Smoking

Im wondering what your point really is, Mark.

It seems to me that we've all agreed with you. But your posts seem to indicate that you think otherwise, so I have to ask what other point you are trying to get across.

 

Well since you are pursuing this Mark, for one thing, washing one's hands doesn't involve addiction (unless one has the problem of compulsiveness).

The consumption of tobacco products serves absolutely no purpose other than the gratification of that addiction and I know whereof I speak.

Even the consumption of wine (for instance) in controled amounts serves as a nutrient and has a medicinal value.

The fact that you are aware of the sometimes legalistic or pharisaical attitudes in the church which have a counterproductive effect upon those who are involved with the use of tobacco or any other substance that is addictive is appreciated.

But that is not the only motive.

I just don't believe that the whole counsel of God is served by passing the judgment of "pharasaism" upon the resistance in the church to the use of tobacco, especially when so many folks want help in breaking this addiction both in and out of the Church.

Yes, for the Christian it is a personal matter between the individual and the Lord.

I will agree that there is both a right and wrong way and spirit in the church to deal with these personal matters. I agree that a blanket condemnation is wrong whether preaching the gospel to the "unchurched" or teaching the saints.

But, if/when folks come to me for advice (and they have over the years in my varied ministries), I am not going to adopt your attitude or suggest that they are not being led of the Lord to break a bondage.

To help someone you love break an addiction, improve their health and save money (among other benefits) is not "pharasaical" but IMO is the Christian response to the words "love one another".

Jesus also scolded the pharisees for complaining when He healed on the Sabbath asking if it were good "to save life, or to destroy it?"

HankD

 

and Mark,

the passage about washing hands is referring to the Jewish custom of ritual washing of hands. The Pharisees had taken the issue of "using water to make sure your hands are clean" to the point that it was then made a ritual. And if anyone did not wash their hands ACCORDING TO THEIR way, then the Pharisees criticized them for "being defiled."
It was a requirement that went far beyond what God required.

Smoking does not fall under this category.

 

I thought about this more, Mark.

Im wondering if you believe that merely the act of acknowledging someone's need of help, we are somehow being unfairly judgemental? Its not wrong or self-righteous to try to help a brother overcome something in his life.

We OUGHT to help each other overcome things.

 

I'm beginning to repeat myself Mark, so there is no reason to prolong the debate/discussion (unless you want to).

Bless you brother.

HankD

 

Is smoking harmful to the body? I do believe that the medical consensus is YES!
1. Smoking violates the stewardship of the body since it is definitely harmful.
2. Smoking violates the principle of self-control since it is highly addictive and controls the person.
3. Smoking violates the principle of love since it is blatantly offensive to some brethren and may encourage them to sin against their conscience.
4. Smoking does not glorify God since it offends or causes some brethren to offend and it gives the unbelieving world a chance to scoff at Christians under the control of nicotine.
You said remotely suggest so I have give you at least five Scriptural principles, whether you agree with the application or not is irrelevant, so there are at least five times the Scripture satisfies your challenge of remote suggestion. I did not bother to give the many references for the above but I assume that you know the Bible well enough to know what I am saying and fill in the gaps.

No. There is a parallel since both are under the compulsion of a chemical substance. I suppose one could say, “The smokers, drunkards, and druggies …………” Furthermore, you are using that Pharisee buzzword. It has no meaning or relevance here. In the political world, if you don’t like someone, you call him a Nazi. In the religious scene, you call anyone, with whose position you disagree, a Pharisee.

Well, smokers happen to smoke because they choose to smoke just like people who fornicate choose to fornicate. It appears to me that you are saying one may just incidentally smoke but a person deliberately chooses to fornicate. Both are choices. I don’t think there is any implication of the gravity of the two sins. On the other hand, the principle of glorifying God in our bodies applies to all activity, not just sexual activity. Therefore, it is a legitimate application to make to smoking without necessarily comparing smoking and sexual immorality.

It may be or it may not be. Smoking could be the outward sign of a unregenerate sinner’s rebellion against God in doing the thing he believes to be sin. On the other hand, smoking may be the besetting sin of a weak brother who cannot overcome his craving for nicotine. Yes, if it is a symptom of rebellion against God, then it may be a sign that the person is unregenerate.

Well, I’m pretty sick of hearing the inanity: “You can’t say it is sin if the Bible doesn’t say they shalt not ………. God gave us principles and He gave us rational minds to judge and discern the good from evil. IMHO, this is just a pious excuse for people who want to enjoy their sin without guilt feelings.

 

It does not. It does, hwoever, warn agains abuse. Much of the time, smoking results in an addictive behavior which results in abuse. That abuse is a sin.

To use an extreme: Smoking a pack a day is likely a sin. Hitting up a hookah bar once a month is likely not.

BTW, I'm a nonsmoker, but I'm a slave to caffiene, and battle that addiction often. </font>[/QUOTE]So, how much smoking is necessary to produce cancer? What is the safe limit? I'm sure that you can drink a little arsenic daily but I think I'll decline.

 

Inanities! This argument is the logical equivalent of water is very dangerous to your health since beer is 86% water and drinking beer contributes substantially to the 50,000 highways deaths annually.

Why is drunkeness a sin and compulsive smoking is not?

 

Exactly! Compulsive smoking is indeed a sin. No two ways around it.

I do applaud you for discerning it with "compulsive smoking". As I said earlier, there's a hugh difference between going through a pack a day, and hitting up a hookah bar once a month. Yet the pack-a-day smoker typically gets a free pass, while the person at the hookah bar will get the "appearance of evil" fingerwag.

 

Ok, you can use the buzzword addiction and say that smokers are sinners if you want.
But you cannot find any example of cigarette smokers robbing and stealing to support the habit. </font>[/QUOTE]You’re wrong here. Kids steal money all the time to buy cigarettes. In WWII, girls sold themselves for a pack of cigarettes. In many hard and difficulty times, cigarettes became the currency. People have lied, cheated, stolen, killed and committed immorality for cigarettes.

Yeah? I’ve heard of guys slapping around their wife or kids because they didn’t have any cigarettes in the house.

No, unless you count the guy who is lighting up or reaching for a fag and crashes.

Well, I’ve heard of two guys getting into a fight over a pack of cigarettes and one knifing or shooting the other.

A social taboo is not necessarily bad. In fact, we could use more social taboos today. I can remember when sex outside of marriage was a social taboo and there were fewer illegitimate pregnancies. I can remember when an abortion was a social taboo and there were very few abortions. In Dixie, we were hung up on social taboos about drunkenness, adultery, cheating, lying, stealing, etc. Methinks those were kinder and gentler times then. So, what are you saying?

 

When I was in the Navy, when we went on a cruise and got beyond the 12 mile limit cigarette were sold with no tax for $1/carton, we called them seastore cigarettes. Guys, myself included would buy several cartons.

I gave up smoking and alcohol many years ago.

I'm a caffeine addict, not just an ordinary addict. I buy whole bean French Roast and grind my own beans. There is nothing like fresh ground coffee, particularly French Roast.

We had a cat that used to drink my coffee when I wasn't looking, we wondered why he was so wired. I made sure I put my cup of coffee where he couldn't reach it.

 

What Biblical basis do you have for this? A lot of things that we call sins are not specifically named in the Scripture as “Thou shalt not . . . .” Where does God specifically call masturbation, abortion, pornography, ad infinitum These are discerned from principles God has revealed. God has given us principles in His Word, the leading of the Holy Spirit and rational minds for discerning right from wrong. Just because we don’t all agree doesn’t mean that we cannot judge things to be sin. This is a purely presuppositional fallacy.

This is another fallacy. One does not have to achieve perfection before preaching against sin. Inanity of inanities. We are forbidden to condemn in others what we allow in ourselves but we can judge sin to be sin without being hypocritical.

How do you know what Paul would think? No one knows. You can’t speak for Paul and add clout to your viewpoint by claiming his endorsement.

 

Hmmmmmmmmm….desultory observations? Yeah, I agree; they are desultory—aimless, random, haphazard, indiscriminate, unfocused, halfhearted—look up the synonyms.

You literally mean that “the ONLY sin which is against the body is fornication?" So, drunkenness is not a sin of the body? I can’t find the one and only part in my Bible even though there is a contrasting of sins against the body and sins not against the body.

Even drunkenness?

This does not logically follow. It is an invalid point even though you read it into the scenario. Body stewardship and glorifying God with our bodies are principles applicable to healthy living (eating/exercise), smoking, drugs, fornication, cleanliness, etc. But, there’s no moral equivalence argument here. It is rather like breaking and entering is also trespass on a person’s property but it is the thievery that is the greatest crime.

Yeah, our smoking may make him want to smoke even though he believes it is wrong. If he smokes according to our example against his own conscience then it is sin and we have caused him to stumble. Understand?

How so? Your saying it isn’t persuasive. Give a cogent argument.

Well, I would differ in that Christ’s cleansing of the Temple was more violent but I think that Jesus’ point was their hypocrisy, not their rule.

And I don’t think there is any virtue in nastiness either.

Wrong application. You have misstated and misconstrued the priniciple.

He used this as an occasions to condemn the hypocrisy of the Pharisees.

Now, this propaganda technique is called overstatement. Also, it is begging the question because you have not established that smoking is not sin. If it is sin, then why should Christians be expected to condone, tolerate or endorse it?

Sounds angry and righteous but the logic doesn’t flow. You make judgments, I make judgments and we all make judgments.

Sometimes, it is more than their smoking that stinks—it’s their attitudes. There is a difference between the person who is struggling with a problem and the haughty devil-may-care attitude of I’ll do as I well please. If I were a smoker, I would want to search out this matter Scripturally and find what would be pleasing to God rather than say, “I’m going to smoke regardless.”

 

Malarkey. "I've heard of this and I've heard of that". The point is that in previous times, many of our finest preachers, Christian apologists, theologians, world leaders etc. used tobacco, and no one considered it more than a bad habit. Now it has become against our social norms and so people call it sin.
I won't be winning any arguments about tobacco here, but I seriously doubt Jesus would have told anyone, "Go. And smoke no more!"

 

Someone broke the window out of our car to steal cigarettes. It does happen. However, it doesn't happen "because" of cigarettes; it happens because the person is a criminal.

 

Good point. Someone once proke into my car to steal a radio and a stoller. I'd hardly be able to make an argument that radios and stollers are sinful.