No....not concerning sex before marriage. The answer to that is obvious.....the Bible teaches that sex is reserved for the bonds of marriage.

I'm talking about....abstinence from alcoholic beverages...(or as Rush says..."Adult beverages").

Now before we begin this discussion....do not make this fatal mistake. Namely....assuming I have a position that I'm trying to defend.

To be honest.....I am really neutral right now. I use to teach hard core...teetotalling......abstinence.

However, the hermeneutic of...."Where the Bible speaks....we speak....and where the Bible is silent....we are Silent".....is starting to cause me problems in that teaching if I want to be logically consistent.

Here is example of what I consider an inconsistency on the teaching of abstinence.

We condemn the person who says...."I like to have a couple beers after work...it helps me to relax." Or we condemn the couple who says on special occassions they like to have a glass of wine with a romantic, candlelit dinner.

However, we say nothing to the person who says...."I'm taking anti-depressant drugs because I'm depressed and they help me feel better." Interesting.....we tell our kids "Don't use drugs"....and we use them ourselves.

To me....in order to be logically consistent....a person who teaches abstinence must also teach abstinence from any "mind altering" chemical.

By the way....don't misunderstand this....I'm not talking drunkeness here which is clearly condemned in the whole of the Bible.

I'm talking the casual drinker here.

And....if we use the argument....it is harmful to your body.....what then do we have to say about.....

caffiene??? foods loaded with fat and known to be killers...i.e., fast food, Twinkies and the like?? smoking?? use of drugs....prescribed or otherwise??

In my mind, it is inconsistent to teach alcohol abstinence....and let these other things slide.

I'm really struggling here with what has been a "traditional" Christian church position. I'm not making this up. I really want to be consistent....whatever position I end up taking. I'm struggling for answers.

Still growing.....

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Answers

Michael....

Thank you for your honesty in helping me to deal with this issue as I struggle.

First.....I personally do not drink. My wife and I have tried....the glass of wine....didn't like it....even "the good stuff" taste like Robutussin. Just the smell of beer gags me. My wife and I prefer much more the "non-alcholic" beverages put out by Welches and other companies that have no alchohol and yet....have a pleasant and festive flavor.

Second....your discussion of the leadership qualifications may be a discussion unto itself.

Third....there are a number of passages in the O.T. that refer to any kind of wine or drink as a "blessing from God" and as an indication of prosperity.

Fourth....your assessments failed to (and maybe by intent)answer what seems to be to be an inconsistency in our view of other harmful things to the body....i.e., caffiene....fatty foods.....drugs (prescribed or otherwise).

For instance, I personally have a very difficult time with people that say they have to take anti-depressant drugs. I personally believe depression to be a drug....and I believe that we either choose to be happy....or depressed. (And by the way....before the "expert" quoters jump me on this....many psychology "experts" are now beginning to teach that as well.)

Your post did little to help my struggle....but at the same time I realize your post seems to be careful about laying out "dogmatism"...and simply lays out your personal guidelines. I can respect that.

It boils down to this Michael at a practical level. I go over to someone's house....and they invite me to go to the fridge to get out....whatever. In the process of doing so....I see a bottle of wine....or a couple of beers.

In my younger days....I would have immediately been concerned about them burning eternally in hell. It seems now a days....there are more important things to worry about.

So....as you can see....it is a very practical struggle for me.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Typo from last post....

I said...."I consider depression to be a drug....etc."

I meant to say...."I consider depression to be a sin...."

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Brother Kelley....

Thanks for your comments.

Your points about condeming partaking....and then supporting groups that support drinking was well taken. In fact, in one church in Florida....I had a person in my congregation that condemned drinking....but worked at the bottling factory. Figure that one out.

I do have one question concerning a comment you made...you stated..."it is a better witness to abstain."

My question to you is.....how?? How is it a "better witness?"

Might a better witness be one who truley drinks in moderation??

Not being argumentative....just trying to understand.

Thanks again.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Brett....

You position is certainly....logically consistent.

The key word to describe your position is...."moderation." (Please correct me if this word does not describe the position of your post.)

John MacArthur wrote a book a few years ago entitled "Our Sufficiency In Christ."

The key verse for his book was....2 Peter 1:3..."..His divine power has granted to us EVERYTHING pertaining to life and godliness."

In other words, in Jesus we have all we need.

But in John's book....he points out that is everything but the Christian postion today.

Many are saying...."Christ and psychology"...or "Christ and therapy"....or "Christ and speaking in tongues."

No longer does Christ alone appear to be sufficient.

Do I get depressed at times? Yes...(in fact I am right now). But eventually....I will chose to be happy because....in Christ...I have EVERYTHING I need.

I'm aware of one man who was given medication for his depression. The man's words were..."I didn't even know I was depressed until I went to the doctor."

We live in a society that is so anxious to give out pills.

Is there a place for the use of pills in treating depression, etc.?? Most definitely. When individuals suffer some type of brain trauma that throws things out of whack...it is certainly needed.

But I worry about a society that needs a pill just to get along with the day in and day out rigors of living. Can a person like that agree with Scripture....that in Christ....they have all they need??

Again...I'm not condemning....just trying to understand why we have been such an alchohol abstinence teaching people....and yet....these anti-depressant....and Ritalin type drugs have caught on like wild- fire.

One more thing Brett....the word "spirit"..as I'm sure you know....can also mean "character or ATTITUDE." Something to think about.

Thanks again for helping me through this.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Darrell...

Your post reminds me of the fact that Martin Luther wrote some of our best hymns over a good stein of ale.....and....if I'm not mistaken I believe I heard he also used some of the tunes as well.

Some of you music people can correct me on that one.

Darrell....your well thought out post also reminds me that maybe we don't win as much of the world as we should....because we are always stuck inside our stained glass world.

The one thing is for sure....as of yet....I have not had anyone present the biblical argument for abstention....and again...this is where "the rub" is for me.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Dr. Jon....

Thank you for you cultural insights. As someone who took a number of "Cultural Anthropology" courses while working on my doctorate in Missiology...I can appreciate your remarks.

I think of Italian families, for instance, who also are raised in a culture where a glass of wine at dinner is a "normal, cultural" thing.

One of the biggest mistakes missionaries make is to force their view of morality (which more often than not is cultural) unto other cultures.

Now of course....some cultural things have to be changed because of clear "thus saith the Lords." Polygamy is clearly spoken against in the word...and thus any culture that practices such would need to be "taught out" of that practice.

Thanks again for your thoughts as I wrestle with this issue.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Sam....

Thank you so much for showing the immediate practicallity of this discussion.

Also....the position you state is exactly mine to this point...unless I can be shown otherwise.

That is....the only important factor is....in my partaking....do I cause a brother to stumble.

For instance, I certainly would not want to offer a drink and/or drink in front of a person recovering from drunkeness.

Your point about the deacon also illustrates something else I said earlier.....isn't there other more important things to be concerned about??

Thanks for your thoughts and your help to me.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Here is another passage for consideration.....1 Timothy 4:1-4

"But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from goods, which God has created to be gratefully shared by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with gratitude, for it is sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer."

Check my exegesis of this passage.....

1) Historically, I believe him to be refering to the Gnostic heresy.

2) A part of their heresy was to declare abstension from certain foods.

3) Paul argues this is wrong due to the fact that everything is good because a) God created it; b) if it can be taken with gratitude it is acceptable.

In your understanding, what bearing (if any) does this verse have on the discussion of abstinence??

-- Anonymous, February 09, 2000

Yeah Marc....

But when is the last time you heard a preacher get up and condemn the sin of "eating Twinkies?"....LOL

Which is my point exactly!!

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2000

Danny,

The "qualification list" (not to drudge up old stuff) from 1 Timothy 3 includes the statement for the deacon "...not addicted to much wine..." (1 Tim. 3:8). And then there are a couple interesting views from the Old Testament. One is found in Leviticus 10:8-9, "The Lord then spoke to Aaron, saying, "Do not drink wine or strong drink, neither you nor your sons with you, when you come into the tent of meeting, so that you will not die -- it is a perpetual statute throughout your generations" Then there is the Scripture from Proverbs 31:2-7. I won't quote that one, but look it up. Now not to come down with a hard-line "legalistic" view (which seems to be what I have been mostly accused of lately), I draw from these a principle that I think we can draw application from.

The principle is this: A leader who serves in God's kingdom must not let his judgement be impaired at any time...and leadership in the kingdom is full-time.

We can not divorce common sense. Alcohol for medical consumption is not prohibited. But in the directive Paul gave to Timothy about drinking wine for his stomach's sake...their seems to be the subtle implication that Timothy did not want to drink it because it was against his beliefs (Paul said what he said to help Timothy use common sense).

I think in our culture, the alcoholic beverage industry is one that manufactures its product with this simple premise: to alter one's mental faculties. In Europe and other regions of the world, this is not so much the case. But in America, taste and aesthetic quality of the beverage usually take a back seat to its ability to alter one's mental capacity.

Having said all of this, there is still the concern of witness. So, there is no "Thus saith the Lord..." and Danny goes to the local superWal Mart to buy a six-pack of Budweiser. What is you are seen doing this? What does that communicate?

It is a difficult issue and not one that I am willing to say... "My way is the right way." But, I abstain personally and would never recommend anyone to indulge - even in moderation. For me, I know that I would over-indulge and sin. But who knows...

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Danny, I agree with you that we must be consistant. But what is consistant to some is not to others. For example, we do not drink and condemn it, but then we patron stores that sell it. I remember, when churches in Florida would not go to Bush Gardens, but yet they would buy Wonder Bread, support the St. Louis Cardinals (which are owned by the same company).

I also agree that I have not one scriptural right to say "Thou shall not" but I will teach to be responsible and it is a better witness to abstain. Everyone has the right to drink as they do smoke, but it is better if they do not. Yet saying this- If I teach them that they will go to Hell or are sinning, then I do grievious error. I cannot say this. If I do then I my self must hold to a higher standard, such as not taking cold medicine that contains alcohol or even not shopping in places that sell it.

To me it boils down to consistancy. Anyway, my wife is allergic so alcohol so... God settled it for us.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

I can't answer your question, Danny, which is a good one, but I can throw a bit of spice into the works.

I'm sure you know that in Galatians 5:20, the word "witchcraft" from the King James ("sorcery" in the NASB) is the Greek word pharmakeia, from which of course we get our word "pharmaceuticals," or drugs. It's listed among those deeds of the flesh, including "drunkenness."

I know a woman who suffers from depression. She takes 40 mg of Prozac daily. She once cried on my shoulder because "in order for me to be a nice person, I need a drug." For her, it's truly not a decision, and there is a marked difference in her when she medicates. It might be worth noting that she is also a backslidden Christian who has no interest to know any more of Christ (which in itself is depressing).

I heard Derek Prince speak once on this subject. He uses Isaiah 61:3...

"To console those who mourn in Zion, To give them beauty for ashes, The oil of joy for mourning, The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; That they may be called trees of righteousness, The planting of the Lord, that He may be glorified."

He says that he himself once suffered from a debilitating depression until he read this verse and began to apply praise... and doing so freed him.

But this verse, if truly speaking of depression, calls this a spirit. And I think it noteworthy to see that most of the references of Jesus' healings were coupled with casting out demons - the connection between the two certainly suggests a relationship. But I find in my travels that very little of the Christian world actually believes a spirit kingdom exists (to them it's more metaphorical) and even fewer believe that evil spirits can plague Christians and even fewer yet would try to cast them out of someone.

Getting back to your question about the application of these drugs: Paul obviously thought nothing of Timothy using wine, but cautioned about drunkenness (overindulgence being the mark here). The same could be said for drugs. It may be fine to use them in moderation for medicinal purposes, but as a habit should not be used and certainly never to excess.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Danny -- a very interesting post, and one I find myself dealng with more and more, especially after moving to a college-campus based ministry.

It is very easy to get "uppity" about this, and about the stumbling block concept. I remember well (as I'm sure you do) the elder who wouldn't even drink root beer from a dark brown bottle, in case someone thought he was drinking regular beer.

At a recent retreat our speaker shared how he and others who are involved in a biker ministry (motorcycles) would think nothing of heading to a bar and drinking one beer while speaking and sharing with the bikers there. Same for me. I was coaching a ladies softball team while working at IBM in Florida, and after every win (and they were the best softball players in the league) we would head to a small bar near IBM to shoot some pool and hang out. I usually drank a coke, but on occassion might have a beer. Only one (I knew my limits). It was during a few of those sessions that I shared with one of the gals about Christ and invited her to church. She eventually attended, made her decision to follow Christ and was immersed.

It would be easy for me to head downtown on Friday or Saturday evenings here in Indiana, PA to hang out with students who are hitting the bars. I have not chosen to do that yet ... maybe I will, and maybe I won't. Honestly, I don't have the time now with the new ministry and all.

Just a few more thoughts on the subject.

Darrell H Combs

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

This may open up a can of worms ... but ...

If Jesus wanted all Christians to be 100% teetotalers, to lay off of all alcoholic beverages under any and all circumstances whatsoever ...

Then what the heck was he doing supplying the libations at a party in John 2?! Especially when we are told it was not the cheap (watered down) wine, but the best stuff! One hundred twenty to one hundred eighty gallons of the best stuff!

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Danny struggles with a point that I think all of us in America struggle with. Personally, I think it is due to our cultural biases, not Scripture. Let me explain. I once lived in Germany, near the Rhine River. I went to a German church, and associated with their youth group. One weekend they had a youth meeting at a local home (which was a farm), and they served, much to my surprise, wine! (This was to teenagers to boot.)

My American sensibilities were insulted. Why, didn't these German people know that it was a sin to take a drink!!!

As the night progressed, it was me who was rebuked. When I commented about their taking a drink (and smoking, too, but that is a different subject) one of the local girls turned to me and asked me about the "sinful habits" of American women wearing makeup!

The real issue was not the drinking, or smoking, or makeup...it was our overlaying a cultural bias onto the Gospel. The family that hosted this particular outing was a generational wine producing family. NO ONE GOT DRUNK. In fact, no one had more than one glass of wine the entire night. The wine was with a meal, and after the meal, it was not seen again.

I could give more examples of why we cannot condemn what we do not understand about (like the Martin Luther story -- drinking beer or wine in Europe is actually healthier than drinking water because the water is usually bad. The process of making beer purifies the water). But the point is that not smoking, not drinking, not dancing, not going to movies, etc etc are American cultural preferences, not Scriptural.

I agree with the brother above who talked about the example we set. I personally prefer to not drink. It is because my ministry has been to the military, and many military members are alcohol abusers. So in order to not encourage anyone in excess, I prefer to abstain. But it is my preference, not a mandate. I will not judge anyone who choses otherwise. It is not a "sin" to decide to do something that I have decided to not do. (I don't know if that makes any sense or not.)

I have fought this battle in so many areas (dress, music, hair). Its the old one of someone's preference being institutionalized as a dogma. And it usually cannot be backed up by Scripture. This is one of the points I made in my article "Rural Roots Phenomena" (which unfortunately you all have never seen).

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

I don't have my concordance here at work, but Paul advised Timothy to "take a little wine for your stomach's sake," very clearly. At the most sacred of all sacraments, the institution of the Lord's Supper, Jesus Himself blessed the bread and the wine and gave it to his disciples. Today my church celebrates this sacrament using real wine.

Also, there are many verses in the OT which speak of wine favorably. Aaron was the high priest who entered the holy of holies and had certain prohibitions that the general populace was not given. These were given to Samson and John the Baptist as well, due to their being especially set apart. We do not know why.

Finally, today we know that 1-2 glasses of wine a day are helpful to the health, particularly to the heart and to high blood pressure sufferers.

This is a very, very individual matter which each Christian must address within himself, and between himself and his Lord.

(Graduate of Trinity Intl. University, Deerfield, IL, and pastor's wife for many years in my youth.)

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Danny,

I think maybe the reason why you haven't gotten an argument for abstinence from the Scriptures is because there simply isn't one there. To my mind, The strongest passages to deal with the subject of abstinence don't deal with drinking, but with meat. You know, the place where Paul talks about abstaining from eating meat sacrificed to idols, in order to not hurt the faith of another. If I understand it correctly, Paul had no great problem with the eating itself. But he wanted his readers to be sure that they were not causing another's understanding of the Christian life to cause stumbling and loss of faith.

I suspect the same principles apply to alcohol. We had to deal with it last year here, when a man being studied for the deacon-ship revealed that he and his wife enjoy the occasional beer or spritzer with dinner. We had to decide real fast just where we stood on the matter.

The man has been a fine deacon.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Great discussion!

Rom 14:1-23 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. It is written: "'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.'" So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or DRINK WINE or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall. So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

Alcohol seems to be addressed in this passage along with eating meat and special days. Does this not show here the liberty we have concerning drink?

Danny, I agree with you when you say, "That is....the only important factor is....in my partaking....do I cause a brother to stumble."

We are not to cause a brother to stumble. My question is...what exactly constitutes stumbling? Is just causing offense the same thing?

For example: You believe it is a sin for anyone to drink. I believe God has given us liberty in this area. I...because I do not want you to stumble...would not drink in front of you or ever offer you drink. That being said, you see me in a restaurant having a glass of wine. Great offense has been caused merely in the fact that you have seen me drinking.

Is not causing one to stumble more than causing offense? Is it leading someone to sin?

I can understand your position Dr. Jon, in dealing with the military, as my local body is mostly military. I also see the need to teach what the Bible says on the subject.

Does it seem that too many times the church prohibits when God has not? If so, why do we have the tendency to do this?

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

So, let me get this straight. "All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat ..." So if my brother has issues with eating meat, I have to become a vegetarian? How is drinking wine and eating meat any different in this regard? Other than our American puritanical biases?

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

Had another thought .... in the OT, the Jews could drink wine but were to abstain from certain [non-kosher] foods. Now here in NT times, it is ok for us to eat any foods, but we are to abstain from wine? That doesn't make any sense to me.

-- Anonymous, February 08, 2000

One quick thought that fits with this thread, and might help with some others.br>
We are admonished to not do anything that would cause a WEAKER brother to stumble. But I don't find anything that admonishes us to keep from doing anything that would cause a STUBORN brother to stumble. In other words, we do what needs to be done with our newest brothers and sisters, helping them along. But if you have someone who should be mature in the faith, and is still on the milk, based on their stuborness, I'm not sure that applies.

Darrell H Combs

-- Anonymous, February 09, 2000

Darrell,

Here, here!

Must confess that I have been on both sides of that one (both being the stubborn and confronting the stubborn). I would like to think I haven't been the stubborn one in a while, but sometimes only the passage of time reveals such things to oneself.

Mark

-- Anonymous, February 09, 2000

Danny,

??? foods loaded with fat and known to be killers...i.e., fast food, Twinkies and the like?? smoking?? use of drugs....prescribed or otherwise??

Wine, foods etc. It is interesting that the food and sacrifice laws of old were put in place as teaching aids. Today we see people consume large amounts of fats and then take drugs and heart operations to remove the fat from their systems. God in his wisdom had the fat etc removed and offered to him in order to teach the people. He also gave many outlines as to drinking alcohol. From that I gather our health would improve greatly by following directions from the teacher.

(Exo 29:13 KJV) "And thou shalt take all the fat that covereth the inwards, and the caul that is above the liver, and the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them, and burn them upon the altar."

Simply put, don't eat fatty stuff or guts and use moderation if you want to drink wine etc.

-- Anonymous, February 09, 2000

As a Christian minister and as someone who was not raised a Christian I will not drink for two reasons:

Number 1, if I had not found Christ I probably would be an alchoholic and would have ruined my marriage. I could not drink in moderation (or better say, chose not to). How does anyone else know they can or will chose to?

The second reason I will not drink is because I could not buy it without wondering who will see me. Imagine if a spouse of a Christian that comes to our church saw me buy alchohol, yet they were not a Christian, what would they think? They may think it is o.k. for them to drink if a "preacher" can. They would be right. The problem is, they may get drunk and cause all kinds of problems.

Personally, I will not condemn a Christian that drinks in moderation (I don't think it is biblical). However, if I see a Christian drink, I tend to loose respect for them because I have seen first hand in my life what alchohol can do to lives. And I think that our society is much the same.

BTW, I feel that Christians should also whatch what they eat and drink as well as not smoke and get proper exercise (one of my weeknesses). After all our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor.6:19, 20).

God Bless- Marc

-- Anonymous, February 09, 2000

Danny,

The reason that we do not preach about eating of twinkies is because although they be unhealthy, no one eats a twinkie and beats up their wife or drives drunk and gets in an accident.

As stated earlier, drunkeness is a sin. For many it is hard to determine what drunkeness is and when 1 drink will lead to more.

God Bless- Marc

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2000

Darrell,

You say... "We are admonished to not do anything that would cause a WEAKER brother to stumble. But I don't find anything that admonishes us to keep from doing anything that would cause a STUBORN brother to stumble. In other words, we do what needs to be done with our newest brothers and sisters, helping them along. But if you have someone who should be mature in the faith, and is still on the milk, based on their stuborness, I'm not sure that applies."

Help me out here.

Rom 14 1 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.

2 One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables.

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way.

14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.

15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.

20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.

21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

23 But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

Does one whose faith is WEAK necessarily mean NEW brother or sister? Of course the longer we have been in Christ the more mature we should be. This is not always the case though.

I am having a problem in determining the meaning of stumble in this context...

Does this include simply causing offence (but not leading someone into sin). Or does it mean causing one to sin?

-- Anonymous, February 11, 2000

I guess I mean that a weaker brother is USUALLY a newer brother or sister in Christ. There may be those who have been in the Lord for many years who are still weak ... but my personal experience is that those who have been Christians for many years, and who are still "stuck" on things like these, are much more stuborn than weak. In most cases they refuse to mature ... at least in certain areas of belief or better yet opinion.

Just my personal view.

Darrell H Combs

-- Anonymous, February 11, 2000

(I originally posted this in response to "Thinking on Drinking." It seems more appropriate to this discussion. I'm interested in your feedback.)

An influential verse for me on this subject used to be 1 Corinthians 10:23 - All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. From basic study, I knew drinking was not prohibited by Scripture. (Original languages aside, 'Not given to much grape juice' and the possibility of drinking grape juice causing a brother to stumble, just didn't make sense.) But I knew people held strong opinions against drinking, (though they did not see them as opinions), and thought drinking would interfere with my ministry. My thought was, 'I know the position is not biblical (i.e., to view drinking as wrong), but I'll just focus on the "important" things.' I saw precedent in the circumcision of Timothy (Acts 16). Paul knew it was not required by God, but Timothy's being uncircumcised would have diminished the effectiveness of their ministry.

Recently, another passage(s) and a different incident have affected my view. Galatians takes a strong stand against people undermining the freedom that we have in Christ (e.g., do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery, 5:1; if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed, 1:9). And not just because it is not fair to have to sacrifice such freedom, but because the mentality that calls for us to do so fosters legalism and erodes Grace. In Galatians, Paul refers to an incident outwardly similar to the one with Timothy. A traveling companion (Titus) was not circumcised. This time, Paul refused to circumcise him. Why? Because doing so would have lent credence to the position that being circumcised was necessary for salvation (i.e., legalism).

My point: Which incident best represents the situation in most churches? Should drinking be viewed as presenting an obstacle to ministry, and so advised against? Or, does the popular stand against drinking actually have a more insidious effect on the ministry of the gospel of Grace because it perpetuates legalism?

Think beyond drinking for a minute. My fellow FCC alumni, do you remember playing Skip-Bo and Uno in the Holy Land? Was it because no one knew Rummy and Euchre? No, regular playing cards were prohibited. Why? We did not want to offend anyone. Granted, but why would anyone have been offended? Because, 'Christians do not play cards.' (Ever heard anything similar regarding pool? I have.) And then there is the dreaded . . . facial hair! I had a friend tell me once that if he grew a beard, his congregation would run him out of town. Maybe some exaggeration, but I do have another friend whose father was not asked to give the communion meditation for a whole winter, during which he had a beard. When it came off in the Spring, he was back in the rotation. (If "Thou shalt not drink" is an inference, what would you call that "biblical principle"?!?)

I used to classify such things as "minor issues" which were best overlooked in order to focus on the important things. But now I wonder, Is it possible to be legalistic in some areas (i.e., the "minor" ones) and not in others? Experience tells me, No. What about you? That being the case, do such attempts not to offend actually do more harm than good? I'm sure Paul's refusal to circumcise Titus ruffled a few feathers. However, he decided it was best for maintaining the purity of the Gospel and the life of the Church.

Again my point: Which situation best reflects most churches - Timothy or Titus? What is the ultimate effect of the position we have been espousing regarding drinking? Have we wisely removed obstacles or unwittingly fostered legalism?

-- Anonymous, February 28, 2000