I was swept away (again), into a fundamentalist feud over alcoholic drink. My ears perked up when I came across a humorous post on teetotaling. I figured that the issue was a current hot button topic at Sharper Iron, and so I went digging.
Turns out, Shelton Smith (The Sword of The Lord) and Robert Sumner (The Biblical Evangelist) rival editors of influential fundamentalist periodicals, have both recently decried a new book from BJU press on the alcohol question. I haven’t read Randy Jaeggli’s book The Christian and Drinking: A Biblical Perspective (he’s a prof at BJU), but from what I am reading at Sharper Iron, he defends an abstentionist position in a biblically defensible way. He is careful with the text and so believes Jesus actually drank alcoholic wine, albeit perhaps with less punch then is available today.
His honest treatment of Scripture is too much for the hard line fndamentalists to swallow. They view his book as only doing lip service to a temperance policy. The alarm must be sounded.
So I’ve had my nose in a few threads over at Sharper Iron, discussing this hot issue. I’m not so much discussing the book, as the merits of a moderationist position. You can find my position outlined in this forum post. And I detail the different discussion thread links, in a forum post over at our own Transformed by Grace forum site.
I’ve had quite a few interesting posts concerning wine on my blog in years past. Click on the wine cateogory for the full list, but here are a few of my favorites:
I’m very moderate when it comes to alcohol, but I am kind of dogmatically moderate. In other words, I believe it is wrong to take a very strong position against alcohol, in the same way it was wrong for “abstainers” to pass judgment on those who ate meat.
Here is my take on it:
http://founderandperfecter.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/can-christians-drink-alcohol/
Good post, Ben. Those who are quick to judge drinkers of alcohol, often have never drank any, and hence can’t understand the experience.
For my part, I think Scripture’s attitude toward alcohol, should shape mine. So I changed my practice to quit treating the substance like it is evil. If God commends the substance, even when He forbids its abuse, surely we can too. Or do we need to add our rules where Scripture remains silent?
If we deduce from the Biblical prohibtion of drunkeness that all alcohol is wrong, do we the deduce from the Biblical proscription of gluttony that all food is wrong? Interesting that these two sins are sometimes mentioned together.
You can add other things to that list too, Randy. Are women (or to be more frank sex) wrong? No, not if enjoyed within the proper Biblical context — marriage. Lust isn’t wrong if its directed at my wife. We can outlaw all food, any communication with the opposite sex, and any taste of alcohol — that won’t curb sin. Sin isn’t in the object or substance, it’s in the heart of wicked men.
Whooweee. You sure do know how to stir a hornet’s nest don’t you Bob? lol. Just to comment on your last statement, I know Luther said something to the effect – “Some men will be tempted to worship the stars, but that doesn’t mean that we should pluck them from the heavens.” Though mentioning the name Mark Driscoll can start another whole controversy on its own, I will say that he preached a pretty insightful (and historically powerful) sermon entitled “Good Wine, Glad Hearts” that I thought put this question in its proper context. You should be able to find that online somewhere.
Hank, thanks for the tip! Hornet’s nests seem to find me… LOL.
Greetings,
I am a born again believer who is unsettled and unhappy where this subject is concerned. Any research I have conducted seems to have only fundamental extremists and extreme imbibers to appeal to and I am very frankly frustrated. I have of late adopted a position of complete absitnence, but, as you yourself stated, I long to adopt the way of Christ. I have read so many statements, diatribes, and disserations that my mind and spirit are currently in an uproar: I can’t seem to discover any information that is not biased! I want to know the Truth, whether it contradicts my current convictions or not! There is logic on both sides, but neither seems to be focused entirely upon the will of the Father; the goal is to prove a point and prove the other party wrong. All I want is the Truth! Honestly and from the bottom of my heart, I CANNOT understand how the Lord would, by creating “good wine” at the wedding in Cana, place a temptation in the way of His people, that he would create something that is rotting. I cannot understand it; it contradicts everything I have learned (I have a Masters in Theology, believe it or not!) and come to spiritually understand. But how can what I have spiritually understood contradict what others claim to have come to understand? It simply makes no sense! I can’t be as articulate as I’d like in this instance. I feel that my very faith has been shaken, truthfully, for I am being approached with the possibility that my Savior is not who I have imagined Him to be. I do not abstain because I am legalistic, nor do I judge others who do not view imbibing as sinning, nor am I “close-minded” (the ascription of such unjust titles among brothers and sisters in the Lord is extremely exhausting and discouraging, by the way). In my heart I cannot see how it can be right to partake of alcohol even in moderation. I cannot see it, though I want to know if I am wrong or not. I want to live my life in a way pleasing to my Lord. I think what many fail to recognize is the need to acknowledge motives and purposes. We are designed to glorify and edify our Lord in everything we do. That’s the real thing. I have read and re-read Scripture, Hebrew and Greek lexicons, commentaries, etcetera, but I remain undecided, and yet it is not spiritually logical to me that Christ would imbibe, that He would encourage others to do so, that “merry” is synonymous with divine “joy”, or that moderation prevents anyone from overindulging. I just don’t know, but would like to know that, even if I do abstain, that I am respected just as I respect others. That I am loved, even as I love others. I am so tired of Christians treating each other like absolute dirt over something like this!! I am tired of those who have been convicted being labelled “the weaker brother”, “legalistic”, and “judgmental”. It’s wrong! I am so tired of compromise on one side and whatever else is on the other. I feel that I am in a category all my own and that everyone else is warring it out to see who wins the argument. Shouldn’t we be doing EVERYTHING as unto the Lord? I suppose I’ve finished talking (for which, I’m certain, you are extremely grateful).
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. (Proverbs 18:13)
Bob,
I recommend reading a book before commenting on it. If you will recall, several posters on SI have embarrassed themselves because they spoke from second-hand information without doing their homework.
As for the question of alcoholic beverages, I have neither the time, space, nor inclination to debate it here. Let it suffice to say that I believe the Biblical position is abstinence because drunkenness is definitely sinful and Paul clearly lays out an inspired argument of believers not doing anything that would influence our brethren to sin. It is irrefutable that some people cannot drink without being tempted to drunkenness. Social drinking is putting temptation before those with this predisposition and it goes against Paul’s teaching. Furthermore, whatever is not of faith is sin and many Christians definitely believe drinking is sinful. Arguing for Christian drinking in moderation will embolden some to violate their conscience. Thus, the argument is moved from the tedious wrangling about meanings of words (i.e. wine – alcoholic or non-alcoholic) to a clearer position of love and concern for our brethren. But take it for what it’s worth; I care not to debate it further. However, I will make the following comments on the blog posts:
1. You wrote: “His honest treatment of Scripture is too much for the hard line fndamentalists [sic] to swallow.” This is clearly a biased statement. Your word choice of “honest treatment” indicates a prejudicial attitude toward those who critiqued Jaeggli’s book. You are tarring with a broad brush anyone who disagrees and “honest treatment” infers without warrant that Jaeggli’s opponents are less than honest. Bob, you’re trying to win your argument with prejudicial words rather than hard-nosed ratiocination. You have beautifully illustrated one of the propaganda techniques that we studied in sophomore political science class.
2. The arguments that Jesus drank alcoholic wine are inferential and speculative at best. We should base neither doctrine nor practice upon speculative views, which amount to nothing more than one man’s biased opinion or imagination.
3. Randy posted: “If we deduce from the Biblical prohibtion of drunkeness that all alcohol is wrong, do we the deduce from the Biblical proscription of gluttony that all food is wrong? Interesting that these two sins are sometimes mentioned together.” This is shallow and specious reasoning. Whereas the analogy may hold (it also works with sex) to a superficial extent, the contrapositive is not necessarily true. The OT Law did have prohibition against specific foods. The simple answer to the question is NO, although I’m not sure where your baseline is in this analogy. One does not necessarily infer the other because they are separate and different events embodying different conditions. Food makes you fat, not drunk. Are all fat people gluttons? Not necessarily. Obesity is influenced by genetics, exercise, type of foods eaten, etc.
4. The argument for Christian consumption of beverage alcohol is essentially a legalistic one–if it is not specifically prohibited, then it is lawful. Although the charge of legalism is often laid against those professing abstinence, it is really their opponents, who overlook Paul’s arguments for self-imposed restraints in the name of love, that are reasoning from a legalistic standpoint (i.e. it is permissible if not specifically prohibited). IMHO, it is much like the reasoning of the legalistic Pharisees who manipulated the Law to their advantage for doing the things they desired.
The Apostle Paul set the bar higher than mere legalistic performance of those things required when he wrote: All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any (1 Corinthians 6:12).” and again, he wrote: “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not (1 Corinthians 10:23).” In light of said principles, how can one argue for the Christian to drink alcoholic beverages? It says more about the heart and its desire to please God than the mere keeping of a commandment. This is NOT legalism, all contrary arguments not withstanding.
Best wishes to you, Bob.
With regards,
Roland E. Pittman
It amazes me that fundamentalists are the only ones who want to argue about such a non issue. Let me ask all of you this: “What did churches use in the Lord’s Supper prior to Dr. Welch coming up with a way to market all the concord grapes that were grown in his part of the country? (he is the one who figured out how to effectively pasteurize grape juice so it wouldn’t ferment and yet retain its flavor). Prior to Welches there was no such thing as grape juice. A study of church history will show that fermented wine was (gasp) consumed during the Lord’s Table. But Fundamentalists really don’t want to study church history that they find uncomfortable. Why is it that Fundamentalists love to tackle this issue? Why not a lively debate on eating? We all know that eating can lead to gluttony. So I guess we should all be fitted with eating tubes so that we don’t overeat and thus be tempted to be gluttonous. The abstinence argument has no logic to it. Or rather, it logically leads to the eating argument I just presented. Oh, wait, we can’t discuss gluttony and call it sinful because we would offend too many overweight Baptists. How many preacher decry alcohol but drink pots of coffee throughout the day. Why is it that alcohol is evil but caffeine (the most addictive psychotropic drug there is) can be consumed with reckless abandon? Show some consistency please. What about the scriptures that require an elder to not be given to much wine? Please don’t tell me that wine wasn’t really wine in the Bible. The language speaks for itself. Christ was the master vintner. The wine he created out of the water was the finest vintage ever produced. Even the man running the wedding thought so. Just read the passage. The bridegroom is commended for serving the best wine last.
Drunkenness is what it condemned in the Bible. Lack of self control is condemned in the Bible. It is Pharisaical to suggest that one should abstain so as not to sin. That is legalism pure and simple. It is exactly what the Pharisees did when they created a boundary outside of God’s boundary so as not to offend God’s boundary.
I say eat a steak and enjoy it. Sink your teeth into some cheesecake. Drink and enjoy it. Just don’t sin by overindulging in any of them.
I would be willing to discuss this with anyone over a nice glass of 12 year old Macallan and a premium cigar!