The doorway of Drugs to the spirit world

[matt wade]

I was pumped up with so much morphine after my cancer operations I would not know where I was.

This might explain things..the demons got a hold of you while you were knocked out! :laugh:

 

[evangelist6589]

What about pot, in moderation and where it is legal of course?

My comment was more about alcohol being an introduction to other drug use with adolescents. Not really that it was a sin (I do not necessarily believe it to be a sin).

For those in the ministry, however, my views may be different. Ministers are to be "above reproach." There is an emphasis on how one is perceived, and I believe that this may include cultural influences. A minister cannot be taken seriously if he drinks but lives in a cultural environment where drinking is considered unbiblical (that minister is certainly more "me" centered than is appropriate). We are not forbidden to drink, but not all things are beneficial. We do not live for ourselves, our desires, or even our needs. We live for Christ, and it is the love of Christ that should shine through our lives...not our 'right' to engage in any type of behavior. So I do agree with you that Scripture does not forbid drinking, although I may disagree in that I believe many who invoke this principle do so unbiblically (in a self-centered mindset void of a true biblical worldview). Legalism is legalism. Just saying that you are entitled to do something is not less legalistic than saying others are forbidden to do something else.

But again, my point was that drinking is, for many, an introduction to harder drugs.

Please follow what the word teaches and not speculate and being up other subjects. It's your opinion on alcohol and not what is taught. I follow what is taught clearly.

 

[JonC]

Please follow what the word teaches and not speculate and being up other subjects. It's your opinion on alcohol and not what is taught. I follow what is taught clearly.

That is EXACTLY my point. Too often people dismiss what the Word teaches to legalistically follow what suits them. They justify and elevate their own desires (even if the object is not 'sin') and call it "liberty." Their sin is not in drinking, or dancing, or smoking. It is this elevation of the self over and beyond others. Present company, apparently, included.

BTW, ministers being "above reproach" is not my "opinion."

 

[evangelist6589]

What about pot, in moderation and where it is legal of course?

My comment was more about alcohol being an introduction to other drug use with adolescents. Not really that it was a sin (I do not necessarily believe it to be a sin).

For those in the ministry, however, my views may be different. Ministers are to be "above reproach." There is an emphasis on how one is perceived, and I believe that this may include cultural influences. A minister cannot be taken seriously if he drinks but lives in a cultural environment where drinking is considered unbiblical (that minister is certainly more "me" centered than is appropriate). We are not forbidden to drink, but not all things are beneficial. We do not live for ourselves, our desires, or even our needs. We live for Christ, and it is the love of Christ that should shine through our lives...not our 'right' to engage in any type of behavior. So I do agree with you that Scripture does not forbid drinking, although I may disagree in that I believe many who invoke this principle do so unbiblically (in a self-centered mindset void of a true biblical worldview). Legalism is legalism. Just saying that you are entitled to do something is not less legalistic than saying others are forbidden to do something else.

But again, my point was that drinking is, for many, an introduction to harder drugs.

I see. Well you know GTY HAS A present blog open on legalism and this type of thing as what one would call enforced holiness is not appropriate. Churches that are so hard line on rules are legalists

 

[JonC]

I see. Well you know GTY HAS A present blog open on legalism and this type of thing as what one would call enforced holiness is not appropriate. Churches that are so hard line on rules are legalists

Keeping in mind I said drinking was not the issue, what does Scripture say? You are taking the same legalistic approach, just in an opposite direction.

 

[Don]

Keeping in mind I said drinking was not the issue, what does Scripture say? You are taking the same legalistic approach, just in an opposite direction.

Good point.

Legalism is when what YOU say is right, even if you have scripture to back it up; because that scripture may be interpreted by others to mean something else.

For example, the use of "not given to too much wine"; the actual thought given from the Greek indicates abstaining from, or abstaining from immoderate use. Either is acceptable. It's when we decide on one over the other, and let others know that *that's* the correct way of reading it, that we become like the description in Romans 14...and we fall into legalism.

 

[evangelist6589]

Keeping in mind I said drinking was not the issue, what does Scripture say? You are taking the same legalistic approach, just in an opposite direction.

Legalism is disagreeing with your interpretation it appears.

 

[JonC]

Legalism is disagreeing with your interpretation it appears.

No, John. I interpret Scripture the same as you insofar as drinking is concerned. Legalism is a concentration on the action. Some take a legalistic approach to these issues by saying it is a sin to drink, dance, etc. Other's take a legalistic approach by saying Scripture does not prohibit these actions so they are "legal" for the believer in a self-centered manner. But Scripture takes a different approach. Those acts may not be a 'sin' in themselves, but do you not see the principle behind refraining or participating? Does this really escape your grasp or are you just defensive of your pet indulgence?

Where we do disagree is that you seem to focus on a 'me' centered life while I interpret a different responsibility in terms of the believer as a member of the Body of Christ. The difference is a participation that is for the glory of God (which I advocate) and a participation that indulges the flesh, our desire, or just because we "like the taste" and it is legal (your position). In other words, we may both sit across the table and enjoy a Mikes Hard Lemonade (yuck) but we are of entirely different mindsets. In other words, I am saying that you lack discernment when it comes to "Christian liberty." It was never a liberty to indulge the flesh, but it is the opposite of legalism. Again, you are taking the same legalistic approach, just in an opposite direction.

 

[evangelist6589]

No, John. I interpret Scripture the same as you insofar as drinking is concerned. Legalism is a concentration on the action. Some take a legalistic approach to these issues by saying it is a sin to drink, dance, etc. Other's take a legalistic approach by saying Scripture does not prohibit these actions so they are "legal" for the believer in a self-centered manner. But Scripture takes a different approach. Those acts may not be a 'sin' in themselves, but do you not see the principle behind refraining or participating? Does this really escape your grasp or are you just defensive of your pet indulgence?

Where we do disagree is that you seem to focus on a 'me' centered life while I interpret a different responsibility in terms of the believer as a member of the Body of Christ. The difference is a participation that is for the glory of God (which I advocate) and a participation that indulges the flesh, our desire, or just because we "like the taste" and it is legal (your position). In other words, we may both sit across the table and enjoy a Mikes Hard Lemonade (yuck) but we are of entirely different mindsets. In other words, I am saying that you lack discernment when it comes to "Christian liberty." It was never a liberty to indulge the flesh, but it is the opposite of legalism. Again, you are taking the same legalistic approach, just in an opposite direction.

Wrong! If I drank a mikes and it caused one to stumble then I would stop and refrain. However what I do in my house while eating dinner is my own business and that is my point. I am welcome to have a drink on my own watch as long as it does not lead to sin.

 

[JonC]

Wrong! If I drank a mikes and it caused one to stumble then I would stop and refrain. However what I do in my house while eating dinner is my own business and that is my point. I am welcome to have a drink on my own watch as long as it does not lead to sin.

John, I am not talking about drinking.

 

[rivers1222]

The doorway of Drugs to the spirit world

Beware of Mike's Lemonade.

Just couldn't help yourself, could ya?:laugh:

 

[evangelist6589]

John, I am not talking about drinking.

Thats what I was talking about why did you switch the subject?

 

[JonC]

Thats what I was talking about why did you switch the subject?

I didn't. My initial comment was about alcohol as an introduction to other drug use in adolescents. you ventured into legalism and you're right to drink, not I. Once there I found the subject more interesting and followed your lead.

 

[evangelist6589]

I didn't. My initial comment was about alcohol as an introduction to other drug use in adolescents. you ventured into legalism and you're right to drink, not I. Once there I found the subject more interesting and followed your lead.

I see. Well regarding that age group you may have a point, however I am 37 and many here far older than I so why talk about that age group? For me its been almost 20 years and that was a Pre-Facebook, Pre-Smart Phone world. I used Usenet Newsgroups and IRC chat in those days to debate!

 

[JonC]

I see. Well regarding that age group you may have a point, however I am 37 and many here far older than I so why talk about that age group? For me its been almost 20 years and that was a Pre-Facebook, Pre-Smart Phone world. I used Usenet Newsgroups and IRC chat in those days to debate!

If drinking is an introduction to drugs which are doors to the spirit world then I am not sure age matters. Personally I don't put stock in drugs being such a door, but if it is then we need to look at those introductory drugs as well. Basically I was playing off the Mike's comment.

 

[evangelist6589]

If drinking is an introduction to drugs which are doors to the spirit world then I am not sure age matters. Personally I don't put stock in drugs being such a door, but if it is then we need to look at those introductory drugs as well. Basically I was playing off the Mike's comment.

You can't assume everyone whom drinks socially or occasionally will fall into drugs. Thats a logical fallacy often committed by Baptists.

Also what is wrong with drugs that help ones health? When was the last time you had a Root Canal? After I had mine I had to go to the drugstore to get some drugs. Play it your way and I could have gotten an infection.

 

[matt wade]

You can't assume everyone whom drinks socially or occasionally will fall into drugs. Thats a logical fallacy often committed by Baptists.

Just like you can't assume that everyone that plays D&D is going to worship Satan or kill themselves.

 

[matt wade]

Also what is wrong with drugs that help ones health? When was the last time you had a Root Canal? After I had mine I had to go to the drugstore to get some drugs. Play it your way and I could have gotten an infection.

You still haven't answered how using opiates in a prescribed legal manner is safe from demonic attack while using opiates illegally gives access to demons. Can you address that please?

 

[Rolfe]

Just couldn't help yourself, could ya?:laugh:

It eventually would have been mentioned by someone else. :laugh:

To Evan: I will save you the trouble:

 

[JonC]

You can't assume everyone whom drinks socially or occasionally will fall into drugs. Thats a logical fallacy often committed by Baptists.

You are seriously saying that Baptists often assume that everyone "whom" drinks socially will fall into drugs? I'd post a rabbit picture, but I'm all out. That's silly.

I don't even think that all who use drugs or play D&D will fall into satanism.

Also what is wrong with drugs that help ones health? When was the last time you had a Root Canal? After I had mine I had to go to the drugstore to get some drugs. Play it your way and I could have gotten an infection.

I hate to mention this, but you are the one who indicated that drugs are doors to the spiritual world. You made that link and started this thread. Were you being dishonest then, or are you being dishonest now? Were you speaking of drugs that help with one's health or were you speaking of illegal hard drugs used recreationally? You and I sometimes (perhaps often) disagree. But I have made a concerted effort to be honest, not only because of my faith but also out of respect for you. Sometimes I do fail, but at least I try. You are being extraordinarily dishonest here.