Is a little alcohol alright with the Bible?

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by BrianT:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by C.S. Murphy:
but Romans 15:1 says "not to please ourselves" so my question is why not abstain instead of having to go into stealth mode to make sure you don't offend. Paul said not to please ourself apparently your drinking pleases you or you wouldn't partake so is Paul not saying die to self?

Murph! You're not listening! Take out "drinking" and insert "activity x" into your question, then think about it.</font>[/QUOTE]Brian are you trying to say that since we cannot help but to offend someone with some activity that we should just ignore Paul's words against drinking in front of the weaker brother? And once and for all did paul ever mention doughnuts? And what's up with activity X why not just face up to your problem with drinking that apparently is so strong that you are willing to throw biblical caution to the wind and say I am drinking that is my christian liberty, if a weaker brother is offended and I know about it I will try to convince him of my right to drink and if he cannot be convinced or is mislead or stumbles because of my drinking then I can't help that.
Once again who is my brother? and is he for whom Christ died worth more than my drinking?
Murph

 

[Optional]

Give it up, Brian. Some are obviously just ignoring what you're saying to promulgate their own agendas.

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by C.S. Murphy:

Brian are you trying to say that since we cannot help but to offend someone with some activity that we should just ignore Paul's words against drinking in front of the weaker brother?

No, that is NOT what I'm saying. I've *repeatedly* said that I wouldn't drink "in front of the weaker brother". Don't change the question, you had previously said "why not abstain instead of having to go into stealth mode to make sure you don't offend."

And what's up with activity X

Well, that response shows me you obviously didn't think about it.

Earlier in response to the vegetarian question, you said "If I had knowledge that a person in my presence was a vegetarian I would act as a vegetarian". But that's basically what I said about drinking! And yet you are getting on my case about something you *admit* you handle the *exact* same way! So I ask: "why not abstain instead of having to go into stealth mode to make sure you don't offend. Paul said not to please ourself apparently your (eating meat, which is 'activity x' in this case) pleases you or you wouldn't partake so is Paul not saying die to self?"

If surfing the internet is going to lead a weaker brother to sin with pornography, I will not do it with him around. If eating a doughnut (yes, a doughnut, deal with it) is going to lead a weaker brother to the sin of gluttony, I will not do it with him around. If having a glass of wine is going to lead a weaker brother to sin with alcohol abuse, I will not do it with him around. If going to the beach is going to lead a weaker brother to sin with lust, I will not do it with him around. If working out at they gym is going to lead a weaker brother to the sin of pride, I will not do it with him around.

However, if we outright abstain from everything that might cause a brother to stumble, because we don't know when a brother might see us or hear about it, we could not do *anything*. For example, your vegetarian brother would be offended if you ate meat, so you abstain from eating meat altogether. Then another brother is offended that you *don't* eat meat (yes, I know some people who thing vegetarianism is a sin), so what do you do? Abstain from eating altogether?

why not just face up to your problem with drinking that apparently is so strong that you are willing to throw biblical caution to the wind and say I am drinking that is my christian liberty, if a weaker brother is offended and I know about it I will try to convince him of my right to drink and if he cannot be convinced or is mislead or stumbles because of my drinking then I can't help that.

*Nine* pages, and that's what you think I'm saying? Murph, this isn't the first thread where you either don't read or don't understand my responses. Either way, your misrepresenting what I believe, say, and do is only adding confusion to the discussion.

If you don't get it by now, I fear another 9 pages could be spent going in these same circles, so I'm going to try and wrap it up in the next few posts.

 

[blackbird]

BrianT!! Brother, its an ambush! You aren't being "bush-wacked" here--you are being ambushed!

Give me a good definition of a "weaker" brother! And suppose a brother who is much stronger than you is himself offended by your social drinking! Can the private "tick" the General off as well as having the General "tick" the private off?!!

Just who is the weak and who is the strong??

Your friend,
Blackbird

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by blackbird:

Just who is the weak and who is the strong??

Read 1 Cor 8.

 

[ChristianCynic]

Originally posted by C.S. Murphy:
Brian we can donut this to death but Romans 15:1 says "not to please ourselves" so my question is why not abstain instead of having to go into stealth mode to make sure you don't offend. Paul said not to please ourself apparently your drinking pleases you or you wouldn't partake so is Paul not saying die to self?
Murph

And if abstaining totally from alcohol is pleasing to you, do you still please yourself by not drinking it? or do you you die to your desire not to drink?

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by blackbird:
And suppose a brother who is much stronger than you is himself offended by your social drinking!

If the person is a "stronger" brother, then on what grounds is he offended.

(note: this is not an attack)

Mike

[ September 30, 2002, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Smoke_Eater ]

 

[Ransom]

blackbird said:

Give me a good definition of a "weaker" brother!

A "weaker brother" is one whose faith is immature (perhaps he is a new Christian, for example) and is as yet unable to distinguish between necessary doctrine and disputable matters. As a result he is over-scrupulous and might be easily pressured into acting against his conscience, which for him would be an "offense" - i.e. sin.

By contrast, a stronger brother is one whose faith is mature, who can distinguish between necessary doctrine and disputable matters, and has considered and become "fully convinced in his own mind" about the latter. He has his scruples in disputable matters, and yet he does not hold others to them, nor does he become upset when his personal scruples are broken by others.

And suppose a brother who is much stronger than you is himself offended by your social drinking!

A "stronger" brother, by definition, would not be "offended" (i.e. caused to sin) by my social drinking, because he is "fully convinced in his own mind." If the stronger brother is a drinker, he does not "despise him who does not" drink; if he is not a drinker, he does not "judge" those who drink (Rom. 14:3).

Being offended, i.e. taking offense, is not what Paul has in mind; it is not to the point. (You could call such "Pharisees.")

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by BrianT:
If surfing the internet is going to lead a weaker brother to sin with pornography, I will not do it with him around. If eating a doughnut (yes, a doughnut, deal with it) is going to lead a weaker brother to the sin of gluttony, I will not do it with him around. If having a glass of wine is going to lead a weaker brother to sin with alcohol abuse, I will not do it with him around. If going to the beach is going to lead a weaker brother to sin with lust, I will not do it with him around. If working out at they gym is going to lead a weaker brother to the sin of pride, I will not do it with him around.

Once again give the poor donut a break, did Paul mention donuts or did he mention alcohol, please let's just deal with alcohol if you wish to start another thread on internet, donuts e.t.c. that is great but let's work on the drinking. You say you will not drink in front of a weaker brother and if you realize you did you would talk to him about it not being a sin. I simply have asked you to take another look at your plan because I don't feel you can adequately meet Paul's guidelines with your plan. Just today at Winn Dixie I saw a man loading up on wine and beer, I didn't know him but I do know that his activity was well noticed, if someone there knew he was a Christian he may have offended. If they didn't know it but in three months they joined a church and this man happened to be an usher they would probuly remember the buggy of alcohol and be offended. Does this make any sense?

Murph, this isn't the first thread where you either don't read or don't understand my responses. I understood you on the falling from grace thread and I don't buy that argument either.

If you are concluding this in a few threads please give the donuts a break
Murph

 

[BrianT]

Murphy, let me know when you actually want to address my responses instead of going in circles and avoiding admitting the double standards.

Thanks,
Brian

[ September 30, 2002, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: BrianT ]

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by BrianT:
Murphy, let me know when you actually want to address my responses instead of going in circles and avoiding admitting the double standards.

Thanks,
Brian

I have tried for 9 pages (on this thread alone) and you still don't accept that people are offended by your drinking that you don't even realize. I thought about you today when I saw the guy buying his alcohol. Where do you buy your's at?
Murph

 

[BrianT]

I have tried for 9 pages (on this thread alone) and you still don't accept that people are offended by your eating meat that you don't even realize. I thought about you today when I saw the guy buying his hamburger. Where do you buy your's at?

Prov 20:10 Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the LORD.

 

[Helen]

Folks, we are to live in peace insofar as possible. It is IMPOSSIBLE to live life without offending someone at sometime in some way. That is the point of what Jesus was saying when He mentioned that some called Him a glutton and a drunkard. He concluded that with the remark, "But wisdom is proved right by her actions."

It seems to me that if someone is offended by the sight of someone buying something that is legal, then the person doing the looking has a problem. And we cannot help that. It is not the buying of alcohol, or meat, or doughnuts, or anything else that is offensive. It is the evidence of overuse that is offensive. A drunk person is offensive. A person having a glass of wine with dinner is not. He is doing nothing offensive unless someone else CHOOSES to be offended by it. But a drunk is offensive in a number of ways.

I am also just as disgusted/offended by a grossly obese person who is that way not through a medical problem but because he or she stuffs his or her face every possible chance. I find this just as offensive as a drunk, personally. Both show a total lack of self-control and an unseemly concentration upon one's self and one's own feelings of numbness or satiation or whatever.

Here is another example. We have our own well on our property, which feeds from an underground stream. So although we use county water for the household and drinking, we use well water for the yard and animals. The runoff from my yard feeds a fish pond and then a holding pond further down which is for cattle, so it does not go into storm drains or sewage. Neighbors on both sides of me have not got that stream to feed from and only get about 4-6 gallons a minute from their wells. I can get up to 90 if my pump is big enough (which I most certainly don't need!).

So I will allow a reasonable amount of runoff for the fish pond down the road. On the way down, the water in the ditch waters the roadside trees which my neighbors cannot afford to do.

Now you know the background. But several times this summer strangers have stopped on the road while I was working out in the yard to berate me for wasting water. Each time I explained, understanding their upset. Each time when they knew what was going on they drove away satisfied.

They had a right to be offended by what they thought was happening. But what they thought and what was really happening were two different things. They were gracious enough to admit that.

If a person is buying wine, you do not know what it is for. Maybe it is for me, as I cannot take a lot of medicines and wine serves for coughs, sore throats, relaxation, and muscle spasms. I have a 22 1/2 year old artificial knee and yes, I do get muscle spasms in my thigh occasionally. Given all that, I probably consume the enormous amount of a bottle a year!

In short, you do not know if the person buying the alcohol is planning on getting drunk! You do not know if he or she has EVER been drunk.

Unless he or she is drunk when you see them, you have no right to be offended.

When I see a normal sized person going in for a dozen doughnuts, I think nothing of it. When I see a 300 lb person going in for the same, I cringe. I know what they are doing to their body, and I know that the people around him or her are also suffering because of this person.

Offense is not in the buying or consuming. It is in the waste and the effects of that waste where most consumable goods are concerned. That includes alcohol.

Get a grip, folks, and quit be offended because not everyone in life agrees with you! Save the passions of being offended for things that are destroying people -- like porn on the net, or violence on standard television shows, or any number of things which have NO 'safe' limit at all! Get mad at the way these are destroying our friends, neighbors, and children!

 

[blackbird]

Sister Helen!

Glad to read your post, dear Sister! Let me relate this story--then I'll leave this post alone! I once read a line from Stephen Ambrose's work on WW2 history. Seems like around the holiday seasons--Christmas especially--that the US Troops will somehow or other call a truce with the opposing "Krauts"--to do their best to enjoy a Holy Holiday without the sound of artillery shells nor the crackle of small arms fire! And sometimes the truce would stretch out to the first of the year!!

To Sister Helen, HankD, BrianT, Moderator Murph--Merry Christmas!! Lets call a "Cease Fire!" until at least the first of the year!

Your friend,
Blackbird

PS--Just because Blackbird has called a truce--doesn't mean that there ain't no "Blackbird" recon units out there in the boonies--on watch!

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by BrianT:
[QB]I have tried for 9 pages (on this thread alone) and you still don't accept that people are offended by your eating meat that you don't even realize. I thought about you today when I saw the guy buying his hamburger. Where do you buy your's at?

At this I will depart this discussion as Brian refuses to address the issue which with all due respect to Helen is not water usage or obesity but the thread is alcohol. I did not say that I was offended by a shopper with a basket of wine but rather that I felt a new Christian would be and again with respect to my sister I do not think Paul is saying that if someone is offended it is their problem. With great liberty comes great responsibility. Who is our brother? Peace to all and as Blackbird said merry Christmas.
Murph

 

[Optional]

At this I will depart this discussion as Brian refuses to address the issue which with all due respect to Helen is not water usage or obesity but the thread is alcohol. I did not say that I was offended by a shopper with a basket of wine but rather that I felt a new Christian would be and again with respect to my sister I do not think Paul is saying that if someone is offended it is their problem. With great liberty comes great responsibility. Who is our brother? Peace to all and as Blackbird said merry Christmas.
Murph

Brian addressed the issue of alcohol quite well. Just because you missed the point completely doesn't mean he refused to address the issue. He did so over and over and over...

[ September 30, 2002, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: Optional ]

 

[GIG]

Please, is this horse dead yet? I believe we all understand that you guys are not going to agree on this subject....let it fade into the sunset, because believe it or not , I don't think you're going to change each others minds....

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by C.S. Murphy:

At this I will depart this discussion as Brian refuses to address the issue which with all due respect to Helen is not water usage or obesity but the thread is alcohol.

I *have* addressed it time after time. I have included other activities in the discussion to emphasize the point I was making about alcohol (not to switch the discussion from alcohol), *because the principle is the same* - which principle *you* have even used in this thread for things other than alcohol! Are you the only one allowed to apply this scriptural principle? Is this yet another double standard?

Blackbird, I'm always in "ceasefire" mode. Firearms cause weaker brothers to stumble, so you should avoid them.

 

[Optional]

Blackbird, I'm always in "ceasefire" mode. Firearms cause weaker brothers to stumble, so you should avoid them.

 

[Ransom]

Helen said:

It is IMPOSSIBLE to live life without offending someone at sometime in some way.

[pedantry]
We've got to keep our terminology straight. When Paul says that weaker brothers might be "offended" by our eating meat or drinking wine; when he says that by eating meat sacrificed to idols we might make a brother "to offend," he is not simply talking about making that brother upset. To "offend" means "to entice to sin" - to cause a weaker brother to stumble in his faith.

It's the same word (skandalizo Jesus uses in Matt. 5:29 where he says that if your eye "offend thee," take it out. He is not talking about your eye making you upset, he is talking about it being the channel for temptations that entice you to sin.

The word is used to mean "to be indignant" (see, for example, Matt. 15:12), but that is not what Paul has in view.
[/pedantry]

Paul is telling his readers not to give cause for offense. Don't do what you know will cause a weaker brother to sin against his conscience. He is not saying that we are responsible if someone takes offense. That is his problem.