That's a good question.

The difference is that to forbid it requires it to be a sin in itself - a clear violation of the mandates of Scripture. On the other hand, saying it is unwise is saying that in this cases it may be a sin. It may be a sin to drink if alcohol abuse is common in your family, or if you tend to overindulge. But simply saying (even as a general "rule of thumb" that something is unwise, is not the same as forbidding it. Rather, it is giving someone what one considers to be less than a strict law - like when Paul said he advised sexual abstinence, and he made it clear that this was not a matter of law, but an issue of liberty. Paul was still imparting wisdom, but not a matter of law.

bwsmith made her case that Christians today would be wise to abstain from drinking alcohol. She gave scripture and she gave the circumstances she believes warrant this "rule of thumb". The circumstances include the culture of today, the tendency towards excessive drinking, even the boosting of alcohol content in most alcoholic beverages.

Personally, I disagree with her. But I support her right to express her opinion. It still remains a matter of Christian liberty. We shouldn't confuse her making her case for the wisdom of abstinence from drink, with her mandating that all Christians must abstain from drink because it is forbidden by Scripture. She is saying that it may be wise for Christians today to avoid alcohol because of current circumstances. If she said that is was a matter of law, then she would have to say that any Christians supports some alcohol consumption are apostate.

All things are allowable, but not all things are profitable. Bwsmith was mere expressing the opinion that "as a rule of thumb", drinking is not profitable. Much of what she said has warrant, even if I disagree with her conclusion.

But we need to remember while we are not to set up laws in areas where we have been given liberty, equally so are we to be aware that in liberty there are opportunities to sin (by offense or by abuse of those liberty). There are circumstance where taking advantage of our liberties can be sinful. We are not antinomian.

So we must try to be wise in deciding when those circumstance occur. bwsmith believes that we are living under those circumstance. I disagree with her. But I might be wrong. And that's why we should discuss this and avoid personal attacks and accusations.

__________________
R. Anthony Coletti
Midway Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Jonesborough, TN
[i]et venite et arguite me dicit Dominus[/i]

She didn't say that it "may" be wise. She said that drinking alcohol is unwise and can be likened to Russian Roulette.

Furthermore, concerning the "things are just so bad in our culture that we should abstain" argument, when has the culture not been like it is today? Obviously alcohol has been an object of abuse since the time of the writing of scripture. The warnings of its misuse were written contemporaneously with the other passages of scripture which extol it as a wonderful gift from God. If bwsmith's "warnings" apply today then they should have applied throughout all of history and the praise for wine in scripture was misplaced as well as Jesus' miracle at Cana. We often act as if we live in some terrible phase of history, the likes of which the world has never seen, but a shallow survey of world history makes me think that it is not so. There is nothing new under the sun.

__________________
Davidius
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Currently in the process of transferring membership to an as-yet-undecided church in Chapel Hill
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics

Oh, the present times are much worse.

"Professor" Harold Hill says so:
Of course you'll want to replace a pool table with alcohol and 'River City' with your community, but there's trouble my friend - with a capital 'T" and that rhymes with 'B' and stands for booze. Oh we got trouble.

__________________
Bob Vigneault (Bawb Vēēn-yo)
I just know there's got to be a pony in here somewhere!

The Heartbeat of Heaven (blog) MySpace (Music), MySpace (Personal)
Member of Christ Presbyterian Church, Janesville, WI OPC www.christ-opc.org

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

Trouble, Trouble....sing it Ray

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<div ...</table></div>

__________________
~ Steven Bradford ~
Member Covenant Presbyterian, Chattanooga, TN

It's one thing to say that it is unwise for certain people to consume alcohol, namely those for whom it easily leads to debauchery. I have seen this very thing happen to someone in my own family, so I concur with the warnings for those who should not drink.

But it's quite another to say that it is wise for Christians to abstain from alcohol, the implication being that any Christian who takes a drink, even one who can genuinely drink in moderation and enjoy it as a gift from God that Scripture declares it is, is unwise. That is a biblically unwarranted statement.

__________________
~Greg Carpenter~
Deerfield Beach, FL

"It is a throne of grace that God in Christ is represented to us upon; but yet it is a throne still whereon majesty and glory do reside, and God is always to be considered by us as on a throne." –John Owen

But she also said she was not laying down the law or saying that it was forbidden by Scripture.

I agree with you here, which is also why I also disagree with bwsmith. And I think this is where the argument needs to be addressed - on the merits of the points being made. When people argue for the wisdom of abstinence from alcohol, they give a list of reason. We can look at those reasons and see if they have merit.

If one says the reasons against drinking warrant a law against it, then they fence the law. But it is only "fencing the law" because the new law is not warranted by Scripture. It is still a matter of liberty, and any law is a violation of liberty.

But look at the catechism answers to the meaning of the 10 commandments. There's a long list of what commandment X means, and what commandment Y means. This is not "fencing the law" because the "additional" laws are logically warranted by Scripture - and are not merely stricter laws to avoid breaking the commandments.

How do we determine the difference? By looking at the arguments for the proposed laws. If the law is fully warranted by the Scriptures, then it is not fencing the law, but merely working out the logical implications of Scripture. But if the proposed law is a matter of the application of law to particular situations, then we can not make it law, but leave it as a "rule of thumb" or a suggestion.

I believe when a church starts saying that all drinkers are apostate, or not welcome to fellowship, they fence the law. When they say you can not be an elder or a deacon if you smoke, they fence the law. But if a person gives the opinion that Christians would be wise to abstain from alcohol or smoking, then they are not necessarily making a law (or fencing the law) - and should not be accused of being Pharisaical. We seem to be equally quick to accuse someone of being legalistic when they express opinions regarding what they consider wise Christian behavior.

I don't think your implication is correct.

I agree that Scripture imply that wine is a gift from God and it is my opinion that Christians today can safely drink with moderation. And while the contrary (to the first) would be an biblically unwarranted statement - it is not implied by "it is wise for Christian's to abstain from alcohol".

Ahh man!!!!!!!!!! I gotta give up billiards too?

__________________
1689 Baptist Confession

Psa 55:16 As for me, I will call upon God; and the LORD shall save me.
Psa 55:17 Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.
James Farley, Wilderness Road Baptist Assembly.
Husband of Melissa and father of Ann.
www.wildernessroadbaptist.org

Here is an article by Pastor David L. Brown that he calls, "Seven Good Reasons Christians Should Not Drink"

He uses the same arguments that bw has put forth including the Russian Roulette comparison. The bulk of the piece is tied to the premise that there is a prohibition of strong drink in the Bible. I'm not sure I see it. He repeatedly quotes Prov. 20:1, as did bw, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." He claims this to be a prohibition.

This is a warning that an EXCESS of wine or strong drink is a danger because it brings about DRUNKENESS. I don't see a prohibition of strong drink in this proverb. Is there one?

I am not sure if your reply is to me or “anthony” – but I appreciate the time you took in drafting a response, and am instructed by both your content and tone.

I don’t recall labeling people as “immature” – nor do I remember robbing other Christians of their liberty to make choices, or brandishing a circumcision knife.

I do know that I said one in ten people become alcoholic – and that no one intended that as a goal. You may not see it as gambling with life, sanity and health – but some do.

Certainly many do abstain from fear, instead of faith that Christ has and is delivering them from al their afflictions and sins. Cautioning others that the bridge might be out on a course of conduct is not legalism – yet some may hear an inharmonious tone with the freedom that is our inheritance.

__________________
bwsmith
wife, mother and grandmother!
Severna Park Evangelical Pres. Church (PCA)

It is never wise to call what God calls a blessing, a curse. Statistics can not justify it, logic can not justify it, addiction theory can not justify it, clever sounding analogies to russian roulette, nothing.

God says wine, beer, and strong drink are a blessing and are to be enjoyed. God says the purpose is to rest, celebrate, forget sorrows, make your hart glad, to worship Him. To willfully turn your back on the clear teaching of scripture can be called many things, but "wise" is not one of them.

Of course fasting is not only allowed but (I believe) commanded. Fasting by it's very nature is of a limited duration. Any person, who claims the name of Christ and also sets out a standard of behaviour that contradicts the scripture is engaged in the worship of some god, but Jesus Christ is not his name.

I realise that this may sound harsh. Yet if someone walked up to me and and introduced themselves as a fellow christian who happened to think that it was "wise" "in our time" to "abstain" from sex/marriage/having children/assembling ourselvers together/ or what ever. All of this because of "concern for potential" sins or because of their "witness". Then I would mark that person down as a crank (at best) or a heretic (at worst).

I would love to see a justification from scripture. However I think I will have to wait a long time.

__________________
Kevin Rogers
Sovereign Community Church, PCA
Moncton NB

Having been following this whole thread, I've been thinking mostly about a point that has started to come up in many people's posts in the last couple pages: the difference between calling something "a sin" and calling it "unwise." Some (such as Rich and David) have made the point that the two accusations can be identical. Others (such as Anthony) have responded that they are necessarily different.

I would argue that either one can be the case, completely depending on the context and heart of the person making the observations, particularly regarding how that person views and thinks of the people they are observing. Obviously there is a sense in which a Christian can suggest that something is often unwise without unbiblically forbidding it as sin (like Paul did, as mentioned earlier). But at the same time, it is very possible for me to call a practice unwise and ultimately be making the sin accusation at the heart of the matter.

It ultimately depends on the spirit in which I'm making the "unwise" observation, and how I view those people who partake in the supposedly unwise practice. It would be very easy for me to say, "No, I'm not saying it's a sin. I'm not even saying everyone would be unwise for doing it. I'm just making a general observation." But if I really look down on people for partaking in the practice, be it ever so subtle or vague, I might as well be calling it a sin, or universalizing the "unwise" accusation. And since so much of true meaning of the "unwise" observation can be revealed by observing how I view those who partake in the practice, and since it can be so subtle, non-explicit and vague, it can often be so easy to miss the condescending or sin-implying side of such an observation.

bwsmith, in reading this thread, I have to say I have honestly gotten the impression that your observations of the "unwise" nature of alcohol partaking have the disapproval element attached to them. If that is not the case, please say so and forgive me for misunderstanding you that way. But if you honestly look down on people who partake in that activity you view as unwise, regardless of how subtle it is, then there is more going on than an innocent, no-sin-accusations observation. I hate motorcycles. I think it is unwise to drive them because of the greatly increased risk of injury and fatality they give to the driver on the road. But I have to continually remind myself that even without directly calling it a sin, if I even do so much as look down on people for driving them (which I have done many times), then I am in fact sinning by going beyond God's Law in my own judgment of people, and I ultimately might as well be accusing them of sin.

When we were discussing the Reformed teachings on Christian liberty, a relative of mine once asked me if I would view him as unbiblically judging people if he had concern in his heart for them and their well-being after seeing a liquor cabinet in their house. I said, "Not at all. But I would view you as unbiblically judging them if you later found out that it did not in fact create a problem in their lives, yet you still looked down on them in any way for having it, or even implicitly had further notions of disapproval." So bwsmith, I would encourage you to examine your heart toward people who still choose to partake of alcohol in moderation, and honestly answer the question of whether or not you look down on them with disapproval in your heart. Because that will ultimately be the interpreter of what you mean by saying it is "unwise," and whether that observation is a healthy one in the spirit of Paul on marriage and sex, or an unhealthy one that has subtle elements of unbiblical sin accusation in it.

__________________
Chris


A passion to know and reflect Christ by living and demonstrating the truth and richness of the historic Reformed faith

Visit My Website Here

Christopher Blum
Member of Riveroaks Reformed Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Germantown, TN
Currently attending Trinity Presbyterian Church of Northern Kentucky (PCA) in Burlington, KY

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

Hi Anthony,

I understand what you're saying, and I'm sure you're correct in that that wasn't what was intentionally meant by saying that. I was speaking more in general terms as it is the unfortunate view of many in the Church today that a Christian shouldn't drink. Alcohol is condemned universally without qualification and without biblical basis. I should have been more clear on that. My apologies.

An in-law of mine is a pastor of a pentecostal church. At our wedding reception, my wife and I had one margarita a piece. His response? The entire reception he kept coming up to my wife whispering "sinner" in her ear.

We've had conversations with this individual about alcohol consumption since. Since he couldn't scripturally support his blanket condemnation of all drinking, he would resort to statements very similar to the one mentioned above.

Again, and with respect: I did not use the word “curse.” And with the blessing that the created substance wine and beer were, comes strong warnings, and woes.

If you rely on “teaching” from Ecclesiastes to enjoy life with wine, you must temper that with other passages – especially Prov 24; 31:4-7, comparable wisdom literature, and the warnings from prophets like Isaiah – as well as the instruction of use, and abuse by Paul – whose first century beverage of choice may have had the same name, buy not the same content.

Your imaginary encounter sounds troubling indeed – are you saying you compare my counsel to that?

Could you, would you, elaborate on this distinction?

From where I sit it looks like a distinction without a difference, which IMO is the reason this thread has unfolded the way it has.

__________________
Chris Poe
Mandeville, LA

"There never was a man in the world without a creed. What is a creed? A creed is what you believe. What is a confession? It is a declaration of what you believe. That declaration may be oral or it may be committed to writing, but the creed is there either expressed or implied."—B.H. Carroll

Wow. Scary.

I imagine your wife responding with "And?..."

That kind of thing gives Christian's a bad rep.

Well said Chris...

That means that nine in ten people do not, and can reasonably enjoy God's blessed creation without fear.

Also, it is claimed that one in ten people is a homosexual. Does that mean we all should avoid any sort of relationship with members of the same sex? Is such a relationship "unwise"?

You can't use statistics in a meaningful way in these types of arguments.

There is no wisdom in statistics.

__________________
Tom Albrecht
Member, Covenant URCNA, New Holland, PA.

"I'm not a famous man. I'm just a simple country doctor with horse sense."