Alcohol

[Monster]

I thought they were rhetorical in nature, but at any rate I believe my reply did generally answer your questions.

Let us apply this same logic to gluttony and sexual sin.

non sequitur, nothing to clarify. Drinking is not against God's law nor ours at 21. They will be taught that truth.

drunk up?! Already on the record saying drunkeness is a sin. It has nothing to do with being strong and mighty but in regards to the priesthood of the believer and following Gods Word over mans traditions. If you want to do the latter, all the power to you!

Well then, we'll just disagree on answers, no worries.

Yes let's on gluttony and sexual sin.

I don't see my point as a non sequitur but since you stated so, the gulf is too wide to bother with. We can disagree on that too.

"Drunk up" was a typo on my part (notice the proximity of U and I). Kind of funny considering the context.

I'll say it one last time. Drink up! Have fun; do what you think is right or allowable, encourage you kids and others to do so, set the example you feel is best. My argument has been and will always be is it necessary? Or, is it edifying and profitable?

 

[Monster]

deleted. Not worth replying.

Back at ya' :thumbs:

 

[Monster]

I hate that my first postings here are in an argumentative form. I'm very impassioned about this issue. My early childhood was a living hell due to sin primarily, but that was centered around alcohol consumption. That was out all out of my control. My teen years were a living hell due to my own addiction to the same. Initially under my control but that's the trap.

If you haven't lived it you can't possibly understand it. You can empathize but that's just putting your toes in the pool, no more. For me, it wasn't my first drink or maybe even my hundredth, all of them innocent and casual and allowable by scriptural standards. Whatever the number that sip of booze was that tipped the cart, it changed my life in horrible ways. There was nothing edifying or profitable for me or those whose lives my sin touched.

So, drink up (I guess I lied, this might be the last time to say that) and God's grace upon you so that you never take that sip that tips your own cart.

 

[Arbo]

Hello Monster. An obsevation if I may: If your posts continue to be as angry sounding as your first few here on BB, people might think your moniker fitting.

Some of your questions posed in your post #32 are legitimate ones, but remember that not everyone is of the same opinion. It doesn't mean one is legitimate and the other isn't, just that there are differences.

 

[agedman]

I hate that my first postings here are in an argumentative form. I'm very impassioned about this issue. My early childhood was a living hell due to sin primarily, but that was centered around alcohol consumption. That was out all out of my control. My teen years were a living hell due to my own addiction to the same. Initially under my control but that's the trap.

If you haven't lived it you can't possibly understand it. You can empathize but that's just putting your toes in the pool, no more. For me, it wasn't my first drink or maybe even my hundredth, all of them innocent and casual and allowable by scriptural standards. Whatever the number that sip of booze was that tipped the cart, it changed my life in horrible ways. There was nothing edifying or profitable for me or those whose lives my sin touched.

So, drink up (I guess I lied, this might be the last time to say that) and God's grace upon you so that you never take that sip that tips your own cart.

Welcome to the BB, and I hope that you find at least a few items posted to edify you.

Your last sentence is so very true. I have not met an alcoholic that needed an excuse to drink - they usually look for one not to drink. The attitude shift from "I'd like" to "I need" is so subtle and deceitful. Truth is that addictions in the ranks of believers are climbing at an alarming rate; the numbers are (in my opinion) vastly more.

Most who are "social" or "occasional" do not admit that each time it takes a bit more to satisfy, a bit more to "...." (whatever excuse they use), and as a result the castle of character is lost to the enemy before they even know they are under attack.

Most addiction isn't a matter of "weak wills" or some other claim; the addiction comes because the poison of the toxin has corrupted the rational and made rationalization acceptable.

Monster, I would commend you on your journey from addiction, and you are correct it is never complete. Do not be weary, for as you continue and mature in the grace of the Lord, it will be His strength that will sustain you. Certainly, you may slip, but understand that the Lord is not slack in strength nor in forgiveness. With confession comes the cleansing that only Christ can give.

Thank you for allowing a small peek into your background; it takes a great deal of courage to be vulnerable.

 

[annsni]

I find those who have struggled with a sin are the most vocal against anything that might even be remotely associated with that sin.

Alcohol is given to us by God as a blessing - and it can be abused just like any other blessing God has given us. Jesus Himself made wine and drank wine - all alcoholic - and so alcohol in itself is not sinful. But just like other things, it can and has been abused and I do think that for those who have struggled with it, it is best to stay away from it. But I've seen the "big boys" and "little boys" on the other side of alcohol abuse. The "big boys" are the ones who say "I struggled with alcohol and I cannot drink it now. I'm not going to stop you from having a glass of wine and I will join you in a drink with this seltzer." The "little boys" are the ones who say "You are going to hell if you drink that. You will cause me to stumble and so I will never hang out with you again."

You know what? We belong to a club where there is alcohol (it's a yacht club so there tends to be alcohol around). There are a couple of Christians there and there are a lot of non-Christians. They see that my husband and I don't drink and we've explained why we don't. They have ALL said "Cool!" and that's it. There are a few recovering alcoholics there too who don't drink and join us in a seltzer or juice or soda while the others enjoy their beer or other drink. Some of the other Christians do drink and you know what the unbeliever says about that? "Cool!" It doesn't make a difference. No one says "They are hypocrites because they drink." They know that the Bible speaks of wine and drink and it has good and bad to say about it. They all know drunkenness is a sin and I'm sure if any of the Christians got sloshed, there would be lips flapping but they don't - so there is nothing to say.

I do understand those who have been negatively affected by alcohol can be very vocal against it but you don't say that because a child is raped, all men must become eunics and they should never have sex again. Instead, we use what's called "common sense" and use God's gifts wisely and in the purpose He intended - and we discipline those who misuse it.

 

[agedman]

I find those who have struggled with a sin are the most vocal against anything that might even be remotely associated with that sin.

Alcohol is given to us by God as a blessing - and it can be abused just like any other blessing God has given us. Jesus Himself made wine and drank wine - all alcoholic - and so alcohol in itself is not sinful. But just like other things, it can and has been abused and I do think that for those who have struggled with it, it is best to stay away from it. But I've seen the "big boys" and "little boys" on the other side of alcohol abuse. The "big boys" are the ones who say "I struggled with alcohol and I cannot drink it now. I'm not going to stop you from having a glass of wine and I will join you in a drink with this seltzer." The "little boys" are the ones who say "You are going to hell if you drink that. You will cause me to stumble and so I will never hang out with you again."

You know what? We belong to a club where there is alcohol (it's a yacht club so there tends to be alcohol around). There are a couple of Christians there and there are a lot of non-Christians. They see that my husband and I don't drink and we've explained why we don't. They have ALL said "Cool!" and that's it. There are a few recovering alcoholics there too who don't drink and join us in a seltzer or juice or soda while the others enjoy their beer or other drink. Some of the other Christians do drink and you know what the unbeliever says about that? "Cool!" It doesn't make a difference. No one says "They are hypocrites because they drink." They know that the Bible speaks of wine and drink and it has good and bad to say about it. They all know drunkenness is a sin and I'm sure if any of the Christians got sloshed, there would be lips flapping but they don't - so there is nothing to say.

I do understand those who have been negatively affected by alcohol can be very vocal against it but you don't say that because a child is raped, all men must become eunics and they should never have sex again. Instead, we use what's called "common sense" and use God's gifts wisely and in the purpose He intended - and we discipline those who misuse it.

I have never read such a demeaning post by you!

Perhaps, it is time you spent at the women's shelter rather than the yacht club. Your time would be far better spent.

Your perspective that it is approved of God as a blessing, has no foundation other than what you would desire, and I find such statements unworthy of your usual insight and wisdom. But then you would excuse consumption even when Christ states, "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it gives his color in the cup, when it moves itself aright." (Proverbs 23:31)

But, like I first posted, you won't change my opinion, and I certainly am not going to change yours.

What is sad is that no one who follows my view will ever end up in alcoholic ruinous that is hurtful to all victims.

Your view does not have such ability to claim that innocence of intent.

And, before you spout that you are supporting the truth, frankly I don't have the same view of what you consider "Biblical proof;" such arguments are non-starters and ill conceived to those of us who do not support that view and find Scriptural support for our view.

Leave behind the "yacht unregenerate" and try out your view at the local women's shelter.

Tell them how you proudly violate the Scriptures and condone consuming the intoxicant. How your body is the Temple, that you are a "living example of Christ," yet can so easily violate the priestly estate and heirship. That you would remake the Scriptures into something other than, "Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations: And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean;" (Lev 10:9-10) Is your body not the temple? Does Christ dwell in the heart in all fulness and all joy?

The example of God's leading the Israelis in the wilderness is a picture of the believer's walk in the barren land of this world's living. You certainly would have to remake the Scriptures which state the Israeli's did not consume strong drink or wine during their journey. "And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Ye have seen all that the LORD did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh, and unto all his servants, and unto all his land; The great temptations which thine eyes have seen, the signs, and those great miracles: Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.
And I have led you forty years in the wilderness: your clothes are not waxen old upon you, and thy shoe is not waxen old upon thy foot.
Ye have not eaten bread, neither have ye drunk wine or strong drink: that ye might know that I am the LORD your God." (Duet 29:2 - 6)

You are supposedly an heir to the King of Kings, a member of the very bride of Christ who is the Lord of Lords, and you are supposed to have "living waters" pouring out, and yet you would not take the Scriptures clear statements such as, "It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink:" Proverbs 31:4

Please explain to the battered and abused women and children just how your view would fit with: "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it gives his color in the cup, when it moves itself aright." (Proverbs 23:31) You not only look, but drink what that verse alone does not condone.

The Scriptures of this post are more numerous than those that state a man is to love his wife as Christ loves the church, and yet you would hold more value to the single verse than the multiple verses shown.

Again, no one is going to have their view changed. I don't need to read the excuses and attempts of justification. I have spent many hours hearing that from those who struggle against intoxicants. To hear such from believers is ... disheartening.

I merely post this so that the readers might find that there are those who do not view consumption of an intoxicant Biblical except for medicinal use under the direct authority and oversight of a medical professional.

 

[webdog]

I have never read such a demeaning post by you!

Perhaps, it is time you spent at the women's shelter rather than the yacht club. Your time would be far better spent.

Your perspective that it is approved of God as a blessing, has no foundation other than what you would desire, and I find such statements unworthy of your usual insight and wisdom. But then you would excuse consumption even when Christ states, "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it gives his color in the cup, when it moves itself aright." (Proverbs 23:31)

But, like I first posted, you won't change my opinion, and I certainly am not going to change yours.

What is sad is that no one who follows my view will ever end up in alcoholic ruinous that is hurtful to all victims.

Your view does not have such ability to claim that innocence of intent.

And, before you spout that you are supporting the truth, frankly I don't have the same view of what you consider "Biblical proof;" such arguments are non-starters and ill conceived to those of us who do not support that view and find Scriptural support for our view.

Leave behind the "yacht unregenerate" and try out your view at the local women's shelter.

Tell them how you proudly violate the Scriptures and condone consuming the intoxicant. How your body is the Temple, that you are a "living example of Christ," yet can so easily violate the priestly estate and heirship. That you would remake the Scriptures into something other than, "Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations: And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean;" (Lev 10:9-10) Is your body not the temple? Does Christ dwell in the heart in all fulness and all joy?

The example of God's leading the Israelis in the wilderness is a picture of the believer's walk in the barren land of this world's living. You certainly would have to remake the Scriptures which state the Israeli's did not consume strong drink or wine during their journey. "And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Ye have seen all that the LORD did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh, and unto all his servants, and unto all his land; The great temptations which thine eyes have seen, the signs, and those great miracles: Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.
And I have led you forty years in the wilderness: your clothes are not waxen old upon you, and thy shoe is not waxen old upon thy foot.
Ye have not eaten bread, neither have ye drunk wine or strong drink: that ye might know that I am the LORD your God." (Duet 29:2 - 6)

You are supposedly an heir to the King of Kings, a member of the very bride of Christ who is the Lord of Lords, and you are supposed to have "living waters" pouring out, and yet you would not take the Scriptures clear statements such as, "It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink:" Proverbs 31:4

Please explain to the battered and abused women and children just how your view would fit with: "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it gives his color in the cup, when it moves itself aright." (Proverbs 23:31) You not only look, but drink what that verse alone does not condone.

The Scriptures of this post are more numerous than those that state a man is to love his wife as Christ loves the church, and yet you would hold more value to the single verse than the multiple verses shown.

Again, no one is going to have their view changed. I don't need to read the excuses and attempts of justification. I have spent many hours hearing that from those who struggle against intoxicants. To hear such from believers is ... disheartening.

I merely post this so that the readers might find that there are those who do not view consumption of an intoxicant Biblical except for medicinal use under the direct authority and oversight of a medical professional.

I imagine if they found a Pharisee found frozen in a block of ice and thawed him out, this post could have been written by him.
Ann's post was excellent, graceful and wise.

 

[agedman]

I imagine if they found a Pharisee found frozen in a block of ice and thawed him out, this post could have been written by him.
Ann's post was excellent, graceful and wise.

That response is so lacking truth!

Annsni's post was placing those believers who do consider that the Scriptures do not teach it acceptable for intoxicant consumption as "little boys."

Posting that the "big boys" can handle it all with grace, but the wimpy the "little boys" are in effect the ridged self-righteous who say "You are going to hell if you drink that. You will cause me to stumble and so I will never hang out with you again."

Throughout my business career, I have NEVER met an alcoholic that could socialize with drinking buddies that did not end up "falling off the wagon."

Those that make boast that they can handle it and be around intoxicants are really not wise.

Anyone who has dealt with the addictive personality knows that there is never a time the addictive personality should hang around areas that purposely feed and tease the addiction. The Heroin addicts don't need to be in a crack house. The sexual addict doesn't need to surf the web for porn nor be friends with the prostitutes. The thief doesn't need to hang with thieves. The liars don't need to hang with talebearers and liars. The abused do not need to be around the abusers.

There is principle involved in which Annsni showed a most unwise counsel.


I posted to demonstrate that she needs to get away from the "Yacht Club" mentality and put her faith to doing good work among those who most need the help.

Annsni has a produced some very good and wise posts; her posts on this thread are not of that standard.

 

[HAMel]

Monster..., I just read where you've been accused of posting as being "angry".

I too become "angry" over situations and conditions that happened to me over the years and while I don't dwell on those specifically, I find that when a thought or condition triggers a flashback..., I become angry all over again.

These "flashbacks" are not life controlling but the emotions are real enough for sure. Sometimes people are justified in their anger. You feel like you've been cheated. Deliberately cheated! Used! ...but you gotta deal with it.

 

[Monster]

Monster..., I just read where you've been accused of posting as being "angry".

I too become "angry" over situations and conditions that happened to me over the years and while I don't dwell on those specifically, I find that when a thought or condition triggers a flashback..., I become angry all over again.

These "flashbacks" are not life controlling but the emotions are real enough for sure. Sometimes people are justified in their anger. You feel like you've been cheated. Deliberately cheated! Used! ...but you gotta deal with it.

I'm not angry at all. What I find though is that being direct with people in print/text is typically interpreted as anger. Not by you, you've clearly read carefully...that's why I'm replying to you and not the "other". Sadly, verbal inflection and nuance is lost in this context (I'm sure everyone reading this already is board savvy and knows this, thus no patronization is intended).

Look at some of following posts. Agedman is being called, and not indirectly as written, but actually being called a pharisee. What are they most known for? Oh yeah, they have precious blood on their hands...oops! Jim was attacked, though mildly and annsi, usually a gentle spirit (I've been hanging around these boards for years, just always wanted to avoid this kind of mess) doesn't seem so with her post.

And all of this because I asked them to answer questions. Not once do I directly condemn anyone for drinking. In fact I've encouraged them to drink away, drink up and live the way they believe God would have them. Who got defensive?

When I choose or have chosen not to drink booze, I never, ever, never had to defend myself. Not God's word or God's truth in black and white, I know, but it's life application and observation based on over 40 years of being one His broken, MONSTROUS children...saved by grace.:godisgood:

 

[Monster]

Welcome to the BB, and I hope that you find at least a few items posted to edify you.

Your last sentence is so very true. I have not met an alcoholic that needed an excuse to drink - they usually look for one not to drink. The attitude shift from "I'd like" to "I need" is so subtle and deceitful. Truth is that addictions in the ranks of believers are climbing at an alarming rate; the numbers are (in my opinion) vastly more.

Most who are "social" or "occasional" do not admit that each time it takes a bit more to satisfy, a bit more to "...." (whatever excuse they use), and as a result the castle of character is lost to the enemy before they even know they are under attack.

Most addiction isn't a matter of "weak wills" or some other claim; the addiction comes because the poison of the toxin has corrupted the rational and made rationalization acceptable.

Monster, I would commend you on your journey from addiction, and you are correct it is never complete. Do not be weary, for as you continue and mature in the grace of the Lord, it will be His strength that will sustain you. Certainly, you may slip, but understand that the Lord is not slack in strength nor in forgiveness. With confession comes the cleansing that only Christ can give.

Thank you for allowing a small peek into your background; it takes a great deal of courage to be vulnerable.

Very kind of you, thanks!

I've a wonderful, godly wife of 20 years that works alongside and God used her to make all the difference. When we met, in a christian singles group, I was a drunk. Most of the group were casual drinkers, it was so easy to fit in and hide what I was...if I kept my cool we all looked the same. Nothing like using your own "kind" as camouflage, it's so convenient.

When we started dating, she emphatically stated that I could not drink in her presence, not ever. God's second greatest gift in my life, he used her strength, honor and wisdom to dry out the wretched monster of a boy that I was. Not a single sip in that time though I did use NyQuil once or twice, didn't read the label, nearly caused a relapse...I tough out colds and the flu now with the dozens of other alcohol free alternatives (life's hard when there's so few options).

You understand where I'm coming from and I appreciate that immensely. I imagine that I couldn't have hidden around you. Thanks for the edification.

 

[Jim1999]

I never consumed alcohol as a beverage and still maintain a total abstinence attitude for believers.

In biblical times, water was very poor and often water was mixed with alcohol to cleanse the drinking water. It was never approved as a beverage and there is no proof that Jesus drank alcohol as a beverage.

At turn of 19th and 20th centuries, most people drank alcohol because the water was dangerous as a beverage. Time has changed that. There is just no need for alcohol to-day. So, if it is going to misdirect just one person, I will abstain, so that my testimony will say something in that direction.

I went through three solid years of war in Korea, living in trenches and drinking water from the rivers, where dead bodies floated by, and saw no need for alcoholic beverages. So, why now?

In my pastoral days, my Baptist group was against alcohol as a beverage and no member or pastor would be a user of alcoholic beverages.

Admittedly, some baptist groups have become very loose the last few years, but that does not mean we all have to become booze buzzers!

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Arbo]

I'm not angry at all. What I find though is that being direct with people in print/text is typically interpreted as anger. Not by you, you've clearly read carefully...that's why I'm replying to you and not the "other".

Looks like I misinterpreted your earlier post. My apologies for the unintentional slight.

- The "Other"

 

[Monster]

Looks like I misinterpreted your earlier post. My apologies for the unintentional slight.

- The "Other"

No worries brutha'...it's all about grace. Thanks for sharing yours! I hope I'm doing as well with mine. :love2:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

1st post btw...

- How many of you "proponents" grew up in the environment created by an alcohol user/abuser?

One, at least, as I did, and this is fallacious argumentation.

- How many of you "proponents" are ex-alcoholics (clearly the "ex" is hyperbole) that shake violently when the mere odor of the intoxicant hits your senses?

Immaterial to the question, argument from consequences, and an argument about the abuse of alcohol not its moderate use.

- How many of you "proponents" watched your mother and sisters beaten by a violent drinker?

Plenty, this is sheer emotionalism, this is not valid argument

How sure are you that you'll not fall prey to the worst aspects of the disease?

Alcoholism is not a disease, it is sin.

- How sure are you "proponents" that the next drink you take won't be the gateway to a life of misery?

Plenty of them are, as they are people who have learned self-control. Almost anything can be abused, and to people's detriment. Many a controlled moderate user are beyond positive that they will not "snap" from their next time they imbibe and turn into a booze-induced Mr. Hyde, they are perfectly confident of it.

- How many of you "proponents" are prescient enough to know (and I mean truly know) that those you choose to exercise your "freedoms" in front of will not stumble?

This is a circularity, in that one must assume that the use of alcohol is somehow inherently wrong in order for the example of moderate use to equate to "causing" one to stumble.

How much havoc are you willing to risk wreaking in another's life?

No one, by moderately appreciating some of God's finest products, and man's finest art is "wreaking havoc" in another's life.

- How many of you "proponents" are sure that your kids can watch you drink and NOT follow your example until the "right" time?

At least one, that I can say unequivocally.

What is the right time?

That depends....but it isn't a magic number, it is a matter of maturity.....think....oh...firearms or an automobile, dangerous, but not inherently sinful. Quite usefull in fact.

Will you be proud of them for making the wise decision to drink only when it's "okay"?

Absolutely, I will be very proud of them.

It's easy to go on like this but why bother, eh? You have your freedoms and rights...so how dare I?

It is more than "freedoms and rights"

And it's certainly easier to not bother with what edifies and profits others, so drink up!

This is circular, it must assume that there is something inherently wrong with moderate usage of alcohol to have weight....that is what must be established first: That will never be done, because it simply is not even remotely Scriptural. Thus we have, ad nauseum "slippery-slopes" and "arguments from consequnces" They are, by definition: fallacious.

We certainly wouldn't want to be required to throw "I" or "Me" onto any alter.

I absolutely love several alcoholic beverages, and several types of them....and when God commands that sacrifice in the Scripture...onto the altar it will go. Not before. And not according to the traditions of fallen men.

And after all and finally, there's nothing better for the body than a poison, right?

Alcoholic beverages are SOOOO much more than "poison". Start doing some research into the enthusiasm that cardiologists the world over are developing for the use of (specifically) red wines (the tannins in them to be precise) in keeping alive the coca-cola fatso's constantly dying from heart disease....Ten years....literally, ten years of projected life span. University of Stockholm has some fine work on this. Start talking to a Cardiologist who is knowledgeable on the topic.

It's only a little bit after all

Provided one only drinks a little yes.

and we all know that we have absolute control over everything, right?

Who said that?

Just do the world a favor; for every drink you take and for all the energy you put into defending something absolutely unnecessary, please at the very least, put an equal amount of energy and resources into helping those that the object of your freedom destroys.

The "FREEDOM" itself, destroys no one. Abuse does. You are "free" to drive an automobile, you are also free to do so when you are merely going one block away, are already 45 lbs. over-weight, and have not walked more than 100 yards in a day for 20 years.....(that is "unnecessary"). But if you hit and kill someone, or in your words..."destroy", are you going to file a lawsuit against Buick or Chevrolet, or charge the individual themself for "vehicular man-slaughter". Blame the individual, not the medium.

Oh and, nice to meet you!

And you as well.

I wanted to add this. In the U.S. at least, and parts of the more Evangelical Western World....alcoholism is far more of a problem than it has been in societies which have always known and taught their children and others responsible and positive use. I truly believe that the tacit "rebellion" associated with the idea that the use of alcohol is inherently sinful does more damage because those who are pre-disposed to, or are seeking to, be wicked with its use, encourages them to abuse it by default. Simply teaching a young person the responsible use of a firearm without the assumption that the medium itself is wicked, does NOT tempt someone to become a murderer. In like manner, responsibly teaching someone how to properly use or imbibe or enjoy alcohol (as a potentially dangerous thing) does not tempt them to become alcoholics or abusers...Teaching them that it is an inherent sin to use it, only encourages those pre-disposed to evil to attempt to use it thusly. I think the tee-toller attitude (quite frankly) is more deadly, than the right, Biblical, and more responsible one. Selah.

 

[Monster]

One, at least, as I did, and this is fallacious argumentation.



Immaterial to the question, argument from consequences, and an argument about the abuse of alcohol not its moderate use.



Plenty, this is sheer emotionalism, this is not valid argument

Alcoholism is not a disease, it is sin.



Plenty of them are, as they are people who have learned self-control. Almost anything can be abused, and to people's detriment. Many a controlled moderate user are beyond positive that they will not "snap" from their next time they imbibe and turn into a booze-induced Mr. Hyde, they are perfectly confident of it.


This is a circularity, in that one must assume that the use of alcohol is somehow inherently wrong in order for the example of moderate use to equate to "causing" one to stumble.



No one, by moderately appreciating some of God's finest products, and man's finest art is "wreaking havoc" in another's life.



At least one, that I can say unequivocally.

That depends....but it isn't a magic number, it is a matter of maturity.....think....oh...firearms or an automobile, dangerous, but not inherently sinful. Quite usefull in fact.



Absolutely, I will be very proud of them.




It is more than "freedoms and rights"



This is circular, it must assume that there is something inherently wrong with moderate usage of alcohol to have weight....that is what must be established first: That will never be done, because it simply is not even remotely Scriptural. Thus we have, ad nauseum "slippery-slopes" and "arguments from consequnces" They are, by definition: fallacious.



I absolutely love several alcoholic beverages, and several types of them....and when God commands that sacrifice in the Scripture...onto the altar it will go. Not before. And not according to the traditions of fallen men.



Alcoholic beverages are SOOOO much more than "poison" start doing some research into the enthusiasm that cardiologists the world over are developing for the use of (specifically) red wines (the tannins in them to be precise) in keeping alive the coca-cola fatso's constantly dying from heart disease....Ten years....literally, ten years of projected life span. University of Stockholm has some fine work on this. Start talking to a Cardiologist who is knowledgeable on the topic.



Provided one only drinks a little yes.


Who said that?



The "FREEDOM" itself, destroys no one. Abuse does. You are "free" to drive an automobile, you are also free to do so when you are merely going one block away, are already 45 lbs. over-weight, and have not walked more than 100 yards in a day for 20 years.....(that is "unnecessary"). But if you hit and kill someone, or in your words..."destroy", are you going to file a lawsuit against Buick or Chevrolet, or charge the individual themself for "vehicular man-slaughter". Blame the individual, not the medium.



And you as well.

I wanted to add this. In the U.S. at least, and parts of the more Evangelical Western World....alcoholism is far more of a problem than it has been in societies which have always known and taught their children and others responsible and positive use. I truly believe that the tacit "rebellion" associated with the idea that the use of alcohol is inherently sinful does more damage because those who are pre-disposed to, or are seeking to, be wicked with its use, encourages them to abuse it by default. Simply teaching a young person the responsible use of a firearm without the assumption that the medium itself is wicked, does NOT tempt someone to become a murderer. In like manner, responsibly teaching someone how to properly use or imbibe or enjoy alcohol (as a potentially dangerous thing) does not tempt them to become alcoholics or abusers...Teaching them that it is an inherent sin to use it, only encourages those pre-disposed to evil to attempt to use it thusly. I think the tee-toller attitude (quite frankly) is more deadly, than the right, Biblical, and more responsible one. Selah.

Good answers, very intellectual. I disagree with most, but apprentice your honesty and candor. Drink away, just not around me.

What's in bold, in the quote, is flat-out ridiculous hyperbole. I don't intend offense by that, just being direct and honest. The world would, in my opinion, be a much kinder place without booze and guns. That's from someone that recently blew the stuffing out of a destructive whistle-pig.

Oh and, when you drink...don't use the guns too.

Pause and Interlude to you too!

 

[LillyoftheValley]

HeirofSalvation responded to your post above and I fully agree with everything he said. I however, as his wife, would like to address something that he did not.

Just do the world a favor; for every drink you take and for all the energy you put into defending something absolutely unnecessary, please at the very least, put an equal amount of energy and resources into helping those that the object of your freedom destroys.

I am not, nor are our 4 daughters, being "destroyed" by my husband's use of alcohol. I myself partake of an alcoholic beverage every now and then, but a six pack of Mike's Hard Lemonade will last me a good 2 months, if not more. On the other hand, I DO have a hard time controlling myself when it comes to soda. To the point that I don't keep it in the house. When I do purchase soda, it is never in large quantities. If I use your logic, the partaking of soda by ALL is sin (or at least ill-advised) because of my inability to exhibit self-control.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

What's in bold, in the quote, is flat-out ridiculous hyperbole. I don't intend offense by that, just being direct and honest.

I understand that it is not meant as insult, and none is taken.....but (for my part) I literally believe it to be true...I do not think this is hyperbole. Allow me to phrase what I mean differently: I have spent much time on this, allow me to pose this as a deductive argument..... I am not assuming that you will accept it, but for the sake of "iron-sharpening". Here is the idea:

1.) There are those who are tempted to engage in sin merely for the thrill of rebellion.
2.) Many might not have otherwise thought of alcohol abuse, per se, except for the societally induced "taboo".
3.) The thrill they seek (we are thinking dumb teen-agers) is the thrill of rebellion and the thrill of dis-obedience towards a societal norm which would otherwise not exist.
4.) Because of this, alcohol is far more likely to be abused or utilized solely for the purpose of abuse than it might be otherwise.
5.) Thus, the users of alcohol are far more likely to be those who have a Spiritual Condition, which pre-disposes them towards abuse than would otherwise obtain.
6.) Thus, "tee-totalling" societies, will suffer far more the consequences of alcoholism and alcohol abuse, because of the subjects who are using it and their purposes for it, than societies with a mature and responsible view of it.

Therefore: the tee-totaller attitude (quite frankly) is more deadly, or at least "problematic" than the right, Biblical, and more responsible one.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

That's from someone that recently blew the stuffing out of a destructive whistle-pig.

Stick, Stick and gut that pig....

Oh and, when you drink...don't use the guns too.

WHAT!!! SINCE WHEN....WHAT DEVILLRY IS THIS???? SINCE WHEN DO ALCOHOL AND THE USE OF FIREARMS NOT GEL PERFECTLY??? :laugh:

Welcome to BB!