Most drinkers are moderate

[Luke2427]

I have never heard any preacher say that you are VERY LIKELY to become an alcoholic if you take one drink. I have heard many times that the person that takes their first drink never think they will become an alcoholic.

So....

Also, considering the outcomes of what alcoholism does to people, a 10% rate of alcoholism is edging into the dangerous area. I say this as a moderate drinker. Your arguments aren't convincing. Please stop it, I don't want you on my side of this issue.

First of all 5%.

Try to follow along more closely, please.

Secondly, of the 5% who have a problem I think most thinking people know that many if not most of them NEVER SET OUT TO drink moderately and that's how they BECAME alcoholics. They SET OUT TO party hard nearly every weekend, etc...

Therefore, the percentage of Christian people who SET OUT TO DRINK MODERATELY and therefore become alcoholics MUST be infinitesimal.

Maybe 1 in a million. Doubtful though.

 

[Luke2427]

I will admit that I have no use for alcohol, seen to much bad from it. I will also say two men I know have a glass of scotch each day before supper and one after supper, and they are fine Christian men.
A small sampler of why I don't care for drink;
3 wrecks in my front yard, one had a death, one the driver lost his leg and the other just messed up the car and my yard.
I have lost 2 family members due to being hit by a DWI driver.
I had a DWI driver kill her self by hitting my trailer while I was parked.
Over the last 10 years I have seen two pastors, 5 youth pastors and 5 ministers of music get DWI's down here. That isn't a good picture of the church.
But with that said, I believe for you to drink or not is your call not mine and not to drink would be like wise.

The horror stories you site are the result of ABUSE not moderate USE.

No one here is for ABUSE.

 

[Luke2427]

Have you considered purchasing a mirror?

Still sniping like a petulant child.

You haven't made an argument yet.

You are simply bitter because you CAN'T so you vent by being insulting.

 

[Arbo]

In a nutshell: teaching for doctrines the traditions of men.

When one takes a tradition, which is what teetotalism is, and it is a very NEW tradition, one the church did not embrace for the better part of two THOUSAND years- and they proclaim it as though it is a doctrine taught in the Word of God- that is phariseeism.

There is one more factor- it has to do with practice. It has to do with what you should do and what you should not do. It is not just a teaching like a theological matter between Arminians and Calvinists- it is an expectation concerning how you are to live.

I am a Calvinist. But I do not think Arminianism is phariseeism. Arminianism is a genuine attempt to systematize complex doctrines of Scripture.

Phariseeism is a doctrine, not about how you understand God necessarily, though it does touch that, it is primarily about what is right and wrong TO DO.

And what is your opinion of those who have formed the conviction that Alcohol consumption is wrong and base their belief on what they see as evidenced in Scripture?

 

[Arbo]

Still sniping like a petulant child.

You haven't made an argument yet.

You are simply bitter because you CAN'T so you vent by being insulting.

You just add fuel to the fire with "sniping" like this.

 

[Luke2427]

You just add fuel to the fire with "sniping" like this.

Be consistent and condemn BOTH sides.

Quote her post and condemn her actions as you do mine.

Otherwise you are not being PRINCIPLED here- you are just attacking the one you like the least which is just as bad.

Stand on principle or don't stand.

Do you not agree?

 

[Revmitchell]

Be consistent and condemn BOTH sides.

Quote her post and condemn her actions as you do mine.

Otherwise you are not being PRINCIPLED here- you are just attacking the one you like the least which is just as bad.

Stand on principle or don't stand.

Do you not agree?

I think he was pointing out your hypocrisy. Why are you not embarrassed to post something like this?

 

[Luke2427]

And what is your opinion of those who have formed the conviction that Alcohol consumption is wrong and base their belief on what they see as evidenced in Scripture?

#1- It is not IN Scripture.

This is why the church at large for EIGHTEEN HUNDRED years did not embrace such nonsense.

It's not like the Christians of the prohibition era were the first smart Christians and the vast majority of Christians before them were all a bunch of drunken morons.

Do you see?

The book of Proverbs is the only book in all of the Bible where you could even BEGIN to try to proof text this teetotalism doctrine.

And EVERY responsible handler of the Word of God knows that you don't build doctrine on the foundation of Proverbs.

Proverbs are not precepts. Therefore proverbs cannot be used to condemn anything across the board.


The only exception to this is when something in Proverbs is handled as a precept elsewhere in Scripture.

#2- I don't have a problem with ignorance on this issue. I have a problem with arrogance. When you DON'T know how to interpret Scripture and you DON'T know that teetotalism is a fad in Christian history without roots down through history anchoring in the Scripture- when you DON'T know these things and you STILL have the audacity to PREACH your doctrine anyway- that's what I have a problem with.

It is UNBRIDLED ARROGANCE.

 

[Luke2427]

I think he was pointing out your hypocrisy. Why are you not embarrassed to post something like this?

like what?
____

 

[Revmitchell]

It is UNBRIDLED ARROGANCE.

As is the op

 

[Revmitchell]

like what?
____

Enough said I suppose. Thanks for answering my questions with clarity.

 

[Luke2427]

As is the op

Do you have an argument or are you just an angry man with a beef?

Any coward can attack and snipe from a distance and act like he has the moral high ground.

It takes courage to make arguments and submit your thinking to scrutiny.

Any child can get on here like you do and say "You are POO POO HEAD!!!"

 

[InTheLight]

Also, considering the outcomes of what alcoholism does to people, a 10% rate of alcoholism is edging into the dangerous area.

First of all 5%.

Try to follow along more closely, please.

So if there are roughly 250 million people in America 12 years old and older and HALF of them drink that's roughly 175 million drinkers.

Out of roughly 175 million drinkers only 17.6 million are alcoholics.

So the stat is consistent with other nations and the world trends. About NINETY PERCENT of people who drink in America are NOT ALCOHOLICS.

<Shrugs>....Will do.

Secondly, of the 5% who have a problem I think most thinking people know that many if not most of them NEVER SET OUT TO drink moderately and that's how they BECAME alcoholics. They SET OUT TO party hard nearly every weekend, etc...

Therefore, the percentage of Christian people who SET OUT TO DRINK MODERATELY and therefore become alcoholics MUST be infinitesimal.

Maybe 1 in a million. Doubtful though.

So you just make stuff up in your head and pronounce it as truth? Must be a nice way to live.

 

[Luke2427]

<Shrugs>....Will do.

Well, as you do, how about trying to start with the OP?

95% of people in the world who drink are not alcoholics.

Got it?

 

[Arbo]

#1- It is not IN Scripture.

This is why the church at large for EIGHTEEN HUNDRED years did not embrace such nonsense.

It's not like the Christians of the prohibition era were the first smart Christians and the vast majority of Christians before them were all a bunch of drunken morons.

Do you see?

The book of Proverbs is the only book in all of the Bible where you could even BEGIN to try to proof text this teetotalism doctrine.

And EVERY responsible handler of the Word of God knows that you don't build doctrine on the foundation of Proverbs.

Proverbs are not precepts. Therefore proverbs cannot be used to condemn anything across the board.


The only exception to this is when something in Proverbs is handled as a precept elsewhere in Scripture..

Proverbs is part of the canon of Scripture. It seems to this simpleton that as such, taken in proper context, there's no reason why it cannot be used in doctrine. II Tim. 3:16, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine..." The Bible is either all or nothing.

#2- I don't have a problem with ignorance on this issue. I have a problem with arrogance. When you DON'T know how to interpret Scripture and you DON'T know that teetotalism is a fad in Christian history without roots down through history anchoring in the Scripture- when you DON'T know these things and you STILL have the audacity to PREACH your doctrine anyway- that's what I have a problem with.

It is UNBRIDLED ARROGANCE

Interesting choice of (bolded) words. Convictions different from yours are not just cause to level accusations like this. Few people will take a person's opinion (and I use that word intentionally) seriously when they are insulted for having a differing one. This is why you have the reputation here that you do.

 

[InTheLight]

Well, as you do, how about trying to start with the OP?

95% of people in the world who drink are not alcoholics.

Got it?

About NINETY PERCENT of people who drink in America are NOT ALCOHOLICS.

Yeah, I got it.

Now what about the stuff that you make up in your head, like: "Maybe one in a million Christians that set out to drink moderately become alcoholics."?

or that alcoholics set out to become one because they "SET OUT TO party hard nearly every weekend."?

Where do you get these 'facts' from?

 

[Luke2427]

Proverbs is part of the canon of Scripture. It seems to this simpleton that as such, taken in proper context, there's no reason why it cannot be used in doctrine. II Tim. 3:16, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine..." The Bible is either all or nothing.

Right. This is the kind of thinking I am talking about.

Nobody said Proverbs was not part of the canon of Scripture

Nobody said Proverbs was not the Word of God.

I should not have to explain this on a DEBATE site but...

We are supposed to interpret Scripture in its GENRE.

In other words we don't actually believe that Jesus in heaven right now is a bleeding Lamb with eyeballs all over him and seven horns sticking out everywhere. We understand the GENRE of literature being employed by the Holy Spirit in Revelation 4. It is apocalyptic and therefore largely figurative.

But some uninformed soul might think that when we get to heaven and see Jesus, that's what he is going to look like.

The same thing with Proverbs.

The sluggard does NOT always come to poverty.

A well trained child DOES sometimes depart when he is old.

Diligence does NOT always make rich.

And some poor uninformed soul will either try to spiritualize all of that language so they can spin it so that it will always come to pass or he will be confused.

But the fact of the matter is that when God gives a Proverb He intends for us to understand it as a Proverb- not a precept.

A proverb is a GENERAL truth- a wise saying. Most proverbs are truths with exceptions.

It would be like somebody trying to establish doctrine from the words of Job's friends.

You might say to them, "But what they are saying is not TRUE!"

And they might argue back, "It's part of the canon of Scripture. It seems to this simpleton that as such, taken in proper context, there's no reason why it cannot be used in doctrine. II Tim. 3:16, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine..." The Bible is either all or nothing."

Interesting choice of (bolded) words. Convictions different from yours are not just cause to level accusations like this.

Convictions that are not founded in the Word of God but rather some backwards tradition do warrant such accusations.

Few people will take a person's opinion (and I use that word intentionally) seriously when they are insulted for having a differing one. This is why you have the reputation here that you do.

My ultimate goal is not to convert arrogant people. It is to resist them. Sweetness with arrogant people is less effective than sternness.

But what you hope is that some victim of phariseeism will see these arguments and say, "That guy who is obliterating these fundies is right! I don't have to be a Pharisee to be right with God. I CAN enjoy what God gave me to enjoy!"

I had a pm along those lines within the last 24 hours.

 

[Luke2427]

Yeah, I got it.

Actually I went back and saw what you were talking about.

It is a higher percentage in the U.S. than in the world.

You were right.

Only 5% of drinkers in the WORLD are drunks.

10% of drinkers in America are drunks.

So...

When you consider that prohibition is almost a uniquely American thing could it be that the phariseeism of teetotalism hurt America more than helped it?

Now what about the stuff that you make up in your head, like: "Maybe one in a million Christians that set out to drink moderately become alcoholics."?

or that alcoholics set out to become one because they "SET OUT TO party hard nearly every weekend."?

Where do you get these 'facts' from?

I didn't site them as facts. Try to be fair- even when you're aggravated.

And I explained in the post that you quote from how I came to those opinions.

And I think those opinions are VERY sound for the reasons that I cite in those posts.

 

[Bob Alkire]

The horror stories you site are the result of ABUSE not moderate USE.

No one here is for ABUSE.

Many if not most people who drink have drank to much at one time or another. Go to any bar in town and you will see drunks, go to many parties from work and you will see drunks. Go to any of the many golf clubs around here and you will see drunks in the bar. So many folks pass that moderate use you are talking about.
Many people drink to much every now and then, not an every day deal.
What I'm saying is any moderate drinker can go to excess and many do from time to time.

 

[Luke2427]

Many if not most people who drink have drank to much at one time or another. Go to any bar in town and you will see drunks, go to many parties from work and you will see drunks. Go to any of the many golf clubs around here and you will see drunks in the bar. So many folks pass that moderate use you are talking about.
Many people drink to much every now and then, not an every day deal.
What I'm saying is any moderate drinker can go to excess and many do from time to time.

Who is arguing that it is not true that some people drink too much some times?

How many moderate eaters NEVER eat too much from time to time?

What's your point?