Grace To You

OH, WOW! Pastor John, tell it like it is!

I have had trouble lately with church groups that wear special vests and tattoos in order to go where they claim others would not be allowed. All done to share the gospel, they say. Even the women that go along are dressed for the part including tattoo's known as sleeves.

So it got me to thinking. What if God called them to do missionary work in a country, with a tribe where tattoos would get them killed and all those with them? Why don't they see that their permanent tattoos excludes others they might have been able to witness to?

Why don't they care that when they get on an elevator with their tattoos and rings in their lips and ears that some lady with her four year old daughter might be frightened enough to want to get off? Don't they count? There goes a missed opportunity to spread the Gospel.

Why don't they dress in a way that boldly speaks about who they are? Why don't they think that the "group" they want to infiltrate won't think more highly of them, won't see them more courageous if they go dressed more benign, more conservatively? Why aren't they concerned that the "group" will think they are mocking them? Why don't they depend on God to make a way and depend on Him for protection like all the other missionaries do? Why don't they think the "group" will see Jesus as weak, a conformist?

I don't recall Jesus changing His style, His dress, His speech, His delivery of the Gospel in order to gain entrance anywhere. In fact, I think it got Him more attention....His nerve to go as He truly was, where no other man dare go.

Here I go offending some but it appears to me that some use the Gospel as a way to dress and live a rebellious lifestyle. It has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with manners or customs and doing what the "natives" do. This has nothing to do with taking your shoes off before you enter a home. This is living so you "blend" in with the others. Jesus stood out. He did not blend in.

Dear John. Thank you so much for this article. I'm glad you have addressed this issue. This kind of thing has become an issue in our SBC life. I shudder to think of the young pastors who will influence thousands, and perhaps themselves and their own children, toward alcohol. You and I have seen a lifetime of the terrible results of playing with that adder. Keep up the good work. Your friend, Jerry Vines

Thank you ever so much for this. I have always upheld all your points but i have one question. I have read this question before and noone has answered it. Paul circumsized Timothy in order to reach the Jews right? Does that not relate to culture identity? I could find theologically the answer to why Paul asked the women to cover their heads but with the circumsicion one......i am slighty confused. I know he did it to prevent the lack of it from becoming a stumbling block to present the gospel. I reckon that if he didnt, the door wouldnt have been opened. So his mind was definately on presenting the gospel but in order to do this, he had to identify with the jews culturally. Any feedback on how this situation differs from fitting in to present the gospel? This does not negate that i totally accept everything you have said as my point of view but this one scripture has had me in a dilemma.

Thanks Pastor John for your unwavering serving of God in presenting the truth.

Thank you so much for writing this series! It has addressed many issues and questions that are SO important for us to consider. THANK YOU for providing a solid, Biblical voice on these matters. I so look forward to the rest of the series.

It is such sad thing when a man is so surrendered to the pride of his “Christian Liberty” that it has such complete rule over his heart, and he can no longer surrender to the Lordship of his Savior.

Thank you Pastor MacArthur, for this wise counsel and corrective. Christian liberty should be used carefully so we are sober-minded and ready to take on our appointed tasks. I know in my flesh I am very weak and I have struggled with addictive behavior. So I agree it is foolish to flirt with a behavior known to shipwreck the lives of both unbelievers and believers. Also, so long as we're courting favor with the world (in the name of liberty), we're being sidetracked from our true mission-- proclaiming the gospel and adorning it with a pure lifestyle.

This is a very good issue to discuss, because even older pastor, even though they don't do it themselves, they don't see anything wrong with the public drinking of wine and beer by Church leaders.

My wife and I decided that we had to leave a Church, when we received a less than satisfying answer from the pastor when we asked him why one of the Church ministry was using a "wine and cheese" and a "poker night" to raise funds. It just so happens that the person in charge of that ministry was never shy about the fact that he drinks beer. In fact he put pictures on a popular social website of him and other men drinking beer at his 2 year old daugther's birthday party. This was a little much for us and the pastor of the Church didn't seem to see anything wrong with all this.

We were thinking what kind of testimony is that? Talk about giving people a reason to criticize the Church. This is beyond Christian liberty, what about your weaker brother, someone whose just came out of alcoholism or gambling.

I'm not sure that these people are ready to let go of somethings. They don't mind adding on Christ to their lives instead of replacing everything by Him. I think it's not only to impress others or to attract people to Jesus that they do all this. It might just be that these people just really like do to all these things and they found the perfect avenue to excuse themselves. From seeing all the talk about these things, it almost looks like these things have become idols. Like those who use grace as a license, they use liberty as a way to excuse all those behaviors.

Thanks pastor John for a really good insight on the subject.

I have a brother who is a pastor, he drinks a can a beer 4 times a week. If I visit him, what advice do you have? If I drink, I may encourage him. I don't want to be at fault? I don't even like the taste of beer myself. I have a allergy reaction to it. It makes my face break out in a rash.. True..

I have a question, kind of lengthy but bear with me:

Is martial arts a sin? I got out of it 8 years ago, but almost become a black belt. I transferred a McDojo (basically where one pays for a black belt in a couple years) for the last year and dropped out for that reason. I would like to get back to a true martial arts system, mostly for self-defense and conditioning.

Is that a sin? Now as for the cage-fighting mixed martial arts junk, again it's self defense and conditioning sometimes. But in tournaments and stuff like that, it's wrong. Even Bruce Lee and great martial arts masters see that fighting as a joke and not what true martial arts is about.

Now granted, these people practiced it as a religion mixing it with Buddhism and Taoism. That's wrong I know.

I remember back in the day when I used to watch the 700 Club, Robertson said that if you can punch someone through a brick wall it's demonic. That is also wrong, I have studied the body and what strength is, it's possible without demonic help and only pure strength. Of course people should refrain from doing it anyway.

I am giving out the background for you guys to see whether or not it is a sin. It's very misconstrued in the Christian community.

#3, Sena. God Bless Timothy for going along with it. There was a time, circumcision was required. Then, no longer were we under The Law. But that didn't mean that it was an altogether wrong practice, is my best guess?

And consider that Timothy could go anywhere and it was not obvious to others nor had it ever been a custom that was offensive to other people groups, not a stumbling block as far as I know. To endure such a procedure, Timothy must have truly wanted to not offend (which is very different than conforming)and truly had compassion on a people that were stuck in the Old Law.

I don't know if that is a right answer but all that could come up with at this time. Good question!

Where do we draw the line at smug, Pharisee-like self rightousness just because a Christian decides to be a teetotaler? If you have a drinking problem, and your drinking brings dishonor to Jesus Christ, then you should NOT drink.

Dr. MacArthur, I want to start by saying that I am very grateful for your ministry and teachings. I do not agree 100% with what you teach, although I would put it somewhere around 90%! On the other hand, issues like this one need not cause divisions between brethren, so I hope what I am about to say will be taken in that spirit.

While I agree that modern alcohol (mass produced for profit off of those who are drunkards) has become a scourge and I also agree that we should not be "of the world" (getting drunk to reach drunks...), I do not see alcohol as evil. Alcohol is inherently amoral (without morals). I have had several great conversations on Scripture and the Gospel with a good microbrew in my hand. On the other hand, drunkeness is something we are told to have no part of.

The key for this is really in "moderation." I know that if I have more than one beer, I will get light headed. So, I do not have more than one beer. No problem. The Scripture does not say that beer, wine, cigars, or anything else we can eat or drink that people get upset over, is "deceitfully wicked above all things...who can know it?" It is the human heart that holds that award.

I consume about the equivalent of 6-8 beers in a calendar year. Does that make me evil or unsaved? I don't try to force others to drink it with me, nor do I confront someone who has a beer. I will confront drunkeness, however.

Jesus drank wine - diluted or not. If it is poison, diluting it does not make it less poisonous. Jesus created wine for the wedding at Cana. And wedding parties resulted in huge consuming of wine. So, Scripturally speaking, the issue at hand is drunkeness, not imbibing in alcohol.

One last thing, if I know that a person has a weakness for indulging in the sin of drunkeness, I will not drink around them. I do not want to have a hand in making another stumble.

Thank you again for your obedience in ministry and look forward to more if I survive the scorching from your readers I am about to receive! :)

Thanks for the post. It's important to know. It's good for a pastor not to get drunk on beer. Amen. Sorry if my posts got mixed up. Sorry.

Seems to me it's a macho thing to do to drink beer.. but with Christ it's different for Christ has no sin. Amen.

Thank you Pastor John! It wasn't until 2 years ago that I understood what Paul meant by being "all things to all people". You explained it in terms that even this thick skulled guy could understand. Having said that: We've gotta be able to let things go even if they are not sinful to us or listed in the Bible as sinful. We must be careful to not have our brother or sister in Christ fall because of a host of things, including: Alcohol, cigarettes/cigars, tattoos, music, movie choices...etc. Music, for me, can become my god very easily. Having said that, if my listening to secular music would cause someone to fall....Them I've got to be willing to turn it off or pitch it all together. We've always gotta be aware of idols in our lives....These, so-called, Christian liberties, can become out idols in a heartbeat if we're not careful. Of course, let's not be plastic and false...but, let's remember what's most important: A growing relationship with our Saviour Jesus Christ and leading others to him. Let's not spend every moment trying to fit into this world....Let's be counter cultural and have people ask what in the world makes us so different and so at peace in this crazy ol' world. Let's raise the bar a little and not settle for what the TV feeds us as being cool and hip. I think as we dig in the Word our priorities shift and morph. Put the beer down and pick your brother up! God bless you all and God bless Pastor John and GTY for guiding us deeper into God's Word.

I must say that if someone is using their Christian liberty to pursue a life of anything but holiness they are in direct opposition to the sacrifice of our Lord. As I've said before, I'm 25 and I am greatly concerned about living pure. Do I always live this way? No. But thank God that He is merciful and is willing and able to cleanse me from my sin. I don't drink alcohol for two reasons: I don't like alcohol and I'm afraid of causing someone to stumble. Personally, I don't find that consumption of alcohol to be in and of itself to be sinful; however, as a Christian in the States I find it to be an unwise decision to make because of the cultural stigma that has been given it here in the USA. And as a Christian if we are going to boast we are to boast in the Lord (Jeremiah 9:23) not in the things we consume. As a younger person I don't see this as a hill to die on in the name of "Christian" liberty. If it means forgoing a beverage to keep a brother or sister from stumbling back into sin or stumbling into sin, then I'll stick to sweet tea (besides sweet tea tastes better :) ). I believe that a great principle in this matter is found in 1 Corinthians 10:23-33. Once more, our liberty is given to serve the Lord, not to pursue our own selfish desires (1 Peter 2:16). We are to be seeking unity in holiness, not trying parade our "liberty" by engaging in debauchery or ignoring the conscience of other believers. Christians are to display holiness (1 Peter 1:16). I thank God for not just permitting me to stay the way I was or just letting me do things my own way. I thank God that He has given a standard and that He empowers me in my pursuit of Him. I hope that I haven't sounded like I'm rambling on.

In Christ,

Greg

p.s.

My wife and I really enjoy and are built up through the ministry of "Grace to You." We thank God for men that are willing to stand up for truth. May God continue to bless "Grace to You" and like ministries.

Where do we draw the line at smug, Pharisee-like self rightousness just because a Christian decides to have a drink?

@Rebecca Schwem,

I understand where you are coming from but I have to tell you that as a fellow brother in Christ you have hurt me by what you have wrote. The fact is that I serve the same Christ that you serve. I have tattoos and piercings and I ride a motorcycle. I belong to a motorcycle ministry and wear a patch proudly on the back of my vest. I understand there are many false converts who give people like me a bad name, but let me assure you, we are loving people and would not ever want to scare anyone. When I am out and about I usually try to go out of my way to be extra nice so that I am approachable even with how I look. I love the Lord and I love to share the Gospel. I work for Living Waters/Way of the Master and my number one goal is to see the lost brought to Christ. We even do ministries to kids at hospital s and minister to them. If there are those that outwardly scare people than maybe they simply are not of the faith to begin with. I would ask you to take the time to examine what you say more carefully before you say it. I know personally that it hurt me, but I didn't want to write back in any type of anger, but instead to try to help you understand so that maybe I can erase some of the accusations you have made about people like me. Anyway, I think it has more to do with people being scared or guarded when it comes to people who are different than them. If you want to, go ahead and add me on Facebook. You will clearly see that not all people that have tattoos and piercings are evil. I would love you to take sometime and look into the matter a little further. Thanks and God Bless

@Jeremy Notchick

Well stated Jeremy.

For me. I am a recovering alcoholic who was raised by a functioning alcoholic father. My relationship with my father has been pretty much all but been destroyed because of alcohol consumption and now I watch my father suffering and dying because of his choice early in life to not listen to the pleading of his wife and children when he was still in good health. I play the "what if" game in my head of how things could have been. I shouldn't think in such a manner as I'm now a follower of Christ but it lingers.

#19 Jeremy, you assume I did not think first. I've been thinking abut it for several years. You also assume I have no personal experience with this or right to speak up about it. I do. I am not at liberty right now to name those associations but can tell you I had and have every reason to want to believe their dress is for authentic Christianity. It would serve me well to be able to believe so and be a tremendous comfort to me personally.

I have observed and been tolerant and never really spoken out loud about it until now. John MacArthur has given me the courage to do so. I am as gracious to those that are different from myself as I am to those that I feel compatible with. I have 10 children...been through the teen years ten times and I have 25 grandchildren and 2 great grandchildren. I've seen it all and nothing surprises me. I don't live under a rock.

I am being honest. I'm not a person out to hurt anyone feelings. But if I tip toe around, then you might not know how some of us feel. I don't want to be a proud people. I wear nothing proudly. I'm not even proud of my becoming Christian because, as you know, I did nothing to earn that. Christ picked me. He did it all. I should be going to hell!

Consider this Jeremy. When I was younger, if I dressed like a stripper in order to get other strippers to talk to me, few would consider that wise or God honoring. I believe the power is in God's Word. I don't believe I need to conform. Now you can consider that offensive or you can consider it wisdom.

I'm sorry your feelings are hurt. I'm glad you are a brother in Christ. But you might want to consider my heart and my concerns at the very least. I don't wear tattoos or piercings, I don't wear a vest. So my experience is very different from yours. I have not walked in your shoes and I dare say nor have you walked in mine.I'm not sure we force certain things to be right or fit. We can only do the right thing.

I work very hard now days to make sure I am not a distraction to the Word of God. I think modesty in all things is God honoring. And yet, the culture has changed so, even among Christians, that more Christians are persecuted today for their modesty than those that conform. Doing what you do is far more popular than how I feel.

James 4:17 Romans 12:2

Dear Pastor MacArthur,

Fellow Christians are not the enemy. I know and fellowship with very many Christians who occasionally tipple. They are very, very mature and Godly believers that have a somewhat different perspective on this issue than you.

Please remember, our distinctives are just that. Our purpose, however, is the same; to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. Yes, sometimes other Christians do justify actions and practices that are not ultimately justifiable. Let us patiently, kindly and lovingly instruct them and make sure that we do not go beyond that which is written.

Please be kind and generous toward your fellow believers.

Don't forget the words of Luther himself, "Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women? The sun, the moon, and the stars have been worshiped. Shall we then pluck them out of the sky?

…see how much he [God] has been able to accomplish through me, though I did no more than pray and preach. The Word did it all. Had I wished I might have started a conflagration at Worms. But while I sat still and drank beer with Philip and Amsdorf, God dealt the papacy a mighty blow."

blessings,

Steve

Are you saying it's wrong for a Christian to drink a beer?

#18, John Mickelson.

That is what I meant to say. Too bad there is no edit feature on this thing.

First of all, I can not thank you enough for this ministry. As I child I grew up penecostal and charismatic. To discover this ministry and the life changing TRUTHS of the Word has been more than I can ever express. On to my question, I will try to be brief. My current church has rapidly within the last six months ventured into the "culture assimilation". "All things to all people" (1 Corinthians 9:19) has been preached lately. We have undergone a huge building transformation complete with attractive lighting and a friendly coffee bar. I know what this smacks of and so my husband and I sat down with our pastor the other night. We explained we were unsettled by some of the changes. He was gracious in explaining to us how we got where we are. He admitted that we are in dangerous territory (as a church) and that we can't take our Christian liberty too far. BUT, there is a whole generation of 18-25 year olds that he just doesn't know how to reach. I countered with Acts and that adding to the the body is the work of the Lord we must just preach the uncompromised Gospel. I truly believe the Word of God is not culturally irrelevant. It is a superficial argument to them (we mustn't make them dress like us, but we must go to them not make them come to us.) I think he is walking a tight rope biblically and I'm concerned. He stated that God gives us alot of liberity in how we present the Gospel. I'm confused by this statement. I know we are graciously given liberity (1 Corinthinans 10:23) but how does this fit within the area of evangelizing? I just don't see Jesus or the apostles pandering to the culture. What are the boundaries for how far you can go in trying to reach the lost?

There's too much fingerpointing at how others live and not enough concern for our own personal walk with the Lord. If someone is a Christian and believe that it is best for them not to drink, then that is fine, but the legalists (yes it is legalism), want to insist their own beliefs upon others, and teetotalling just isn't Biblical. Scripture condemns drunkenness and excess, not alcohol usage. But on the flip side of that, I don't believe in the bravado like promotion of Alcohol usage that you find with certain Christian denominations. Obviously, a lot of people cannot responsibly use alcohol and Christians should always proceed with discernment in this area.

#18 John, are you stating that Macarthur's article is smug and pharissee like or am I misunderstanding it?

I myself don't drink. I have not had anything harder to drink then a cup of coffee in almost 15 years. I got clean when I was 18 from all sorts of chemicals including alcohol. Since I have been a Christian I have been called smug and legalistic by other Christians because of the fact I don't drink and don't allow it in my home. I have a very closed minded opinion about anyone drinking alcohol. Not just Christians.

As far as the tatoo's and piercings go, I am heavily tatooed (no piercings though) All my tatoo's I got prior to my conversion. I deeply regret my tatoo's for a number of reasons, some of which Rebecca mentioned in post #1. There have been times where it has stood as a barrier to people I could be presenting the gospel to. My tatoo's were all about looking a certain way and maintaing a certain image and attracted a certain crowd. In my experience tatoo's are all about pleasing the flesh and have nothing to do with glorifying our Lord and Savior.

Thank you for this series GTY. God bless!! Micah

#19 (Jeremy)

I'm sorry but I have to agree mostly with Rebecca on this, but let's make sure we are clear, I would agree that getting tattoos and piercings is sinful. However, I think the rebuking of a brother in Christ regarding such things only applies to tattoos and such received after conversion. Certainly we are all sinners saved by grace and have utterly sinful pasts, but to continue in sin after conversion is contrary to scripture. In 1 Peter 1:14, Peter tells us that to continue in our former sins after conversion is due to ignorance of God's Word. Leviticus 19:28 specifically prohibits tattooing and piercings, and more generally prohibits following the practices of the heathens (unbelievers). 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 confirms that those practices we did before being saved are no longer to be done.

In 1 Corinthians 6:12, Paul states that any indulgence of a Christian is technically lawful, as Christ has forgiven for all of our sins once and for all, but let's expand upon this a bit. Clearly we are not to continue in sin as is made clearly throughout all scripture, Romans 6:1-2. Since obvious sins (explicit breaking of God's laws) are just that, obvious, there was no need for Paul to say "that's bad". Paul here, IMO, is speaking about the "gray area" so many Christians take advantage of in the name of Christian liberty, both sins not defined in Scripture, and certain acts of the law that Christ gave permission to the apostles to declare no longer necessary (circumcision/foods etc.).

Certainly we all still commit sin, and will continue until Christ's return (but surely with less frequency as we mature in Christ). So, as 1 Peter 4:15 makes clear, it is not proper to judge a brother based on a single sin (also Romans 14:10,13), for only God knows our hearts. Also, the rest of Romans 14 actually re-emphasizes Christian liberty, stating that where two believers differ, over debatable conduct, the more liberal is not to condemn the more conservative, and the more conservative is not to judge the more liberal, but Romans 14:20-21 does put the burden of concession on the more liberal believer.

All that being said, I think tattoos and piercings fall under explicit sin as defined in Leviticus 19:28, so yes, it is sinful to continue in such practices after being saved.

#23 (Steve) & #25 (Chris)

While I'm not specifically speaking about you're posts, you both have mentioned sentiments that I have heard on this site and elsewhere that I think needs to be addressed.

I hear a lot of "there's too much concern with what other professed believers are doing and we should focus on reaching the lost". I'm failing to understand how those two efforts are conflicting. All believers should be concerned with maintaining the truth of the Word, and I have yet to see once instance where being concerned with the behavior of the church interferes with reaching the lost. Remember Jesus overturning the tables? Remember Paul rebuking Peter? Certainly maintaining a pure and distinct identitiy separate from sinners should be the goal of the church and is tantamount in our testimony to the world.

Statements like that seem to me to be a deflection response to conviction.

#22 @Rebecca Schwem,

I totally understand what you were saying. And yes, I praise God as well that He chose me when I was incapable of choosing Him. How undeserving we all are.

You didn't hurt me with you being outspoken about this, but rather that most of your comment was geared toward one thing... tattoos, piercings, and vests with patches. From what I gather you too, as I have, had your fair share of run ins with false converts who say they are Christians and dress like that but yet have a "tough guy" attitude and don't even share their faith. I am not afraid to name names and I have mostly experienced this from Bikers For Christ M/M. I have been hurt by that world to.

Also, if I had offended you or made you feel like I was implying you have been "living under a rock" please forgive me. That is not at all what I had meant. Trust me, I had a background in immodesty, an addiction to pornography and I am so grateful for modest Christian women. My wife is extremely modest compared to other women her age and it is more attractive than showing to much. I think that modesty brings glory to God.

I get what you are saying by the stripper thing, but I think it is not a valid point because I do not dress like this or have tattoos to "fit in." I don't even go to biker events or anything. I only dress like this for me personally. I am a firm believer that the Gospel does not need any help. I don't need to look a certain way and fit in to preach the Gospel. In the same way, I don't need to dress or look a certain way to be a true convert and follower of our Savior. Just look at John the Baptist. He was a wild man, ate locusts and honey and wore camel hair and a leather belt. He probably scared some people away to, but that didn't stop him from being one of the best examples we have of an open air preacher. He also was chosen to baptize Christ. I think that if I dress this way it does not hinder the furtherance of the Gospel.

And actually, doing what I do is far less popular than the world I live in. I have been blacklisted, a outcast in the Biker community because I preach the Gospel and practice Biblical Evangelism. Most of them hate me because I use the law instead of telling people "God has a wonderful plan for your life, do you know Jesus?" I have considered where you are coming from, and again, I am sorry if I have offended you at all. My intention was only to expose you to the fact that there are some people you described that truly only seek to please Christ and put no weight on the opinion of man.

Thanks for responding and God Bless you Sister :)

Thank you Pastor MacArthur, Phil Johnson, and others who have attributed to this series. The sad thing is seeing those in the faith whose conscience's were seared through listening to other's take on these issues. Not knowing what to believe, they went ahead and joined them at the pub or drinking, against their consciences. This is what angers me the most about all this. Weaker actually true believers are being led into sin by others using liberty as a cloak for licentiousness. I have one thing to say to those who do this, "When you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ." 1 Corinthians 8:13

Yes Pastor Mac Arthur, excellent!!!

And by the way, God bless you, and praise the Lord you are streaming the Truth Matters Conference for FREE!!! I'd been praying to go, knowing it will cost money I really did not have. Hallelujah! Grace and peace to you and the GTY staff, thanks!

Replying to Steve Bauer's post; where in the bible did Jesus drink wine? So many people state this, yet I still have not found where it states that Jesus drank wine? Anyone, if you have the bible reference please advise, thaks

Kerry H. #30

Sure, I agree with maintaining the Truth of the Word, and with that being said, teetotalism (abstaining from Alcohol) is not Biblical. The Bible condemns drunkenness and debauchery, not alcohol usage. I guess alcohol usage is a favorite "pet sin" to impose legalism upon the brethren because its a common vice out there that is abused by way too many people. But people also forget that food is abused by way too many people as well, but you don't hear too many people crying out about this outrage because there are more people in church with a problem in overindulging in food than there are alcoholics and drunkards, yet I see a lack of absence in rebuking these brothers and sisters for their reckless overindulgence in food. So I guess if we're going to be legalistic, lets at least maintain some consistency across the board. There's way too many Christian brothers and sisters out there with a 40+inch waist, that is extremely unhealthy. See, I can impose that legalism just as easily as the next guy.

#35 Chris

You state that "teetotalism (abstaining from Alcohol) is not Biblical."

Are you stating that people who abstain from alcohol are not being biblical?

I usually don't get to invovled in these blogs anymore because in the end it usually ends up in huge debates that last for weeks and I would much rather be pursuing my studies or spending time with my kids then devote a bunch of time to this but I am suprised with how defensive people are getting about thier alcohol use so I'll give my two cents for what it is worth. Alcohol is a drug. Next to tabbacco it is probably the most abused drug world wide. It is the only drug on earth that the physical withdrawls can actually kill you. I don't think I am posting anything that anyone does not already know, and I don't think that was the point of Macarthur's post, he never actually says having a beer is sinful. He states that alcohol (among other wordly things he lists) should not be a popular topic for discussion and should not be what the body of Christ is known for. Makes you wonder why some have gotten immediately defensive about drinking? Chris, If you haven't already go back and read the first two paragraphs, the last sentence Macarthur writes states that the YRR's "abstinence is deemed a sin to be repented of" which is the impression I got from you with your #35 post. I would also encourage you to follow some of the links and read up on some of the articles. Would you be ok with a pastor who fasted for 40 days from food and ONLY drank beer? I would have a serious issue if it was my pastor doing something like that. I don't believe that makes me legalistic at all and I didn't think that Macarthur came acroos as legalistic or condemming in his post. The last two paragraphs sum up the whole post nicely. The virtues he lists in the last paragraph are what every Christian should long for. God bless

#29  @Kerry Halpin,

Wuill definitely respond to you tomorrow. Gotta get to bed, but assuming you follow the old testament laws in Leviticus because that's what you use to justify that I am sinning than would I be correct in saying you stone people to death who Blaspheme God's name right? Also you make sure that women don't go outside during a certain time of month right. Leviticus also says that is sin. Will reply in length tomorrow but thats it for tonight :). God Bless

Am I legalistic if I am not worldly and question those who appear to be in worldly sin?

I thought the Bible taught we are to be holy & Christ-like?

9 But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;

1 Peter 2:9 (NASB95)

6 You also became imitators of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much tribulation with the joy of the Holy Spirit, 7 so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. 8 For the word of the Lord has sounded forth from you, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith toward God has gone forth, so that we have no need to say anything. 9 For they themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, 10 and to wait for His Son from heaven , whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come.

1 Thess 1:6-10 (NASB95)

11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. 14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; 15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

Eph 4:11-16 (NASB95)

26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens;

Heb 7:26 (NASB95)

9 And they sang* a new song, saying,

"Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

10 "You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth."

Rev 5:9-10 (NASB95)

15 Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

1 John 2:15 (NASB95)

8 But Daniel made up his mind that he would not defile himself with the king's choice food or with the wine which he drank; so he sought permission from the commander of the officials that he might not defile himself. 9 Now God granted Daniel favor and compassion in the sight of the commander of the officials,

Dan 1:8-9 (NASB95)

Thank you Pastor MacArthur!

Rebecca(22) and Kerry(29),

Do these criticisms apply to men like Hudson Taylor, or just men who are involved in biker ministry? How about to suburban soccer moms who drive SUV's? Wealthy business men who buy expensive suits rather than giving to the poor?

To be clear, I am not saying Hudson Taylor sets a biblical precedent, simply that by your definition he was conforming to the pattern of this world by imitating the outward appearance of those 'godless Chinese.'

I think it is more than possible to minister to bikers without looking like one. I would argue against getting a tattoo for ministry purposes, but not from Leviticus(read this article again for reasons not to do that). Instead, I would base the discussion on the superiority of Jesus to my ability to blend into a culture, and on experience building relationships that cross the boundaries of fashion. But you(Kerry) used a passage dealing with the inward man (1 Cor 6:9-11) to outright condemn the outward appearance of someone. That's unjustified, unkind, and actually detrimental to your argument.

I think everyone has heard the expression "you are looking through rose-colored glasses".

We should all be looking through Christ- colored glasses.

All our thoughts,words, and actions should be captive to Christ. What I mean is all our thoughts, words and actions should be filtered through the face of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We need to consciously be thinking: is this thought bringing glory to Christ? Are my words showing the glory of Christ? How about my actions(drinking beer or whatever), are they bringing and showing glory to the Lord?

No one knows the heart of a man except the Spirit in the man.

Remember it is not about you, it's about the glory and honor of our Lord.

Search your heart and your motive. God will.

Is it the heart we are to look at not the outward appearance. Maybe one cant get the tattoo off after he came to Christ. But does it matter where one comes from a culture, like Africa, China, and etc. If one wear symbols that offends God, must remove and avoided. but

say, if I want a bible verse on my arm. Is that wrong?? I saw a young man had a bible verse from Isaiah. but do we know if he living for Christ or not. So it should be the heart that matters.. then.. Oh, Jesus wants us to wash inside of us, then clean outside of us.

God bless.

"The result was a greatly diluted wine that had virtually no potential for making anyone drunk."

I am extremely grateful to the Lord for His work in and through Pastor MacArthur. The Holy Spirit has done much sanctifying work in my life through the teaching of Pastor MacArthur even though I live on the opposite side of the country. I agree that is is almost always wise and Christ-honoring to avoid the consumption of alcohol in public in our culture (USA), but I don't buy the argument that we shouldn't drink wine because it is no longer necessary for health reasons. If the wine was diluted and there was no risk of getting drunk, then why does Scripture make it abundantly clear that drunkenness is a sin?

I personally like what Martin Luther has to say on this subject.

"We must, therefore, be on our guard, for the devil is after us, through his apostles, with all his craft and cunning. Now, although it is true, and no one can deny that the images are evil because they are abused, nevertheless we must not on that account reject them, nor condemn anything because it is abused. That would result in utter confusion. God has commanded us not to lift up our eyes unto the sun, etc., that we may not worship them, for they are created to serve all nations.(Deuteronomy 4:19) But there are many people who worship the sun and the stars. Shall we,therefore, essay to pull the sun and stars from the skies? Nay, we will not do it.

Again, wine and women bring many a man to misery and make a fool of him. Shall we, therefore, kill all the women and pour out all the wine?

Again, gold and silver cause much evil, shall we, therefore, condemn them?...

and...

"Thirdly, there are some who are still weak in faith, who ought to be instructed, and who would gladly believe as we do.But their ignorance prevents them, and if this were faithfully preached to them, as it was to us, they would be one with us.Toward such well-meaning people we must assume an entirely different attitude from that which we assume toward the stubborn.We must bear patiently with them and not use our liberty, since it brings no peril or harm to body or soul, nay, rather is salutary, and we are doing our brothers and sisters a great service besides.But if we use our liberty without need, and deliberately cause offense to our neighbor, we drive away the very one who in time would come to our faith.Thus St.Paul circumcised Timothy because simple-minded Jews had taken offense; he thought, What harm can it do, since they are offended because of their ignorance? ( Acts 16:3) But when, in Antioch, they would insist that he ought and must circumcise Titus, Paul withstood them all and to spite them would not have Titus circumcised. ( Galatians 2:3) And he held his ground. He did the same when St. Peter by the exercise of his liberty caused a wrong conception in the minds of the unlearned. ( Galatians 2:11 ff.) It was on this wise: When Peter was with the Gentiles, he ate pork and sausage with them, but when the Jews came in, he would not touch this food and ate no more with them. (Peter and the Gentiles) Then the Gentiles who had become Christians, thought: Alas! we, too, must be like the Jews, eat no pork and live according to the law of Moses. But when Paul found that it would injure the liberty of the Gospel, he reproved Peter publicly and read him an apostolic lecture, saying: “If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, why compels you the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Galatians 2:14) Thus we, too, should order our lives and use our liberty at the proper time, so that Christian liberty may suffer no injury, and no offense be given to our weak brothers and sisters who are still without the knowledge of this liberty."

#41 (Taylor)

Are you quoting the wrong passage? 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 most certainly deal with physical external vices, which of course are always driven by inward motives. The whole point of the entire chapter is to live a life apart from the sins one committed in the past.

Also, I am not condemning anyone's outward appearance. I am however, condemning the practice of continuing in sin after being saved.

#38 (Jeremy)

It appears you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Should we not obey the 10 commandments? Should we not belive in the promises God declared in the OT? 2 Timothy 3:16. Paul says in Romans numerous times that we are not under the law but under grace (Romans 6:14), no argument there, but he continues on for the rest of the chapter (Romans 6:15 etc) to say that just because we are free from the bonds of the law, we should not revel in sinfulness.

Romans 3:31, Romans 6:15-16,19, Romans 15:4, 1 John 1:6, 1 John 2:3,4,7

I've read a few comments putting words into John's mouth. Did he ever say that having a beer is a sin? No. He criticizes the glorification of beer drinking and flaunting of vices as a badge of honor. It seems that there are many that are jumping to conclusions based only on a short blog article. To anyone truly desiring to hear an in depth biblical examination of alcohol, listen/read the 3 part sermon titled "Be Not Drunk With Wine" on GTY.org. It's excellent and would answer many of the questions posted here.

I have great respect for Dr. MacArthur, and have learned much from him through the years. That's the context for these points of disagreement.

Regarding Paul's recommendation to Timothy that he drink a little wine in 1 Tim. 5:23, Dr. MacArthur writes, "The result was a greatly diluted wine that had virtually no potential for making anyone drunk." The problem with this argument is that it makes nonsense of Paul's command in Ephesians 5:18 to not be drunk with wine, but rather be filled with the Spirit. For Paul's comparison to work, wine must have the potential for behavior-influencing control that Dr. MacArthur wants to minimize in 1 Tim. 5:23. The Greek word for wine is the same in both texts, as it also is in John 2, where Jesus creates it and gives it to the wedding celebrants.

It may surprise some to realize that alcohol is spoken of positively in Scripture more often than negatively. For a solid biblical study of the relevant texts (from someone who himself does not drink alcohol for medical reasons), read Ken Gentry's book "God Gave Wine."

Dr. MacArthur also writes, "... until fairly recently, no credible believer in the entire church age would ever have suggested that so many features evoking the ambiance of a pool hall or a casino could also be suitable insignia for the people of God." It is a bit unfair to lump all of these behaviors - some clearly sinful, others not - all into one category, then say that they stand outside the historical stream of accepted Christian behavior. Let's be fair and deal with the issues individually.

For a light-hearted, buy eye-opening look at the history of alcohol in the church, read Jim West's book "Drinking with Calvin and Luther."

Alcohol addiction is a sin. Alcohol is not sinful. Let's draw lines where Scripture does, but not further.

Respectfully...

By the way, Mary Elizabeth Tyler, I forgot to thank you for your You Tube link. Wonderful.

I used to by soundman in the church, and love all kind of worship music from the heart.

Hear this one on You Tube: O9Czujx1LOc

Dr. John, may I commend you for sticking to the basic fundamentals of the Christian faith. I grew up in a house where my father was an alcoholic, he loved me and my brother but during his life (deceased) he caused his family some embarrassing situations. I personally drank will I was in the U.S. Navy during Vietnam area, but soon noticed My heavenly father caused me to be sick any time I drank. I understood the message and I heeded the warning and haven't drink any alcohlic beverage in 30 plus years. I discovered I could not witness to anyone if I persisted to drink and with the desire gone it was no problem for me. My mother who was a Godly women had a lot to do with who I am today, I teach SS at my church and I feel a purpose for my exitance. My mother told me years ago I could teach, but I rejected that idea until after she passed away six years ago. Finally in closing I allowed the Holy Spirit to guide my efforts and I have found that joy my mother always spoke of. She knew that joy after teaching for over 50 years at our church. May God continue to bless your minitries.

#41 Taylor. Would you please reread my first comment, #1 and tell me where you see a criticism other than an observation?

I asked many questions & received no answers. I never said I held my observations to be true. This has been bothering me for a while. Funny it didn't initially. But as time has gone on, it has. Maybe not so funny after all? The easy way would be for me to not rock the boat and remain silent.

Also. I think I did make a clarification about the difference of conforming and showing good taste or manners. I thought I made it clear that doing what another culture does, ie removing shoes before entering one's home, was not the same as conforming. And if there was a biblical reference that removing shoes was sin, I'd say, Keep Your Shoes On, Brother!

As far as soccer moms with big SUV's and business men with expensive suits...we could go on and on and on. None of those things are done in the name of Christ so I'm not addressing them here. My issue is with people that dress in a way in order to be acceptable to a people group and that might be offensive to our Lord, unlike the case with Hudson Taylor. I'm not an expert on Chinese history or culture but I don't think their attire was sinful or questionable by it's own standards or God's?

And Jeremy, #31. First, you did not offend me. I'm not offended or worried or hurt when others speak out. I am losing the ability to think it is about me, even if my name is mentioned. And thanks to Jesus, my conscience is getting bigger, deeper, wider. I'm either growing in Christ or I'm digressing. I don't think it's that I'm digressing because if that was the case, I'd accept what everyone was doing and everyone would have the right answers. So I must be growing?

As far as John the Baptist goes, he was so filled with the Holy Spirit. "And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,"

Luke 1:41. John the Baptist did not dress to fit into the culture or any culture for that matter. I don't think his dress was an example for us today. Our example was Jesus Christ.1Peter 2:21-25

But, before you say that many of the tattooed and pierced folks have the Holy Spirit too, you and I cannot know one way or the other for sure. We can only know for sure that John the Baptist was and he was handpicked by God before he was even conceived.Luke 1:13-17.

This series has been about maturing and maturity. Popular today are crosses worn as jewelry, not as a sweet sentiment to our Lord.Cool guys wear them too...big ol' crosses on big ol' chains around their necks. Fashionable ladies wear, what would have been in my day considered gaudy, big crosses to match their attire. I like fashion.I had this really big red jeweled one I wore occasionally. The Holy Spirit really convicted me on that one. To use our Lord and His death as a fashion statement was wrong. I tossed it. I'm growing up. After all these years,I'm finally growing up.

I'm sure this blog will be well received, and the piling on will begin by everyone who sees this sin in others. I do not drink, but wonder if this message would be as well received if it substituted gluttony for drunkenness.

The day we begin to see our own sin as being as great as the sin we do not struggle with is the day we'll be as concerned about the 5th slice of pizza at the lock-in or the 3rd plate of fried chicken at the picnic as we are about the cooler of beer at the softball game.

When the morbidly obese man in the suit is as quickly identifiable as a Baptist preacher as the beer (or coffee) fanatic is of the Young-Restless-Reformed, we need to look at the plank in our own eye.

Be slow to label Dr. MacArthur as a Pharisee who commands abstinence from alcohol. While MacArthur himself is a proponent of abstaining, If you read the article in light of what MacArthur has previously taught in places such as his study Bible (ex. John 2:3) you will discover that the article was not written to convert those who practice moderation to total abstinence but instead to rightfully rebuke children who unknowingly disgrace themselves and the Reformed faith by practicing pragmatism in their evangelism and being known for their championship of mixing drinks rather then maturity in Christ.

I had my small wild streak in college. That being said, I have not "partied" in over a decade, and have not even sipped alcohol in nearly 7 years. Despite the fact I rarely bring up the topic, I get more flack from christians who drink than from non-believers. The non-believers usually give a respectful nod to my determination while christians are somehow offended.

This is not a strange thing. The enemy has little need to stir up conflict in the mind of the lost. A believer, however, he seeks to disrupt and cause trouble for the believer specifically and the body of Christ as a whole.

The more mature believers understand the spiritual battles we go through. When a less mature brother/sister reacts with quarrels, tension or lashing out to justify their sin, majoring on minors or creating division in the process, .... those who understand what is really going on need to respond in love and prayer.

I have had many instances where a calm statement of truth in the context of love for the other person had deffused what they were quickly working up to a divisive argument. Even if they did not walk away convinced of their wrong, they did walk away with their bonds to the body of beliers still intact.

While those who use the gluttony comparison have some points, and it's true that it is a sin most tolerate and overlook because it does hit so close to home. That is wrong. To tolerate gluttony makes you a companion with it's evil work as well. But I completly understand about the alcohol stance here as well. How many people have ever been killed by being under the influence of 14 pieces of fried chicken? The average non churched person doesn't look twice when they see a Christian going up for his fourth plate of chicken. However,even the most unlearned pagan knows it just doesn't look right for him to be sipping on a beer. I guarantee he thinks what a hypocrite, and there goes his possible christian witness, sin or not. In my opinion, alcohol in what man has used it for is wicked and evil. It about destroyed me years ago and to be honest even looking at this blogs picture( beer tap) gave me the jitters and ugly memories of what alcohol did to me. So God bless people for being labeled "legalist" it may just save some from a life of addiction and torment.

#52 Rebecca Schwem,

I’m glad I did not offend you or hurt you, that is good. Amen to that, if it is not all about Christ than are we really even in Him. I can tell how important Christ is in your life and I thank God there are sisters like you, not afraid to stand up for something they believe. Even though we might disagree I am still blessed by our conversation. Oh, I definitely believe John the Baptist was born again before he was even born; it clearly shows He leapt for joy in Elizabeth’s womb just by being in the presence of his Savior. I wasn’t trying to claim that John the Baptist dressed that way to fit into culture. That was my whole point that I am trying to convey to you. I am not dressing or looking a certain way to try to fit in with any type of crowd. I am not looking this way for anyone, I am not on this earth to try to please men and how they want me to look. And I am growing up as well. I used to want to get tattoos all over and have piercings everywhere because I thought it looked cool and I would “fit in.” After praying on that and waiting on the Lord I knew that would be the wrong choice, at least for me. I have a piercing on each ear, just one piercing. I have and Alpha and Omega tattoo on my right wrist, I have a cross with the Scripture Rev. 16:15 under it on my right bicep and I have the word Irish on my back between my shoulder blades. The only tattoo that regularly shows is the Alpha and Omega one. Am I going to get anymore tattoos, I don’t know. All I know is that I am not convicted by the ones that I have, and I definitely did not get them to make it “easier” to witness to a certain group of people. If I wanted to fit in with the bikers, which I don’t, than I would simply tell them what they want to hear, “they are sinners, but it’s ok because God has a plan for them and Jesus loves them.” We simply know that what I just said is not biblical and is not the Gospel; therefore I don’t fit in with the people group most associate me with. And believe me, nowhere am I saying that most tattooed and pierced folks have the Holy Spirit. Thanks again and God Bless.

#29 ,#47 Kerry Halpin,

First off, your use of 1 Peter 1:14 is off because I never said that I got tattoos before I was saved. As for Leviticus, let us take it in context. You are taking from there and applying it to me to show I am a sinner right? Well, let me do the same for you, just to show you how invalid your argument is. I will be using all of Leviticus 19:19-37. Do you where clothing made of two different types of material? If so you are going against Leviticus 19:19. Do you eat steak that is not well done, or any type of dish that has a trace of blood in it? If so you are going against Leviticus 19:26. Have you rounded off the edges of your temple, or mar the edges of your beard? If so you are going against Leviticus 19:27. You see, your argument using Leviticus just doesn’t work. Also, you are incorrect, Leviticus 19:28 only deals with tattoos, not piercings. Also, your usage of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 does not apply because it doesn’t say anything about tattoos. I agree that we shouldn’t keep practicing sin after we are saved, but my friend; you simply present no valid evidence that tattooing is a sin. Your opinion of Roman 6:1-2 is simply that, your opinion. Remember, if you are going to use scripture you can’t interpret it to fit your argument, you are using this scripture out of context. This scripture says, “1What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?” There is no gray area here; it clearly states sin, not gray areas. You might think that’s what Paul meant, but my friend that is simply not what Paul actually said. His words are clear, he was addressing this to people who were false teachers, trying to lead the church astray by telling them they are free to sin so Grace may abound. This is one of the main reasons Paul wrote Romans, because he had not visited them yet, but knew of false teaching so he wanted to address them.

Again, I am not reveling in any kind of sinfulness because tattooing simply isn’t a sin. I challenge you to find any scripture in the New Testament that states that we are not to get tattoos. Again, if you want to use Leviticus make sure you remember all the other things in Leviticus. I only brought up a few near the same verse you used, but there are many other things as well. For another great read on this I would recommend looking at what Christian Apologist Matt Slick says about this on his site, Carm.org. It is a really great read. God Bless brother and I hope I didn’t talk your ear off too much.

#29 Kerry Halpin

If you believe Leviticus 19:28 is applicable for Christians today, you also need to obey the rest of this chapter, including:

Leviticus 19:19 - do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material

Leviticus 19:26 - do not eat any meat with the blood still in it

Leviticus 19:27 - do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard

We may be laughing but it's actually a serious matter.

This sort of random proof texting is a complete abuse of the Bible.

If you want to make a Biblical case against tattoos and piercings (which I do feel are inappropriate for Christians), you'll need to improve your exegetical skills considerably. And incidentally, if piercings are wrong for men, then surely they are wrong for women as well...

Did anyone notice the hypocrisy of Patrick? On the one hand he "acknowledges" "addiction" among "church planters and pastors" yet he flaunts drinking. That's the problem. No one needs that kind of "coaching". That's not maturity nor love of a brother, nor living above reproach.

I was beginning to wonder if anyone would challenge Dr. MacArthur on this... Good to see some rational, biblical arguments refuting some of the incorrect interpretations and conclusions he came to.

Oops, I said exactly the same thing as Jeremy in #58. It wasn't intentional.

Regarding alcohol, I agree that Christians should not be known for or defined by their drinking habits. However, the Bible does not oppose drinking in moderation. But we do need to consider how it will be viewed by those around us. Having a glass of wine with a meal at a restaurant may be OK, going into a bar for a few beers may not. Yes, it is a case of social perception, but some forms of alcohol consumption are closely linked with the very worst that the world has to offer.

If someone feels that completely avoiding alcohol is the best witness, they have the freedom to do that, but it's a personal choice, not a scriptural requirement.

And for the avoidance of doubt, addictions of all sorts are wrong.

#56 Keith Stokes

Where I live, there is no stigma associated with Christians "sipping on a beer", and the unsaved world does not look down on them. It's all a question of culture and how people are expected to behave. (And incidentally, I don't drink beer).

Regarding food, yes, overeating does not cause any immediate problems. But being overweight has very serious long-term health risks, and it is an abuse of the body that God has entrusted to you whilst you are on this earth, the body that is a temple of the Holy Spirit. So no matter what the world or the church thinks, not looking after your body is a sin.

(And no, that doesn't mean we have to be fitness fanatics. It simply means that we have to eat a balanced diet, keep our weight in the right range, and take a reasonable amount of exercise - the basic things that all physicians agree on).

#61 Chad Miller

What specific do you have in mind? And why?

Many people and churches are embracing tattoos and beer drinking as a way to reach the world. I believe our responsibility is to challenge and confront the world,not conform to it.

Unfortunately, many people and churches do not realize they are reflecting the same culture they are trying to reach.

"I believe that one reason why the church of God at this present moment has so little influence over the world is because the world has so much influence over the church."

- C.H. Spurgeon

Think twice. Then think again.

Grace and Peace.

Steve @#24 writes,

Are you saying it's wrong for a Christian to drink a beer?

No. I don't take anything John wrote here as him saying that it's wrong for a Christian to drink a beer, or that it is even a sin. The emphasis is upon evaluating the motives of those folks who brazenly flaunt their liberty with such issues merely because it is the "hip" thing to do or allegedly strikes against fundamentalism and the moral legalism that chaffed them when they were growing up in church.

John is pointing out some rather important things: Is such flaunting of liberty in these areas truly a good thing in a Christian's overall ministry? Is it even necessary? Do we so devalue the power of God to save that we genuinely believe we have to get tattoos and start theology groups in pubs in order to have a hearing with unbelievers who happen to live a "rough and tough" lifestyle? It is Arminian methodology of the rankest sort.

Chris @#35 writes,

But people also forget that food is abused by way too many people as well, but you don't hear too many people crying out about this outrage because there are more people in church with a problem in overindulging in food than there are alcoholics and drunkards, yet I see a lack of absence in rebuking these brothers and sisters for their reckless overindulgence in food

These are two unrelated things here. Overeating doesn't have a negative impact on our society. There are no "Mothers Against Overeating" groups (unless you count the first lady's eating campaign as heading in that direction), nor is it a criminal offense to have three bowls of banana chocolate chunk ice cream. Overeating has negative impact on only one person: the one overeating. Those who overeat don't beat wives, children, or cause major accidents that take innocent lives. Hence the reason why Christians should be vigilant with the example they set for others if they partake in alcohol. What I often see from the YRR crowd is a lack of genuine wisdom and discernment.

#55 Mr. Lambert

#56 Mr. Stokes

Great posts.

"Despite the fact I rarely bring up the topic, I get more flack from christians who drink than from non-believers. The non-believers usually give a respectful nod to my determination while christians are somehow offended.

....

The more mature believers understand the spiritual battles we go through. When a less mature brother/sister reacts with quarrels, tension or lashing out to justify their sin, majoring on minors or creating division in the process, .... those who understand what is really going on need to respond in love and prayer"~ Mr. Lambert

"However,even the most unlearned pagan knows it just doesn't look right for him to be sipping on a beer. I guarantee he thinks what a hypocrite, and there goes his possible christian witness, sin or not."~ Mr. Stokes

Those who approve of alcohol and say "it's not a sin to drink a beer," might need to rethink that thought. Drinking "a beer" might be a sin, if it causes your brother to stumble or bring reproach on Christ.

21 It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles. 22 The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.

Romans 14:21-23 (NASB95)

5 "And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; 6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

Matt 18:5-6 (NASB95)

You who "drink a beer," think about those other than yourself. It might not be a sin if you are at home with your wife or at the lake fishing/working on a project with your Dad or brother if they will not stumble because of the "can of beer" or "glass of wine" that you guys had.

But if you decide that you are going to have "a beer" at a local pub/bar/tavern or are around other believers that you don't know whether or not THEY will be sinning by having "a beer," then in these couple of instances you might be sinning by what you approve of in the eyes of those unbelievers or Christians who will stumbel.

Some might say and have said to me repeatedly, "well it is not going to cause ME to stumble!"

IT'S NOT ALWAYS ABOUT YOU! Your "beer" might cause someone ELSE to sin or bring a reproach on Christ. 1 Corinthians 6:9-20

9 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is Abel your brother?" And he said, "I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?"

Gen 4:9 (NASB95)

3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,

Phil 2:3-5 (NASB95)

Philippians 2:14-16

Keith Stokes @ #56

So funny! "How many people have ever been killed by being under the influence of 14 pieces of fried chicken?" The best laugh of my day.

Hi Rudi:

I saw your comment and will look into that video. Keep up the good work!!! And get back to it! LOL!

Well I guess Dr MacArthur can forget getting invited to that Resurgence conference.

#56 Keith Stokes

It should be a no brainer that for a Christian who was a former alcoholic or recovered/recovering alcoholic, should not drink at all obviously. But there are plenty of Christians who I personally know in which alcohol is not a problem for them at all, and they do not abuse it. So I can understand why those who have struggled or are struggling with alcohol have such a strong stance against it. Scripture commands Christians to deal harshly with their sin, whatever it may be. Unfortunately some Christians like to take the legalistic stance on alcohol and impose their beliefs on non-struggling Christian despite the absence of any Biblical mandate to do so (that is unless they took a Nazirite vow). The Bible has scriptures that praise wine, and also scripture that condemns drunkenness/debauchery. In all things we are to proceed with discernment, and eat, drink (or not drink) to the Glory of God.

#71 Heath Lloyd

LOL!

Gluttony, overindulging in food and the possible health consequences associated with eating recklessly such as diabetes is no joke. Just ask anyone with diabetes who has to take insulin shots. It should be treated just as seriously as alcoholism.

Chris, #74,

Gluttony and overindulgence in food only has health consequences for one person. The over eater. Drinking HAS had serious consequences to innocent people. In fact, many innocent people a year. Like I stated, we have no laws regulating your cholesterol count when you drive home from Black Angus. This has to count for something with any YRR who advocates an anti-teetotalling mind-set with his friends.

#75 Fred

Yes, I mentioned in my above other posts that if one is a recovered/recovering alcoholic and struggles with alcohol, then they should NOT drink. Again, its all about discernment.

BRAVO!!!!!!!!!

This topic sure has sparked a firestorm...:-)

Fred Butler,

"Gluttony and overindulgence in food only has health consequences for one person."

I beg to differ Fred, with all the respect which I have for you and your opinions, but that statement is not correct based on the overwhelming impact that obesity, overweight conditions, and diabetes has upon the health care system in this country and elsewhere.

For example here is an excerpt from an article on Canada dot com September, 2010:

""The economic burden of diabetes in Ontario is staggering and threatens the sustainability of our health-care system and the provincial economy," said Michael Cloutier, chief executive of the Canadian Diabetes Association.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, most of the newly diagnosed cases will come not from the morbidly obese, who are at the highest risk of developing diabetes, but from the thousands of moderate-risk Ontarians who are simply overweight, according to a recent study by the Toronto-based Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences."

The issue is at hand, in my opinion, one of where the Christian's focus lies. If the focus is man-centered or self-centered (as is far too often the case within many circles of evangelicalism) then all sorts of pragmatic means will be conjured up, used, and defended as a "Christian" way of life.

If the Christian's focus is Christ-centered then much of the foolish overindulgence of any sort will be tempered.

Paul gave us clear understanding regarding our liberties in Christ. Those liberties are not to lead one into licentiousness but rather to a balanced, Christ honoring, brother edifying lifestyle. Further, legalism is as dangerous as licentiousness. One must strive to be in balance and not swing too far upon the pendulum.

Reply to #34 Corey Key

Matthew 11:19 - The Son of Man cam eating and drinking , and they say, 'Look at him!" A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'

Luke 7:34 has much the same wording.

I take it from these verses that there is no denial of Jesus actually consuming alcoholic beverages.

(As an aside, I don't have tattoos but does the returning triumphant Jesus in Revelation have tattoos on his thigh (19:16?)

It probably wouldn’t surprise you to know Alcoholism is the number one drug problem in our country, enslaving millions of adults—and teenagers. Nor would it shock you to learn that 75% of American adults drink alcohol, 6% of that number classifying themselves as alcoholics. You wouldn’t dispute the reported dollar amount Americans spend each day on alcoholic drinks—$197 million dollars. And surely you’ve heard the statistic that says an alcohol-related automobile accident occurs every 30 minutes.

But just to ensure you have all the facts about alcohol, here are a few more statistics. Alcohol factors into…

• 73% of all felonies

• 73% of child abuse cases

• 41% of rape cases

• 81% of wife battering cases

• 72% of stabbings

• 83% of homicides

If you’re curious, alcoholism costs our nation around $60 billion each year. And excessive alcohol use is the third leading lifestyle-related cause of death in the U.S., taking more than 100,000 lives each year. While those statistics probably sadden you, I’m sure they don’t shock you. You already know alcoholism is a tragedy that touches all of us in some measure. But in my estimation, here’s where the startling stats appear—young people and alcohol.

Three-fourths of all American high school seniors report being drunk at least once, and each day in America 7,000 children under the age of 16 take their first drink—but probably not their last. Alcohol is the top drug choice for children and adolescents.

Let that statistic sink in for a second. 75 out of every 100 high school seniors have been drunk at least once (and that number includes only those seniors who confessed).

The bottom line from the Bible is this: Drinking alcohol is dangerous, and for many—maybe most—it proves to be an unwise (but not necessarily sinful) choice.

But John hasn’t even bothered making those points—at least not in this blog article. He’s simply pointing out the folly of parading alcohol around as the principal symbol of Christian liberty.

My experience with some reformed on-campus ministries, shockingly, was that they introduced under aged teens to drinking—all in the name of Christian liberty. The pressure to conform was high. As a college pastor, I had to warn parents of the dangers of reformed ministries on university campuses. That was quite a change for me. I hadn’t anticipated protecting my students from the dangers of reformed ministries. That was nearly a decade ago, but things haven’t changed…

Speaking of Darrin Patrick, he is part of Acts 29--he sits on the board along with Matt Chandler and Mark Driscoll. He also teaches at reTrain and the ecumenical Saddleback 12 Conversations where he shared the pulpit with Joni Tada, Ligon Duncan, Os Guiness, Michael Horton, Richard Mouw, and Tim Keller.

As noted by BP News ("Alcohol, Acts 29, and the SBC"):

"The alcohol issue goes straight to the top at Acts 29, whose president, Mark Driscoll -- who is pastor of the Seattle-area Mars Hill Church..."

Driscoll has a whole message on drinking called "Good Wine, Glad Hearts". Mars Hill's description of the message:

"Historically, God’s people have greatly enjoyed alcohol. Throughout the last century, however, Christians have watered down their beer as well as their doctrine. Mars Hill pastors speak on a theology of alcohol."

In the message Driscoll claims the Puritans' first order of business wasn't to build a church but a brewery. He calls Martin Luther's wife a "classically certified, trained brewer" and "yes, that's a beautiful woman..To me that's a Proverbs 31 godly woman." He then tries to make the case that prohibition came out of feminism. "My case is that drinking light beer is a sin."

Is it any wonder that more and more "Reformers" are flaunting their drinking as well as other worldliness? Apparently the new thing for "pastors" at church websites is to tell us what their favorite drink, movie, hobby, and music is. Case in point, here are the bios of two leaders at a Presbyterian church:

"Steve is a sports fanatic who loves fine Scotch, a smooth cigar, and a stimulating conversation on the confluence of theology and culture."

"Hector and his wife Christy, have spear-headed Christ Church’s outreach to the homeless in our community. Hector enjoys a good port and a delicious cigar accompanied by great theological conversation."

Source: Christ Church SCV

As Tony Miano said: "The church is too busy courting the world, not calling the world to repentance." Source: "America: the modern valley of slaughter" video(time mark 52:00)

"I believe that one reason why the church at this present moment has so little influence over the world, is because the world has so much influence over the church! Nowadays, we hear professors pleading that they may do this, and do that--that they may live like worldlings. My sad answer to them, when they crave this liberty is, "Do it if you dare. It may not cost you much hurt, for you are so bad already. Your cravings show how rotten your hearts are. If you are hungering after such dogs food--go dogs, and eat the garbage!" – Spurgeon

#58 (Jeremy) and #59 (David)

Should we ignore Leviticus 19:11,12,13,17 or Leviticus 19:18b, which Jesus reaffirmed as the second greatest commandment? The arguments against my post could easily be used against rebuttal posts - selective text choice. However, let's look at this from the whole of scripture:

The OT clearly identifies many sins. Does being under grace mean that nothing is sin except what is explicitly defined as sin in the NT? Romans 6:1,2 and 1 Peter 2:16 and a wealth of other scriptures I've already mentioned declare that sin is still sin. Jesus says in Matthew 23:23 that the pharisee's problem was not strict obedience to the law, but rather in that they were right, but the problem was inward corruption. So what is the logical next step? If the OT says it's sin, it's still sin unless the NT explicitly removes the prohibition, as is the case for meats, drinks, circumcision, preaching to the Gentiles, etc... Indeed, if we remove the definitions of sin found in the OT, then sin has no definition at all, and all things are a gray area.

Now, since clearly the NT declares that there are many sins which are not in the "gray area", then the definition of such sins must have come by the law, in the OT (Romans 7:7,12), and such definitions of sin still persist. Now, if the law defines sin, and the NT does not couteract the OT (Matthew 5:17,19), then sin is still sin.

But what about Paul's declaration in 1 Corinthians 10:23? Well, if you are thinking what I think you are thinking, then applying such thought to OT sins means it's okay to do any sin condemned under the law. Is this true? NO, for all the reasons I stated before and more. So what then is the proper EXEGESIS of this scripture? Romans 6:15 says we aren't under the law. But a careful examination of Romans 7:5,6,10 and Romans 6:23 shows us that being free from the law means being free from the condemnation of the law, which is condemnation unto death. Indeed, since Christ died for us once and for all, we shall live forever with Him, without the penalty of the law, which is death (Hebrews 10:14 and Romans 6:11).

But wait, didn't the apostles declare certain unlawful OT practices lawful for NT believers? Yes! But they were specifically called out in the scriptures, and there was no general rule stating "all sins are now not sin". The apostles ALONE were given this power by Jesus Himself (Matthew 16:19), and the truth of this verse is that it wasn't what the apostles decided was now lawful, but what Jesus decided was lawful and ordained them to proclaim.

And what about the abolishment of the sacrificial systems and all its laws and regulations? According to the entire book of Hebrews, Jesus was the final sacrifice (Hebrews 6:12).

to be cont'd...

...cont'd

Are we missing anything else? Well, some laws were for the preservation of cleanness and purity of God's people, but this was tied to the sacrificial covenant, explaining why Leviticus 19:19,26 no longer applies to believers. So, does the previous statement negate Leviticus 19:28? No, because Leviticus 19:28 is not a commandment tied to the cleanness of the believer as relating to the old sacrificial covenent. Does this then mean that Leviticus 19:27 is also still valid? Yes! But let me explain, these were customs of heathens that the Israelites adopted, therefore not being separate from the world (Romans 12:12). But wait, can we take a more general approach to Leviticus 19:28 as well? No, because piercings and tattooing are still current practices of the unbelievers (both of which are HEAVILY used in satanic worship and the like), therefore those acts are NOT to be committed by the unbeliever because of 2 Corinthians 6:17.

And in all of this, we haven't even touched on the fact that our bodies are now the Lord's, and not just our own.

Oh, Tommy. Thank you. This blog needed some clarity, some focus. And I agree, there are two issues, the seriousness of strong drink and the one Pastor John was speaking about...the sheer folly of it all.

I think this discussion starts to separate many on here. I am amazed at the attempt...no wait, the desire to compare alcohol and it's dependency with other sins. Why do grown people want to make those comparisons?

It's like some are asking..."which is worse...if I gorge myself to death or drink myself to death?" It's not either or. Both are wrong!

Or the question some have, "what about those people in the buffet line? What about those gluttons?" Yes? What about them?

I think with so many families that now have generational alcoholics, it should be obvious that offering anyone an alcoholic beverage has a much higher risk of that one becoming a statistic you speak of than offering to by one's dinner. And to call that fellowshipping in the Lord. This is the stretch generation! Or what's the popular phrase now? "It works for me!"

"as he does in all his letters when he (referring to Paul)speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."2Peter 3:16

drugs and drinking don't mix well for that drunk that hit me. but I just want to say to the young students. Please think responsiblity before you get behind the wheel. Jesus can help but you must ask him.

Correction to my previous post. Hebrews 6:12 should be Hebrews 10:12 and Romans 12:12 should be Romans 12:2.

For those advocating/defending tattoos.

I'm sincerely asking this out of pure ignorance. I haven't been to a tattoo parlor--only seen them on TV.

Are there tattoo parlors whose walls, decorations, and artists don't represent the dregs of society and where all manner of sin isn't glorified?

#91 Gabriel

I am not an advocate for tatoo's. I do have alot of tatoo's from my pre-christian life though.

You ask: Are there tattoo parlors whose walls, decorations, and artists don't represent the dregs of society and where all manner of sin isn't glorified?

Sin is definately glorified in the ones I have been in. In fact, I think anyone picking up a tatoo magizine could discern that almost immediatley with how most of these tatoo conventions are portrayed and how they have their models dressed on the covers.

"But John hasn’t even bothered making those points—at least not in this blog article. He’s simply pointing out the folly of parading alcohol around as the principal symbol of Christian liberty." Tommy Clayton

Thank you!

Over and over again some people have clarified what the article clearly says, and over and over again people continue to take this issue to a different direction. Point in case, gluttony. I agree that gluttony is a sin, but it has nothing to do with this topic and comparing it to alcoholism is funny.

Some tatoo parlors are dangerous, drug dealers and worst. I walk by and it looks worldly.. which it is..

Over and over again the Bible condemns drunkenness and not drinking, and over and over again people continue to take this issue to a different direction.

Thanks, Chris. Sorry if I got off topic...

#85 & #86 Kerry Halpin,

Leviticus 13:32-33 says this

32This is the law for him who has a discharge and for him who has an emission of semen, becoming unclean thereby; 33 also for her who is unwell with her menstrual impurity, that is, for anyone, male or female, who has a discharge, and for the man who lies with a woman who is unclean.

See, this says that all the scripture in Leviticus 13 is the LAW for anyone with discharge. That would mean that it still applies because it is law right?

Secondly, you keep talking about piercings. Where is there any scripture that deals with that?

Honestly your argument is rather weak when you apply it to scripture. The fact is that the New Testament reaffirms the commandments. That is what we live by. You can say I am not saved or that I am continuing in sin, but again, I never said I got tattoos before I was saved.

When you make a more valid argument that can actually be defended with scripture than I will respond, but honestly you keep using one little scripture that was abolished when Christ died for us, he fulfilled the law.

Tommy Clayton #81,

The statistics are staggering for alcohol abuse. Let me say that I agree with the flavor John is presenting in his article. The point of my previous post is to demonstrate that any overindulgence can lead to extreme consequences for the individual and for society at large...there should be no disputing that as the statistics you presented as well as what I presented spell out the facts.

What I find somewhat unnerving is the propensity for SBC pastors (as well as others) to point to "beer drinking" as the go-to sin for beating up folks only to be silent about the obese guest evangelist or the deacon who lights up a cigarette on the church door steps before church begins and as soon as it is over.

What is needed, as I stipulated earlier, is a Christ-centered focus in our worship and our daily lives. Much of the over indulgences would be tempered if that would occur...but I digress.

I will add that I adhere to total abstinence from alcohol in my life. However, I also agree that legalistic extremes are not the cure for the issue at hand. John MacArthur has always been one to preach God's Word faithfully and allow the Holy Spirit to make the appropriate application...I agree with that stance.

I further agree that using alcohol as a ground-neutralizer is absurd. Greg Bahnsen stipulated the myth of neutrality in his teachings and he was very accurate. There is no such thing as neutral ground. We as the representation of Christ in this world should do as Paul instructed in Romans 1:5 "Through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations,"

Paul wrote to the Galatian believers: 6:7 "Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life."

Paul also wrote: "May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world." (Galatians 6:14) What Paul stated here is that the desires of this temporal world held no allurement for him. He was focused on running his race and finishing strong. He would not be side tracked by nonsense such as having a few beers with the fellas...simply not in Paul's mindset. The YRR crowd John is addressing here is a far cry from that example!

KF

#93 Elaine Bittencourt: Just ask people with fingers falling off and legs being amputated or going blind how funny it is because of their self induced diabetes brought on by gluttony.

Bible Questions and Answers, Part 37, Code:70-9

Here's another question of a different nature. And by the way, these are not necessarily related, I want to cover as many as I can so I won't take a lot of time on them. "Should Christians drink wine coolers?"

Perhaps some of you were hoping this question didn't come up. Should Christians drink wine coolers? Let me just give you a brief response to that.

A wine cooler is an alcoholic beverage. It is my own personal conviction that I do not drink alcoholic beverages of any kind any time and there are several reasons why. Reason, and they're not in a particularly spiritual order, but reason number one is the fact that I believe the Bible warns very, very strongly about drunkenness and very, very strongly about losing control in dissipation, Ephesians 5:18, "Be not drunk with wine in which is dissipation but be filled with the Spirit." If I'm going to be under the control of something I want it to be the Holy Spirit, not some substance.

Beyond that I am convinced after studying the Word of God and studying the backgrounds around the Word of God that that wine which was imbibed in the time of the New Testament, and even in the Old Testament, was highly diluted with water, five to one, six to one, seven to one, eight to one. And wine...and they really drank water if you want to see the true picture and they simply purified the water by putting a little bit of fermented wine in it because it...it killed whatever else would be in the wine that might cause them some physical problems. But it was not the normal drink of the time of our Lord for people to drink unmixed wine. You read in the Bible about two kinds of drink, wine and strong drink. Strong drink was unmixed and those who drank strong drink drank it for the purpose of drowning their problems. The wine that was consumed in the Bible was very definitely mixed with water extensively. Because you lived in a warm climate, the land of Palestine was hot, the very fact of thirst could contribute to a high consumption of wine. In order to prevent drunkenness they mixed it with water so that your body could not hold the amount that it would take to inebriate you.

So, that simply to point out to you that I don't think you can advocate wine drinking from the Bible unless you have diluted it sufficiently with water as they did in biblical times.

.........more to come........next comment

Continuing with question concerning alcohol and answer given

by John MacArthur:

The other reason that I will give to you as to why I don't believe that Christians should drink wine is simply because of what the apostle Paul says, "The kingdom of God is not food and drink," Romans chapter 14. And he says if anything that I eat or drink offends my brother, I won't do it. Now I have lived long enough to have dragged enough people out of saloons to have tried to patch up enough shattered devastated lives, to have tried to put together families and marriages that have been devastated by alcohol to have a healthy hatred for it. And since we live in a culture where alcohol is only an option, not a necessity, it seems to me without particular constraint for us to consume that kind of beverage. I certainly would not want to be responsible for giving someone else the idea that it was okay to drink alcoholic beverages and then watch them in an out-of-control way be destroyed by what they saw me do. And so, in deference to a weaker brother, in deference to not making someone stumble, I choose not to do that. And since there's no compelling reason to do it because there are so many other things to drink, it has no place in my life.

Mr. Lemi (#95) just proved my point.

#100 - Keith, another example of twisting words. Did I say gluttony is funny? No, I said your comparison is funny. Stick to the topic.

#99 Keith Farmer

Good points. I'd like to also add to what Keith mentioned, scripture admonishes us to deal harshly with our sins, using hyperbolic language to make a point, "if your eye causes you to sin, cut it out!", point being is to deal with whatever would lead you to sin harshly. If that means being a teetotaler because you can't cut off at one or two drinks then that's what it should mean for you.

Discretion and discernment is needed because there's more people that struggle with alcoholism than don't, so do not be so quick to invite people out for drinks, or offer them some at a party/gathering/function because they may be a recovered/recovering or current alcoholic.

Also keep in mind that despite all the Scripture references in the world isn't going to change the mind of the Legalist. They are a committed bunch, vigilantly on the watch lest somebody somewhere dare have a little fun.

from The Greatness of John the Baptist by John MacArthur, code:42-6

"He will drink no wine or liquor," Luke 1:15

Liquor is often translated in the New Testament and the Old...strong drink...strong drink, and I'll comment on that in a moment. This demonstrates just generally a temperate life style, a moderate life style, a life style of self-denial. One who wore camel's hair, a leather belt and ate locusts and wild honey, had already demonstrated great temperance and somewhat an indifferent attitude toward the pleasures of the world, the dietary pleasures and the wardrobe fashion pleasures of the world he had eschewed or disdained.

There were two Old Testament words which he would have known very well for wine. One of them is tirosh, it's a Hebrew word for new wine, fresh wine which is grape juice, grape juice. It's associated with blessing in the Old Testament. You see the word tirosh, you see it in Deuteronomy 7, Deuteronomy 11 and 2 Kings chapter 18, and some other places, and it's simply grape juice. And it was enjoyed and it's associated with the way God blesses, He provides vineyards, and He provides grapes and He provides the fresh sweet new grape juice. That's tirosh.

Then there's yayin, a more familiar word in the Old Testament. yayin refers to fermented wine. There was no refrigeration. The climate of Israel is identical to the climate of Southern California, so that it is a very warm climate and the summers are very, very hot without refrigeration. Obviously everything would ferment and so the Old Testament had a word for fermented wine, it's the word yayin. The rabbis were concerned about the intoxicating capabilities of yayin and so they required that this fermented wine be mixed with water, be mixed up to eight to one, eight parts water, one part of wine in order that it might be diluted. Dilution of that liquid would prevent intoxication, also the introduction into the water of the fermented wine would act as a disinfectant on the water which was otherwise not free from amoeba and bacteria and whatever. So the rabbis called for a mixture. So they would drink either grape juice normally or they would drink this mixture of water and wine. The Old Testament acknowledges the common consumption of those beverages, both new and mixed. It calls for moderation in both. And it rejects drunkenness and a love for drinking.

continuing from The Greatness of John the Baptist:

Proverbs chapter 20,verse 1, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler and whoever is intoxicated by it is not wise." Wine has the potential to mock you, to turn you into a fool, as it were, strong drink can make you into a brawler and anybody intoxicated is just not using their mind. Proverbs 21:17 says, "He who loves pleasure will be become a poor man, he who loves wine and oil will not become rich." Why? Because spend all your time drinking, you love to drink and you don't work, you become a drinker. Chapter 23, of course, even a further warning, verse 20, "Do not be with heavy drinkers of wine." And there are judgments pronounced on drunkards. I won't take the time to go through all those. Read the prophet Amos, a brief little book, I think nine chapters or so. And the prophet Amos says there are certain judgments coming on God's people because of sins associated with drunkenness with wine. Later in that prophecy, however, to show you God's view, he says, "When the Messiah comes and establishes His glorious Kingdom, it will be with sweet wine," in Amos 9, I think it's verse 13.

New Testament there's a common New Testament word for wine, it's oinos and it basically shows the same thing.It is to be dealt with in moderation. One is not to linger long beside his wine, that is loving drinking and drunkenness is identified as a serious sin. Wine was used in that society, it was used, remember in John 2 at a wedding. Jesus went to the wedding. When they ran out, Jesus created wine. He created wine bypassing the earth, bypassing the vineyard, bypassing the vine, bypassing the grape, bypassing the grape vat. He just created wine and you can be sure it was wine that bypassed the curse and therefore it was new wine. But even fermented wine had a role to play. You remember Paul said to Timothy, 1 Timothy 5:23, "Take a little wine for your stomach's sake." It may have been that he needed to swallow some disinfectant for his own health. Drunkenness, according to Ephesians 5:18, is considered a sin, "Be not drunk with wine in which is dissipation," that's a pagan kind of action.

#104 (Chris)

"...lest somebody somewhere dare have a little fun."

This sums up the true reasons many Christians drink, all the while making claims that their reasons are "christian liberty" and "trying to reach the lost". Finally some insight into true motives.

I'm not going to respond anymore to comments. If you have to justify your actions, and your only justification is christian liberty, then you've missed the point of every scripture touching on christian liberty.

#102 Rebecca

That still doesn't address why some people want to condemn the brethren on here that drink, rather than where the real blame should be placed, on the Drunkards, like the Bible teaches. Sola Scriptura.

Regarding John the Baptist and the fact of his avoidance of alcohol. He was a Nazirite and took a Nazirite vow, which meant no consumption of wine, wine derivatives, grapes, raisins, or anything to do with the grape.

A drunkard, Mr. Lemi, is not made overnight.

Plus, I often wonder if all these people shouting "Christian liberty" know the meaning of us, true born-again Christians, being called "holy"?

The purpose of Christian liberty is not having the right to do something, but rather exercising the right of NOT doing. Talk about "free will". Some of us are still in bondage.

I think Christians should be shouting "I am a slave of Christ" instead. And behave like such. But it takes a man to do so.

#107 Kerry Halpin

Thank you for proving my point. Yes I do have FUN in my life, and no, it isn't all because of drinking alcohol (moderately). I do love the Lord Jesus Christ with all my heart, mind, and soul, and the Bible (Sola Scriptura) as the Word I strive to live by every day. I feel no need to apologize because I do have fun in my life, and will not let you or any other professed Christians try to guilt trip me into feeling guilty for the Liberty that I have in my Saviour. Search your own heart as to why it angers you so much that others don't share your same stance which has no Biblical basis.

#108, Chris, it doesn't? The alcoholic drink today is different than the alcoholic drink in the Old Testament and the New Testament. Have you and others not used scripture to show that alcohol, ie wine was an approved beverage? Do you not see that the beverages of then and now were indeed different?

In other words, if the common mixture was used by the folks in the OT, it would be hard to get drunk or even a little tipsy because of the water content. They simply couldn't increased their level of alcohol before the need to void the water. So they could drink away and have no fear of doing anything foolish or getting their donkey or camel pulled over.

Rebecca,

I'm in a different time zone, so my answers may not be timely, but I will try and address all of the questions from your first post, and then refer you to my previous post, as I believe they are all answered.

Q: What if God called them to do missionary work in a country, with a tribe where tattoos would get them killed and all those with them?

A: What if God has called them to minister where they are and dressing like an average American would get them killed?

Q: Why don't they see that their permanent tattoos excludes others they might have been able to witness to?

A: You have stated that the gospel is not about fitting in, so why should a tattoo or a different appearance keep someone from being able to witness? Is that not preaching conformity to the world most of us live in?

Q: Why don't they care that when they get on an elevator with their tattoos and rings in their lips and ears that some lady with her four year old daughter might be frightened enough to want to get off?

A: Appearances again. Do you care that your appearance might offend someone of a different socio-economic status?

Q: Don't they count? There goes a missed opportunity to spread the Gospel.

A: "Jesus stood out. He did not blend in."

Q: Why don't they dress in a way that boldly speaks about who they are?

A: Like Christian t-shirts, or clerical robes? A good tattoo makes a bold statement about your priorities even if I don't agree with getting them.

Q: Why don't they think that the "group" they want to infiltrate won't think more highly of them, won't see them more courageous if they go dressed more benign, more conservatively?

A: I really do think soccer moms and business men apply here as they are in the world not or it, and have been commanded to make disciples. Drive a cheap car, wear handmedowns.

Q: Why aren't they concerned that the "group" will think they are mocking them?

A: Because that isn't ever the result.

Q: Why don't they depend on God to make a way and depend on Him for protection like all the other missionaries do?

A: You don't need less protection just because you wear the right clothes. Do missionaries in the Arab world dress like westerners? Do they still rely on God?

Q: Why don't they think the "group" will see Jesus as weak, a conformist?

A: Because they boldly preach the truth.

** Hudson Taylor dressed as the Chinese. some elements of Chinese attire were heavily influenced by Buddhism. And he grew long hair. The people of his time were greatly offended by him.

#110 Elaine

I agree, that Christians should practice "Holiness" instead of Self Righteousness and condemnation, but external religious folk are more concerned with pointing out what others do, instead of concentrating on their own walk with the Lord. However, it takes a discerning Biblical Woman to understand this, not a religious Pharisee.

#109 Chris, so glad you mentioned the Nazarite Vow. Excerpt taken from the same lesson, The Greatness of John the Baptist by John MacArthur,

"not meaning from Nazareth, having nothing to do with that, an old Hebrew word meaning "separated." A vow of separation...a Jew could do this, decide I want to separate to God for a period of time. I want to be totally devoted to God. I want to just...I want to walk the high road with God and so I'll take a certain period of days and I will vow this Nazarite vow of separation unto God. The first component in it is this, verse 2, "The Nazarite to dedicate himself to the Lord shall abstain from wine and strong drink, drink no vinegar neither made from wine or strong drink, neither drink any grape juice nor fresh or dried grapes all the days of his separation." It was only for a matter of days usually, "Not eating anything produced by the grapevine or even the seeds or the skin." Nothing to do with the grape. He would abstain from that which was the normal pleasure of the pleasurable beverage of life. So it was a way to devout himself to God by self-denial. "Then he would not take the razor to his hair, his beard, he let his hair grow, not giving any concern to how favorably he might look in the face of people, and neither would he touch a dead body so that he would bring upon himself any unceremonial uncleanness, any unceremonial uncleanness." So this was the Nazarite vow, but it incorporated this idea of neither drinking of wine nor liquor.

Some have suggested that John may have been a Nazarite for life. There were only two, according to Scripture. Most people just did that for a few days. There was Samson, according to Judges 16 and Samuel according to 1 Samuel 1. Very rare someone would do that their whole life. Maybe John was a Nazarite for life...for life, separating himself. We know he separated himself by living in the desert. We know he separated himself in his life style. It may well be that this was indicative of a life of a Nazarite, although it doesn't mention anything about his hair.

But the point is this, he took consecration to the highest level, to the very highest level. Here was a man who on the outside was a consecrated, devoted, separated man. As well as the outside, though, look at the inside, verse 15, and it's the inside that made the outside possible. "He was filled...will be, it says...filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb." He will be filled with the Holy Spirit, that will be the pattern of his life. He not only will be a man on the outside devoted to God at the highest level of devotion, but on the inside empowered by God at the highest level as well."

continuing in next comment

Lesson continued The Greatness of John the Baptist by John MacArthur

"The idea of being filled with the Spirit simply means that he would be under the influencing control and power of the Holy Spirit. His life will be under Spirit control. His life will be dominated by the will of the Spirit. The will of the Spirit, of course, largely expressed in the Word of God, but his life will be dominated by Holy Spirit influence. By the way, the phrase 'being filled with the Spirit' Luke uses numerous times in the book of Acts. It simply means God's Holy Spirit will be in control of his life while he's still in his mother's womb."

John the Baptist chose to not have other spirits in his system that might be in conflict with the greatest spirit of all...

the Holy Spirit!

#115, Taylor, I appreciate your attempt. At least you tried. I gotta tell ya, question #1 was a bust for me. Your answer made as much sense (and I mean that in the most respectful way) as some female defending her right to dress seductively with no worry she might draw the wrong attention and suffer consequences because, after all, conservatively dressed females get raped too. It just doesn't do it for me. Sorry.

Question #2 has nothing to do with the one doing the witnessing. It had to do with the one being witnessed to. You can try to witness to someone in the next car with a bone in your nose but I doubt you'll have much success.

I'm sorry, with all due respect, it goes downhill from there. I do appreciate that you made an effort but I don't feel right taking up time or space debating or reacting to all those types of answers. The answers seem obvious to me and in all honesty, while my questions were sincere, I don't feel you are opened to understanding my position. And that makes it a waste of time.

Reply to #80- Thanks Brian.

TO EVERYONE,

Anyone saying that the wine back than was diluted; where is evidence of this? I see MacArthur saying it over and over through the stuff Rebecca shared, but what valid references are there on this?

My problem with this whole theory is this.

#1) If this is true than why doesn't it make a clear mention of it, and even more, why wouldn't it just say they were drinking water instead of wine.

#2) BIGGEST POINT... Christ's first miracle. If the diluted theory is true than wouldn't it put less value in Christ turning water into wine. He could of easily poured a little wine into each basin of water if this is true. Also remember, they said the wine was the best saved for last, the best wine always has age to it and the best wine would not be diluted. If it wasn't diluted and what MacArthur is saying is true than wouldn't it be sin to give actual aged wine to the party guests? Would like some answers on this....

It seems that some are ABOVE correction and instruction.

7 He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonor for himself,

And he who reproves a wicked man gets insults for himself.

8 Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you,

Reprove a wise man and he will love you.

9 Give instruction to a wise man and he will be still wiser,

Teach a righteous man and he will increase his learning.

10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom,

And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

Prov 9:7-10 (NASB95)

There seems to be a certain attitude I keep seeing throughout these articles.

25 In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

Judges 21:25 (NASB95)

This is an attitude that I am very familiar with. For the portion of the YRRs who fit this shoe I hope you'll learn from Pastor MacArthur and those over you in the Faith.

Maybe a fellow youngster (25 years old) can give you some brotherly advice.

I was in the military (Marines) and was a baby Christian, about 6 months old in Christ when I joined the military. This was very providential. As a sinner and a young Christian I had a LOT of maturing to do.

It took 2 years to get it through my head what the meaning of submission was. I had a Brother in Christ who was younger in age, but older in Christ as my roommate. A very patient Brother. I am sure it was excruciating for him to see my rebellious attitude at work while everyone new that I was a Christian.

It took some real chastening for me to learn. I am thankful to the Lord for teaching me the lesson of SUBMISSION TO AUTHORITY. To learn that I was bought with a price and I am not to do my own will.

What I see in some of this YRR movement is a need to SUBMIT TO AUTHORITY. We need to realize that we do not have near the wisdom of those over us.

Instead of asserting your "rights" and "liberty" how about denying yourself and becoming a servant? Maybe take the example of Christ? Philippians 2:1-11

Paul had the right to be paid and have a wife, but for the sake of the Kingdom he denied himself. 1 Corinthians 9

Maybe follow the example of the OBEDIENT centurion? Matthew 8:5-13

5 You younger men, likewise, be subject to your elders; and all of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, for GOD IS OPPOSED TO THE PROUD, BUT GIVES GRACE TO THE HUMBLE.

1 Peter 5:5 (NASB95)

7 Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.

Heb 13:7 (NASB95)

17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you.

Heb 13:17 (NASB95)

Maybe us youth should stop, listen, say "yes Sir, PASTOR MacAthur (insert other (e)Elder) thank you for watching over my soul! I will actually seriously consider what you are saying and resist the immature tendency to tell you that I already have it figured out."

To All:

When excercising "christian liberty", I would guess that christians who drink and have tattoos use these as a way to "break the ice", to share the gospel?

How do you do that? Are you like Paul in Acts 24:24-25?

When Paul was brought before Felix and Drusilla he preached to them :

RIGHTEOUSNESS,SELF-CONTROL, AND THE JUDGEMENT TO COME.

Paul was direct and to the point. Are we like that? Or do you tend to wait, build bridges, establish relationships so that maybe if they like you, they will listen to you introduce Christ.

By the way,except for Jesus, no one and I mean NO ONE, has ever loved God with ALL their heart, with ALL their mind, with ALL their strength, and with ALL their will. Not you, not me.

Words to meditate on,

Grace and Peace,

Sanford

Excerpts from Calvin's commentary on 1 Corinthians 6 would be very helpful at this point:

Verse 12...

"12. All things are lawful for me. Interpreters labor hard to make out the connection of these things,2 as they appear to be somewhat foreign to the Apostle's design. For my own part, without mentioning the different interpretations, I shall state what, in my opinion, is the most satisfactory. It is probable, that the Corinthians even up to that time retained much of their former licentiousness, and had still a savor of the morals of their city. Now when vices stalk abroad with impunity,3 custom is regarded as law, and then afterwards vain pretexts are sought for by way of excuse; an instance of which we have in their resorting to the pretext of Christian liberty, so as to make almost everything allowable for themselves to do. They reveled in excess of luxury. With this there was, as usual, much pride mixed up. As it was an outward thing, they did not think that there was any sin involved in it: nay more, it appears from Paul's words that they abused liberty so much as to extend it even to fornication. Now therefore, most appropriately, after having spoken of their vices, he discusses those base pretexts by which they flattered themselves in outward sins."

and

"But all things are not expedient. Here we have the first exception, by which he restricts the use of liberty -- that they must not abandon themselves to licentiousness, because respect must be had to edification.5 The meaning is, "It is not enough that this or that is allowed us, to be made use of indiscriminately; for we must consider what is profitable to our brethren, whose edification it becomes us to study. For as he will afterwards point out at greater length, (1 Corinthians 10:23, 24,) and as he has already shown in Romans 14:13, etc., every one has liberty inwardly6 in the sight of God on this condition, that all must restrict the use of their liberty with a view to mutual edification."

I appreciate your comments, but most of the YRR folk I know will say Amen to most of what you say, and preach against it as well, which leads me to ask "Who are you actually talking to here?"

I think one thing to keep in mind with any kind of teaching no matter how Biblical one's theology might be we teach far more powerfully by example.

Brought up a good question is we can't go around gossiping about why this man or woman wearing tattoos or drunk. That what happen with the pharisee in Jesus' time on earth 2000 years ago.

My point is directly to the pharisees in Jesus' time is that they don't take the plank of their own eye. They judged Jesus for eating with tax collectors and sinners. They judged Jesus for touching the dead, the outcast, the leper, and etc. They forgot and don't know that Jesus is God himself.

You are right, Taylor. That Jesus did'nt blend in, He stood out. Thanks.

When Jesus raise the dead, heal the sick as well the lepers, open the eyes of the blind, cast out demons, and etc. The pharisees just don't want to believe it and wanted to kill him. They even call Jesus, satan. How terrible to do so...

John Macarthur’s post here as well as Tommy’s comments (#81) took me a bit by surprise as I was not aware of this current trend in ministry. Once again, I so appreciate John Macarthur and the GTY staff for their pastoral concern for the church and the wisdom in their warnings and exhortations. I am at a loss to understand how one can find fault with what they have written here. I am saddened to think that a pastor would be championing drinking when there is such strong potential that someone under his influence might be led into a habit which would enslave them. Why champion the things of this world anyway when we are to be keeping our eyes on heaven? Let us set our minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth (Col 8:2).

#116 Chris,

Point to clarify: Were you referring to Elaine as a "discerning Biblical Woman" or "a religious Pharisee"?

Question for you: Would you be willing to yield your right to drink and never consume alcohol ever again (or, for a specified period of time -- see example below) in order to not cause a weaker brother or sister in Christ to stumble into sin?

For example: Your family opens your home to a former pastor and his wife (from another part of the country) for 12 months as they enter a recovering program at your local church. This former pastor is a recovering alcoholic and lost his ministry due to his addiction to drinking. This would require you to remove all alcohol from your house and refrain from drinking during this 12-month period.

I too agree with you in a 100%. Some groups have the idea to reach out people from urban subcultures becoming like them in apparency, languages, music and a little of beer in other words they change for 'their sake'. Where are the requirements of the gospel then?

The world ought to be like the church is but not the church like the world is.

Thanks.

#122 Benjamin Booker. What a testimony! Very well said. Very courageous! I really appreciate how you stepped up and allowed The Holy Spirit to mature you so that now you are a Godly man of discernment. And God Bless your roommate for his persistence and patience!

You mentioned something so key in this series that I don't think has been mentioned before.....SUBMISSION! Could it be that something more than alcohol is clouding the minds of others? Maybe some are struggling with submission as you once did?

Be nice if we could all meet back here in a few years and see if any are eager to make the same confession that you did? Thanks, Brother, for taking the lead. I think you were spot on!

#132 AND #134, Mary and Anderson, very good points. I like what you both said, short but powerful!

#121, Jeremy, are you really calling out the credentials of John MacArthur? Who do you find a credible shepherd, if not him? Todd Friel and Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort all find him very credible. I trust his research.

# 116, Chris,

You assume to know a lot about me. How do you know I am one of those "external religious" folk? If everytime an older Christian rebukes a younger Christian they [older folks] are immediately labeled as "external religious folk" then we must perhaps tear out some of the pages in our bibles? I am not sure you are aware of this, but older folks are to be respected, and their advice heeded to. There must be a reason why is that so, and why God explicitly talks about the older being wiser than the younger.

It is very telling, as someone else pointed out, that you relate drinking to having fun. Sadly, that's another wordly concept that many Christians seem to adhere to. As if people who choose not to drink are boring or don't know how to have fun.

The "practice of holiness", as you put it, is being separated from that which defines the world. That was the entire point of God giving Israel so many rules, even to the smallest detail. He wanted a people for Himself, without any stains, without any wordly marks or concepts or ideas. It was drastic, it was (to use a popular word) radical.

I firmly believe that if Jesus had given us some "rules of holiness (separation)", we would have far less people calling themselves Christians than we have today. But God gave us the liberty to choose, knowing that those who are really seeking Him, those who follow Christ and call Him Lord, would give up that liberty for something much better. He also gave teachers and pastors, men after His own heart, who would lead the generations in all holiness and wisdom.

Our eyes should be focused upward, Chris, and not on the things of this world.

I thank you for the opportunity to evaluate all these points. Grace and peace to you!

WOW --- What a great article by pastor John --- As a newcomer to this blog, my first observation is that some of us have never outgrown our teen-age rebellion. The sanctifying work of the Spirit will take care of that and a host of other besetting sins --- Thank God!

#137 Elaine

I agree, our focus should be upwards to Christ, not in arrogant self righteousness and unneeded condemnation towards brethren to whom it is NOT warranted. If you reread the last post to me you wrote, maybe you would've been more careful to how you responded, but like I said anyone who is self righteous never sees their own error, just that of others.

McArthur didn't offer much of a "discussion" on the subject as he couches "booze" from the get-go as a "lubricant", "vice", "controlled substance", "symbol of society's steamy side", "symbol of sin's bondage", "addiction", etc. So, you know where he stands before he even offers a few points (save John 2) on the "other side." Here might be a few more things to consider . . .

(and, for how long during the "entire church age" have pool halls and casinos been present? Methinks he might be messing with history just a bit)

He then switches to wine saying it was virtually needed back then to dissuade amoeba and parasites (though, folks in those days had no clue what such things were), but ironically enough, he never once mentions Jesus' first miracle (done at the request of His mother, no less). So, in his world, it is "okay" to drink wine if you don't have good water, but not for any other reason? Is that like saying it's okay to commit adultery if your wife is not around? If McArthur was seeking to write a full expose on the matter, why not mention such a pivotal moment in the life of our Lord and His disciples? (maybe it's because this single event undermines much of the rest of his thinking on this subject - in my opinion). Read the text if you haven't in awhile. The master's words are pretty clear on what normally happened at weddings, at least as it applies to the wine supply and quality. Or, go to a Jewish wedding today for further research...

For McArthur (and some of these other modern churches), The Christ was also the First Enabler.

As for not causing one to "stumble", i suppose much of this depends on how we are defining "stumble". What does the word mean? For me, i think it is sometimes actually a GOOD witness to have a single beer in the company of friends who are known to over-indulge. It shows them that it IS quite possible to stop with one or two. . . just as no one would sit and drink 6 or 7 Cokes, most people treat beer the same way (at least, in my experience). Anyway...just some thoughts.

You might also check out how Mr. Guiness (who started said brewery) was inspired in church by some of John Wesleys' sermons to make his a great company.

#139 Chris

Wow, come on now Chris, shame on you! Don't be so touchy. That personal shot at Elaine in #116 was uncalled for, careless and without a doubt rude and dishonoring to her.

In keeping with the theme of this blog...Grow up!

#69 (Benjamin)

Those who approve of alcohol and say "it's not a sin to drink a beer," might need to rethink that thought. Drinking "a beer" might be a sin, if it causes your brother to stumble or bring reproach on Christ.

I often point out that there are areas that God seems to have left vague, and I believe He did it on purpose. Is a single beer intrinsically sinful? No. Is drunkeness sinful? Yes. So where's the line? Two beers? 3? At home? In public?

The answers to the "in-between" questions are personal and vary depending on situation, environment, witness, etc. Navigating the vague waters between complete abstinance and drunkeness requires selfless, humble focus on honoring Christ and listening to the Holy Spirit. Only when our priority is Christ's honor, His fame, and our seeking to abide in Him can we answer the "in-between" questions.

Essentially the answer to this (and other similar questions) is not in the realm of what is "permissible" but what is "beneficial." And that answer can vary.

#140 T

You said, "For me, i think it is sometimes actually a GOOD witness to have a single beer in the company of friends who are known to over-indulge."

Read the scenario in #133. Would you be willing to yield your right to alcohol for the sake of a weaker brother?

Hi,

I've managed to track down an excellent article on the subject of wine. I would strongly encourage people to read it.

If you google for "protestant transubstantiation mathison" (without the quotes) and click the "show more results from thirdmill.org", you should find links to a four part article in PDF format. It argues for the use of wine at communion, and deals with virtually all the questions we've been discussing here, in great detail. It includes a survey of all the Biblical texts and quotations from many reformed theologians.

It's by Keith Mathison who is a theologian with Ligonier Minstries and is very highly recommended.

#127 (Sanford)

When excercising "christian liberty", I would guess that christians who drink and have tattoos use these as a way to "break the ice", to share the gospel?

And it would be a guess. I don't drink. My wife does occassionally. She also has a tattoo. But no one would know either one of those if she didn't volunteer that information.

Over and over I see people make statements like this, assuming a christian with a particular style uses it to "be cool" or connect to share the gospel. However, I RARELY see anyone willing to believe there are christians who simply like tattoos or piercings or an "adult beverage" now and then.

Why does the style always have to be a "break the ice" tool. Why can't we just accept that some people just like it?

David, when you think about it, it is kind of odd that we don't have any articles (that i know of) dealing the history of when modern Protestants argued for (and received) grape juice at communion rather than the traditional wine that had been used since ancient Jewish Passovers. It seems a no-brainer to have wine at communion (a name which Protestants also changed from "Eucharist"), but this probably went out with the Real Presence (and a few books of the bible) as well. Interesting to see how the modern changes to the faith are now seen as "the norm", though they are (rightly) being re-examined by many these days.

Doh! I have now only quickly skimmed the articles you posted, and i see the author IS dealing with the history of our current modern manmade traditions. Great! Finally! (HA! and i was raised to think it was only the crazy "Papist" who had manmade traditions. I'm seeing more and more that with each new denomination a man creates, he also creates a whole new set of traditions, some in scripture, though many/most are not. So whatever happened to sola scriptura?) : )

i would be very interested to see Mr. Macarthur address some of these issues on the other side of his very modern opinions...

#144 David

Instead of juice and crackers being used at communion, you are promoting wine (today's version) and bread.

Would you promote serving children (as young as 5 perhaps?) the shot of straight wine (today's version) or would you instead use a watered down 5 to 1 ratio that would have been served at the Last Supper/Passover? Or, just grape juice for children?

#147 (T Newberry)

I'm seeing more and more that with each new denomination a man creates, he also creates a whole new set of traditions, some in scripture, though many/most are not. So whatever happened to sola scriptura?) : )

I can't speak for others, but as a baptist I can say this: It's "scripture alone" ... as intepreted by a daecon body in a meeting as dictated by Robert's Rules of Order. Some times things get lost in committe. :-)

#145 Marc

You said, "I don't drink. My wife does occassionally. She also has a tattoo. But no one would know either one of those if she didn't volunteer that information."

Here's a short list of who already knows your household consumes alcohol:

1. Any employee of your local grocery store (cashier, bag boy, shelf-stocker, etc)

2. Garbage man assuming you recycle the glass

3. Neighbors -- they know everything

4. Blog readers of GTY.org ;-)

Obviously without us knowing your leadership role in your local church, any one of these individuals could know you are a Christian (perhaps a youth pastor or deacon?) and see you purchasing alcohol and may perceive that as an endorsement. "If Marc's family does it, so can I..."

The apostle Paul wasn't vague at all in outlining principles to govern our Christian liberty especially when our liberty may offend a brother or sister with a weaker conscience.

#135 Ms. Schwem, Thank you,

Yes God was very gracious to confront my sinfulness and save and begin to sanctify me.

"You mentioned something so key in this series that I don't think has been mentioned before.....SUBMISSION! Could it be that something more than alcohol is clouding the minds of others? Maybe some are struggling with submission as you once did?"~ Ms. Schwem

Yes I think this is a very key issue. It is really the antithesis of the "it is only a beer, I'M (ME ME ME) not going to stumble."

Whether or not I am going to get drunk off of a single beer is not the issue.

THE ISSUE IS OUR TESTIMONY AND LEADING OTHERS INTO SIN/CAUSING THEM TO STUMBLE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO LISTEN TO WISE COUNSEL AND WE WANT TO JUST KEEP THINKING ABOUT OUR "RIGHTS" AND "LIBERTIES."

"Be nice if we could all meet back here in a few years and see if any are eager to make the same confession that you did? Thanks, Brother, for taking the lead. I think you were spot on!"~ Ms. Schwem

Well that is my prayer that we would all mature in Christ and be sanctified entirely! I know I have a long way to go and one thing that might help is if I listen to those God has given us to lead us!

16 Rejoice always; 17 pray without ceasing; 18 in everything give thanks; for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus. 19 Do not quench the Spirit; 20 do not despise prophetic utterances . 21 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; 22 abstain from every form of evil.

23 Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass.

25 Brethren, pray for us .

1 Thess 5:16-25 (NASB95)

11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. 14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; 15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

Eph 4:11-16 (NASB95)

Thank you again Ms. Schwem, especially for your patience and encouragements to us all. Sometimes that is hard to have to do, kinda like my old roommate toward me. Love suffers long (1 Corinthians 13:4).

#138, Patrick, wish I had said that! I was thinkin' it. Trust me, I was thinkin' it! After dealing with 10 teenagers and their rational, I was having déjà vu.

Sena (Post #3) Timothy got circumized so that he could go with Paul into the temple.

#146 and #147 T Newberry

Yes, this study does look at history, and concludes that there is an unbroken 1800 year tradition in every branch of the church (including reformed protestantism) of using real wine at communion. Only when the Temperance movement began in the 19th century did Christians start using grape juice. I'd encourage you to read the whole thing, and share it with others (especially Baptists!).

You are exactly right about traditions - evangelicals have just as many as catholics. Although we believe in sola scriptura and don't regard ours as binding, we tend to read the Bible in a way that reinforces our existing view, so they effectively become authoritative. This is called confirmation bias. The example I always use is that in apartheid-era South Africa, reformed evangelicals interpreted the Bible in a way that validated the racist system of that time.

The sad thing is, as well, that when someone suggests that perhaps the accepted view isn't a correct understanding of the Bible, they are often condemned as a liberal or heretic, ostracised, and metaphorically burnt at the stake. I find this really upsetting, and it reflects very badly on the evangelical world.

Wow. And I thought "The Gospel According to Jesus" caused a stir! I'm a newbie here. I left a post at #16 and have been following the drama....errr....I mean blog ever since. Maybe we could all meet somewhere, have a nice frosty pint of Yoo-Hoo and talk about our Lord together. BTW. Thank you Rebecca Schwem. Your comments are very helpful. And, I love your attitude. God bless you all!

#145 Marc

From Sanford

My question is WHY do you like it?

We have died to ourselves have we not?

We are now slaves of Christ, He is our Master now, is that not true?

Masters' do not ask their slaves what they like or what makes them happy. On the contrary, slaves do what would make the Master happy.

I no longer think about what I would like, my self-esteem, or my self-confidence. I should be dead to that. My esteem is in my Lord, My confidence is my God.

It is hard to think like that, I struggle with it myself. I am still being transformed.

I have family members who drink occassionly,and also have a couple of tattoos.

I want to understand why they reason the way they do, and I like them to see why I reason the way I do.

I also understand my reason is fallen and polluted because of my sin nature.

Grace and Peace.

Sanford

Your message you sent me was very confusing as to why your question was addressed to me. Number one I do not support alcohol in any form. I've seen what alcohol can do to a family first hand. A close friend of mine for 35 plus years told me his dad told him when he was growing up that all that ever came out of a bottle of alcoholic beverage was hearthache and misery. And I feel just that way.

To: #149 Posted by John Linak

"Would you promote serving children (as young as 5 perhaps?) the shot of straight wine (today's version) or would you instead use a watered down 5 to 1 ratio that would have been served at the Last Supper/Passover? Or, just grape juice for children?"

I think your outrage on this issue comes from 2 things:

1) a modern evangelical cultural bias against such things, as well as current U.S. law which dictates a "drinking age" (i doubt there was such a thing in 1st century Palestine), and;

2) your own personal tradition that says drinking is somehow wrong or even "unChristian"

I'm still amazed at how everyone seems to be ignoring John 2 . . .

#142 Mr. Lambert

I agree with your post Sir. And at the same time I really am trying to emphasis a greater black and white issue that is not vague in any way shape or form.

"I often point out that there are areas that God seems to have left vague, and I believe He did it on purpose. Is a single beer intrinsically sinful? No. Is drunkeness sinful? Yes. So where's the line? Two beers? 3? At home? In public?"~ Mr. Lambert

Though I agree with this my focus is not to come up with some arbitrary legalist rules and scenarios, but to show something much more important.

Again, the issue that I am NOT trying to address is some arbitrary amount of alcohol that people should or should not drink, but to show THAT THE ISSUE IS OUR TESTIMONY AND WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE LEADING OTHERS TO SIN/CAUSING THEM TO STUMBLE AND BRINGING REPROACH ON THE NAME OF CHRIST JUST BECAUSE WE INSISTENTLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT OUR "RIGHTS" AND "LIBERTIES."

5 "And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; 6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

Matt 18:5-6 (NASB95)

That statement by our Lord Jesus is not very vague or black and white.

Thank you Mr. Lambert for your post. I do agree to your points when concerning one's OWN-SELF and alcohol, but the GREATER issue is OTHERS and whether or not I am going to cause them to stumble.

"If, Sir, I have described you and you will not repent of your sin, I tell you that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for you, for you have led young men to the alehouse and taught them to drink the devil’s drugs and to repeat your foul blasphemies and to imitate your scandalous lasciviousness! Yet before it is too late, I beseech you

to repent of your sin, that it may be blotted out by the precious blood of Jesus Christ, God’s Son, which cleanses from all

sin! But if not, “other men’s sins” will cry out against you for judgment at the bar of the Almighty! I solemnly charge all

of you who have not committed this iniquity, to never do so—take care that you never say a word which might stain the

innocence of a child’s mind and that you never let fall an expression which might, in any way, be the means of leading

another person into sin—for it is an easy thing for us to become partakers of other men’s sins by tempting them to

commit iniquity." Charles H. Spurgeon, "Accomplices in Sin"

Our faithful Pastor MacArthur quoted Pastor Spurgeon in a sermon entitle "The Job Description of a Faithful Pastor."

Thank you again Mr. Lambert. And this was not directed toward you, but rather I see that I had failed to emphasis my original point well enough.

To: #150 Posted by Marc Lambert

"I can't speak for others, but as a baptist I can say this: It's "scripture alone" ... as intepreted by a daecon body in a meeting as dictated by Robert's Rules of Order. Some times things get lost in committe. :-)"

Either you wrote this tongue-in-cheek or you are reinforcing my point that each new man-made denomination comes with man-made traditions. Some are great - like the creation of New Testament, Christ's Masse and Easter, while others maybe not so much...

Last time i checked, the bible (nor the beloved early Church which is sought to be "Re-Formed" in Protest-antism) ever taught "sola scriptura", nor is there anything such as "Robert's Rules of Order" mentioned in my bible. Is it found in yours? : )

Alcohol obviously had some legitimate uses in the Bible (a staple drink in Palestine; an emblem of blessing & prosperity; an incredible sedative; and other medicinal purposes).

Isaiah equates wine with the joy of salvation in his great invitation to sinners, saying “Come and buy wine and milk…without money and without cost.” In some sense it was God’s gift to mankind. But with gifts come responsibilities, especially where alcohol is concerned.

So, as expected, along with the affirming passages in the Bible, we find a flurry of warnings. In fact, the warnings Scripture attaches to alcohol use nearly triple the commendations. And then there’s the history…

Noah’s Inebriation

The Biblical history of alcohol consumption often includes disaster. In less than 10 chapters, Scripture introduces it with a bang in the account of Noah’s vineyard. Remember the consequences of Noah’s brush with wine?—drunkenness, shame, perversion, and a blighting curse on one third of the earth’s population. Here’s the progression: Noah became a farmer, planted a vineyard, drank the wine, became drunk, and uncovered himself. Noah and wine did not mix well.

Think about that. The first mention of alcohol in the Bible led to drunkenness—and ended with a disaster, not a casual discussion about culture and theology. And here’s the worst part: All this came from a man who loved, obeyed, and worshiped God (Gen. 6:8, 16, 22; 8:20). Don’t miss the lesson here. A worshiper of God met alcohol, and the outcome was not good. It rarely is.

Drunkenness and Disaster

Searching for other occasions of alcohol-induced disasters in Scripture doesn’t require much effort. They’re everywhere. Lot’s drunkenness became an occasion for his daughters’ act of incest. Fool-hearted Nabal became drunk, rebelled against God, and eventually lost his life (1 Sam. 25:36-38). Elah was “drinking himself drunk” when his servant Zimri conspired against him and took his life (1 Kings 16:9-10). Benhadad led his party of allied kings into a drunken frenzy which ended with their slaughter (1 Kings 20:12-20). At his drunken feast, Belshazzar praised the pagan gods and was slain on the very same night (Dan. 5:4-30). The Corinthians were notorious for desecrating the Lord’s Table with their drunkenness. Some were chastened with sickness, and others died (1 Cor. 11:20-30).

Drunkenness is always associated with terrible things in the Bible: sexual immorality, dissolute behavior, uncontrolled passions, and the pride of life.

Some even make the case that Nadab and Abihu were under the influence when offering strange fire to the Lord in Leviticus 10, hence God’s prohibition of alcohol consumption for any “on-duty” priests in Lev. 10:8-9. I’ll not argue that point here, but interesting nonetheless.

But here’s the point. As one reader already noted, Drunks aren’t made overnight…

#149 John Linak

I am not promoting anything. I am simply letting people know that a highly-qualified evangelical theologian has studied the Bible, church history, and the views of God's people throughout the ages, and has concluded that there was unanimous agreement for 1800 years that real wine should be used at communion, and that by departing from this the church has erred. I find his arguments compelling. (I don't think he discusses what sort of bread to use).

I don't think Mathison comments on diluting the wine but quotes sources that mention this, so I'm sure he would have happy with it. As far as children are concerned, he doesn't seem to discuss this.

My view would be that if children participate in communion, then it should be genuine communion, and I accept Mathison's view that this requires real wine. Whether the children are served full-strength wine or a diluted version, I do not have an opinion on - I think it should be decided by the local church with parents being consulted. Likewise, if a church felt that children should be considered as a special case and given grape juice, that is their decision under God. I'm not sure if there are any theological grounds for making a special case, so I think highly diluted wine would be preferable to grape juice.

My current church generally uses shared communion cups where everyone only takes a small sip. My previous church used individual cups where people got a larger "shot". This type of difference in practice may influence a church's decision as to what is appropriate for their children. Also some jurisdictions have legislation relating to offering alcoholic drinks to children (sometimes with religious exceptions) and these must obviously be complied with.

Sorry to give a long answer but I don't want to be misunderstood.

(By the way, if you haven't read Mathison's study in full, please do so. It's a superb piece of scholarship).

Love the look of the new blog!!! This is awesome. Thanks GTY!

To: #156 Posted by David Smith

"Yes, this study does look at history, and concludes that there is an unbroken 1800 year tradition in every branch of the church (including reformed protestantism) of using real wine at communion. Only when the Temperance movement began in the 19th century did Christians start using grape juice. I'd encourage you to read the whole thing, and share it with others (especially Baptists!)."

"1800 year tradition" of reformed protestantism? That would be news to me (and the history books) : )

And on the rest of your post (and it sounds like we are kindred spirits - unity is always nice), it does seem what most folks REALLY mean by "sola scriptura", is, "my sole ecclesial authority on earth is MY interpretation of the books i have concluded are to be called, 'holy scripture'." Whatever happened to "listen to the church", as Jesus taught the 12? Who is one with Christ but His Bride...and His Bride is not a book (which didn't even exist in its present - Protestant - form until about 200 years ago). Folks, we REALLY need to study more of Christendom...where the bible came from, how the church got started, who has ecclesial authority, and why, and how they pass it on, etc. It's one thing to be passionate about your beliefs, but at least be sure they are grounded in something, and someOne far deeper than simply the date of the creation of your particular denomination.

To others...read John 2 and see what comes to light about this "beer" issue...(honestly, this shouldn't even BE an "issue").

#167 T Newberry

(You got it right eventually!)

I wasn’t implying that reformed protestants have been around 1800 years!! 

Rather interestingly, Keith Mathison (author of the wine study) has written an interesting piece on Sola Scriptura which says something very similar to your comment.

He says that this phrase came in the context of the Reformation when the catholics said that the pope was the authoritative and infallible source of doctrine. The reformers said no, the Bible alone is the authoritative and infallible source of doctrine.

However, the Reformers never sought to deny the authority of the church, and it was always understood that doctrine should be formulated from the Bible, by the church, in accordance with its structures – councils of theologians and the like. In other words, no private or personal interpretations!

If you google “+solo scriptura mathison” it will be the first hit. (Drop the quotes, but include the +, and the solo is correct – not sola in this case. You’ll see why when you read the article). Mathison has written a whole book on this subject (The Shape of Sola Scriptura), but I haven’t read it. He strikes me as a genius, though. If you’ve appreciated his writings, you can contact him via Ligonier to say thanks.

Wow, nice website. very new bold look. Smiles.

John the Baptist grew up without drinking wine, and any strong drink. In the wilderness, he ate honey and locust. He was filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb. He was to turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God, to make people ready for the Lord. Baptizing people in the Jordan River.

Wine or grape juice for the Lord's supper does'nt matter which to usas long it comes from the vine(grapes). Teach the children before you offer them the Lord's Supper, They first need to understand what it means. God bless..

#136 Rebecca Schwem,

No, I am not calling out any credentials of Pastor John, what I am doing is simply questioning the sources of where he found this information at, because it clearly isn't in the Bible. Yes, I know Ray and Kirk personally, they are friends of mine, and I know they respect John MacArthur.

The thing that I find troubling is that when anyone questions the integrity of Pastor John's argument about the wine back then they are treated as outcasts. Come on here, we aren't Martin Luther starting a Reformation from the church..... I can have a different opinion that Pastor John and still agree with his teachings. All I am saying to you, Pastor John and anyone else claiming the wine was different back than is to prove it. Where is your evidence, please give me some evidence to substantiate your claim.

#127 Sanford Doyle,

Speaking for myself and only myself, you are most certainly incorrect in guessing that I have tattoos, piercing, or have an occasional beer as a way to “break the ice.” That would be an absurd thing to do and would in and of itself be conformity to the world. I am not trying to “fit in” to today’s culture. I am 23 years old, I have been married for 3 ½ years, I don’t listen to non-christian music, I do not watch any movies with blasphemy or sexual content, I don’t cuss, I don’t smoke, I don’t advocate for homosexual marriage, I don’t advocate for abortion and I don’t go crazy over Lady Gaga…lol….. So as you can see, I am far from what this world calls normal for a 23 year old man. What I do use for “ice breakers” are Gospel Tracts from Living Waters. I also use small lie detector boxes which I craft myself for Living Waters to sell. You can look those up on their website if you want. I never drink in public and never will because #1 I don’t want to make a fellow brother stumble and #2 I think it could send a wrong message to somebody who is weaker in the faith. I can actually say over the past 2 years I have consumed about ten 20oz. bottles of beer. I have consumed these in the comfort of my own home where I know I will not make anyone stumble. Also, I do not advocate the drinking of beer by Christians nor do I encourage it. It is a choice best the left up to the Christian and their convictions given them by the Holy Spirit. My friend, I am not a “friendship gospel” type of person. I preach the law followed by grace. I use the law as a mirror to show one his/her sins and preach the Cross to show the Grace of God in crushing His Son for our sins.

#171 Jeremy,

From Sanford

You misunderstand me. My post in 127 does not guess that you or any Christian has tattoos or drinks.

What I meant is that if anyone DOES have tattoos or drinks, do they use that as an opening to share the gospel.

If not, then how is the gospel shared. My intent was not about drinking or tattoos, but about how the Apostle Paul shared(confronted)

Felix in Drusilla in Acts 24.

Paul preached righteousness,self-control and the judgement to come.

My intent was to show how Paul modeled to us how to proclaim the gospel.

Drinking and tattoos aside, our proclamation is what was to be my focus.

I too like the Living Waters website and enjoy listening to Ray Comfort and Wretched Radio.

Grace and Peace,

Sanford

T NewBerry #160 You said: I’m still amazed at how everyone seems to be ignoring John 2.

In what way has this article, or those commenting on it ignored John chapter 2? What point do you think John 2 is making about Christians, alcohol, and evangelism?

If Jesus had created the wine, then sat down and had a few drinks with those Galilean pagans attending the wedding—just to, you know, show them how culture savvy He was—then maybe you’d have a point.

The point of John 2 is for Jesus to manifest His glory to His disciples. You can be sure the wine He created was not a strong drink. Hab. 2:15.

re:#160 Mr. T Newberry

I'm not outraged at all. I'm actually quite calm over this matter.

In reply to your comments to my post:

1. Are you against a legal drinking age?

2. Are you serious? You don't even know me.

Have you seen my question for you at #143?

In regards to John 2, I would gladly drink the yummy wine of Jesus at the wedding in Cana since it wasn't strong drink.

re:#165 David

Gotcha, thanks for sharing your thoughts. (I didn't know if you had children or not)

As a parent, I was trying to discern how strict and consistently you would apply Mathison's study to genuinely saved children as they participated in communion.

#173 Posted by Tommy Clayton

Tommy,

Take a moment and look up the word Methuo as used in John 2:10 in your BDAG.

And yet the superintendant of the wedding feast insist that the wine that Jesus created is superior to what they had already served.

You'll have to do some hermeneutic gymnastics to make it imply something other than what it is clearly saying.

Greg # 176

Oinos means wine, not strong drink. In the Bible, strong drink was pretty much forbidden for any use other than medicinal purposes.

The meaning of the verb, methusko does nothing to advance your argument if you’re claiming Jesus’ wine was stronger than the previous wine. The headwaiter’s comment simply highlights the quality of the wine Jesus created, not the strength. It was superior in quality to the wine previously served.

Surely you’re not claiming that Jesus transformed the wedding ceremony into a drunken party? Again, Hab. 2:15.

Finally, you said: You’ll have to do some hermeneutical gymnastics to make it imply something other than what it is clearly saying.

Take a stand and tell us what that text is clearly saying and we’ll take a look at your hermeneutics ;-)

What is really sad is how there is so much focus on ALCOHOL!

It reminds me of that saying "I don't drink and I don't chew and I don't go with girls who do" or something like that...

The Bible doesn't say the love of alcohol is the root of all evil, but the love of money.

The *love of alcohol is certainly sinful---BUT I would truly like for the people so eager to judge a man who drinks alcohol in moderation, to be just as eager to judge himself for say...overeating, which also clouds judgment.

OR

for being covetous, for loving money or for being self-indulgent in any way. But that doesn't happen. Because it's not as obvious as (gasp!) such an such seen at Wal-Mart with a wine bottle in her cart!!!!

I have recently witnessed a so-called Christian woman seek to DESTROY a man for drinking alcohol and be completely oblivious to her own terrible jealousy and greed. She says, "I have no vices."

What is truly sinful? Trying to destroy another human being or drinking wine in moderation?

Sadly, so many Christians judge other people to be *true Christians if they go to church 3x a week, don't drink, don't smoke and don't cuss. And I have seen OH so many of these "squeaky clean" Christians be SATAN'S greatest asset in the church.

Brethren this should not be...

btw--I don't agree with any effort to attract people to Christianity by tattooing it or soaking it in beer or turning it into a circus or anything like that. God's Word is enough.

#170 Dan Wilson

You said "Wine or grape juice for the Lord's supper does'nt matter which to usas long it comes from the vine(grapes)."

The paper I linked to took a different view, namely that the church had historically been totally agreed that wine must be used, out of obedience to Christ. There was no dissent from this view. The change to grape juice only happened in the last 150 years and has no biblical or theological basis whatsoever. The view that grape juice is acceptable for communion is therefore a false teaching.

Tommy,

"In the Bible, strong drink was pretty much forbidden for any use other than medicinal purposes. "

Let me be clear...I am not an advocate of alcohol consumption. The dangers are real and present in our culture. The culture we live in (America) has made alcohol consumption a rebellious, partying, live-it-up item (may have always been that).

However, Tommy I am surprised that you made such a statement without really researching beforehand. Here is one example contained within the Law itself demonstrating the very opposite of your statement:

Deuteronomy 14:22-26

Tithes

22 Be sure to set aside a tenth of all that your fields produce each year. 23 Eat the tithe of your grain, new wine and olive oil, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks in the presence of the LORD your God at the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name, so that you may learn to revere the LORD your God always. 24 But if that place is too distant and you have been blessed by the LORD your God and cannot carry your tithe (because the place where the LORD will choose to put his Name is so far away), 25 then exchange your tithe for silver, and take the silver with you and go to the place the LORD your God will choose. 26 Use the silver to buy whatever you like: cattle, sheep, wine or other fermented drink, or anything you wish. Then you and your household shall eat there in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice.

In verse 26 the NAS uses the words "strong drink" The term strong drink (shekar) is defined as: strong drink, intoxicating drink, fermented or intoxicating liquor.

If we are going to argue let's do so forthrightly and not based on our emotions. There are plenty of reasons why not to drink intoxicating drink and the bible does forbid drunkenness...that is as far as we should take the matter lest we be dishonest with our apologetic.

The head steward expects that at this point in the celebration some of the guests would have had too much to drink: the verb methusko does not refer to consuming too much liquid, but to inebriation.

The alcholic content of the wine cannot be proven from this text, and is not the issue.

The wedding stewart's claim in the context is clear, in contrast with a common custom in which the best wine was served first and the lesser quality later, he affirmed that this wine, served last, was the best.

Even if it is not "hard wine" it is alcholic wine and is obviously capable of producing drunkeness.

This is easily proven by searching the use of the word Oinos and it's use in the NT.

The Jewish wedding geust are itoxicated and Jesus creates somewhere between 120 to 180 gallons of additional "better wine" for the already inebriated wedding geust.

Hab 5 say's nothing about the strength of the drink, but of intoxicating your neighbor to indulge in some evil wantonness.

So by trying to protect Jesus from culpabilty here by citing Hab 5:15 you have brought indictment against the Lord.

Using Hab 5:15 is an illegitamate totallity transfer, a form of hermeneutics you should be aware of and avoid.

You should know better.

Let me make a comment to everyone.

This topic is obviously generating a lot of discussion, particularly when the view that Christians mustn't drink alcohol is questioned.

This suggests to me that the abstinence position is a deeply ingrained value to many people here. They will have been taught it from an early age and it will have become part of their identity. It's a tradition that defines them and unites their community - "We are Christians and we don't drink...".

I think this is what sociologists call a "boundary marker" for a particular group.

If it's challenged, people perceive it as a threat to everything they hold dear. They attempt to defend it using any means possible. Logic and reason are often overlooked as the status quo must be upheld. Heat rather than light is produced.

So, four comments:

Firstly, our theological heritage centers on someone who disputed the accepted beliefs of his time. We emphasise studying the Bible, allowing it to speak to you. We should never be afraid of doing this, and we should try to do so without any preconceptions as to what the result will be. We are a people who should be "always reforming".

Secondly, those who question the abstinence approach on Biblical grounds are not trying to destroy evangelicalism. They are simply trying to understand what the Bible teaches.

Thirdly, the details of what it means to be "in the world but not of the world" are not specified in the Bible. We have to work them out for ourselves. This may be different in different situations.

Fourthly, differences of opinion are OK. This is not a matter of foundational doctrine. We can interpret the Bible in more than one way. It may not be possible to say who is right and who is wrong. We should love and respect each other even though we may disagree over something that we feel strongly about. (And John MacArthur would never want to be treated as infallible!).

(By the way, I am not a beer drinker - I don't like it - although I occasionally drink wine.)

This is quite separate from any discussion about the approach of certain parts of the YRR movement, which do seem to be focussed on beer to an unhealthy extent.

For those of us who know that God's Word is all-powerful, maybe we should stick with proclaiming that rather than demonizing certain things like Alcohol because truthfully, I feel there could be a demon in chocolate too because it sure does tempt me alot. =) I could probably even find Bible verses to make the eating of chocolate sinful.

Of course, we should discuss the dangers of things that can be possibly dangerous, but this focus on alcohol---the glorification of being a T-Totaler has misled a great many people---even me.

I was once into drugs, alcohol, and the whole party scene. When all of that was cleaned up and replaced with church activity and such ---something despicable crept in---pride.

If a person consumed alcohol or did not come to Sunday School or church on Sunday night---I felt that legitimate grounds to exclude them from truly being a Christian. Scary--I know. I could not have been thinking more like a Pharisee.

I truly believe God has matured me over the years. He allowed me to see the ugly hypocrisy behind the walls of T-Totalers and even the VERY active in church. Mostly---He showed it to me in myself.

I'm not accusing all T-Totalers of hypocrisy, but I do believe it's present more often than not.

It's easy to show statistics of the harm caused by alcohol. But I truly wish we could see the statistics of death and destruction caused by the love of money and selfish ambition---which truthfully is glorified by many Christians.

How many abortions? How many children abandoned and neglected? How much infidelity? How many divorces are the result of the love of money?

I believe these statistics (if we knew them) would make those of alcohol use, pale in comparison.

We tell our children that Christianity is about denying yourself, then turn around and push them into college so they will obtain lucrative careers and live lives of comfort and ease.

When my two youngest boys were very small, I would be embarrassed as we passed a stack of beer or shelves of wine. They would point and say things like..."oooooh--there's alcohol--that's bad!" EVERY time without fail. I honestly don't know how they developed "such an eye" for "wickedness". Sadly, some of it MUST have come from me.

I realized that I was growing little Pharisees---children who did not understand that it's THE HEART---THE HEART---THE HEART that is desperately wicked.

I've been working to undo that ever since. I want them to understand that drinking alcohol doesn't make a man "BAD"--- it's what comes OUT that makes a man bad --- ESPECIALLY PRIDE.

I say all of this to say --- maybe it's better to plead our case that God's Word is enough moreso than focusing on proving that drinking alcohol is so wrong.

I always come back to that need for total dependence on Christ's leading because it really is SO easy to stray to the right or left---toward licentiousness or legalism.

May God be with us all....

Sorry I haven't been commenting... I've been a little busy (re: this new site).

It's been said several times before, but I think it's worth saying again for the sake of clarity.

This discussion has derailed far from the original blog post. MacArthur is not a Teetotaler in the strict sense (i.e. he does not teach it is wrong to drink alcohol). This blog post says nothing about the rightness or wrongness of Christians drinking alcohol. This blog also has nothing to do with whether wine new grape juice or old grape juice should be used in communion.

It has everything to do with Christians making alcohol drinking their badge of honor.

If that's not you, and you merely enjoy a can of beer or glass of wine here and there, then this blog isn't about you.

And, quite frankly, if you're talking about anything other than that, you're off topic and therefore in violation of our blog rules. Just sayin'.

So here's a question to see if we can get things back on track. People keep trying to make historical arguments (you know, like the first building the Puritans erected was a brewery). Here's the problem with those--we don't live in the past.

Today, alcohol is representative of the American sin-saturated party scene. Have any doubts about that? Watch any alcohol commercial. Parties and girls are part and parcel to our culture's captivation with alcohol. That being the case (and yes, some will argue with that), should Christians make alcohol their badge of honor in 21st century America?

#188 Gabriel

Thanks for bringing us back on topic. I plead guilty as charged to sidetracking.

I think perhaps the heat has arisen because JM didn't explicitly state this key bit of your comment - "If that's not you, and you merely enjoy a can of beer or glass of wine here and there, then this blog isn't about you". His original post (which I've just re-read), as well as quite rightly condemning making beer a central part of your identity, also seems to suggest Christians should avoid alcohol completely.

If I've missed something, apologies for my stupidity.

#171 Jeremy Notchick - If you read your comments (#121) again as I did, I think you too will see that it read as if you were questioning John MacArthur's (JM) credibility or maybe even his discernment while selecting research on a subject that he's had decades to study....on our behalf, I might add. I mean, this man of God who has taught NT diligently, patiently, methodically for over 40 years, verse by verse, strikes me as a man that is thorough & detailed when it comes to interpreting the Word of God.

JM doesn't know me from the man in the moon. But I have been following him & some others for over a year now. In addition to himself, does he has a top notch research team & staff? No doubt. But what impresses me most about John MacArthur is his heart, his dedication to God & His Word. No other pastor as helped me see such rich detail within a few scriptures. Things I had missed for years & would have continued to miss.

I am blessed to hear a man that is so devoted to our Lord. I'm not reading about him in history books. He's in this generation...a generation that has become so vile & he's held fast to ....to what?....to truth. It took listening to only a few sermons to realize this man cares little of what the world thinks of him. He will honor God with boldly teaching the truth! He is truly God's gift to The Church. It is not in him to abuse or take liberty with the scriptures. Never!

For me, it's not just about his theology, although I do appreciate his determination to teach with boldness & truth. I am grateful for how much I have learned. It's about his love & reverence he has for our Lord. He's not melodramatic but when I hear the detail of his lessons, I'm struck, absolutely struck by the time that he devotes to these lessons. Those details & the time to prepare opened my eyes & my ears to a man of God that really considers every word of scripture precious. The Holy Spirit convicted me that the least I can do is to hang onto every word, every scripture he diligently teaches. Many a time I've had to listen & listen again. Every lesson melts my heart because I can hear the devotion & feel the Holy Spirit on this man. For me, personally, it's a rare, rare experience.

John MacArthur knows it's not about him. This is God using him. Our God, yours and mine, Jeremy, made John MacArthur a great teacher & he's to our advantage. Hebrews 13:7.1; Hebrews 13:17; Proverbs 23:12.

Learning under him has brought me closer to God. I was like many who have these dry spells here & there, searching. I didn't want an emotional experience as some might want. I wanted more from God & His Word. I wanted more OF God. I found it by accident through the teaching of John MacArthur. Accident? Hardly.

So, when I hear his heart, his love for others, his love for Christ and truth, it is right that defend him. If I can't defend a man of God that has a lifetime of faithful service, whom or what then shall I defend?

Just so happens my husband and I were out to eat last night. It was a family restaurant, I suppose, because I saw many families there, many children. Even so, alcohol was served.

I watched a young woman , apparently celebrating one of those mild stone birthdays, with a few margaritas. Quite a large gathering of friends or family or both. There were seniors at her table along with a thirty something group and others that looked like teenagers. She must have been celebrating her 21st because of the excitement about her drink?

Ah, the traditions of man. Mark 7:8. You turn 21 and you mark it with a drink. How mature.

Amen and thanks. (Personal note by way of explaining why I may be a little biased on this topic: the Lord has kept me free from alcohol for more than 28 years; I became a Christian a year after joining AA, which I know is not the way to salvation but did introduce me to the idea of surrender to my Creator--something I never undertstood from just "going to church" (RC) as a kid.) I, too, oppose the trend toward "being cool" while professing Christianity; we're supposed to be in the world but not of it. In addition, ethly alcohol alters the thought process. The sin nature already exists--and even sober I must still deal with sin as we all do-- but speaking from my experience, alcohol made things worse on that score. I find it sort of ironic that at AA meetings (where few even profess to be Christian) individuals speak well of a change from their old, destructive ways--while some churches see aspects of wordliness as virtues. The occasional glass of wine or beer likely isn't equivalent to full-scale debauchery (though as a former addict to them I still avoid those things) but I am impressed by felow Christians who gave up alcohol upon their conversion even though they didn't have full-scale "drinking problems." Though God is soverign in whom He will save, I think image does play a role in witnessing. If one can do without alcohol--and if drinking causes a fellow Christian to stumble (or a potential one to reject the gospel)--then the "comfort factor" or "being cool" aren't worth it.

#151 (John)

any one of these individuals could know you are a Christian ... and see you purchasing alcohol and may perceive that as an endorsement. "If Marc's family does it, so can I..."

The context of the comment was that my family's use of alcohol or possession of tattoos is not an effort to appear "cool" to reach unbelievers.

#158 (Sanford)

My question is WHY do you like it?

We have died to ourselves have we not?

We are now slaves of Christ, He is our Master now, is that not true?

Masters' do not ask their slaves what they like or what makes them happy. On the contrary, slaves do what would make the Master happy.

Why does anyone like anything? Why do I prefer jeans to slacks? Why do some guys have goatees and others full beards? Why do some ladies wear braids and others ponytails? Some things are simply harmles preferences.

ANY style or activity can be taken to a selfish or vain extreme. My point is that we conservative christian types tend to pick on ones we don't like as if they are inherently bad. Assuming a particular superficial style will or won't please The Lord is just as bad as those who use a style for vain purposes. He looks at the inside. We're the ones obsessed with outward appearances.

#188 (Gabriel)

This discussion has derailed far from the original blog post.

But you've got to chase those rabbits down every trail. You can't let them escape! In all seriousness though, I think what tends to happen is that (since JM is pretty thorough and usually agreed with) we all give our nod of agreement to the main point and proceed to address the secondary issues attached to the topic.

#162 (t Newberry)

Either you wrote this tongue-in-cheek or you are reinforcing my point that each new man-made denomination comes with man-made traditions.

Both. I have the gift of sarcasm. :-)

#161 (Benjamin)

but the GREATER issue is OTHERS and whether or not I am going to cause them to stumble.

...

but rather I see that I had failed to emphasis my original point well enough.

I think you did a fair job in maiking your point. I do completely understand the idea of not causing others to stumble. That is actually why I personally choose to abstain from alcohol. There is no taste or effect of that particular beverage that I want bad enough to risk causing a problem for someone else. I often try to impress that same idea upon my students.

However, especially in a setting such as this where believers of various stations and maturity come together to discuss these issues ... I think the more likely risk is that a "eaker brother/sister"inclined towards legalism might see all that is being said in opposition and take that to the opposite extreme,and instead of faith they now have (in their mind) justification for their legalism.

Thanks, Keith.

I could have been more accurate by saying it like this: In the Bible, strong drink sakar is mentioned mostly in highly unfavorable and negative contexts. Deut. 14 is an exception—there aren’t many.

Here’s the point I was trying to make:

You can’t argue from John chapter 2 that Jesus made wine with a higher alcoholic content than the previous wine served. I’m not claiming it was alcohol- free. I’m saying the passage makes no comment on the wine’s strength, so neither should we. It was superior in quality. Period.

You certainly shouldn’t argue from John 2 that Jesus’ purpose for creating the wine was to help everyone get intoxicated, or more intoxicated, as Greg Gallant seems to be arguing. Serious problems with that interpretation.

Okay, back on-topic.

Thanks for helping me clarify ;-)

#191 Posted by Rebecca Schwem

"Just so happens my husband and I were out to eat last night. It was a family restaurant, I suppose, because I saw many families there, many children. Even so, alcohol was served.

I watched a young woman , apparently celebrating one of those mild stone birthdays, with a few margaritas. Quite a large gathering of friends or family or both. There were seniors at her table along with a thirty something group and others that looked like teenagers. She must have been celebrating her 21st because of the excitement about her drink?

Ah, the traditions of man. Mark 7:8. You turn 21 and you mark it with a drink. How mature."

So Rebecca,

Did go over and introduce yourself as Christian and find out whether or not these people were bible believing Christians, and explain what might or might not be wrong with what they were doing?

Or did you just sit there quietly in your self-righteous judgement?

Ah the traditions of men, Mat 7:2, how mature.

In my country, alcohol is so much a part of our culture, that even most schoolchildren have tryed to become drunk. Social activities almost always involves alcohol. There have been much public debate, but the only advice is to be a good example yourself and teach the young to drink moderate.

My daughters are 11 and 14, and will face this part of life also. My job is to tell them about our beloved savior, so He also can keep them out of the devils snares. The church fails that part in my country.

#190 Rebecca, thank you for your post. Your thoughts were refreshing and well presented. I have been following John MacArthur's teaching for several years and have found him to be a true student of the Word.

I am currently enjoying his teaching in Romans. God has indeed blessed him with a intense love for the Word. I do not believe one can generate such love on your own. It is the grace of God. It is particularly helpful to have some one like him to bring clarity to some of the grey areas.

Having said that though, I do not believe there is anyone who is 100% right all the time; not Charles Spurgeon, Martin Luther, or John MacArthur. John Piper felt the best you can get is someone who is around 80% right; JM is probably close to 90%!

I have found it useful to consider others like R. C. Sproul and Al Mohler as cross references.

God bless as you as you proclaim the truth and stand up for the Word!

P.S. You probably already know this - you can get a GTY app on a smart phone, and you can watch live video streams of the Grace Community Church services at gracechurch.org. John's last sermon on Mark as he closed out the NT was great, in case you have not heard it.

#198 Greg Gallant- As a matter of fact, we were the seniors at the end of their table. They know how we feel. They have heard our wisdom. They are "Christians". We were the only ones not drinking. It was too loud to even bless the meal or the birthday girl whom we love dearly and loves us. My husband, at my side, indiscriminately, leaned towards towards me and blessed our food. We did not create a scene. We sat and watched other peoples' demeanor change with just one drink.

Thanks for asking.

Sorry Gabriel,

I got off the point and did'nt meant to. I do drink wine at the Lord's supper, David. God bless. Smiles.

#196 Mr. Lambert

I think you did a fair job in maiking your point. I do completely understand the idea of not causing others to stumble. That is actually why I personally choose to abstain from alcohol. There is no taste or effect of that particular beverage that I want bad enough to risk causing a problem for someone else. I often try to impress that same idea upon my students.

However, especially in a setting such as this where believers of various stations and maturity come together to discuss these issues ... I think the more likely risk is that a "eaker brother/sister"inclined towards legalism might see all that is being said in opposition and take that to the opposite extreme,and instead of faith they now have (in their mind) justification for their legalism.~ Mr. Lambert

I have a question for you Mr. Lambert (in all seriousness and due respect. My intention is to legitimately now where you are coming from).

When you are with your students you “often try to impress that same idea”, why you “choose to abstain from alcohol.” Because there “is no taste or effect of that particular beverage that I want bad enough to risk causing a problem for someone else.”

Q: Why would you teach your students (how old are they?) the greater motive of love (1 Corinthians 13), but in this setting (the blog) instead of teaching the same simplest and greatest principle (love; self sacrificial act on the behalf of the other with a genuine heart of concern) why would you digress to this confusing talk of “rights”, “liberty”, “legalism”, ect, when the principle of love when emphasized settle’s these kind of issues.

My point is why we aren’t talking about the motives of the heart and one’s conscience before the Holy One rather than conversing back and forth like a bunch of lawyers (not necessarily you, but every time it comes up it become a “legal loophole” circus). That is what is going to be confusing to a “weaker brother/sister.”

The “weaker brother/sister” will be confused by all of this lawyer talk (which when a lot of people talk about Christian liberty they mean “what can I do because it isn’t in black and white” rather than “wow, I have been freed from the law’s jurisdiction, from its penalties, from a guilty conscience, from the fear of death, from the Devil to do his will, from slavery to sin so that now I am free “to serve a living and true God, 10 and to wait for His Son from heaven , whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come. 1 Thess 1:9-10 (NASB95)

(Part 1)

continued...

Notice in these following verses (below, Romans 14). If the “weaker brother/sister” views something to be unclean because of his conscience then the “stronger” is NOT to judge him and MORE THAN THAT he is NOT to let what is good for him (stronger one) be spoken of as evil!!! Paul says that in these matters of food and drink we are to cater in love to the “weaker brother/sister” and give up food or drink if those particular foods or drink will become a stumbling block for him (we can teach that it is not unclean and at the same time, in love, consider his conscience).

Instead of inferring that he is a legalist (not inferring that is what you are saying Mr. Lambert) maybe we should think soberly about why he has that conviction. Maybe us “stronger” ones should see that he was “weak” and there are many “weak” sheep among the flock that might fall into the same temptation in their weakness as did this brother. That doesn’t mean we make a bunch of legalistic rules, but we are to be sober (Acts 20:29-32). I think the danger is not “legalism; thinking that works will please God rather than faith”, but licentiousness (Jude 4). Especially amongst this Reforming and Calvinistic group that affirms Biblical Soteriology, I think “sola fide” will stand rather than falling into legalism. The danger then is probably more the “walk” rather than the theology.

13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this—not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way. 14 I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 For if because of food your brother is hurt, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food him for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let what is for you a good thing be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who in this way serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19 So then we pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another. 20 Do not tear down the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are clean, but they are evil for the man who eats and gives offense. 21 It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles. 22 The faith which you have, have as your own conviction before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.

Romans 14:13-23 (NASB95)

(Part 2)

Thank you, Mr. Lambert, for having the conviction to abstain for the sake of others and teaching your students why it is that you do so.

#201 Mrs. Schwem

I don't think Mr. Gallant saw that coming. I appreciate you taking the hard stances in life that are often criticized as being "self-righteous." It is easy not to make any discernment (which is popular today), but it certainly isn't loving. I think Paul spoke of righteousness (Acts 24:24-25).

Keep on being steadfast Mrs. Schwem! I certainly appreciate it.

57 but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord.

1 Cor 15:57-58 (NASB95)

#200 Thomas Mathew- If you look back at my post, you will notice I said I listened to John MacArthur and [others]. In fact, the exact quote in second paragraph of comment #190, is, "But I have been following him & some [others] for over a year now."

Let me add that in addition to listening or watching online, I do have a church home with a most faithful pastor of 45 years who shepherds a church with a membership of 17,000. Through the Lord's guidance, he has led us to be debt free since the 70's while still growing and expanding and being blessed with beautiful worship centers. Through the Lord's guidance, he has led us to help other churches become debt free as well as planting new churches and contributing heavily to missions. Through it all, the Lord has blessed us with still being able to help the local community in need.

We also have a wonderfully gifted Jewish teaching pastor available to us on Wednesday evenings. I often send him excerpts from Pastor John's lessons because I know he appreciates them and because I know he will let me know if he disagrees or has another opinion. So far, his reaction has always been favorable.

I made great strides to give my impression of Pastor MacArthur as that of a gifted teacher and most loyal servant but not perfect. I know he would not want that nor expect it and would certainly reject any idea of it (perfection, that is).

I listen to the ones you mentioned as well. I have no problem with cross referencing what others teach. Still, no one has to be perfect to be trusted. I do believe it has been the up-most importance to Pastor MacArthur to be found trustworthy with our Lord's Word.

Such a man should be defended and that should include those you mentioned. And I'm sure they have been.

Yes, I listened to his last lesson on Mark. I can't imagine the feeling in that room at the moment! Quite remarkable! Quite inspiring!. No words can express the gratitude I have for such an accomplishment and the willingness and generosity of our Lord to allow Pastor John to see this to it's end. How Wonderful! How Marvelous! Goodness, I might just break into song here!

Thank you for your comments that allowed me to explain myself better. Grace to you, Brother!

Growing up I was taught that any consumption of alcohol was wrong-WRONG: Sin. I bought it. I had clear convictions in many areas, but where alcohol was concerned I had a very legalistic view on alcohol based on what I was taught, and not primarily what God's Word says about it. It was not until later in our marriage when we allowed wine to be served for special meals in our home that I realized how completely judgmental I had been against any and all who consumed alcohol. I was truly a former Pharisee in my heart in that regard.

So, what kind of balance have we arrived at? 1. We no longer look down on those who consume alcohol just because it is alcohol. That judgmental spirit is exactly what the Pharisees were known for. 2. Moderation is key. We are strictly forbidden to get drunk in God's Word. No one can argue with the Scriptures about that. 3. We should NEVER offend those around us who would think otherwise. (Including friends, family, etc.) That means we at times hide the wine bottle... just because we do not want it to become an issue in any way at all. Especially for those who have had, or still have issues. 4. We invite our children to drink with us, in moderation, as a family, at a social meal TOGETHER (ie: not alone- to "escape" anything)... to teach them about our freedom AND moderation. We are an example to them of what moderation looks like. We also enjoy the flavor/s, and talk about them as we would favorite ice cream. We also are clear to talk of the dangers, and heartbreaks of those who have abused the stuff. (Proverbs has a lot of warnings.) 5. If Jesus turned water into wine... and we don't fully know His motive, then we at least must be careful not to condemn the substance/s. He could have just as easily turned it into purified water, or tasty Welch's grape juice. But he was within a culture that drank wine, He drank wine, He turned water into wine, and became our ultimate example of how you live this life in MODERATION, to the glory of God. I do think that when Jesus turned the water into wine there were a few there who were imbibing too much, and likely drunk or half-drunk already... We can not assume He did this in a setting where all were above reproach.

I am not on a soapbox here... I don't think it is worth it, in the realm of what is important. But as we rightly condemn the ABUSES of alcohol, (or sex, or food for that matter), we should be careful not to toss what God meant to be good and enjoyed in moderation out the window, if this is not warranted based on God's Word. Does the Bible strictly condemn alcohol across the board? If not, neither should we. We live in a fallen world, and God desires we walk differently: In step with the Holy Spirit, and in moderation. If we are fooling ourselves, drinking to look "cool", to get a slight buzz, to escape reality, or to co-mingle with the world comfortably, we are already on the path of destruction, as Pastor MacArthur rightly pointed out.

#208 Jane

In Holland, they use exactly the same arguments for cannabis.

How do you think about that? God created it, so why not enjoy it moderate?

#205 Benjamin Booker, it truly was not a set up...at least not by me!

Thanks for your encouragement, Brother.1 Thessalonians 5:11

This was written by Kenneth Gentry Th.D.

I think it is well though out and well written. I will have to post it in three parts.

Part one:

Few issues have generated more heated debate among Christians than that of the morality of alcohol consumption. The dispute has generated responses ranging from local educational temperance movements to federal amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Certainly there is evidence of widespread abuse of alcoholic beverages today; this few would deny.[1] Furthermore, the Bible clearly condemns all forms of alcohol abuse, by binding precept and by notorious example.[2] Yet the ethical issue before us is: Does the Bible allow for a righteous consumption of beverage alcohol? The fundamental question is ethical, not cultural or demo-graphical; it requires an answer from a Biblical, not an emotional base.

Three Viewpoints

Among evangelicals the fundamental approaches to alcohol use may be distilled (no pun intended) into three basic viewpoints. (1) The prohibitionist viewpoint universally decries all consumption of beverage alcohol. Adherents to this position do not find any Scriptural warrant for alcohol consumption, even in Biblical times. (2) The abstentionist perspective discourages alcohol use in our modern context, though acknowledging its use in Biblical days. They point to modern cultural differences as justification for the distinction: widespread alcoholism (a contemporary social problem), the higher potency distilled beverages (unknown in Biblical times), and intensified dangers in a technological society (e.g., speeding cars). (3) The moderationist position allows for the righteous consumption of alcoholic beverages. This position, while acknowledging, deploring, and condemning all forms of alcohol abuse and dependency, argues that Scripture allows the partaking of alcoholic beverages in moderation and with circumspection.

The Importance of the Question

Often, non-moderationist argumentation inadvertently and negatively affects certain aspects of the Christian faith. It can undercut the authority of Scripture (in that any universal condemnation of what Scripture allows diminishes the authority of Scripture in Christian thought). It may distort the doctrine of Christ (in that any universal censure of something Jesus did detracts from His holiness). It adversely affects our apologetic (in that any denunciation of that which Scripture allows sets forth an inconsistent Biblical witness).

My approach to the issue before us involves three presuppositions: (1) The Bible is the inerrant Word of God. Therefore (2) the Bible is the determinative and binding standard for all ethical inquiry. And (3) the Bible condemns all forms of alcohol abuse and dependence. The moderationist viewpoint in no way compromises any of these three fundamental commitments.

Part two:

The Wine of the Bible

Undoubtedly, the starting point for any rational discussion of the matter must be with the nature of the wine in Scripture. The moderationist position is that the wine righteously employed by and allowed for consumption among God's people in the Bible is a fermented quality, alcoholic content beverage. Consider the evidence for this assertion.

1. Lexical Consensus. The leading Old and New Testament lexicons and etymological dictionaries affirm that the major terms used of wine represent a fermented beverage, a "wine", not "grape juice." The most important terms for the debate that are employed in Scripture are yayin and shekar (Hebrew) and oinos (Greek).[3]

2. Translational Consensus. The major English translations of Scripture translate these words by English equivalents that bespeak alcoholic beverages, rather than terms such as "juice," "grape juice," and so forth. Translations include: "wine," "strong drink," "liquor," and "beer."[4]

3. Lexical Relationship. One of the major words in our debate is shekar ("strong drink," NASB). It is the noun form of the verb shakar, which means "become drunk."[5] This is evidence of the inebriating capacity of shekar.

4. Contextual Usage. Many of the verses that condemn drunkenness (see footnote 2) make reference to such beverages as yayin, shekar, and oinos. In addition, yayin is said to "make glad the heart" in a number of places.[6] This surely has reference to the effect of an alcoholic beverage, when used in moderation.[7]

5. Descriptive Reference. In certain places in Scripture the aging of the liquid express of the grape is specifically mentioned (Is. 25:5, 6; Luke 5:39). Aging is an essential factor for wine to be alcoholic.[8]

6. Circumspection Requirement. On some occasions, "strong" Christians are instructed to forgo the use of wine (Rom. 14:21), when there is a serious likelihood of "destroying" (Rom 14:15) a "weaker brother" (Rom. 14:1; 15:1). This surely indicates the temporary forgoing of an alcoholic beverage, rather than grape juice.

7. Ecclesiastical Expectation. Church officers are required to use wine in moderation (I Tim. 3:8; Tit. 2:3), indicating its fermented quality and intoxicating capacity.

8. Qualified Silence. Interestingly, there are no Biblical distinctions between "safe" wines.[9] Scripture lacks any commendation of "new wine" (fresh grape juice) over and exclusive of "old wine" (fermented beverages). Scripture lacks any commendation of watered wine over undiluted wine (it even disparages water wine, Is. 1:22). Scripture lacks any encouragement to retarding fermentation, which occurs naturally. Evidence exists that wine was intentionally exposed in order to accelerate the fermentation process (Is. 25:6; Jer. 48:11).

Two late thoughts to this topic:

1) Comment Number 121 raises a valid point which has not really been answered. My very brief research indicates that it is far from a settled issue that the wine/alcohol referred to in the Bible was always diluted with water. Inasmuch as a lot of the arguments MacArther makes rely on this assertion, it is reasonable to ask for a little more in depth treatment of this.

2) I think Greg Gallant (comment 198) understandably read Rebecca Shwem's comment 191 as not knowing the people she referenced drinking at the restaurant. The original comment said, "I watched a young woman , apparently celebrating one of those mild stone birthdays, with a few margaritas. Quite a large gathering of friends or family or both. There were seniors at her table along with a thirty something group and others that looked like teenagers. She must have been celebrating her 21st because of the excitement about her drink?" (emphasis added). It sounds like a guess about the makeup of the group at the table and the age of the person celebrating. Not that it really makes any difference, but it is an understandable mistake.

When I became a Christian as a teenager and into adulthood, I was always taught that Jesus was not a Drinker of Alcohol. And that the miracle of water to Wine (was grape juice). Why would there be a need for Jesus to make alcoholic Wine. As Pastor John MacArthur has stated that one of the biggest reasons for mixing wine into their water was to make the bad water drinkable. And Pastor John MacA has studied this extensively and checked into the historical facts. I'm kind of shocked that SO MANY Christians are saying there is nothing wrong with Drinking Alcohol. Alcohol is a drug and very addictive.

#213 Jeremy Ireland You are correct. He obviouly did not know. That was my plan. GTY blog prefer that we not use personal experience that involves others out of respect for their privacy, I assume. I was trying to honor that rule and be discreet about a most recent experience that related to the current topic.

And you are right again. The fact that he did not know, mattered none. I had no idea that he would give such a reaction and couldn't have planned or prepared for it. Whatever was exposed was not of my doing. Could have been divine or simply the old adage of " be careful what you ask for"?

I'm having a hard time with the Jesus, the one some argue gave us strong drink, gave us wine equal to what we have today with this Jesus in Matthew 6:13 "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one."

Does it makes sense that we are to pray that God not lead us into temptation as He passes us a strong drink? We know scripture does not contradict itself, so how does that cash out?

If alcohol lowers our inhibitions, yours and mine, why would a loving God, the one we call Wise Counselor, Provider, Protector, my Rock, my Fortress, the Great Physician and on and on, give us a drink that has led so many into temptation? I think we all agree that alcohol leads many into all kinds of temptations. None of us know how we will be affected before that very first drink. With all we know and all that a loving God knows about the devastation, why would He approve of such a drink?

And before any ask, "Why would he give us food when so many abuse it?", let me answer now. Food doesn't put people at the same risk as alcohol. Abuse of food is risky but it's not the same risk. Many a person would have fled temptations had alcohol not been involved. We know that to be true. This is about a common problem, not an exception to the rule. Why would a loving God sign off on a drink with an alcohol content that had such risk and then tell us to pray that we not be led into temptation?

I'm reading everyone's comments. Many excellent points and research being done here. I'm impressed. I really am. I keep trying to see it as those that believe our Lord made wine intended for consumption, with others perhaps already inebriated, of equal value to what we have today and then said,"Now don't forget to pray that it won't lead any of you into temptation. Party on!"

Maybe alcohol doesn't stumble everybody but this sure is stumbling me. Let me have it. I keep trying to guess how someone will make this fit?

Very encouraging! For anyone really wanting to have some clarity on this issue I strongly recommend listening to/reading these messages.

"Be Not Drunk With Wine, Part 1, 2, 3" ~ Pastor John MacArthur

You can listen right here on GTY. Pastor MacArthur faithfully goes to the heart of the issue!

I am really thankful for the Lord's grace and mercy, the clarity of His Word, and the faithful teachers of it.

Oh how thankful I am that the Lord has saved me from a life of drunkenness. A life that still ravishes ones very close to me. It is easy to sit back and say "oh well he had a problem with alcohol so he is going to have such and such a view because of his past experience, but I can handle it." Hopefully some will heed wisdom and not say a couple of years down the road "that guy, he had a point, look at how things are now..." I wouldn't wish it upon anyone to get mixed up in drunkenness. I am not saying drinking wine is a sin, but I will qualify that by encouraging everyone to follow along with Pastor MacArthur through the Word on this issue.

Pastor MacArthur really goes deep, so these are somewhat academic, but you'll really be built up by the teaching.

God bless you all,

BB

A church I attended several years ago indicated in their informational handouts/bulletins that their first services began in a bar. I always had the impression this information was included in their literature in order to make people who frequented those places feel "in their element" if they decided on attending this particular church because of its roots. I initially left the church for other reasons, but considering what I've read here, this is yet another reason why I should have left. I know they serve food at this bar as well, but oddly enough again, the church literature emphasized they started in a bar, not a restaurant. Now this church is in its own building and just completed a multi-million dollar expansion. I wonder if it includes a bar. (Coffee bar, that is.)

#188 Gabriel

Is it within guidelines to comment on comments? If I'm not mistaken, an administrator commented about the destructiveness of alcohol--(#81). =)

I've heard J. MacArthur's in depth sermon on drinking alcohol. While he doesn't outright call for t-totalism, in so many words, he does.

We are desperate for historical perspective. Losing it has caused much of our problems in the church and the world. (See Jeremiah 6:16)

The question is asked, "Does a fish know he's wet?" It's a great one to consider...

2 Corinthians 10:12b "...but when they measure themselves by themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they are without understanding."

*MacArthur's note on the above passage: "Paul pointed out the folly of the fals apostles' boasting. They invented false standards that they could meet, then proclaimed themselves superior for meeting them."

A "clean on the outside" person who is in church comparing himself with the same, is certainly righteous, so-to-speak, by the standards in his midst, yet he is truly far more lost than the unbeliever living in decadence. This is what Jesus condemned time and time and time again.

We are a materialistic, wealth-driven society where selfish ambition is glorified---right along with alcohol. Do we condemn the love of money so prevalent in our culture? Or just the love of alcohol? If we answer honestly---it's alcohol (the convenient answer.) It truly seems that we have chosen our standards for righteousness, that is...regular church attendance/ participation and abstinence from all "obvious" sins. And WHAT are we producing here? I hasten to say---legalists of the worst kind.

The YRR crowd has learned well *from us*.

For quite some time now---it has been a "badge of honor" to *NOT* drink alcohol.

If all we are doing is getting people to give up their dirty badge for a shiny one---we've missed the Truth. We're getting people to trade in their ugly addictions for more "respectable" ones, like wealth.

Life lived in a stupor is clearly not very profitable---even a great many non-Christians see that. It turns out that giving up a life of decadence isn't so hard after all. But giving up a successful, profitable life may be very hard indeed. We've chosen to condemn the convenient things.

I can't help but be reminded of Matthew 23, namely verses 25 & 26: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean he outside of the cup and of the dish,but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee, *first* clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may become clean also."

It must be our priority to lift up Christ---not ANY badge of honor---especially not a *shiny* one.

I trusted the leaders of my church to lead me in the right direction when I was a new Christian. Yet they led me astray by making judgments based on their own standards, rather than scripture.

Blessings to all---Jamie =)

#225 But Jamie....who would you or anyone assume that those that abstain and warn others are doing so out of arrogance or some badge of honor? There are those that have social issues just because they claim to be Christian. Their noses are in the air. They strut about. But they aren't representative of the church as a whole.

Why can't it be that some express their opinion and it's only to be part of the conversation? Why must those that abstain have to be the ones to remain silent for fear they might be accused of being Pharisaical? Is there anyway one can communicate, state their own opinion about the wisdom of abstaining from alcohol without being reduced to such lowliness? I don't think it should be flaunted but I haven't seen anyone do anything but give their own opinion and perhaps personal experience.

Why can't you just say that MacArthur and those that agree with him are just plain ignorant? Do we have to have an superior attitude to believe what we believe? Maybe we are just plain honest and loving, ignorant fools and not Pharisaical at all.

I wish someone had the time to count how many insulting pro alcohol/right to use comments have been made vs insulting comments from abstainers through this series.

For #218 Rebekah...

I could have written what you wrote word for word a few years ago. And felt it with just as much or more passion. The one thing that was a game changer for me is that if we follow the if/then approach to temptation: If alcohol tempts me (or others), then it is wrong, and we all should abstain (when it is not decidedly condemned as sin in Scripture) then we must be willing to do that across the board. It gets really sticky when we add some factors. One, not everyone is tempted by the same things. Two, if you look at all the evils in our society... one of the most prevalent sins of our culture (and just about any culture) is sexual sin. If we follow the if/then way of dealing with sexual temptation we would surely HAVE to say, "Okay, we are watching millions fall in this sin. Families are torn apart, children are being abused. IN the church. So that is it. No one should take part in it no matter what." (Monks tried to do this. Few were successful.) Because we know marriage does not end sexual temptation... then it would go for all- across the board. For one, you would have a battle cry up to heaven if you tried to teach such a thing. Nor should we. We don't throw out something that can be used for terrific evil just because many, many do. We must rather walk in step with the Spirit, and be self-controlled. If we do not learn self-control we have fallen short in so many ways. For those who have learned to walk in self-control with consumption of alcohol, and do not offend their brother... It is not a sin. We don't go throwing the babies out with the bathwater... We go before God and say, "purify me"... in every area. We know some Biblical examples did abstain from sexual activity, or made themselves eunichs and had grace for it. Others learned self-control. So with other areas in life... Some abstain, others learn to be moderate. The main issue being those who are flaunting their freedom, I think, to gain some comfortable status with the world. THAT is an issue for any Christian. We must grow up into maturity. Some enjoy alcohol in moderation as unto the Lord, others abstain as unto the Lord. This notion would have smacked me in the face a few years ago and made me hopping mad. But now I believe that God truly does offer grace for both.

Sorry if I'm putting my two cents again too soon, but something just occurred to me to add: It seems the whole controversy of this topic stems more from the desires of people ("should I or should I not drink beer, which is something I want to do; something that makes me personally happy. ") In other words, "I would be more comfortable if the Lord's will were in line with my desires." What if a Scripture passage spelled it out, plainly: "Followers of Christ Must Never Drink Alcoholic Beverages." (Of course there is no such line--but what if? Would you obey it? I daresay most of us would.)

I've already mentioned why I don't drink--alcohol itself played a key role in telling me I would die from it if I continued--and I praise God that through that experience, though indirectly, I found Him (or rather He reached me--what kind of Calvinist am I, anyway? :) ) and He replaced that thirst with a thirst for His righeousness. So for me, personally the debate is moot.

Another irony just occured to me: I have never asked, at an AA meeting, (as I said in my earlier post I know its principles are not the same as salvation, but they played a role in leading me to the Lord.) this hypiothetical question: "If you knew for certain that the only way to get sober was to surrender to the one, true Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, would you do so?" (AA's text mentions "going to any lengths" to get sober.)

Of course, sobriety and salvation are not the same thing. And nobody IS asking such a question in that context. Just as nobody seems agreed on whether refraining from alcoholic beverages is a Christian's duty. My purpose in this reply has been to raise questions, not necessarily answer them. The Lord has all the answers. The best advice I ever received from my AA sponsor (a Christian who urged me to read the Bible in the first place) is this: "Pray."

#227 Jane Wilson - Jane, my comment/question has nothing to do with man's character and everything to do with the character of a Holy God.

Temptation is not sin. Jesus was tempted several times. It's giving into to sin, giving into the temptation that births sin.

If the water Jesus turned into wine at the wedding had the same alcohol content of today, I can only think of 3 reasons why Jesus was OK with this:

One, He was tempting us Himself to see how we handle our alcohol or

Two, He was allowing Satan to tempt us to see how we handle our alcohol or

Three, He was wanting everyone at the wedding to chill, kick back, loosen up some and continue to have a good time or perhaps an even better time?

Maybe there was a fourth reason.....the guests were at risk of food poisoning and the wine was to kill the poison?

From the very first drink...and Satan knows this, our inhibitions are down. And I might add, the most seriousness of that is risk of spiritual warfare. We are more easily led. I don't claim to know who can drink several beers and still walk a straight line and not slur his speech or get overly friendly. The one that seems most in control is the one I worry about the most. Because, his over confidence causes him to not see what's coming. Nobody watches over him because he seems fine. The drunk gets all the attention.

So if wine as we have today or beer or any alcoholic beverage is a gift from God, I want someone to explain the gift? Not how we shouldn't judge or how it isn't worse than other sins. I'm not judging and I'm not comparing it with other sins. I want to know and understand exactly what this gift of wine from our Lord is all about. What was it's purpose if not the aforementioned and the things John MacArthur has previously taught? And it should be a use, a purpose that doesn't contradict God's character but rather be consistent with it.

Oh, I thought of a fifth reason....Jesus was hoping that after all that food and wine and sun, everyone would just fall asleep and he could slip away unnoticed?

Thank you for your comment, Jane.

#222,Thanks Benjamin, I've been listening to it while working.

#228 Mike, well are you going to? Are you going to ask that question? I'd love to know the responses. Are you allowed to ask those kinds of questions or do you have to do that on your own time away from the meetings? What a mission field you have there, Brother.

Keep putting in your 2 cents worth. Look at how many comments I have made. If yours is 2 cents, then I'm guilty of pelting quarters at this blog!

I received a phonecall. A very near familymember was braugt to a mental hospital last night. Her sons , 10 and 15 feared for their live, because she was drunk and treatened them with a knife. Her life is in ruin, with her marriage broken recently.

So please pray for me. I'm be out for a period.

My only thougt is from Paul. I would never again touch anything that could lead to this. Jesus even say it is better to have a millstone around your neck.

Bless you who truly know Jesus.

It's a little sad (and probably revealing about how tied we are to modern traditions) that so many folks will jump through hoops to try to say that Jesus changed water into unfermented wine. folks, we have a word that...it's called, "grape juice". If our trusted bible translators knew that it was unfermented, they would have told us so. Also, if the drinkability of the "bad water" was the main issue, i think of two things:

1) why were the vessels of water there in the first place? in other words, why would they have vessels of bad water sitting around? sure, maybe it was for cooking, cleaning, or something...which is certainly possible, but;

2 ) Jesus could've simply turned the bad water into GOOD WATER (and done a nice little teaching moment on "Living Water" as well), but alas. He didn't. (also, dig into "living water" and "mikvah", and you'll find some amazingly dandy things!)

It is sad to see how Protestants have changed so many things from how they were in the beloved early church. We have now changed wine into grape juice, and His words into mere symbols. (dig into the Eucharist, as did the ancients...)

The majority of Christians do not have a problem with alcohol that is consumed in moderation. Episcopalians, Anglicans, Lutherans, Catholic, and Orthodox all accept alcohol being taken moderately, and accept no biblical teaching as prohibiting it—other than clear biblical commands against abuse and drunkenness.

Most fundamentalist and holiness traditions teach that Christians should abstain from alcohol, with a few such churches saying that if Christians do have an occasional drink, it should be in private so that others do not get the wrong idea and so that a bad example is not set, etc.?!

If, however, those who do not drink make this issue a doctrinal distinctive, a core teaching, so much so that they judge other Christians who do drink in moderation, they have crossed the boundaries and are guilty of condemning others whom God receives (see Romans 14). They (those who drink in moderation) answer to the Master themselves – and are certainly within biblical teaching in adopting such a position.

This issue should not be made into a test of Christianity—as if those who occasionally drink could not possible be Christian. For there is no biblical position to support such a view, rather it is a human tradition that smacks of legalism. On the other hand, those who do believe that they can drink alcohol in moderation are not free, in Christ, to demand drinking of those who believe that they should abstain. Romans 14 has a great deal to say about this.

Fact is, the judgment and condemnation usually comes from those who decide to abstain, and pronounce all those who take any alcohol at all to be outside the body of Christ, or at the best, extremely weak, on the fringe, and barely Christian. There is no biblical warrant for this judgment, while there is much in the Bible, from the mouth of Jesus, against such criticisms and exclusive opinions.

Some choose not to drink because of their pasts—and they have every right to make such a decision. Some are recovering alcoholics, and of course should not drink. But to simply condemn all who ever take any alcohol is unbiblical, and those who do so have no biblical authority for doing so—in such cases they are teaching human tradition and reason, not what the Bible says.

No one needs to drink in order to be a Christian. No one is excluded from Christianity, or becomes a weak or fringe Christian simply because they do drink, in moderation.

In Christ,

John

Rebecca; thanks. One of these days I just might ask that question at an AA meeting, though (as a sometime coward and procrastinator, praying for courage and guidance) I can't promise when. (I have in fact posted it on a Facebook forum --of professing believers who, like me, are also in AA. Not a forum of the general membership). And I do see it as sort of a mission field, but I am also taking criticisms about being wary of false teaching and being "unequally yoked" under serious advisement. Though I am grateful to the "program" for getting me to a point where I transitioned to true, Biblical Christianity, ultimately it's the Lord God--not a program--Who keeps me sober (among many other aspects of His guidance.) Ten of the 28 years He has so far kept me sober, I did not attend any AA meetings. (I do attend a solid, Bible-believing church.) More and more as I study and pray and listen to sound doctrinal teaching (GTY and GraceLlife audio sermons are among my favorites, in addition to the messages from pulpit at my home church) I see the Christian life as-- rather than a "program"-- full surrender to the sovereign Lord and how, according to Scripture, He would have me live at every moment (and I admit I fall far, far, short, assailed often by the enemy and diverse temptations--which still do not not, praise God, include one for alcohol.) For me, "recovery" was an initial metaphor for the saved, redeemed life. But now I have the real thing. To me, debates about the permissibility of pleasures (and--to serve the Lord fully-- why do we not just give the benefit of the doubt and refrain from even the appearance of wrong? "Because I like the taste?" What's THAT about?) are needless stumbling blocks in our walk. It was from AA that I came to grips initially with the wrong of self-centeredness, which the Bible explains is inherent in the sin nature.

Let's ask ourselves in debates like this--Who's the more important focus here? Me? or Him?

Thanks again.

(Ouch! Got a splinter from that ol' soapbox....) :)

First off, I want to Say thanks for the great commentary by Rebecca Schwem!

Here's a QUESTION with some Commentary: Was The Wine that Jesus created at the Wedding of Cana.... Alcoholic Wine or NON- Alcoholic WINE (Fresh Grape Juice-Juice out of this world and like no other)?

1) 99% of the Christians th...at are Looking to Drink and party Quote John 2:10 as saying that the people were DRUNK

and Jesus was right there with them...the Head Bartender. Christian Drinkers love that!

2) So here's what we got. A Large amount of wedding guests, including Jesus and his family. People celebrating and drinking freely to the point of open drunkeness (according to most defending their right to party and drink, will say its right there in the scriptures)!

3) QUESTION: I would imagine that People at the wedding knew Jesus well (with his family there and all). Would they not know Jesus (The Lord of the Universe) stance on being DRUNK? 1 cor 6:9-10 where the Lord say's that Drunkards WILL NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. We'll these so called drunkards at the Wedding are not only SINNING (if that be the case).....In fact they are sinning right before their Creator and Savior!

4) BUT THEN! According to all the Christians that Love their Drug of Choice (Alcohol). Jesus turns a blind eye to the intoxicated wedding guests (and I guess....must have hoped God the Father wasn't looking)...because then according to those that say this was alcoholic wine. Jesus decides to make appox.

150 gallons MORE of the alcoholic stuff! Not just the cheap low grade stuff. The real FINE Alcoholic Wine. The best!

5) The SIN: If this were true (which it is not and is unconscionable to even consider as being true..this whole scenario) if this were actually alcoholic Wine. But JESUS would have contributed and endorsed the wild drinking and drunkeness that not only preceeded the miracle; but which he would have contributed to.

6) THE PROBLEM: iF Jesus did this.....then He Sinned and can no longer be our Savior (he would be with blemish and not worthy to be the worlds sacrifice)! Well ...we all know that isn't true. So it must be that Jesus miracle was as John MacArthur has said....was the BEST, freshest, unfermented WINE that ever was! He would never temp anyone folks,come on....THINK about it!

Alcohol is a DRUG....it alters ones normal thought process when taken in, lowers their inhibitions (EVEN IN MODERATION!!). That means EVEN in Moderation...you are under its Influence and thus (going against our Lords words of INSTEAD being FILLED with What???????.......YES..."The HOLY SPIRIT"....not alcohol.

Remember Alcohol is a DRUG and is Responsible for MORE Deaths, Destruction, broken family's, broken marriages, auto accidents, rapes, ALL Sorts of Sexual Crimes, Cost in Damages(I could go ON and ON here).....then ALL of the ILLEGAL Drugs put together. YET this is the DRUG that God endorses???? Any person that is being honest with themselves would have to say NO!

#229 (Rebecca)

James 1:13

I think you already knew this and were likely just speaking about both plausible and implausible reasons for argument's sake, but I thought I'd check to be sure ;)

How does a Christian separate themselves from the world? How does a non Christian view a person who says they are a Christian yet sit in a bar pounding down a beer? My brother in law works for a guy who says he is a Christian, and they just had a get together for perspective customers and guess what the beverage of choice was? You guessed it alcohol. My question would be why as a Christian would you follow along with the pattern of the world and think that alcohol is what is needed to relax the situation. Could the person serve juices and trust in God with his business that God will bring the people to him. I work in law enforcement and I will say this, I am oppossed to all drugs but if a choice was given between a drug like marajuana (still very bad) and alcohol I would rather see the charge to make alcohol illegal and marajuana not. (again, not endorsing marajuana, just using for comparison). When will Christians begin taking this serious and stop flirting with the world. God calls us to be different. We don't even belong to this world once we are a new creation but yet we still have to live in it temporarily. God does give us liberty, but that does not mean a license to indulge in worldly things.

#237 Darren D. - WOW! How did I miss that? How could anyone not see that as a sin if it happened as some propose? You hit that out of the ball park, my friend. Our blessed Savior could not be our Savior under such conditions. If He did what they claimed, then we aren't truly saved!

Fantastic reasoning. Wonderful insight! Thanks so much for bringing that to our attention.

Know what's exciting here? Not who's right or who's wrong. But seeing the Holy Spirit working here and opening our eyes to what was there all along and now seems so obvious. Thank you Jesus! Thank you Father, Thank you Sweet Holy Spirit!

#231 Rudi - So very sorry to hear about your family member. I will pray for her right away. Please keep us informed if you feel like it. I know sometimes you feel isolated there but know as bothers and sisters in Christ, we very much care here and praise God that you are willing and obedient to His word and calling.

We will pray for her, give thanks for your service and pray God gives you strength and comfort and a peace that surpasses all understanding. Philippians 4:7 Thank you, dear brother, for letting us know and sharing with us in your time of despair.

Rudi,

Just wanted to also let you know that I will be praying for your and your family. May God give you His strength and peace and use you to bring His light to your family. May through this tragedy they come to know their Savior.

Thank you a hundred times over!! I was raised in a home with an alcoholic parent and it started with a few beers, then wine etc. I see this happening in our young pastored churches in either the pastor himself or a pastor who will not address the problem.

I pray for you and that God will continue to bless you with holy boldness-and raise up courageous pastors/teachers such as yourself.

Martha hidalgo

#241 Thank you Rebecca. You truly have Kingdom Character.

It’s my sister, she’s 10 years younger than I. (I’m born in 1963, and have to calculate my age every birthday :-))

I visited her today in the hospital, and she’s miserable, clouded in darkness. She is still heavily burdened by the event, and by the tragic events several years ago. Like the rest of my family, she has kept a great distance to all talk about God, refused to listen. But I’m her hero. She said she is amazed about how I can have peace and joy in all the tragic events of my life. I have lived with death, injuries, drunks, criminals, prostitutes and all the rif-rafs of the society the most of my life.

I told her the truth, that I’m rotten like everybody else. There is only one who is good, and He died to save us. We talked about foundation, how the house will tumble down one day if it is build on sand, that a life without God is inherently nihilistic, purposeless and empty. She bursted out in tears when I told her, that hundreds of Americans was praying for her right now.

Her brain can’t handle all the inputs right now, and that’s all right. That gives me time to prepare some excerpts from John MacArthur’s sermons she can read. Thanks for your prayers.