine represent having been offered to the gods which are Satans guise desiring to steal and rob God of any possible glory that he(Satan) wants for himself. So the babe sees the brother eat that steak and drink the wine and the babe then second guesses his own conscience. Violating the conscience which has yet to gather the necessary discernment, thus openning the door to further and future violations of conscience. I have heard a great many brothers and sisters on this site that have questioned themselves in their discernment because it runs so counter to many in the church. This is in no way related but it does allow us to empathize with the babe who at this stage has yet to discern the issue of gods and the sacrifices offered to them.

So if we can tie this back to idolatry and other gods then the harm to the babe is without debate and the one who is guilty of such and calls himself a brother should see the err of his actions? On the other hand, if we are allowing the perpetuation of unexamined tradition and cultural influence upon which much dead work is built then we best examine the cost of fanning such flames.

I will add to Kripsy's question What is the benefit of smoking? I realized some added Cigar smoking to the list of liberities we have.

I disagree with smoking more than I do drinking, We are the temples of the Holy Spirit and should take care of our bodies and treat them as such. To my knowledge smoking has no benefit health wise as say the glass of wine some are prescibed.

This would also apply to junk food as well though, is putting that many calories into our bodies necessary and or Godly if we are to take care of our bodies?

"But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak." - 1 Co 8:9(KJV)

Often when we say that someone is offended we do not mean what the Bible word is expressing exactly; we mean to say they are troubled, angered, or hurt about some teaching or action of others and while those things may be encompassed by what the Bible word means, they do not express it well or fully. The word 'stumblingblock' used here appears to have a very similar meaning to the other words used in the New Testament, that are also translated stumblingblock, and 'offend'.

According to the greek dictionary, they have the general sense of something that trips up, causes someone to stumble, in the religous sense - to sin, to loose or depart from faith, or even to fall away. Offenses are things which erode faith and cause others to sin.

Paul's warning here is not so much against causing confusion or questions in the conscience of someone who would see a believer sitting at the table of idols, eating things offered to them, his warning is against emboldening them to worship the idol itself, or to think that because the 'mature believer' is able to eat food offered to them, it is acceptable to worship them also(since that is what eating the food would have symbolized).

That is why he poses such a strong question after it:

And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish for whom Christ died?

According to the dictionary the word perish means 'to destroy fully'.

Given that and the heavy stigma that acholol has in Western society, the tremendous cost of human life and suffering that is has been a direct party to, the ease with which it ADDICTS, and the power it has to alter human personality and perception, any bias against it among Christians, even if heavily traditional, does not seem as though it should be burdensome at all.

In a society and culture that does not compell people to drink wine or acholol in the absence of clean drinking water, when every resturaunt, supermarket, and corner store has dozens if not scores of choices of beverages to drink and enjoy, any bias against aclohol among Christians does not seem like it should be burdensome at all.

A wise man said that wine is not for kings.