A question concerning gluttony

Think about what you're saying. Would saying someone most likely got liver cirrhosis from alcohol abuse (being a drunkard) be hostile? No, it is stating a fact. There are consequences to sin. Or are you one of those Christians that only likes to talk about love; any mention of sin makes one hostile?

I've not said gluttony = fat. I've said gluttony = overeating, and I've said fat most often results from both overeating and lack of exercise. There are other causes of obesity, but they are a lot more rare then overeating combined with lack of exercise. And I've even clarified that to you twice.

If your obesity did not result, even partially, from overeating then you fall into one of those rare categories I've described before (hormonal, genetic problems, etc.). That is why I say obesity most often stems from gluttony, not that it always does.

I've shown no hostility toward obese people other then stating that they most likely got that way from the sin of gluttony perhaps combined with lack of activity.

 

In all the verses you cited I see nothing stating that the motivation of overeating determines the sinfulness. That's like saying if you drink 2 quarts of vodka a day in order to be a rebel then you're a drunkard and sinning, but if you drink that much vodka a day b/c you're nervous then its fine or not a sin.

Certainly the sins of being a drunkard or a glutton (along with a host of other sins) are often associated with stubbornness or rebelliousness. But as in the case of Jerry Falwell, sometimes they stem from ignorance. They are no less sinful and their consequences are no less serious (heart attack, liver disease, etc.), but the person may be less culpable if they truly were ignorant of their sin since ignorance can be the difference between willful sin and accidental sin.

All that being said, I have been careful to state that there *are* other causes of obesity other then overeating (hormonal, genetic, etc.). However, they are more rare then the overeating cause. Most often, obesity stems from overeating and lack of exercise, or in other words, the sin of gluttony combined with lack of exercise.

Of course, if someone is tied down I don't think anyone would blame them for not exercising. If someone only has beer available to drink, then no one can blame them for drinking too much. And if someone only had ice cream and french fries available for every meal then no one could blame them either if they gained some weight and became malnurished. But most people can afford more then french fries and ice cream. And even if someone can't afford as many fruits and veggies as someone else, they can still eat proper amounts of what they can afford. And even in the case of "healthy" foods, it is possible to be gluttonous involving vegetables and fruits too.

 

Extreme drunkenness can be had from 8 oz of liquid... if it is vodka (that much beer would not get any adult near drunk in most cases. So overdrinking has more todo with content then quantiy in some cases. Overeating can be similar. So I agree with you to a certain extent.

However, the ancients were not as blind to the realities of life as you seem to think they were. They knew the difference between wine and strong drink. They didn't have to know the chemical makeup of alcohol to know that much. Similarly, they also knew the difference between vegetables and delicacies. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it takes less delicacies to make you feel full (or in the extreme to give you a stomach ache) then it does broccoli (just like it takes less liquor to end up with a hangover then it does beer). The definition of "calorie" is not necessary; the result is obvious.

Overdrinking has to do with continuing to drink after reaching a "satisfactory" amount of alcohol. Similarly, overeating has to do with continuing to eat after reaching a "satisfactory" "full level". That level can be reached with less fatty foods or more vegetables, but nonetheless if you keep eating after reaching it then you are overeating and being a glutton. The problem is when people start to get used to the inebriation or hangover that comes from drinking too much of "to strong" drink, or in the case of overeating, they get used to the stomach ache or general "a little too full" feeling that comes from eating too much of the wrong kind of food. Then instead of rejecting those feels (which is natural at first) they begin to crave those feelings. Many obese people actually *want* to feel "too stuffed." They love that feeling and are addicted to it. For some it is truly the only time they are happy!

What I'm saying in too many words is that the person who got obese from eating fast food didn't eat the same quantity of food as someone who got fat from fruits and vegetables, but given the fat content (and fat is generally what makes your stomach feel the most full) of the food he consumed... heoverate of *that* food.

I don't intend to offend you, but I believe if you become obese and do not have a hormonal/medical or genetic problem... then you overate. It may take less brownies to overeat then it does green beens; but overeating sometimes has more to do with content then quantity.

 

I do have an ax to grind. It isn't personal (as in "a glutton hurt me when I was a child" kind of personal) as much as it is a conviction that gluttony should no longer be the sin that the Church in America loves to participate in and never speak out against.

It is our job to edify each other as well as encourage. It is not our job to remain silent when brothers go astray. When a person sins publicly sometimes they need to be called out publicly, to uphold the image of Christ. There are many examples of this in the Bible. I think this especially applies to someone who stands in the media for Christ all the time, yet gluttonously eats himself to death. I have no personal ill-will against Falwell, but if I knew him before he ate himself into a heart attack I most certainly would've talked to him about his problem and tried to reason with him, in love, from the Scriptures.

I'm not stoning anyone here. I've made clear that it is not possible to judge every obese person you see as a glutton. I've also made it clear that Falwell's soul is in God's Hand, as the Ultimate Judge, not mine. There is a difference between judging someone (as in stoning them to death or making yourself the final judge over their soul) and simply pointing them to *God's* judgments in the Scriptures and asking them to consider if they are living in line with those words of God.

Love without accountability is no love at all. "He who has no sin cast the first stone" does not mean "never talk about sin" or "never confront sinners". It means exactly what it says... whoever has no sin (none of use) can stone the sinner to death and be the arbiter of his salvation or damnation. It means more then that, but it definitely doesn't mean Christians are prohibited from calling sinful behavior what it is... sinful behavior. Christians other then Christ call out sin for what it is all through the New Testament.

 

Are you serious? I mean come on, do you not realize that in calling me self-righteous you are "judging" me according to your own definition of the word? Perhaps you should take your own advice! It seems you already know what my pet sin is... for you have proclaimed it loud and clear.

The fact is if this thread were titled "a question about murder," and we were talking about Adolf Hitler, and I was pondering whether he really did commit the sin of murdering people or if in fact he was just helping the human race as he said, then you would not be sitting here judging me as judgmental. In fact, you probably would be weighing in with some Scripture of your own, perhaps some historical facts, and saying, "No, it seems Adolf did in fact murder."

We can analyze activities, even activities of specific people, and ask whether they are sinful or not. We can come to conclusions from our own readings of the Scriptures, and use those conclusions to guide our own lives and to help provide guidance to others. Identifying sin is half the battle of making sure not to commit it ourselves.

That being said, what I'm doing in analyzing Falwell is not "Judgment". Judgment has to do with analyzing and then handing down a *sentence*. That is what is meant by "he who has no sin *cast the first stone*". In addition to a skewed view of gluttony, many in the church also have a skewed view of what "judgment" is and use it simply as an insult to levy toward people they disagree with.

Falwell died of heart disease. He was obese, *very* obese. You do the math. The most common symptoms of overeating and obesity is heart disease. I didn't hear any statement released about him having a genetic or hormonal problem, did you? The sin of being a drunkard is "overdrinking" and the sin of being a glutton is overeating. All the facts point to Falwell likely engaging in gluttony.

That is my analysis. I have made clear earlier in the thread that Christ is the ultimate judge, but it seems obvious to me Falwell likely participated in gluttony for a great majority of his life. I don't dislike Falwell. I dislike the image gluttons portray of Christ when they preach the gospel but very publicly and habitually ignore the entire point of it... Christ making us dead to sin and alive in Him. And I dislike the policy of the Church in America to ignore gluttony as if it isn't one of the leading causes of death in America and spiritual hypocrisy in the Church. A Christian committing sin publicly and habitually can be much more damaging to the gospel then an Atheist committing sin publicly and habitually.

The only reason you judge me as self-righteous or judgmental is b/c you disagree with my analysis; not b/c you never engage in such analysis yourself. Both you and Falwell have analyzed particular activities that particular people engage in and pondered whether or not they constitute sin. Falwell in particular did that *a lot*. I think he can afford a little analysis aimed at him.

 

Yet it is somehow okay for you to judge me as being "judgmental". Hmmm... I sense some hypocrisy in this righteous stand you're taking.

The fact is if this thread were titled "a question about murder," and we were talking about Adolf Hitler, and I was pondering whether he really did commit the sin of murdering people or if in fact he was just helping the human race as he said, then you would not be sitting here judging me as judgmental. In fact, you probably would be weighing in with some Scripture of your own, perhaps some historical facts, and saying, "No, it seems Adolf did in fact murder."

We can analyze activities, even activities of specific people, and ask whether they are sinful or not. We can come to conclusions from our own readings of the Scriptures, and use those conclusions to guide our own lives and to help provide guidance to others. Identifying sin is half the battle of making sure not to commit it ourselves.

That being said, what I'm doing in analyzing Falwell is not "Judgment". Judgment has to do with analyzing and then handing down a *sentence*. That is what is meant by "he who has no sin *cast the first stone*". In addition to a skewed view of gluttony, many in the church also have a skewed view of what "judgment" is and use it simply as an insult to levy toward people they disagree with.

Falwell died of heart disease. He was obese, *very* obese. You do the math. The most common symptoms of overeating and obesity is heart disease. I didn't hear any statement released about him having a genetic or hormonal problem, did you? The sin of being a drunkard is "overdrinking" and the sin of being a glutton is overeating. All the facts point to Falwell likely engaging in gluttony.

That is my analysis. I have made clear earlier in the thread that Christ is the ultimate judge, but it seems obvious to me Falwell likely participated in gluttony for a great majority of his life. I don't dislike Falwell. I dislike the image gluttons portray of Christ when they preach the gospel but very publicly and habitually ignore the entire point of it... Christ making us dead to sin and alive in Him. And I dislike the policy of the Church in America to ignore gluttony as if it isn't one of the leading causes of death in America and spiritual hypocrisy in the Church. A Christian committing sin publicly and habitually can be much more damaging to the gospel then an Atheist committing sin publicly and habitually.

The only reason you judge me as self-righteous or judgmental is b/c you disagree with my analysis; not b/c you never engage in such analysis yourself. Both you and Falwell have analyzed particular activities that particular people engage in and pondered whether or not they constitute sin. Falwell in particular did that *a lot*. I think he can afford a little analysis aimed at him.

 

I think this thread has been beat to death. I want to thank those who have participated in this thread. Especially those who had the courage to say "I am obese" or "I used to be obese", whether or not you agree with my stand on this issue. May God give you strength to live for Him to the best of your ability.

I do not mean to imply I have no sin by bringing up a discussion about a sin (or an activity, whether or not you think it is sinful) that many people in the Church engage in. I face the consequences of my own past sins (and sometimes present sins) just like everyone else. To those who think I am judgmental, I have stated pretty clearly why I disagree. There is a time to take the tree out of your own eye before talking about other's specks. However, that doesn't mean it is immoral to talk about other' specks; it just gives a timetable for when to.

May we all be offended at the things that offend Christ, and encourage each other toward good works... even if it means offending each other at some points along the way! Thanks be to God for forgiveness and strength through Jesus!

- "Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses." (Proverbs 27)

 

I meant that to be my final post in this thread, but I'll try to answer the questions you asked me.

I never said everyone who is obese has a heart attack, or the converse. I'm not sure what to tell you except perhaps you should read what I've said again.

And I haven't seen any anger displayed in this thread. Perhaps you confuse disagreement and debate as anger. I've stated an opinion about gluttony being a common and serious problem in the church, folks have called me self-righteous and judgmental, and I've responded to that by pointing out the irony (or perhaps hypocrisy) of "judging" someone as "judgmental" (to use the word judge in the incorrect way it was used above).

These seem like fairly standard things that occur in debate and discussion concerning a topic which people are sensitive and have often strong feelings about. I don't sense this "anger" you ask about though... sorry!

Anyway, I will say again, may we all be offended at the things that offend Christ, and encourage each other toward good works... even if it means offending each other at some points along the way! Thanks be to God for forgiveness and strength through Jesus!

- "Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses." (Proverbs 27)