Featured Moderation is what helps- not teetotalism

The police don't measure "drunkenness" anymore. They simply measure "blood alcohol." That is all they have to do. As I said, where I live the blood alcohol level has been lowered from 0.08% to 0.05%. That is low enough that not many people are "drunk" on that amount of alcohol.

But groups like MADD are pushing them to go farther, and they probably will. They want 0.0%. They want to see a "designated driver," one who has not had even one single drink driving those who have been drinking. Drinking and driving don't mix. They are pushing yet for stricter laws that sees that person behind the wheel has not touched alcohol whatsoever.

They have come that far with smoking--no smoking in any public place.
They can do the equivalent with drinking. Ban it in all motor vehicles.

 

How is measuring blood alcohol level different from measuring drunkenness?

 

There are many people that can easily have 0.05% alcohol in their blood and still pass all the tests that the police will give them. They won't visually be drunk, but the fact that they will have alcohol in their blood deems them unfit to drive. It is becoming a no-tolerance issue, instead of a relative "I can hold my own" issue.

 

In your opinion, then, is a person that has consumed 4 oz. of beer unfit to drive?

And you didn't answer my question...

 

Then I didn't understand your question.
We are not in the business of measuring drunkenness. I believe the Bible teaches abstinence not moderation. So why should there be any need for measurement.

Yes, according to the law (or what soon will be the law) a person who has four ounces of beer will be unfit to drive. If it will be measurable he will receive a fine. There soon will be a no-tolerance law in effect. Drinking and driving don't mix.

The world can see this.
How much more should we, who are ambassadors for the king of Kings remain sober and clear-headed when we represent Him. Our minds need not to have judgment clouded by alcohol. Why would any Christian defend this vice? That is beyond me.

 

That really doesn't make sense in light of Jesus both drinking wine, and creating wine from water. And yes, it was wine, not grape juice. The biblical Greek does not support such an explanation.

 

The Bible teaches drunkenness is a sin, it does not teach having a drink is a sin. Blood alcohol level is one way to measure drunkenness.

Do YOU think a person who has had 4 oz. of beer is unfit to drive?

So you are saying that the world's standards are a good thing, in this instance.

If I'm staying home relaxing on a Friday night and decide to drink a couple of beers while I watch a ball game, I am

--not having my brain clouded
--not misrepresenting my faith
--not endangering anyone
--not sinning
--not tempting a "weaker brother"
--not damaging my witness

Why would any Christian denounce this? That is beyond me.

 

When one says that the word rejects ANY alcohol consumption, but cannot cite any scripture to verify this, IMHO they are getting awfully close to "ADDING" to the word.
Mighty dangerous ground regardless of how you personally feel about the topic.

 

Government doesn't define drunkeness, it defines impaired driving...the same government that defines birth control as slicing up an unborn baby. Look to the Bible for examples of drunkeness, like Noah and Lot.

 

Fundamentalists always go over the line into a legal obedience,rather than a gospel obedience. It is as if they feel the Holy Spirit needs help to convict a believer of sin.

12 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.


RM was getting at this principle earlier.

That being said.....there is a biblical separation to be considered.Some who flaunt their liberty in Christ often go into sin. Flaunting their liberty and chasing after a worldly model, which DHK is getting at...but he let's his personal conviction get confused with the biblical teaching.

13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

 

That depends how you interpret the Bible. Don't be so dogmatic. You have your opinion, and that is all.
The kings and priests of the OT were forbidden to drink.
We are kings and priests before God.

"Wine is a mocker; strong drink is raging, and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise."
"Look not upon the wine when it is red; when it turns itself alright."
Proverbs 23:31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.
--Don't even look at it; much less drink it.

I haven't even started yet. In reality I have given very little Scripture, but there is much to give.
The evidence in John chapter two is overwhelming.

What I think is not the question.
What the law says is at the root of the matter. If the government passes a law of no-tolerance then you would be breaking the law at four ounces. Is that not true?

Absolutely! The world's standards are good in many cases. The entire justice system is based on the Old Testament. "Thou shalt not kill," for example.
If you are just in possession of cocaine, without ever having ingested any, you have still broken the law. The world's laws are good in many cases. The Bible explains in great detail how we are to submit ourselves to our governments in Romans 13:1ff.

A former Prime Minister once said (in the context of sex): "What people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is their business."

Perhaps that might apply to you. It applies to you when you open up your computer and wherever your eyes take you; what sites you look at. It applies to you when you decide what TV programs to watch; what kind of DVD's or videos to watch; what kind of music to listen to, etc. It applies to you in how you use your time.
The latter is particularly important if you were a pastor working from home. If you were squandering your time watching TV or on the internet, instead of in prayer and the word, preparing for Sunday morning or evening, or whatever other pastoral duties you might have, then you will give account to God for it.
But we all will give account to God for that which we do in this life (pastor or not).

 

Looks like this thread is on its way to being closed. So, moving on.

So, Romans 14:1-4 establishes that what is weak or strong when speaking of weaker brethren is not their education or will power, as is commonly asserted, but their faith.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
​

Again, these are all matters of faith and practice.

9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
​

Nothing here in dispute

13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in [his] brother's way.
​

Now here is a commandment: "Judge this"

Judge what? That no man put an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

So in obedience to the commandent, I made my post in the thread now closed and boy did the natives get restless.

 

Rick,

Actually what we are contending for is Christian liberty. All Christian liberty should be practiced in moderation; whether it be drinking water or drinking alcohol.

Our rule for Christian liberty is the Bible. Short and sweet. Not one poster has been able to show where drinking alcohol is prohibited by the Bible. Not one. They have cited social and weaker brother arguments; neither of which speaks for or against exercising Christian liberty. They have insinuated a callous disregard on the part of those who choose to use their Christian liberty in behaviors they describe as "vice(s)". So, not only do they say that Christians do not have the right to exercise their liberty, they charge them with sin! And that is what it comes down to really. The burden is on them to prove the Bible speaks against Christian liberty, specifically drinking which was the purpose of this thread. On that point they have come up short.

 

And anidiot pastor is a danger to his congregation. I pity the people that sit under you.

 

It is merely a manufactured man made mechanism to force you to do something or another.legalism vs liberty.