Drinking Alcohol Moderately

[dwmoeller1]

I think when Christians drink, they are flirting with sin. Some Christians feel that casual drinking is OK. I however do not agree with this concept. It only takes one drink too many for it to become "sin." Quite frankly I think casual drinking with Christians is just a way for them to justify their sin.

While I respect your feelings on the matter, the reasoning is fallacious. The exact same argument could be made about food - that eating food is flirting with sin because one bite too many is all it takes for eating to become a sin (ie. gluttony).

Forgive me for this example, but its one of the best I can think of. The bible clearly speaks of fornication being a sin. Many "non-married" couples believe they can justify their sin by participating in every other sexual activity other than "sex," and they believe they are still being obedient to God's Word. How sadly mistaken are these people.

So holding hands or kissing between non-married couples is flirting with sin? The couples who excuse hand holding are just trying to justify their sin?

 

[dwmoeller1]

You are absolutely right about Christian's seeing how far they can go without sinning. Do they think Jesus did this? Absolutely not! Jesus interacted with sinners, but He did not partake in the potentially sinful activities that they did. As far as Christians beleiving that partaking in oral sex is OK before marriage saddens me. These people are totally defiling God's plan for sexual interaction between a man and a woman. Any type of sexual activity, including oral sex, should be reserved for marriage and marriage only. Once again, this is just another way that Christians are flirting with sin.

See, I have a background in a group which used this same exact sort of reasoning with regards to sexual activity. However, they drew the line in a different place. You decry those who excuse oral sex, well they would decry those who excuse kissing before marriage, even any touching at all (sometimes even between an engaged couple), as flirting with sin.

Jehovah's witnesses use the same sort of reasoning to deny things like tea and coffee to their members. The group I came from used the same reasoning to argue that eating white bread was approaching sinfulness. And don't even get them started on certain toys.

Were they being extreme or just taking the reasoning to its logical conclusion? If the former, then explain why your reasoning is sound, but theirs was not.

What I see is believers seeking to bind other's consciences - something Paul had very strong words about. Please explain to me how your reasoning is essentially different.

 

[dwmoeller1]

I was always taught that if the act is questionable ask yourself a couple questions:

1. What are my reasons for doing this?

2. Will I be glorifying God with my actions?

3. Will this be a good witness?

These all relate to your own conscience, not to Scriptural teachings. So while they are very good for helping to determine what *you* should do in a particular situation, they are not necessary useful in determining universal principles of what is permissible for all believers.

 

[webdog]

You have made some good points here. But, what about in the scripture when it speaks about not making another brother stumble? Whats your opinion on this in regards to drinking alcohol?

I believe Scripture is speaking about a scenario where I would offer you a drink knowing your convictions on the matter. Avoiding all alcohol consumption just because someone may have the same conviction as you is not in picture here. If this is the case eating out in public could cause someone with a food addiction to stumble, an attractive person going out in public could cause someone to stumble, etc. As believers we are not to live our lives in fear of someone's ignorance on any particular matter, but live our lives to please God. If someone happens to get the 248 Scripture passages dealing with alcohol wrong, that's 248 times they have bypassed the truth. At that point it is on the person who wishes to be willfully ignorant.

 

[webdog]

There is no way my former pastor of singles & worship could have witnessed to those guys while drinking beer. Can you see someone with a beer in their hands and witness to others?

I've done this. I've witnessed to neighbors at a cookout, friends at a sports bar watching a game, and at home.

It is hard for me to listen to things a person who is drinking beer may be saying because he is not apart from the world.

I wouldn't be so quick to label something as "worldly" that God calls a blessing and encourages you to spend your money on if you desire. You have redefined the term to fit your convictions...a sin in itself.

This really ruins your testimony.

According to who, you? Actually it strengthened my testimony. My neighbors couldn't believe a Christ follower could be a normal person like them, one who didn't live like the Amish. All of these man made extra biblical requirements are the same things Christ got on the Pharisees about and do more harm to people than good. You may have good intentions in your convictions, but don't just regurgitate everything you have been taught without going to Scripture first.

 

[dwmoeller1]

You have brought up some excellent points. My sister has some friends from church who believe in drinking moderately. Well.. many of them ended up getting drunk after all. That was not their intention. Even if you don't get drunk, you still get a buzz from drinking. I am amazed at how some people have misconceptions about wine in the bible. For example, I know that Jesus didn't serve alcoholic wine. A good article to support the truth is at http://www.learnthebible.org/jesus-and-wine.html. Jesus is sinless. He certainly would not do something that would lead to some people getting drunk. At least a few people always get drunk when alcoholic beverages are served at a special event.

The exact same reasoning applies to serving food and gluttony. In any gathering where food is served, someone always ends up being gluttonous. Thus your above logic would lead us to conclude that the loaves and fishes Christ gave out were not really food. After all, Christ would never do anything which would lead to someone being gluttonous.

When the reasoning is applied to food it leads to clearly absurd conclusions. Unless we can show how the logic is not applicable to food, we must conclude that the logic is fallacious and should be rejected.

You are certainly right about many unmarried people doing everything short of sexual intercourse. I feel that many of them are too physical before marriage. For example, one of my good friends and her husband went too far physically. They fooled around and she got pregnant. They were very strong Christians. In fact, my friend's husband was a seminary student working on becoming a pastor. This shows you that any strong Christians could fall.

Another example of the logic leading to unreasonable or absurd conclusions is when its applied to physical contact between unmarried couples. By your logic, holding hands and kissing before marriage should be considered impermissible.

It seems like many Christians are constantly thinking about how much they can do without "sinning" rather than looking at what they should avoid that would lead to the sin in the first place. I learned from one of Eric and Leslie Ludy's books on purity that some Christians even think that oral sex is okay for unmarried couples.

This is a very good point. If one drinks and has to consider constantly how much they can do without entering into sin, then they probably shouldn't drink until they gain maturity.

However, the Christian friends of mine who exhibit self-control and moderation in drink don't think about this - its not an issue for them. They just exercise moderation. They have the same basic approach to alcohol that the mature Christian has towards food. After all, you would agree with me that a person who is constantly trying to figure out how many bites can they eat while not being gluttonous have it all backwards. Same with drinking alcohol.

The key is in why someone drinks (or eats). If one drinks (or eats) in order to satisfy some inward need that drink (or food) was not intended to satisfy, then their problem is with their view of drink (or food). So, if one eats in order to relieve stress, then avoiding overindulging is going to be a problem. Or if one drinks to fill some emptiness or out of boredom, then avoiding overindulging is going to be a problem. But eat and drink in faith, accepting them as good gifts of God, and partaking in gladness of heart and thankfullness of spirit, then the problem with overindulgence dwindles to almost non-existence.

 

[dwmoeller1]

So where does the line that devides sin and non-sin? If Jesus drank wine and that makes drinking wine ok, then what about beer, whiskey, or vodka? I am sure you believe the wine Jesus drank was fermented. If that is so, do you think Christ ever got drunk, or even tipsy?

Do you agonize with these question over the subject of food? I hope not, or if you do, I hope you can realize that its not the proper attitude towards food. Its not the proper attitude towards alcohol either. If you obsess over "How much is too much?" or "What kind is acceptable and which is not?" you miss the whole point. If one simply accepts that alcohol is given by God as a good gift, that we should take joy and pleasure in this gift, that we should be thankful for this gift and that we should not look for improper things from this gift - specifically, things which only God can and should provide - then then all your above questions becomes totally beside the point.

It is only in the framework of legalism and conscience binding that such questions have any significance.

 

[dwmoeller1]

All of these man made extra biblical requirements are the same things Christ got on the Pharisees about and do more harm to people than good. You may have good intentions in your convictions, but don't just regurgitate everything you have been taught without going to Scripture first.

This is a very key thing to consider (and beyond the subject of alcohol). What does it say about our Christian witness when unbelievers automatically see Christianity in terms of does and don'ts? Haven't we failed in our Christian witness if the name of Christ is so strongly associated with does and don'ts (many extra-scriptural) that this is what the unbeliever automatically assumes is the heart of Christianity? Instead, shouldn't the key identifiers of the Christian be things like visiting the orphans, caring for the widows, loving their fellow believers?

IMO, its a very poor reflection the the church when things like drinking hurts one's witness? Remember, it was the Pharisees who criticizes Christ for eating and drinking, not the sinners who accepted His word.

 

[webdog]

I encourage everyone to read a good article on alcohol and the bible at http://www.james-dave.com/alcoholfaq.html. I know that the wine Jesus provided at the wedding was in fact non-alcoholic wine. It is clear that people drank a lot. If it had been alcoholic, some people would have gotten drunk. Some very skinny people get drunk even after just 1 drink.

Actually Jesus made the "best" wine, and the Old Testament defined the "best" wine in Isaiah 25:6, which is coincidentally the SAME wine our Lord will serve us one day! Well aged, well refined wine can in no way shape or form be considered non alcoholic. Call any winery and ask if that is a possibility today or 2000 years ago.

Scripture does not say if people got drunk at the wedding, but their senses were blurred as to what the good wine was and the secondary wine. Being a jewish wedding, I can almost guarantee there were people there who were drunk. Christ did not sin by providing good wine any more than we sin by providing food to someone who eats too much. Personal accountability and responsibility apply.

 

[webdog]

This is a very key thing to consider (and beyond the subject of alcohol). What does it say about our Christian witness when unbelievers automatically see Christianity in terms of does and don'ts? Haven't we failed in our Christian witness if the name of Christ is so strongly associated with does and don'ts (many extra-scriptural) that this is what the unbeliever automatically assumes is the heart of Christianity? Instead, shouldn't the key identifiers of the Christian be things like visiting the orphans, caring for the widows, loving their fellow believers?

IMO, its a very poor reflection the the church when things like drinking hurts one's witness? Remember, it was the Pharisees who criticizes Christ for eating and drinking, not the sinners who accepted His word.

Unfortunately, this is what the world sees in modern day America. They see people like the Phelps lunatics (which hold to MANY of the same legalistic standards mainstream believers do...but on a grander scale), the Koran burner, or the hypocrites who preach out on such matters while doing them.

How refreshing it must be for a non believer to come across a Christ follower who allows Scripture define what sin is and not place the yoke of burden on them with "can't dance, can't watch tv, can't wear pants, can't play games, can't play cards, can't hang out with unbelievers, can't drink alcohol, can't drink coffee, can't, can't, can't"

 

[annsni]

You have made some good points here. But, what about in the scripture when it speaks about not making another brother stumble? Whats your opinion on this in regards to drinking alcohol?

Then we are to not partake. Of course we need to not use this as a wide across excuse for all mankind ("You don't know who might stumble so you can never do that.") but if you know that you will be in a situation where you are well aware of an issue, then it would be brotherly kindness to not drink.

For example: My husband and I were on a cruise in June. We had our children in the children's program and my in-laws had gone on to a show. We were sitting in one of the lounges listening to a great jazz trio and we both said that this would be a time that we would have a nice glass of wine. Our drinking a glass of wine at that time would not have caused anyone to stumble (other than our budget because they charge a LOT for alcohol these days!!) and it would have been within our liberty to have done so.

As an opposite example, back when we did drink, we were at our yacht club for a quiet dinner and each had a glass of wine and someone came up to us and sat down talking. In our discussion, he asked us "Hey - Aren't you Baptists?? Don't they forbid drinking?" and we were able to tell him what the Bible says about alcohol and he was then able to tell us about his hostility towards Baptists because of a very outspoken Baptist neighbor he had who would always get on his case about drinking and that he was going to hell because he drank. What a stumbling block to witnessing!! Once he heard that drunkeness is a sin and not having a glass of beer, he was much more receptive to the Gospel and has since become a Christian - AND given up drinking. LOL

 

[Steadfast Fred]

You mean that no good can come of abuse of alcohol. It wasn't the alcohol which was the problem but his immoderate use of it. Same with food, same with sex.

Besides, anecdotes are useless in a discussion since for every anecdote you pull our in favor of your side, I can pull out the same or more in favor of the opposite. Plus, anecdotes tend to ignore or pass over important details.

Furthermore, lets be careful and quote principles in their context. Here is the full context:
29Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes?
30They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine.
31Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.
32At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.
33Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.
34Yea, thou shalt be as he that lieth down in the midst of the sea, or as he that lieth upon the top of a mast.
35They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not sick; they have beaten me, and I felt it not: when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again.

You argue, not to partake at all. But the context of Scripture is that of those who abuse wine, who are addicted to it. After all, the things described - the insensitivity to pain, the lack of inhibitions, the red eyes, the abnormal bad temper, being accident prone, getting into fights, babbling, etc. - don't happen to those who drink in moderation but to those who get drunk or are alcoholics. It is those who tarry long at wine and seek it out that this passage is speaking of. It says nothing of moderate use of wine.

Scripture teaches that alcohol deceives. Alcohol is the problem.

Comparing alcohol with food or sex is nothing more than a feeble attempt to justify alcohol.

 

[webdog]

Scripture teaches that alcohol deceives. Alcohol is the problem.

Comparing alcohol with food or sex is nothing more than a feeble attempt to justify alcohol.

Alcohol is an inanimate object. Trying to put moral characteristics on an amoral agent is a feeble attempt to justify your legalistic standards.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

Alcohol is an inanimate object. Trying to put moral characteristics on an amoral agent is a feeble attempt to justify your legalistic standards.

I guess you must think the Bible is feeble then. The book of Proverbs tells us alcohol deceives, so that belief has been around much longer than I have.

Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise. Proverbs 20:1

 

[webdog]

I guess you must think the Bible is feeble then. The book of Proverbs tells us alcohol deceives, so that belief has been around much longer than I have.

Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise. Proverbs 20:1

No, I think your literal take on hyperbolic terminology to be feeble. Using your logic Jesus is also a lamb and a consuming fire...afterall that's what the Bible says

At any point I have yet to be deceived by a glass of wine or beer... my ears aren't tuned to their language.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Scripture teaches that alcohol deceives. Alcohol is the problem.

Scripture teaches that food deceives, so food is the problem (Prov 23:3) and we should forbid its use.

Or! in context, neither food or alcohol is deceitful as a general rule, but is deceitful for those who are "given to appetite" or "they that tarry long at wine". You can't rip the verse out of a context which clearly applies to immoderate use and use it to forbid partaking altogether. Just as you don't use Prov 23:3 to argue against eating fancy food altogether, neither can you legitimately use Prov 23:32 to forbid moderate alcohol use.

And while we are on the subject of forbidding things because they are said to be deceitful...
The the tongue is deceitful (Ps 52:2), so the the tongue is the problem and we should forbid using it. Favor is deceitful and beauty is vain (Prov 31:30), so both should be forbidden. Wealth is deceitful (Mark 4:19) so we should forbid money.

Comparing alcohol with food or sex is nothing more than a feeble attempt to justify alcohol.

Why the heck would I seek to justify alcohol? I don't use it myself, nor am I every likely to. This is known as an ad hominem circumstantial fallacy. It is just as valid as denying your argument because they are nothing more than a feeble attempt to forbid alcohol. Deal with the soundness of the arguments, not the supposed character and motives of those who give the arguments.

Also it ignores verses where those things are compared, and it ignores that various passages condemn their abuse in the same terms.

 

[dwmoeller1]

I guess you must think the Bible is feeble then. The book of Proverbs tells us alcohol deceives, so that belief has been around much longer than I have.

Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise. Proverbs 20:1

So don't be deceived. Drink in moderation and faith. If you can't, then don't drink. Again, the context is that of immoderate use.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

Not all food is deceitful, it is dainties that the wise Solomon warned against. And not just any dainties, but the kings dainties.

Daniel saw the same thing when in captivity. And for this purpose, he would not defile himself with the kings wine nor his meat.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Not all food is deceitful, it is dainties that the wise Solomon warned against. And not just any dainties, but the kings dainties.

You only say that cause you read it in context. Likewise the context about alcohol is not about it being deceitful no matter what, but about it being deceitful "in the end" and in the context of overindulging. Just as you read one in context you have to read the other in context.

This is especially true when there are so many verses which deal with alcohol in a positive and/or permissive manner.

 

[jbh28]

Is it a sin for a Christian to drink alcohol in moderation? No
Now, should a Christian drink alcohol in moderation? Is it wise to abstain from all use of alcohol? To me, that's why I don't drink. It's not because the Bible forbids it(which it does not) but because I don't need to drink it and I am very likely to no drink in moderation. (listen, I hardly drink Mt. Dew in moderation ). That's me and my opinion. Alcohol has wrecked a many of families. I don't want to look back many years later and wish I had never taken that first drink.