The sin of gluttony and obesity???

[Revmitchell]

That is a good idea.

So here goes the BIBLICAL definition: Gluttony is engaging in too much food or drink—overindulgence (Pro. 23:20). A glutton is a disgrace to the Father (Pro. 28:7). Since a glutton is the same as a drunkard (Pro. 23:21), gluttony is a work of the flesh (Gal. 5:21) opposite the fruit of self-control that the Spirit gives (Gal. 5:23).

The proverbs 23 passage does not define gluttony as a sin. It merely points out the negative consequences.

Well by the biblical definition of gluttony, no—Jewish feasting (so long as it wasn't overindulgence) was not gluttony. However, gluttony can appear even in feasts commanded by God. That was the case in Corinth regarding the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 11:17-22).

The Issue in Corinthians 11 was not gluttony. It was the irreverent manner in which they took part in the ordinance of the church the Lord's Supper.

 

[Deacon]

Some people tackle their obesity with a variety of surgical procedures.
Jesus suggested that if your eye causes you to stumble you should pluck it out.
Origen (b. 185 – d. 254) had a problem with lust and castrated himself.

I personally think much of our obesity problem is due to a societal pattern of inactivity;

jobs that require hours of sitting,
doing nothing but moving words or numbers on a page.
​

And that coupled with some of the best food ever cooked on earth… means wider waist lines.

Are there any other sins that are medically solved?

Rob

 

[robustheologian]

The proverbs 23 passage does not define gluttony as a sin. It merely points out the negative consequences.

Proverbs 23:20 defines gluttony, and v.21 does point out it's consequences. But what about Proverbs 23:21 in relation to Galatians 5:21? Aren't works of the flesh sin?

The Issue in Corinthians 11 was not gluttony. It was the irreverent manner in which they took part in the ordinance of the church the Lord's Supper.

What made their treatment of the Lord's Supper irreverent? Was it not the gluttonous manner in which they went about it?

 

[robustheologian]

Jesus suggested that if your eye causes you to stumble you should pluck it out.
Origen (b. 185 – d. 254) had a problem with lust and castrated himself.

I guess no one can ever accuse Origen of not taking the words of Christ serious.

 

[John of Japan]

I can see an the argument for habitual being in there. I will say that the idea of a punishment for a one-time offense being unreasonable is relative. For instance, I may think having to be stoned for being caught working on the Sabbath is an unreasonable punishment but at the end it is relative to me. Good reference to Deut. 21:20. Thank God for the new covenant.

Point taken, but I think the difference would be that gluttony only appears once in the Torah, but the Sabbath occurs 30 times. I think God put a lot more emphasis in the Sabbath in the Old Covenant than on proper eating.

 

[robustheologian]

Point taken, but I think the difference would be that gluttony only appears once in the Torah, but the Sabbath occurs 30 times. I think God put a lot more emphasis in the Sabbath in the Old Covenant than on proper eating.

I would have to agree.

 

[Revmitchell]

Proverbs 23:20 defines gluttony,

No it doesn't

But what about Proverbs 23:21 in relation to Galatians 5:21? Aren't works of the flesh sin?

One is not related to the other.

What made their treatment of the Lord's Supper irreverent? Was it not the gluttonous manner in which they went about it?

No Paul never characterizes it that way. They did however treat it like a party having no respect for the real reason they were there.

 

[robustheologian]

No it doesn't

Are you saying a glutton is not one who overindulges in food and drink like in Pro. 23:20??

One is not related to the other.

So in light of Pro. 23:21, you're saying a glutton and drunkard aren't related to each other???

No Paul never characterizes it that way. They did however treat it like a party having no respect for the real reason they were there.

So if gluttony and drunkenness were not present (as you say) what did Paul mean by "for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk" (1 Cor. 11:21)? Why is the word "drunk" even used then??

 

[Revmitchell]

Are you saying a glutton is not one who overindulges in food and drink like in Pro. 23:20??

No I am saying that verse does not define it as a sin.

So in light of Pro. 23:21, you're saying a glutton and drunkard aren't related to each other???

No I am saying those two verses are not related to each other.

So if gluttony and drunkenness wasn't present what did Paul mean by "for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk" (1 Cor. 11:21)? Why is the word "drunk" even used then??

This statement appears to be conflating the two. Could you clarify for me.

 

[robustheologian]

No I am saying that verse does not define it as a sin.

I never said that Proverbs 23:20 defines it as sin. I then further clarified it as defining gluttony (in post #23)...which you then disagreed with (in post #27).

No I am saying those two verses are not related to each other.

I said that the drunkard and glutton are related to each other given Pro. 23:21. So if a drunkard and glutton are the same, especially in that they face the same fate, gluttony is a work of the flesh like drunkenness is (Gal. 5:21). The opposite of love (Gal. 5:22) and is therefore sin (Gal. 5:20) and is therefore sin; the opposite of peace (Gal. 5:22) is fighting (Gal. 5:20) and is therefore sin; the opposite of self-control (Gal. 5:23) is drunkenness (Gal. 5:21). Would you not say that gluttony is the opposite of self-control?? And is therefore sin???

Could you clarify for me.

Gluttony and drunkenness (overindulgence) were present in Corinth during the Lord's Supper which is why Paul addressed that there were some going hungry (due to others' overindulgence) and that some were drunk (due to their own overindulgence).

 

[Revmitchell]

I never said that Proverbs 23:20 defines it as sin.

Ok, what did you say it defines it as then?

I said that the drunkard and glutton are related to each other

Related how? Are they cousins, siblings?

Gluttony and drunkenness (overindulgence) were present in Corinth during the Lord's Supper which is why Paul addressed that there were some going hungry (due to others' overindulgence) and that some were drunk (due to their own overindulgence).

Paul never suggested gluttony was present. What you quoted in that chapter earlier does not even come close to saying that. The issue was not over indulgence either. The issue in 1 Cor 11 was their lack of focus on God and turning it into a festive party so to speak. Their irreverence toward God given the reason they gathered. Gluttony is not even in view here in any way.

 

[robustheologian]

Ok, what did you say it defines it as then?

I said that is the biblical definition of gluttony. I also said it's something that's a disgrace to the Father...sounds like sin to me.

Related how? Are they cousins, siblings?

They are in the same class of sin—sin of lack of self-control (overindulgence).

Paul never suggested gluttony was present. What you quoted in that chapter earlier does not even come close to saying that. The issue was not over indulgence either. The issue in 1 Cor 11 was their lack of focus on God and turning it into a festive party so to speak. Their irreverence toward God given the reason they gathered. Gluttony is not even in view here in any way.

Umm...to you it isn't in view. Paul addressed that there were some going hungry...what lead them to going hungry? Lack of food due to others' overindulgence. Paul addressed that some were drunk...how did they get drunk? Overindulging in wine.

 

[Revmitchell]

I said that is the biblical definition of gluttony. I also said it's something that's a disgrace to the Father...sounds like sin to me.

And around we go. I will leave you to it.

Umm...to you it isn't in view. Paul addressed that there were some going hungry...what lead them to going hungry? Lack of food due to others' overindulgence. Paul addressed that some were drunk...how did they get drunk? Overindulging in wine.

Lack of food for some does not mean someone else automatically over indulged. That is an assumption without foundation. The subject here is gluttony not drunkeness and while they were drunk it was not the issue here,

 

[robustheologian]

And around we go. I will leave you to it.

So something that brings disgrace to the Father isn't sin?? Hmm...

The subject here is gluttony not drunkeness and while they were drunk it was not the issue here

Gluttony and drunkenness are both sins of overindulgence. For drunkenness to not be an issue Paul and the Holy Spirit sure thought it was important enough to write.

 

[Revmitchell]

So something that brings disgrace to the Father isn't sin?? Hmm...



Gluttony and drunkenness are both sins of overindulgence. For drunkenness to not be an issue Paul and the Holy Spirit sure thought it was important enough to write.

I did not say it was not sin. You will not find that in any of my posts. What I said is that the scripture you posted did not declare it sin.

The description of their behavior was to show their lack of focus on worshiping God not to focus on over indulgence. To pull that out of that passage is to miss the point and the context which is:

1Co 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

 

[tyndale1946]

What's your thoughts on this? Should obese individuals be viewed the same as homosexuals? I'm especially interested in hearing from the "sin has no degrees" crowd.

If Gluttony is a sin... I'm guilty, guilty, guilty!... Baptist love preaching and they also love eating... Sometimes too much!... There are quite a few Baptist (of the large variety) that get in line for the fellowship lunch. You go peaching that doctrine of gluttony in the pulpit and as one brother said to one preacher you gone from preaching to meddling... I'm just saying!... I can smell the gospel bird now... You know fried chicken!... Brother Glen:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Crabtownboy]

I did not say it was not sin. You will not find that in any of my posts. What I said is that the scripture you posted did not declare it sin.

Believe you are wrong there Rev. Many translations use the word gluttony or a form of the word in Proverbs 23:20. This verse in certainly talking about two sins.

Be thou not among ... as the verse begins means it is a sin as it is short of the perfection of God and you are to stay away from over drinking and over eating.


Proverbs 23:2 is a strong statement.

” Proverbs 23:2 proclaims, “Put a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony.”


Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/gluttony-sin.html#ixzz3Wfh16o32

 

[robustheologian]

I did not say it was not sin. You will not find that in any of my posts.

So then you agree gluttony is a sin. :applause:

 

[Bro. Curtis]

If Gluttony is a sin... I'm guilty, guilty, guilty!... Baptist love preaching and they also love eating... Sometimes too much!... There are quite a few Baptist (of the large variety) that get in line for the fellowship lunch. You go peaching that doctrine of gluttony in the pulpit and as one brother said to one preacher you gone from preaching to meddling... I'm just saying!... I can smell the gospel bird now... You know fried chicken!... Brother Glen:smilewinkgrin:

A lot of baptists wink at gluttony. Look at your post. Preach against sin, but not mine. Then yer meddling. :BangHead:

Gluttony defiles the temple.

 

[robustheologian]

A lot of baptists wink at gluttony. Look at your post. Preach against sin, but not mine. Then yer meddling. :BangHead:

Gluttony defiles the temple.

I always feel a little weird when we agree. lol