Moderation is what helps- not teetotalism

[Revmitchell]

How do you reconcile this belief with these scriptures? Deacons and aged women are not to drink too much wine, bishops none at all.

1 Tim. 3

[regarding bishops] Not given to wine...

[regarding deacons] Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine,

Titus 2:3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine

I would like to answer that but quite frankly I do not understand what your questions is. What you have posted backs up what I am saying. Of course we all know the passages about being sober minded.

 

[Luke2427]

You said you'd go verse by verse. Romans 14, 15 and 1 Cor. 8 are the relevant chapters. I'm not writing a commentary, we're simply discussing what is being said.

I didn't say a weaker brother was one who is weak in will, and neither did Paul. He said weak in the faith, and that is not the same as ignorance.

Before we go on, that needs to be understood. That doesn't mean one who is ignorant or undisciplined or lacking self-control.

Your anecdote had someone being influenced to do something that they could not handle by someone who COULD handle it.

That's not congruent with the weaker brother principle in Scripture.

We cannot go verse by verse properly without first getting the overall context. That is what I provided.

It does mean ignorant when the issue is REPEATEDLY identified in the text as knowledge versus LACK OF KNOWLEDGE.

The weaker brother is one who does not know what the stronger brother knows. That is why he is weaker.

A lack of knowledge is ignorance.

 

[DHK]

Smoking in moderation is not a vice. As a matter of fact scientific studies have proven that pipe smokers have a slightly longer life expectancy than NON-smokers.

You live in Mississippi. Don't they grow tobacco there? Whose reports have you been reading? Tobacco backed junk science is my guess!
It is proven fact of science that pipe smoking is a major cause of cancer to the mouth. Any kind of second hand smoke is damaging to the health of others, not only to yourself.

Smoking won't send you to hell; it will only make you smell like you have already been there.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, beneficial about smoking.
Smoking and alcohol are the two biggest drains on our health care system. If people gave them up what a tremendous savings in cost to all involved there would be in the health care system. Their resources could be allocated to those who really need it.

Sex is CERTAINLY not a vice if it is done the way God commands: within the bonds of marriage.

Have you been following this discussion?
The context is one who, as soon as he left home began to drink. He also joined the army at the same time, presumably was not married. Marriage was not in the equation. Sex is wrong outside of marriage. And that is what I said. I was also speaking of sex with more than one partner. Is that all right within the bounds of marriage? You don't seem to read and understand well.

A vice is something you do inordinately.

Where did you get that lame definition?

a : moral depravity or corruption : wickedness
b : a moral fault or failing

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vice

The word "vice" is a noun; "a vice." It is not a verb--something you do, as you have defined it.
--Drinking alcohol, whether one glass or one firkin is a vice. It is the "drinking of alcohol" that is the vice. It is the corruption, the wickedness, the moral depravity. It has nothing to do with the amount. Have you had your firkin today?
(In answer to your other post, just as we don't speak middle English today [most don't have any idea what a firkin is], so people wouldn't speak koine Greek or OT Hebrew today either. Learning to speak Biblical languages would be a vain exercise in discipline, not a profitable one.)

When the government raises taxes on alcoholic beverages and tobacco they deliberately call it a "sin tax." Even the unsaved know that it is a "vice." They call it "sin." It is amazing how the government will label these as sin, but a man who says he is a baptist pastor will not. Truly amazing!

Drinking is not a vice.

Your opinion. The dictionaries say others.
Even governments say otherwise.

Doing DRUGS is not a vice if it is done properly. I have taken oxicontin before- when I had shoulder surgery.

Again, you are foolish enough not to follow this conversation. I mentioned marijuana, cocaine and LSD--all non-prescript drugs. We all have taken prescription drugs at one time or another for varying ailments. That is not the subject. That is an entirely different subject--a red herring.
--But am I to assume that you will inject yourself with heroin, even in "moderation,"? Are you really saying that? Will snort cocaine? Do it in front of your children? Teach them to do it "moderately" so the world doesn't have to teach them? Really--not a vice??
Nooooo. It is not a vice!! It is just illegal; comes with a jail sentence, and in some countries the death penalty is attached to it. A vice??

What you IFB folks lack knowledge about is that NOTHING is unclean in and of itself. It is when you do it inordinately that it becomes a vice and a sin.

Taking drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes are not vices you say.
And then you tell me I am the one without knowledge.
You need to do your homework.

 

[Aaron]

We cannot go verse by verse properly without first getting the overall context.

Yes we can. The Scriptures say what they say, and everything you want to argue will be covered. Paul said weak in faith. Faith does not equal knowledge. So your weakness = ignorance assertion has to be corrected

Are you willing to go verse by verse or not?

 

[Winman]

Excellent post DHK, I agree with you 100%.

Nevertheless, I think even you would enjoy this video;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYJi7dmu590

 

[Luke2427]

You live in Mississippi. Don't they grow tobacco there? Whose reports have you been reading? Tobacco backed junk science is my guess!
It is proven fact of science that pipe smoking is a major cause of cancer to the mouth. Any kind of second hand smoke is damaging to the health of others, not only to yourself.

Smoking won't send you to hell; it will only make you smell like you have already been there.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, beneficial about smoking.
Smoking and alcohol are the two biggest drains on our health care system. If people gave them up what a tremendous savings in cost to all involved there would be in the health care system. Their resources could be allocated to those who really need it.

Well, as usual there is what backwater Independent Fundamentalism teaches and then there's the facts...


A US Surgeon General report “Smoking and Health”(No. 1103, page 112) noted,“Death rates for current pipe smokers were little if at all higher than for non-smokers, even with men smoking 10 pipefuls per day and with men who had smoked pipes for more than 30 years.” On page 92 the report also stated, “Pipe smokers who inhale live as long as nonsmokers and pipe smokers that don’t inhale live longer than non-smokers.

 

[Luke2427]

Yes we can. The Scriptures say what they say, and everything you want to argue will be covered. Paul said weak in faith. Faith does not equal knowledge. So your weakness = ignorance assertion has to be corrected

Are you willing to go verse by verse or not?

Context first.

I should not have to tell you that. There is not a reputable exegete on the planet who does not know that.

 

[Aaron]

Context first.

I should not have to tell you that. There is not a reputable exegete on the planet who does not know that.

Comment then, on Romans 14:1-4.

 

[InTheLight]

I would like to answer that but quite frankly I do not understand what your questions is. What you have posted backs up what I am saying. Of course we all know the passages about being sober minded.

You contend that completely sober-minded is a Biblical mandate, correct?

In these verses we see that deacons and aged women are allowed to drink wine, but not to excess, however, bishops are not to drink at all. That means that Paul is advocating moderation in the consumption of alcohol when it comes to deacons and aged women.

The ESV renders 1 Tim 3:8-- Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine,, NASB says the same thing and the NIV does so at Titus 2:3.

So teetotalism is not Biblical, but moderation is.

 

[Revmitchell]

You contend that completely sober-minded is a Biblical mandate, correct?

In these verses we see that deacons and aged women are allowed to drink wine, but not to excess, however, bishops are not to drink at all. That means that Paul is advocating moderation in the consumption of alcohol when it comes to deacons and aged women.

The ESV renders 1 Tim 3:8-- Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine,, NASB says the same thing and the NIV does so at Titus 2:3.

So teetotalism is not Biblical, but moderation is.

You are reading into it more than is there. Your is an assumption without much support.

 

[DHK]

Well, as usual there is what backwater Independent Fundamentalism teaches and then there's the facts...


A US Surgeon General report “Smoking and Health”(No. 1103, page 112) noted,“Death rates for current pipe smokers were little if at all higher than for non-smokers, even with men smoking 10 pipefuls per day and with men who had smoked pipes for more than 30 years.” On page 92 the report also stated, “Pipe smokers who inhale live as long as nonsmokers and pipe smokers that don’t inhale live longer than non-smokers.

Maybe your lifespan is about the same? So?

Pipe and cigar users do not normally inhale much, which may not cause lung cancer, but they run the risk of developing mouth cancer. In the case of pregnant women, smoking is doubly dangerous, as it affects the child in the womb. The nicotine in tobacco reduces the blood flow, and thereby, the flow of oxygen and nutrients to the unborn baby gets reduced causing, sometimes, the death of the baby itself.

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/harmful-health-effects-smoking-cigarettes.html

The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that more preventable diseases and deaths are caused by tobacco than any other source. Pipe smokers tend to smoke differently than cigarette smokers, holding smoke in their mouths and throats rather than drawing deeply into their lungs. Although this difference in technique might seem to lessen the risk of pipe tobacco, it does not reduce smoking's health risks and instead creates additional risks.
Misconceptions

Some people believe that pipe tobacco is less harmful and has less nicotine than cigarettes or cigars. But the National Cancer Institute states that all forms of tobacco are harmful to your health. No level or frequency of tobacco use, regardless of the product, is safe.


Addiction
Nicotine impacts dopamine production, a neurotransmitter that affects the brain's pleasure and reward center. Inhaling the nicotine in pipe tobacco stimulates the production of dopamine in ways similar to heroin or cocaine, triggering a pleasure response in the brain. Over time, smokers crave this pleasurable sensation and seek to satisfy the craving by smoking more. When pipe smokers attempt to quit, their bodies experience withdrawal symptoms such as sleeplessness, hunger and irritability.
Diseases
As a result of the harmful chemicals in tobacco, people who smoke run the risk of developing several diseases including cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and lung disease. In addition to lowering the smoker's quality of life, each of these diseases is expensive to treat. Although pipe smoking is hazardous to your health, the American Cancer Society states that people who smoke pipe tobacco have a slightly lower risk of death from stroke and diseases of the lung and cardiovascular system than cigarette smokers, but a higher risk of death from those same health issues than non-smokers.
Additional Cancers
Pipe smokers do not inhale as deeply as cigarette smokers; instead, they hold smoke in their mouths and throats. Holding smoke rather than inhaling it creates additional risks for pipe smokers. They experience more frequent instances of cancers of the mouth, including the lip, throat, larynx or voice box, and the esophagus.
Secondhand Smoke
Burning pipe tobacco and exhaled smoke create a gas called secondhand smoke that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says contains a minimum of 250 toxic chemicals. Non-smoking adults exposed to secondhand smoke experience immediate harmful effects to their cardiovascular systems and lungs. Repeated exposure can result in heart attacks and lung cancer.

Children are also at risk from pipe tobacco secondhand smoke. They experience respiratory problems including asthma, sneezing, bronchitis and pneumonia. Secondhand smoke causes ear infections in children and places babies at a greater risk of sudden infant death syndrome.
Effects of Quitting
Quitting smoking has immediate and long-lasting benefits. Immediately, your body begins expelling the high levels of carbon monoxide that build up from smoking. This improves the flow of oxygen to your lungs and brain, increasing your energy and focus. Your heart rate and blood pressure return to normal levels, and over time your circulation and lung function improve. Longer term, people who quit reduce their chances of developing cancer and other diseases and improve their longevity.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/321053-the-risks-of-smoking-pipe-tobacco/

Take that and put it in your pipe.
But you will not take that info because you simply want to justify your vices no matter what they are. Truth is denied at all costs, isn't it?

 

[InTheLight]

You are reading into it more than is there. Your is an assumption without much support.

Bible says deacons should not be addicted to much wine, which tells me a little wine, i.e. moderation, is OK. How else can one read these verses? It's plain as day.

 

[DHK]

Bible says deacons should not be addicted to much wine, which tells me a little wine, i.e. moderation, is OK. How else can one read these verses? It's plain as day.

It is not always as plain as one would like it to be.
Here is what MacArthur says on p. 75 in his book "Pastoral Ministry,"

Not addicted to Wine.
This third point translates the Greek word paroinon, which literally means “to be alongside wine.” This pastoral requirement is repeated in 1Tim.3:3, as well as in Titus 2:3, where it gives a qualification of older women who assist younger women in an official capacity in the church. Anyone in any kid of Christian leadership needs to be alert and clearheaded.
Does this mean that pastors in the New Testament times never drank any wine at all? No, wine was the common drink back then. You could not drink the water without risking infection. Even today in countries where adequate refrigeration and water purification do not exist, the first thing you are told when you visit is, “Don’t drink the water.”
Any kind of juice standing in the heat will ferment. People of ancient times were well aware of that, so they took a number of precautions to avoid intoxication. The first was to mix wine with water, as much as eight parts of water to one part of wine. This served more as a disinfectant for the water than a recipe for a tasty drink, because mixed eight to one, there was not much taste there. You could not get drunk on it because your stomach could not hold what it would take to intoxicate you since the combination included so much water.

Even after this process they commonly boiled it.
Either way they could not be given to wine, addicted to wine, etc.
They had to be alert and clear-minded all the time.

 

[InTheLight]

It is not always as plain as one would like it to be.
Here is what MacArthur says on p. 75 in his book "Pastoral Ministry,"

The first was to mix wine with water, as much as eight parts of water to one part of wine. This served more as a disinfectant for the water than a recipe for a tasty drink, because mixed eight to one, there was not much taste there. You could not get drunk on it because your stomach could not hold what it would take to intoxicate you since the combination included so much water.

If you could not get drunk on wine the Bible wouldn't say for deacons to "not be given to much wine." It's really that simple. Why complicate the plain meaning of the verse?

 

[preacher4truth]

If you could not get drunk on wine the Bible wouldn't say for deacons to "not be given to much wine." It's really that simple. Why complicate the plain meaning of the verse?

Exactly. Moderation not abstinence. DHK and others would struggle in Germany where believers consume beer with no guilt.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Maybe your lifespan is about the same? So?
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/harmful-health-effects-smoking-cigarettes.html

http://www.livestrong.com/article/321053-the-risks-of-smoking-pipe-tobacco/

Take that and put it in your pipe.
But you will not take that info because you simply want to justify your vices no matter what they are. Truth is denied at all costs, isn't it?

Hey...good response.:thumbsup:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Exactly. Moderation not abstinence. DHK and others would struggle in Germany where believers consume beer with no guilt.

Germany...ha....geeze, my living room.:laugh:

 

[Revmitchell]

Bible says deacons should not be addicted to much wine, which tells me a little wine, i.e. moderation, is OK. How else can one read these verses? It's plain as day.

I never said moderation was not ok. In fact I believe that scripture never forbids alcohol. But you run into a problem when you get drunk (or buzzed) or anything less than sober.

 

[InTheLight]

I never said moderation was not ok. In fact I believe that scripture never forbids alcohol. But you run into a problem when you get drunk (or buzzed) or anything less than sober.

I'm trying to understand your position. You also said:

Moderation is good so long as it does not exceed any level of intoxication at all. Anything less than completely sober is sin.

Is it your position that any intake of alcohol will cause the drinker to lose sobriety? In other words, if a person has, say, 1/2 a beer have they left sobriety?

 

[Revmitchell]

Is it your position that any intake of alcohol will cause the drinker to lose sobriety?/QUOTE]

No, it is different for everyone. But some folks who call themselves Christians like to defend their buzz as if it is not a form of drunk. intoxication is intoxication and anything less than completely sober is sin. One drink with a meal is one thing but for the average person any more than that is a problem.