"The JBU community has also adopted prudential rules that are consistent with but not required by Scripture (Prohibitng the use of alcohol and refraining from university-sponsored social dances) in order to guide and encourage the Christian conduct of undergraduate students. "

Everyone in my dorm signed but me.

Two things:

I think they retract from Christs' holiness when they state this since he drank.

This violates my liberty and forces me to submit my authority and preferance to man-made tradition or laws as though they were Gods.

__________________
Tim Potts
Siloam Springs, Arkansas
Member of Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Student at John Brown University
-Let the church change the world and rather than the world change the church-

How committed are you to attending this school? Are you required to sign?
They seem to hold typical Evanjellyfish views on what the Christian lifestyle looks like, if you want to go to this school, you may have to humor the poor floppy things!

__________________
The man who is disposed to think of his sin as a great calamity, rather than as a heinous crime, is not likely either to reverence God or to respect His law. - John Kennedy, 1873
Meg
Blog
Member, Intown Presbyterian Church,PCA, Portland, OR

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Here's a silly question: are you 21?

__________________
Fredrick T. Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX)
Christ Church Blog

"The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle)

They say themselves these steps are not required by scripture so I can not see how you reach this conclusion that it retracts from Christ's holiness.

I would have a problem if they said these things were Biblical - but they admit they are not and are simply doing it out of some level of prudence. Must you sign it? Where exactly is the problem? Is the small matter of alcohol really worth the fuss you could create?

__________________
Fraser,
Trinity Reformed Baptist Church
Hamilton, New Zealand.

I will be soon.

I also don't see the conscience problem. It may be something that you don't want to do, but there is no violation of conscience. Schools do this all the time in order to deal with the realities of school life.

One example: Grove City College requires all freshmen to live in a dorm on campus. No exceptions (that I know of). That certainly is not a Biblical requirement, but something the school thinks is prudent.

Given the (legendary) penchant of college students to be drunkards, it seems to be presented reasonably. I might not like it either, and might choose another school because of it, but this does not appear to violate the Bible.

If their justification for restricting the use of alcohol by students is that it is unBiblical, they are directly contradicting Scripture. Scripture teaches God created alcohol for our good and enjoyment to His glory. Therefore, to ban alcohol use b/c it is "unBiblical" is a violation of God's revealed Will and is a doctrine of men. Christ condemns such practices of contradicting the commandments of God with commandments of men which are extra-Biblical. The WCF XX teaches:

To sign this document is to betray your true liberty of conscience as a Christian, b/c they are asking you to approve extra-Biblical commandments of men, which are in opposition to God's Word. The abolitionist position IS at enmity with God's Word, b/c it makes many righteous men - including Christ Himself - to be sinners. This is unacceptable.

I would either attend a different school, or kindly ask to explain to someone why you cannot, because of your faith, sign such a document.

(especially wrt to the Lord's Supper)

__________________
Andrew Myers
Husband of Jessica, Father of Jackson, Katie and Samuel
Member, Presbyterian Reformed Church of Northern Virginia
Warrenton, VA USA
Editor, The Matthew Poole Project

"Let your Morning Thoughts, and your last Evening Thoughts, be what shall become of you to all Eternity." -- Matthew Poole

The Statement itself is prima facie not about impinging on liberty of conscience, or condemning alcohol:

If the position were that prohibitionist, it would be required by Scripture. This may not be wise, but it is not a liberty of conscience issue, any more than if the school made all roads on campus 15 MPH.

Drinking alcohol is an issue dealt with directly in Scripture, though. That contract is taking a prohibitionist stance, which is not only un-Biblical, but anti-Biblical and against the testimony of Christ as living a perfect life of obedience to God's Law on earth ... of course this is unacceptable! Blasphemy! God Forbid!

If their document took a moderation standpoint, that would be perfectly biblical, asking students who are of age to drink responsibly in Christ and to God's glory. This is the only contract I would sign, otherwise I would be violating my conscience and in sin.

Then Paul was a sinner. There is absolutely nothing wrong with refraining from Biblically permissible activities for reasons of prudence.

I do not permit "moderation" in drinking with my 7 year old. There is a reason. The school is clearly saying that certain activities, while NOT required by Scripture (that is what they say, so it is again not a position of testimony against Christ) will not be permitted for prudential reasons. You may certainly think they are being imprudent, even dumb. But you do not understand liberty of conscience or 1 Cor 6, if you think it is violative of liberty of conscience.

Or is no authority ever permitted to prohibit anything unless the Bible explicitly calls it sin?

With all due respect, I get the impression that some Christians think drinking is a means of grace!

Can Tim no longer partake of the Lord's Supper, then?

How does the "all things are permissable/not all things are beneficial? argument apply to alcohol? Is not alcohol required of Christians (in the LS) and recommended for their benefit by Scripture??

The Lord's Supper is!

I guess you have your first case then to bring against your Church for unbiblically binding the consciences of every member of the RPCNA:

That certainly is not the statement of a voluntary secular organization - it has the authority of Church discipline behind it. Why don't you start there instead of worrying about a voluntary school's policy on its property?

That is no longer binding within the RPCNA, according to a few Pastors I have asked (before I joined the Church) but thank you for your concern, sir.

[Edited on 8-23-2005 by WrittenFromUtopia]

[Edited on 8-23-2005 by WrittenFromUtopia]

The jist of the topic seems to be,

At what point does liberty of conscious override God given authority figures.

Id say only at points of contradiction to the Bible. Remembering that the Bible support being subject to governing authorities (Rom. 13).

Thus, can a governing authority establish an extra Biblical "law" binding upon the conscious, that would yet be based upon the moral law. (case in point- not drinking till your 21)

__________________
John Leonard
Deacon: Mid-Cities Presbyterian OPC
Bedford, TX

From my reading of the statement it seems to apply only to when Tim is on campus or in the dorm? If that is the case than the arguments about the Lord's Supper don't really apply.

I see it as simply a extra requirement set by a external body for participation in their activities. It is no different from a corporate company requiring men to have neat hair cuts or what not. There is no issue of conscience that i see. Simply a question of whether you consider going to that school to be worth giving up receational drinking. If signing the statement meant endorsing prohibitionist views or binding you for your entire life even outside of school then there would be problems.

Just as a sidenote, i question why people love to forbid something in a way 'consistent with but not required by the scriptures'. If scripture does not forbid something why should men go along making up their own regulations to control others? God obviously knew that alcohol abuse would be a temptation to some of his children as well as cause much suffering in the fallen world. If he decided that prohibiting drunkedness and allowing moderation was ok, why do men need to go further? In 1 Cor Paul did not tell the corinthians that since idol meat was obviously an issue at that time and place they should lay off all meat 'just in case'. He gave them principles to be applied on a case by case basis.

Since the school itself admits that such a prohibition cannot be proven from scripture, i think they are wrong to try to regulate their students that way. I mean wrong as in it is not a biblical practice...obviously from a secular point of view it is their school and they set the rules they want.

There is a place for so called 'extra-biblical' rules. Authority figures like fathers or husbands can use their authority to set rules that are not biblical commands, though they should be careful not to be too harsh or controlling. Likewise individual christians may set rules for themselves to avoid temptation etc. But imho it is not for a school to set rules like this. I think the bible is crystal clear on the lawfulness and even commends proper use of alcohol. You are right to observe the Christ himself drank alcohol. Hence a all out prohibition is not more christian in any sense. I am more understanding to where people are coming from on the dancing issue, i still think a blanket prohibition is forcing one's own convictions on others.

That being said, again, if you don't mind i see no sin in signing the statement, if the school's education is worth it to you.

__________________
Mark
Independent baptist
Singapore

__________________
Adam Leavelle
Westminster OPC
Roaring Spring Pa.

http://www.myspace.com/aleavelle
"Speak wisdom to a fool and he'll think you have no sense at all"

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

It's a blessing