On Jul 12, 2007, SBCer in OKC said:

Based on your reasoned logic I will be looking forward to your next editorial on the sin of gluttony. Which do you think is a greater problem in our current world- obesity or drinking in moderation? Which does the Bible explicitly condemn? We are a people of the Book not philosophy.

---

On Jul 13, 2007, Chris said:

I always find it interesting when people respond to an editorial by justifying with comparative problem while not challenging the content directly. I don't see why Mr. Adams not addressing obesity allows the condoning of drinking in moderation. The apparent point you're making, Mr. SBCer, is that since nobody will address gluttony then it's okay to drink. Most would find this conclusion absurd. And I would challenge your point of obesity being a greater problem. I believe the facts given in Adams' editorial of alcohol being a common factor among car accidents and social problems weigh a greater concern on our society. I don't know many who are going to jail because they are eating too many Big Macs. And since you pointed out that we are a people of the Book, why does Paul make the contrast of excessive wine drinking with being filled the Spirit? Why doesn't he instead say "be not a glutton of beef which leads to obesity..."? If you sole point is to promote the concerns of overeating, then so be it. I would agree that healthy living should be a proper observance. But if you are saying drinking in moderation should be acceptable because obesity is not addressed, then your argument is foolish.

---

On Jul 13, 2007, Sarah Montgomery said:

You left out the fact that some people drink because they enjoy the taste of alcohol. A small glass of warm red wine with a big juicy steak can be quite a pleasure! David mentions wine as a gift from God to "gladden the heart of man...." (Psalm 104:15, ESV) At times we behave like the Pharisees, creating our own rules to hedge people in so that they don't get close to breaking the law. Perhaps instead we should promote "...that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor." (1 Thess. 4:4, ESV) I realize that this passage is specifically directed at sexual immorality, but if our bodies are the temple of the Living God, then all that we do to it, or put in to it is a reflection of how well we are reverencing our Saviour. This brings me to another problem of double standards. We strike hard against alcohol use, and yet gluttony abounds in our congregations. What a bad testimony to the lost when we have no more self control with food than they do! Think of all the deaths from stroke, heart disease, diabetes, etc. These are the number one killers of our time by some statistics. And what about our stance on modesty? Our pews are filled with Christian women who are exposing their bodies, and at the same time their own selfishness towards brothers in Christ. Christian men should know their Church to be a haven from the struggle of the lust of the eyes. What about the lost man who might have an addiction to pornography? How could he possibly pay attention to the gospel message with Satan using our own women and girls to distract him? Maybe instead of taking big public stands on ISSUES we should decide with Paul, to preach nothing "except Jesus Christ and him crucified." (I Cor. 2:3) Only a budding awareness of the great goodness of God, the dark sinfulness of our own hearts, and the distance that lies between these two states can bring a man (by the power of the Holy Spirit) to the point of Salvation. And only a deepening of this awareness can bring about the Saved's sanctification. The sanctified will not drink irresponsibly, and will stand out as better testimonies than a Temperance Union ever could. All things will be richly enjoyed, and the lost will see that Christianity is not about what you can't do, but about the great things that you can do: glorify and enjoy God forever. Respectfully, Sarah Montgomery

---

On Jul 13, 2007, Tim Walker said:

Mr. Adams puts a nice case forward for a reasonable reason why a person might decide to avoid drinking alcohol. Unfortunately, it's just his reasoning based on what he believes to be important, and not based on any solid Biblical teachings or evidence. I reckon it might be OK as one man's advice to another, kind of like choosing the best car or a nice neighborhood to live in, but it shouldn't be confused with true Biblical-based teaching or instruction from our Lord.

---

On Jul 14, 2007, susan stephens said:

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! Finally someone addresses this issue! I am amazed at the amount of Christians who justify allowing alcohol to be a part of their lives through scripture. I am even more amazed at the silence from so many biblical authorities regarding this problem. My children, ages 23 & 20, have needed someone besides mom & dad to tell them why Christians should avoid alcohol. Thankfully, God has led them to the appropriate answer, through His Word, parents, grandparents, and an amazing OBU professor. I am copying this article to give them to use in their many confrontations with other Christian & BAPTIST friends who tell them otherwise!

---

On Jul 14, 2007, susan stephens said:

Wow!!! After having just read the comments left by others, it's clear to me that many just do not understand Scripture. First of all, God's Word clearly states that we are not to be a stumbling block to others! We are here on earth, NOT to enjoy some wine with a juicy steak, but to spread His Word to others!!! If we are truly interested in what God would have us do, I'm positive that alcohol would not be a factor! He's interested in saving the lost, period! The sad fact is...WE ARE NOT! We refuse to give up anything that comes in conflict with our own comfort and desires!

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Bud said:

Sarah and SBCer, do you think that just because Dr. Adams does not address gluttony or pornography or modesty in his message about DRINKING he is saying those things are okay? In fact I guarantee he believes gluttony, pornography, and modesty are an issue, unfortunately for you his story was about alcohol. Whether or not alcohol is okay or not is up to you to decide, but know this, 1 Corinthians 6:20 says you are bought with a price so glorify God with your body and your spirit, which are his. If you are just having a drink at chili's with some friends you may not think that is wrong, but that little boy from your church who see's you who's family was destroyed by aclohol might, and it is still up to you whether you drink or not but are you really willing to potentially ruin your witness so you can temporarily escape the worries of your life you were called to live?

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Suzan said:

Dear BrotherBud, You raise an interesting point. This picture of the child seeing you have a drink at Chili's with your meal is good. If he sees you having a drink with your meal he will be shown a good example. Also children will be held accountable for his or her decisions once he or she is grown. Just as they are held accountable for their decisions on food and pornography. Maybe we should throw what you watch on tv into the mix? What kind of an example are we? The person you describe in Chili's just set a good picture in that child's mind. It is the adult the child or other people see ordering drink after drink that is in danger.

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Suzan said:

Oops! Forgot to mention if just seeing someone do something causes children or others to do things that are sinful and we are held accountable for allowing them to see us or by just seeing us do something causes a stumbling block then we really are Adam's children. The sin is our nature, it isn't because we see someone doing something that makes us sin. We worship God for such a great Saviour! For only by His blood can we be reconciled to God. Being saved from the separation from God and daily thankful He covers the Christians sins, He even saves stumbling blocks (which we all are if you are truthful)or His power to save is limited.

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Chris said:

Suzan, you rambled way to much and you're totally off base. I would encourage you to do a study on I Cor. 8:10-13. Paul's teaching would disagree with you about sinning "because we see someone doing some something." Paul says an issue (he addresses eating meat offered as sacrifices) that would cause a weaker Christian to violate their conscience is a sin. It is a sin against those weaker Christians by encouraging them to do something they believe is wrong. That's at the heart of today's concerns of drinking alcohol. It is one of those issues of today that can cause one to stumble. And here's what I say to anybody who brings up any other issues -- immodest dress, gluttony, entertainment, pornography, etc. Why do you think Mr. Adams is condoning any of these issues? If you think he's wrong for what he says, challenge him directly. Don't be like the liberal politicians who use similar foolish tactics by bringing up another topic and avoiding the topic at hand.

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Richard Laws said:

That is one great editorial. Your explanation was very clear and provided a very useful analysis to support your case. Please write one on gambling as that is an issue that also needs some editorial clarification because it is never discussed in our Sunday School Clases. I plan printing this editorial and using it when the opportunity presents itself. richard laws

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Suzan said:

Chris, the stumbling block comment in the passage you bring to the table is not referring to alcohol being a stumbling block, but is referring to meat sacrificed to idols. Too many terms have been undefined in this discussion so that it leaves application wide open. What is the meaning of terms like "stumbling block", "weaker brother", or "destroy" . Several points should be noted, especially with this "pet" passage: 1. 1 Corinthians 8 is not speaking specifically to the issue of alcohol use OR alcohol abuse. It is specifically addressing a problem especially specific to believers at Corinth. And that is meat sacrificed to idols. 2. In citing 1 Corinthians 8 how often do some fail to include verse 9: "But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak." Catching the larger context, one then realizes this passage is, more than anything, a call to careful, thoughtful living. I think this is why several have brought up the issues of gluttony and modesty. Careful living involves way more than alcohol. 3. If Paul, or any of the other New Testament writers, had seen the need to address alcohol as the great evil that some think it is, then he/they would have addressed it specifically in this or another passage. 4. Alcohol is specifically mentioned in the New and the Old Testament. The negative citations are always in reference to drunkenness. The positive usually are given in the context of the blessings of God. “Behold, the days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when the plowman shall overtake the reaper and the treader of grapes him who sows the seed; the mountains shall drip sweet wine, and all the hills shall flow with it. Amos 9:13 (ESV)

---

On Jul 14, 2007, Sarah said:

I suppose I didn't speak as clearly as I thought I did! First, I objected to the article's stereotype that all drinkers are either escapists, or weak-minded health nuts. I pointed out that some people enjoy alcohol in moderation for the TASTE, not the effects of EXCESS. Enjoying what we eat and drink does not necessarily make us into hedonist pigs. We can sup a glass and eat a bite, and praise our God for the marvelous things he has given us the ability to create. Is it so blasphemous to think that we might bring glory to our God when we enjoy a glass of wine? Second, I objected to the classical stance against alcohol by Baptists. It is akin to other denominations and the well-known Pharisees who put their own rules and teachings on the same level as Holy Scripture. Perhaps this seems like picking nits, but the Bible does not say DRINKING alcohol is wrong. It says DRUNKENESS is wrong. It says causing a BROTHER (not a lost person) to stumble is wrong. I do not agree that one brother should condemn another brother for having a drink in the same way he would if the brother was involved in sexual immorality. I agree that if drinking might cause my BROTHER to stumble, then I should not! However, having a glass of wine in my home with my family (not at Chili's) is an entirely different matter. Not that we should try to hide as though we felt guilty (or else I wouldn't have opened this can of worms with my first comments), but that we should use prudence in exercising our liberties so as not to be a stumbling block. It is easy to make up a set of rules to follow, and to feel good about ourselves when we have kept them. This is why all religions and moral systems are so full of them. But all these things are IDOLATRY. It is much harder to follow Christ and know that we can never feel good about ourselves, because nothing is good about us even on our best day. We find peace and rest in Christ alone, and in His goodness alone. We read the Bible and let the Holy Spirit lead us through it. We listen to the preaching, and then evaluate it against the Word. We live from day to day, led by God, and not by the rules of the Southern Baptist Convention. When we elevate a stance held by church leaders to the same level as Scripture...I say again, IDOLATRY. Real Christianity won't let you off the hook simply because you didn't "drink, dance, smoke, or chew, or go out with those that do." My third point was that we have become too focused on ISSUES, and not on God. Issues are man-centered, and all the sermon's and articles in the world about the evils of alcohol and drugs and sex will not change a sinner's heart. Only God can change a sinner's heart, and so our preaching and teaching and writing and thinking should focus on Him. I am tired of position articles and pseudo-Catholic quarterlies and topical sermons and all the statistics that show sinful behaviors to be just as high or higher among Christians as among non-Christians!

---

On Jul 15, 2007, Chris said:

Suzan, I was responding to you and how you were incorrect about sinning "because we see someone doing something." Paul uses eating meat sacrificed to idols as an example of Christians' abusing their liberties. New believers are often very sensitive to what is right or wrong, what they should or shouldn't do. Some actions (such as drinking) may be perfectly all right for us to do but may harm a Christian brother or sister who is still young in the faith and learning what the Christian life is all about. We must be careful not to offend a sensitve or younger Christian or, by our example, cause him or her to sin. When we love others, our freedom should be less important to us than strengthening the faith of a brother or sister in Christ. And you missed my point if you think I don't believe modesty or gluttony is important. They are concerns, but as I've said previously, just because Mr. Adams did not address those issues does not mean to condone drinking alcohol in such a manner that can cause a weaker brother to stumble. Alcohol abuse is a major concern in our country, and this shouldn't be something that is taken lightly. I trust all those who provide isolated situations of drinking a single class of wine with dinner or similar limited cases have a mature understanding of how social drinking can be a problem in our society.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Suzan said:

Chris, I do not believe that Paul is just using meat sacrificed to idols as an example. As I have said before this was a very real problem in that first-century Corinthian culture. Paul is specifically addressing a real problem, not merely giving a hypothetical example. If I were in a church that had a recovering alcoholics ministry then we surely could use 1 Corinthians 8 as an example of how one would be seeking the higher good by denying a good gift from God. The child in your church, or a new believer, needs to be discipled properly, not just visually, but verbally. "learning what the Christian life is all about." as Paul puts it, "is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." (Romans 14:17). Christianity is not defined by what you do or don't do. Furthermore, moderate consumption of alcohol is not condemned in Scripture. Good discipleship would be to tell that new believer that it is not condemned in Scripture, but that drunkenness is condemned. I would hope that is the same way you would teach a new Christian about sexuality. Or should we just tell them the statistics of how many marriages break up because of adultry, and tell them to abstain totally? We need to be telling people before, during, and after evangelism that sin comes from within and salvation comes from without. Jesus said that that which goes into a man's body is not what defiles him, but what comes out of his heart is what defiles him. We can argue this till the cows come home, and until you realize that alcohol does not make the alcoholic, the sinful heart of the man makes the alcoholic. It would be just like banning guns. If we could do that, we would just start clubbing each other to death because of our sinful hearts (Jeremiah 17:9, and Psalm 51:5, just to cite a few). There is a name for having a "banned list". It's called legalism. If you have a personal conviction, you should follow it, but you should not go beyond and condemn what God does not condemn in Scripture. By the way, I am a non-drinker.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Peter said:

If one were to continue on this trend of logic, Baptists should not drive. After all, millions die in car accidents each year, not to mention those who live but are faced with life altering injuries. And for some, the temptation to speed is so great. What if a habitual speeder saw us driving and was tempted to get behind the wheel!?! What then? No, we certainly don't want to be their stumbling block. Alcohol is like chocolate, soda pop, or anything else we know to eat in moderation. A little can taste awfully good, but too much will make you sick. The Bible calls for us to avoid drunkenness and drinking wine to excess, agreed, but for a denomination to stress Biblical inerrancy, and then to ignore 1 Timothy 5:23 seems wrong to me.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Chris said:

Suzan, the reason I'm addressing you in the first place is you previously wrote "The sin is our nature, it isn't because we see someone doing something that makes us sin." You are partially incorrect with this statement. If you want to just say that what Paul is writing is strictly about eating meat sacrificed to idols, I will go along with your misinterpretation on the point of correcting what is false in your statement. Doing something that provokes one to sin IS a sin. Eating meat sacrificed to idols during Paul's time was a struggle for those who were young in their faith. Paul's point is that he is willing to give up eating meat in order to help someone grow in their faith. Do you see the point? Christians should evaluate the importance of all Christian liberties and be respectful of those who may struggle with them. If someone struggles with alcohol, yes, tell them that drunkenness is a sin and if it's best for them to abstain, they can definitely live life appropriately without alcohol, and I will respect their preferences by not partaking myself. Yes, we do have a sin nature, but we should be considerate to those who may struggle with issues, even to the extreme that Paul poses of sacrificing certain liberties. Suzan, no action in of itself brings condemnation to those who are in Christ. Romans 8 addresses this. You never will read anything I have written to contradict that. I never said, nor is Mr. Adams saying in his editorial, that having an alcoholic drink will cause condemnation. However, you have contradicted yourself with the statement I pulled from your previous posting. I don't really understand your example of sexuality. If you are talking about an unmarried Christian, yes, I would tell them to abstain until marriage. Paul is pretty specific about this. You are right that there is a concern of legalism. Those who believe one is condemned or rewarded by certain actions are incorrect. However, I don't endorse this perspective, nor do I believe Mr. Adam does since the title of his editorial is "On liberty and liquor."

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Jag said:

I find that this argument boils down to a simple question, " Is it sinful to drink in moderation?" I must agree that the Bible does not specifically say, "thou shalt not drink whatsoever from thy lips." Neither does it say, "thou shalt not consume cocaine." The Bible specifically deals with issues in the day in which the particular book was written, but this does not stop us from gleaning from a particular passage principles with which to guide our lives. Suzan, you say that, "Christianity is not defined by what you do or don't do." What a bold statement to make when it is so very unscriptural. It is true as Paul says that it is by grace that we have been saved. But it is also true that as James put it that, "a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." We are justified before God by grace alone, but we are justified before men by our works. Our fruit shows our faith. Since our faith or Christianity is therefore defined by what you do, what do we do on this subject of alchohol? Since the Bible does not directly say not to drink alchohol one would assume it is okay to do. Alchohol consumption was probably not a problem so big as we have today. There were not 100,000 people each year dead from the consumption of alchohol. Now there is. We would all agree that illegal drugs such as speed, cocaine, pot, etc. are bad because they cause chemical dependency and addiction, destroy the body tissues, alter your state of mind, and can eventually kill you. Alchohol can cause chemical addiction, it does destroy the liver and kidneys over time, it alters the state of mind, and kills 100,000 people each year. Alchohol as stated in the Messenger kills 6 1/2 times more youth than do all other illegal drugs. What right do we have to drink for our own personal pleasure when it can endanger our bodies when the Bible specifically tells us to deny worldly pleasures. If pleasure is your only reason for drinking, then it is sin. I have a few reasons for not drinking. 1) i refuse to give the money the Lord has blessed me with to a company(s) that is responsible to some extent for the deaths of 100,000 people each year as well as is responsible to some extent for the addiction that is alchoholism of so many people today. 2) as my body is the temple of the holy spirit I want to be in complete control over it as to have it disciplined for the Lord as Paul teaches. I don't believe this can be done while intoxicated. 3) I have watched a friend my own age drinking at a party. At that party was a teenager from the church that he serves at as a volunteer in the youth ministry. That student, as I am told, now drinks and has been drunk. And is on the verge of alchoholism. We must in every way do our best to teach the younger generations what Christlikeness is all about. Drinking alchohol does not fit into that picture for me.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, John Sargent said:

Regarding the editorial by Randall Adams ("On liberty and liquor", BFM, July 12, 2007), I think that he lists valid emotional needs that many people try to sooth with alcohol, yet he is myopic in his explanation of cause. I am one who consumes alcohol occasionally; yet, the following is not a defense of its use. The consumption of alcohol is an easy target, because most people know of someone who has been negatively affected, directly or indirectly, by the over-consumption of alcohol, licit drugs (pain-killers, anti-depressants) or illicit drugs (marijuana, etc.). However, there is a substance that provides a similar salve to emotional hunger, yet negatively affects many more people than alcohol: food. According to a study published in JAMA (http://www.csdp.org/research/1238.pdf, March 10, 2004), for cause of deaths that occurred in 2000, tobacco ranked #1 (435,000 deaths; 18.1% of total deaths), followed by poor diet and physical inactivity (400,000; 16.6%), and alcohol consumption (85,000; 3.5%). What this study demonstrates is that a person is ~4.75 times more likely to die from illnesses related to over-eating and sloth than alcohol. To bring this into context, this study does not take into account those who are killed by a drunk driver, nor those who are killed by a driver that is not able to control their vehicle while experiencing a heart attack or diabetes-related shock. Adams’ alcohol is a “splinter” compared to the “plank” of food and poor exercise habits. If Adams were to study the demographics of the Southern states, of which contain the highest population density of the SBC, you would discover several striking statistics: they are among the poorest economically, least educated, yet grossly overweight in American society. Firstly, this means that they can afford only cheap, high-carb, low-nutrition foods. Secondly, with a poor education, they lack the critical thinking skills required to improve themselves and their economic situation, so that they can afford better food. Critical thinking skills, though potentially harmful to the conservative faith, should never be discouraged. Baptist leaders should be mindful of the people’s wellbeing, and not the sustenance of the organization. Thirdly, the churches within the SBC, though not exclusively, are implicitly encouraging poor diet behavior by promoting donuts/snacks in Sunday School/Life-Group classes, pot-luck dinners and the like with high frequency. Jesus broke bread, not the buffet. So, is food, or the over-consumption of food, the problem? Absolutely not! The substance, whether it is alcohol or food, is secondary to the root cause. The questions we should be asking ourselves are these: Why are so many people medicating themselves with food and/or alcohol? What are their hurts and emotional needs? Is it easy for a congregant to dismiss a message from the pulpit concerning the evils of alcohol, when the 300+ pound preacher is having difficulty catching his breath? Using the state of being over-weight as an indicator, why aren’t SBC pastors ministering to their “spirit-filled”, yet emotionally “empty”, congregations? Recently, the BGCO decided to spend millions of dollars on a media campaign to address Oklahoma “lost-ness” outside of the church. It seems that their attention span is short concerning the ministry to those God has already provided. John Sargent

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Jag said:

just a few thoughts John. You are quoting a study that shows poor diet and physical inactivity kill 400,000. You then turned to use this to prove your point of food as a bigger problem than alchohol. The study does not show "food" as a bigger problem than alchohol. It may show the combination of overeating, eating poor food selection, along with not exercising as a problem but to call out one part of that as a bigger problem than alchohol would be wrong. In fact, if food is a problem I think we should just cut it out and no longer eat at all. But then we would die huh? Food is a neccesity of life. It must be taken in and used with discipline because you cannot not eat. Alchohol is another story. It can be cut out. Paul teaches that if something causes you to sin, though maybe is not a sin itself, to cut it off. I have cut off alchohol from my life. And to leave out deaths caused by drunk drivers which is a number near 6 digits by most studies, and to say that is okay because it left out people killed by persons having a heart attack while driving, which is a considerably lower number do to the fact that in 80% of heart attacks it is a slow recognition of pain that allows in most cases people to slow down, pull over, etc. makes your study fairly invalid for this discussion.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Jag said:

I don't believe it is right to turn what is a discussion about liberty and liquor into a discussion about sex, other drugs, obesity, etc. The Messenger has approached some of these subjects in the past and I am sure will in the future, but at hand alchohol is either damaging to the body or purely for pleasure. Either would be wrong. If in that pleasure you could convince that God is honored and glorified through what you do while drinking or thereafter then you might have a point.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Chris said:

John Sargent, I'm glad you don't disagree with Mr. Adams' editorial. I'm sure Mr. Adam's doesn't disagree with you either. I've met him, and he doesn't fit the description of a 300+ pound preacher. I'm sure other concerns of alcoholic drinking besides health matters have crossed your mind as well.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, John Sargent said:

Jag - I apologize for not being a more effective communicator, but you missed my point, which is that the "over-consumption" of food is used more often than alcohol to feed emotional hunger. This is evidenced by the multitudes of overweight people in general and congregants in particular. High food consumption, and poor exercise habits, most often lead to heart disease and/or diabetes. Each year, many more people die of heart disease and diabetes than alcohol. Therefore, the misuse of food has a higher probability of negative outcome (i.e. poor health or death) than the misuse of alcohol, though the negative outcome usually takes longer to occur than through alcohol. Please read my original posting again. I did not state that the study was OK or valid by leaving out victims who died at the hands of an incapacitated driver; the implication is that victims were not specifically segregated. In 2000, 16,653 people (alcohol consumers and victims) were killed in automobile accidents involving alcohol, though 26,500 people died in accidents in which alcohol was not a factor (i.e. not paying attention, equipment failure, talking on the phone, eating a Big-Mac or a Twinkie, etc.). By using Paul's writings, you have emphasized my point: the sin in this case is gluttony. The sad thing is that there is little emphasis on gluttony from the pulpit.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, John Sargent said:

Chris – Did you mean to say that you’re glad that I don’t “agree” with Mr. Adams’ and vice-versa? You’re use of a double-negative would mean that you’re glad that Mr. Adams’ and I agree with each other. I do not disagree with Mr. Adams’ editorial in principal; however, I think that he is focusing his polemic on a popular target while not addressing the real issue – emotional hunger – which can be medicated with alcohol, food, sex, etc. Please read my original posting. In no way did I imply that Mr. Adams weighed 300+ pounds, nor did I state that all preachers are overweight. To state my point differently, no one is likely to take the advice of flossing regularly from a dentist suffering from gum disease and tooth decay.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Rich Dunbar said:

After reading these comments I fear that many on both sides of the issue are making a dangerous assumption concerning the use of alcoholic wines in the Bible. Before you stop reading my comment and start presenting your justifications I would reccomend to you a little book which S.A.N.E. will provide you a copy for about $5. It is titled "Wines of the Bible" and was originally written in the late 1800's. You may reach S.A.N.E. at www.saneok.org The book very clearly documents the uses of the words for wine biblically and extra-biblically during the old and new testament periods. It illustrates that the most common words for wine in hebrew and greek are used interchangeably when speaking of alcoholic wine and sweet juice, both in the Bible and in other ancient documents. The point is to ask the question, why do we automatically assume an alcoholic connotation with the word today when the same word had no such distinction to the readers in their culture? We always interpret scripture in light of the cultural context in which it was written, why should the passages that deal with wine be any different? We don't use the word wine for unfermented juice but the ancients did and in fact used the same words for many different varieties of fruit juices that were unfermented. All of the references in scripture where the wine is clearly alcoholic are negative in their appraisal of it's use and effects. All of the others require no necessity to assume that the text is speaking of alcoholic wine. Please take the time to check out the book mentioned above. You will learn a lot in the process. In Christ Love

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Chris said:

John, yes, I'm glad you agree with Mr. Adams, and I'm glad you do not disagree. I did read your orginal post, thus the reason I responded to you. The 300+ pound remark was intended to be humorous. I know you didn't imply he weighed that much. My point is your argument, though not disqualified, doesn't totally relate to everything Mr. Adams is addressing. You only focus on health matters. There are other concerns with alcoholic drinking too. How about you scroll up and read my original post where I say I don't know many who are going to jail because they are eating too many Big Macs. I'm not discrediting your information, but I trust you also can respect the overall concerns of social drinking. They do need to be addressed, and Mr. Adams chose to do so. If you desire to raise the flag on the issue of gluttony and the other areas of concern, wonderful! I will not disagree (notice there's a double negative - it means I concur). But if you think there's not an alcohol problem on its own in our society, then please tell me why all the alcohlic commercials make an emphasis of not drinking and driving. They realize there's a problem, and they're trying to protect their business by saying "See! It's not our fault! We told them not to drink and drive!" So I hope you can respect why many find the issue of social drinking to be a problem on its own. I believe a mother of children in their 20s posted her appreciation of Adams' editorial. She thinks this is a serious issue because of the influences her kids are facing. So thanks again for supporting Mr. Adams and his viewpoint.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, Suzan said:

Chris, I am fine with being wrong and have no problem admitting that more often than is profitable to others I miscommunicate my thoughts, whether I am wrong or just miscommunicating the truth or what I think, I apologize. My forte' often is rambling, but will not concede that I was TOTALLY off base as really don't think I was, since any action we take is a choice, often unwise, hasty, immature, or lazy choice, but ours to own none the less. Am sure God will sort out what blame is ours or not and His justice is perfect, never failing. There are sins of omission and commission. I am sensitive to the needs of others and helping build those up weaker or younger in the faith. There are many believers who before they were saved drank in moderation and alcohol wasn't a problem of drunkenness before they were reborn and that part of their lives won't really change, while maybe food or lust was a problem they will work on. To single out alcohol as the only liberty we have is not honest to those in the Church or the lost. I agree totally with the comments SBCer in OKC, Tim Walker, Sarah, John Sargent, and Peter. The five just mentioned are much better communicators of my position than I can be. To those who are better readers than communicators as I, stick with the five mentioned above and they will show you a bigger picture of God who is not afraid to deal with any issue rather than just make a list and hide from things. You can trust all of your children to Him who is able to renew their lives from the inside out and make more mature worshippers of Him who made them. We women have a propensity to protect with lists rather than take the adventure of really knowing and learning the largeness and greatness of God. For the good of the church and our children let us desire true children of God and not good Pharisees and Sadducees. What great disservice we do our loved ones and those we don't know if we only teach them "good honest living" or to be "good honest citizens" as the secular world would teach them to be good environmentalists, good "healthy" food eaters, good church members. HEART and MIND must be transformed by Christ. Remember those who said they did this and that and are told to depart, I never knew you.

---

On Jul 16, 2007, rick said:

For an article that was supposed to be biblically based, I see a surprisingly little amount of scripture in these replies. Let's start with Deuteronomy 14:26 where the children of Israel were COMMANDED to use alcohol in celebration of God's goodness to them. "And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household," As for the weaker brother argument read that passage again the "wearker brother" is the one who believes in abstaining from meats. The modern day analogue is Christians who believe it is wrong to imbibe alcohol. THEY are the weaker brethren, not the ones who believe it is right to imbibe or worldlings. Y'all need to read the Bible, not opinions on the Bible.

---

On Jul 17, 2007, Chris said:

Okay, Rick, I'm going to read the Bible. Let's try Romans 14:21. "It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall." I am going to try and make this as simple as I possibly can. Drinking alcohol is not a sin. Do you get that? Are you happy that I'm saying that? If all those who are trying to justify drinking in moderation want to hear that the action of taking a glass of an alcoholic beverage, putting it to your lips and causing such liquid to go down your throat is not a sin, so be it. I concur. But let's look at the bigger picture and the message Paul is giving. The main reason why Christians remain on Earth is to further the Kingdom. There are many who struggle with the issue of drinking alcohol. I'm sure there are those who are probably offended that I said drinking alcohol is not a sin. Those who believe as I do that it is best not to promote alcoholic drinking because it is a great concern in our society are not trying to post a list of do's and don'ts. We believe we are following what Paul is teaching and that is to be sensitive to those who struggle with certain Christian liberties. In Paul's time it was eating meat sacrificed to idols. He gives an elaborate explanation on how to handle this issue. The same process can be applied to today's similar concern which is drinking alcohol. Paul went so far as to say that it is best to abstain from eating meat in order to help one who is young in their faith to grow. He's not saying the actual process of eating meat is wrong. We are not saying the actual process of drinking alcohol is wrong. But for the sake of sensitivity to those who struggle with drinking alcohol, let's apply the same principle that Paul is saying with those who struggle with eating meat sacrificed to idols. As Christians who know their responsibility, I'm sure this can be observed.

---

On Jul 17, 2007, Jag said:

I concur Chris. No matter what false justifications try to be made, it is clear that as the eating of meat was a big issue in the new testament church, so alcohol is a big issue here. No matter what we say, the Scriptures are clear that we will be held responsible if we are the cause of a younger Christians stumbling. And John, I'm sorry. Many many people drink without any type of inner hunger to be satisfied, though some might drink for that reason. I just have to quote a line from his editorial: "Alcohol does not contribute to building a constructive life that seeks God's glory." How true.

---

On Jul 17, 2007, susan stephens said:

I spent my high school years in Massachusetts. All of my friends were basically "taught" to drink. I was involved in the music program and whenever we had an after-concert party, the parents provided beer. In fact, my brother & I usually had to bring our own can of pop. I was a bit of an enigma to my friends. They challenged me frequently with arguments not only about alcohol, but on Christianity as well. I was not judgmental, nor defensive. I simply stated that I did not wish for alcohol to be a part of my life. I told them that it scared me to death and that I had no desire whatsoever to drink. We remained friends throughout our high school years. A few days after graduation, I saw 3 of them. We were saying goodbye when they said, "You know, we've been watching you for the last 5 years. We just knew that someday you would drink. We're really impressed that you didn't." I had watched them for 5 years also. I saw their struggle with alcohol, which, for many led to other drugs. So many of them were troubled & confused. I also saw some of them accept Christ and begin to lead new lives. I'm not saying that my not drinking led them to Christ. What I am saying is that they saw something different in me. They wanted to know what made me different...which led to many conversations about Christ. You know what's really weird? I never started those conversations! They did! Am I glad that I had the example of a family who was so completely devoted to Christ that they tried not to do things that would hurt their witness? You betcha! You can also be assured that my husband & I in turn were also dedicated to give that same example to our children!

---

On Jul 17, 2007, Suzan said:

susan stephens, the story you told is wonderful! Many people can tell also of God's gracious working when they did enjoy a glass of alcohol with someone who was lost as well as stories of helping weaker brother's grow stronger in the Faith because of enjoying ONE of God's good, varied, and many gifts. Main point here is that God uses all of us in our varied ways to save and also build each other up in the Faith. Would like for this to be an encouragement to the body rather than opportunity to argue.

---

On Jul 17, 2007, Chris said:

Suzan, I'm glad you agree with the support of not promoting alcohol. I'm glad you finally realize that it's not necessary to justify moderate drinking and see the concerns we have in our society. I am encouraged with your last post.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Suzan said:

Chris, Am glad we can agree. My husband says I am not a drinker, though am an avid cook and do use it on occasion when a recipe calls for it. It is what it is and I do respect each individuals conscience on the subject. I TRY to have Paul's spirit on reaching the lost. (1Corinthians 9:19-22). I guess being raised in the SBC it seems silly for their to be a sort of undefined use of the word "promote", and often those who define it as.... none in any way, any day....would exclude buying it, other than in over the counter cough meds or debate the use of imitation flavorings rather than real vanilla or almond extract. It's just sort of strange since the SBC exercises little to no church discipline in any area and their roles are a joke to the world. Not trying to be mean, just wish there was some honesty, and more real scholasticism. Honesty and maturity will do more for the spread of the Gospel than going to seed on issues. We as Baptists are going to have to use more than "feelings" when dealing with lost Emergent church goers, Roman Catholics, Mormons, Muslems....... We need to learn, teach, and embrace the Word honestly to do battle in a more educated society unless we ONLY want to reach the uneducated and it seems the scriptural mandate it for it to go to ALL. I am for reaching both/and. Again, not wanting to offend, just get some leaders and others to think! We are to grow up, Ephesians 4:15, and work together for spread of the Gospel, not spread our views on issues or liberties and make rules outside of Scripture as the Roman Catholic or other religions do. Am very thankful for a very good and Christ like Pastor. May God send true revival to the Church. Hope this is clear and constructive, not hurtful.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Marty Adkinson said:

Amen! This is the first article AGAINST alcohol useage by Christians that I have read, that makes practical sense. The two arguments put forth are well written and well thought out. Many times we tend to throw out Bible verse that have been "creatively edited" to show our point of view, but this looks at the practical side of the issue. I have always used the "stumbling block" argument, but you have given me some new things to ponder. Thanks, Marty Adkinson Minister of Music/Education Union Hill Baptist Church Purcell

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Chris said:

Actually Suzan, you're not very clear. As far as cooking, most wines and similar cooking liquids have the alcohol eliminated during the process. And that can be a great example of my point. Elminate the issue of alcohol. I'm glad that Jag pulled the comment from Mr. Adams' editorial. "Alcohol does not contribute to building a constructive life that seeks God's glory." It really doesn't. You gave a suggested setting of someone sharing Christ while drinking a glass of alcohol. Although I question the validity of such taking place, whoever this someone is could be drinking something non-alcoholic as well. The content of the drink matters very little in the conversation. However, the setting could be a major factor, as well as how much alcohol is being consumed. As far as the other aspects you wrote, you were pretty vague and basically appeared to just criticize the SBC. So I believe your comment is neither clear nor constructive.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Suzan said:

Oh, my, shouldn't have commented any further. Your questioning the validity of people being able to share the Gospel and see someone converted while consuming a glass of alcohol is sad. Pre-prohibition days for starters would lend itself to host of people being converted while sharing alcohol, not to excess. Not to mention foreign countries where people are saved while consuming a beverage that is not alcoholic. Maybe you should fellowship with some Brothers and Sisters in Christ in other denominations who share the Gospel and see lost saved too. I love the SBC and want it to grow, my family goes back before Statehood who were Baptist and SBC when it began. I want to see the SBC mature, my criticism is because of the "extra" biblical interpretations put on the Scripture. If one has to look for good arguments to justify their decision to not drink or cook with alcohol it becomes more than a Scripture issue. In America it became an "issue" after prohibition days. Many Baptist's are known to enjoy punch with flavorings that are not cooked out and it appears a bit legalistic to not purchase cough medicines that have any alcohol content. Are you going to start policing every wedding, pot luck, shower, or fellowship meal, medicine cabinet,and not have a care over weightier matters? Guess one of my points is I don't care if people drink or don't drink. Sure I don't want anyone to get drunk and mis use one of God's good gifts, anymore than I want them to eat more than one twinkie or one serving of dessert at a fellowship meal. ( Depending on their height, metabolism, activity, they could have more than one I suppose.) Do you realize there are lots of people out there who have your view of alcohol only with soda pop. They say since your body it the temple of God and soda pop is of no beneficial value and does not build a constructive life (they actually try to show you "facts" to prove)it is wrong to have one or anything made with sugar. Same goes for anything cooked in an "unhealthy" manner. Consistency is the problem. Alcohol is no different than sugar in some peoples minds or "unhealthy" food. That's why fighting the use of alcohol reminds me of trying to argue with a health food nut. People are going crazy with the use of "man-made" vs. "natural" being constructive for your health and well being in life. God has made all things good, He said so, how man uses what God has made is what makes them good or bad. Moderation is helpful in the use of anything. Maybe this helped or someone more articulate in print can explain what I am trying to say.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Mary said:

Marty, A practical approach is useful, but does that necessarily make it biblical? The two arguments of the article are decently argued but form an incomplete defense by neglecting to address the point Sarah brought up. Yes, people drink as a chemical vacation and that is wrong even when it is not to excess. Our problems should be brought to the Savior, not to food or alcohol! Yes, some people believe there is a health benefit. I do not have the medical background to argue that point. But, out of curiosity, I would question why the controlled consumption of alcohol for medical reasons would be problematic for a Christian when other medical (chemical) interventions are not condemned. Concerning the person - like Sarah - who enjoys the taste of wine in moderation (in her own home or with careful judgment about where), I have not heard a convincing PRACTICAL reason why that is wrong. And isn't the editorial supposed to be addressing the issue with reason, rather than biblical arguments? Mr. Adams' conclusion that, "Alcohol does not contribute to building a constructive life that seeks God's glory." is weak reasoning. I could substitute "Diet Coke" or "chocolate" for "alcohol." The biblical arguments I have seen elsewhere do not particularly sway my opinion one way or another. I simply do not believe that there is enough evidence in scripture to absolutely condemn or defend the moderate use of alcohol. I believe it is open to fallen, human interpretation and can respect rational, "biblical" arguments from both sides. Drunkenness is absolutely, biblically condemned, I think everyone agrees with me on that point if no other. Personally, I think the comments are degenerating into what Paul warned of in II Timothy 2 and Titus 3. Please go read these chapters in your own Bible before you continue this discussion.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Chris said:

Suzan, you're probably right. You shouldn't have commented any further because you went way off the point I was making. It's not sad that somebody is leading someone to Christ. It's sad that you think drinking alcohol had to be an essential part of the conversation. Whether it was consumed or not has no bearings on the conversion. And I'm not giving you any "extra" biblical interpretations. I've been telling you exactly what Paul taught. In Romans 14:21, he specifically pointed out don't eat meat or don't drink wine or do anything that will cause a brother or sister in Christ to stumble. I think you should follow further along one of your said points which is you don't care if people drink or don't drink. That would be similar to my mode of thinking. If you know someone who struggles with the issue of alcohol, be sensitive to them about it. If they chose not to drink and prefer not to be around it, don't encourage them otherwise. Can we at least agree on that? And by the way, what happened to you appreciating Susan Stephens' wonderful story about her choosing not to drink and being able to witness to her friends? It sounds to me like you are contradicting yourself now and would consider her legalistic. Her story is the prime example of how to live without promoting alcohol, which has been my point all along. She didn't push her standards on her friends. She just abstained, and it apparently was affective to the point that the Holy Spirit moved upon her friends. She even said that she doesn't believe it wasn't that she abstained, but that they saw something different in her. That's all I am trying to say as well. Please tell me that you will at least agree that alcohol doesn't matter in the conversion of Christian. Hopefully we can find an agreement somewhere.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Suzan said:

Very sorry to have given ANY communication that would in any way mean that I was not happy for the situation with susan stephens being able to see salvation occur because she was different. Very happy and rejoice over that! I do not encourage others to drink and am considered extremely conservative in most circles. I agree with you on Romans 14:21 in the whole context and think verse 22 (ESV) makes my point of keeping things between yourself and God, not imposing my inabilities or abilities in regard to freedom/liberties on anyone including a denomination of people, therefore Dr. Adams posting his arguments/position is not the best for the SBC, but that's okay, it's still a free country. Yes, we totally agree that alcohol doesn't matter in the conversion of a Christian. Thank you for sticking with the rambling and lacking communication skills.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Chris said:

Okay, Mary, I read both passages. By the way, who is Marty? You're exactly right. There is no direct scripture condemning drinking alcohol. There is direct scripture about Christian liberties that can be observed in such a way that can be a hindrance. The reason alcohol is singled out is due to the problem it is in our society, very similar to the issue of eating meat sacrificed to idols during Paul's days. Diet Coke and chocolate don't appear to render such concerns. I trust that I have given gentle instructions to those who oppose me, leading them to a knowledge of truth (II Tim 2:23).

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Sarah said:

Chris, I think you should go back and reread Suzan's comment to Susan Stephens. She is not contradicting herself. You did not understand what she was actually trying to say. A person who drinks in moderation can also be someone who sets an example for others to see. Susan's school friends saw something different in her because she didn't drink. If I never get drunk, or drive after drinking, or drink to solve my problems (chemical vacation), or buy for minors or do any of the things that other drinkers do; then couldn't it be said that they are seeing something different in me, too? I used to work in a hospital ER. Twice while I was there a fellow employee was killed in a tragic way. Both times my fellow lost employees dealt with this situation by going out and getting drunk as a group. They knew that I was a Christian. They KNEW that I believed drinking in moderation is fine. They saw something different in me when I didn't go out drinking with them, and this ALSO brought about conversations about Christ and how he can make a difference in your life. Just like Susan Stephens, it wasn't the drinking or not drinking that mattered. It was seeing something different in me: "She doesn't use alcohol to solve her problems, but she is not a teetotaler." This is a real life example of how a Christian DRINKER showed something different to others. Other's may have stories of how they fellowshiped over a glass of wine, and showed others something different because they didn't go to excess. Suzan's point is that our EXPERIENCES do not determine how everyone should live. The AMAZING thing about God is that he gives everyone different experiences and uses them in different ways. We can not use a testimony about our experiences to make rules, because if you look around, you will find people with conflicting experiences. Human beings are complex, and narrow rules don't fit every situation. Paul said he sought to be all things to all men. (See 1 Cor. 9:22) Maybe that means that there is a time and a place for drinking, and a time and a place for abstaining! Maybe God can use the moderate drinker to witness to some people who are hardened and skeptical. I have met a lot of people who were bitter toward Christianity, but they gave me a chance when they started to see that I didn't fit the "correctly molded Southern Baptist" stereotype. They wanted to find out if other things were different about me, too. This is what I took away from Suzan's comment.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Chris said:

I'm sorry, Mary, I just found out who Marty is. I guess I overlooked his comment. I am glad he was encouraged by Adams' editorial. Suzan, I am greatly encouraged by your responses. You are excellent in making me think for myself on what I believe. I am glad we know that alcohol is not necessary to be promoted in Christian witness. It could mean that we also agree with Adams' remark that it is not constructive. Also, I welcome your thoughts on Rom. 14:23. This would be a man I would want to support and help him overcome his doubts and struggles. That's why I wouldn't eat meat with him. And guess what? If he struggled with drinking, I won't promote alcohol around him either.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Chris said:

Hi Sarah, you know what's great about this testimony you gave? You spent time with your co-workers. I'm so certain that those co-workers could have the same perspective of you even if you didn't have a drink because you demonstrated care for them. That's how Paul was all things to all people. He was sensitive to people. He knew that if they had a problem with eating meat, he would do his best not to be a hindrance to this issue. I trust you would have the same sensitivity.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Wayne Hatcher said:

Chris, For an excellent example of someone being led to Christ over a glass of wine you need to read the excellent post by Wade Burleson, pastor in Enid, the largest SBC church in Oklahoma. Burleson was twice past president of the BGCO. If you are not able to copy and paste the link below, google his blog Grace and Truth to You, and look for the June 14, 2006 post. The actual account is found fairly far down in this lengthy post, but it is well worth the read: http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2006/06/conversion-to-christ-over-glass-of_14.html I do not plan to argue with you over the issue, I just would like to point you to some very plain texts that nobody likes to bring up: Amos 9:13 and Psalm 104:14,15. Someone above has already cited the Deuteronomy 14:22-27 passage in which God COMMANDS His people to rejoice in His bounty, which includes wine. Good exegesis with the analogy of Scripture demands that we go to the plain texts to shed light on the not-so-clear texts.

---

On Jul 18, 2007, Chris said:

Thanks Wayne. I am curious to know why Paul's teachings that I have mentioned previously are considered not-so-clear. Also, I am going to apologize for questioning someone being led to Christ while drinking a glass of alcohol. It appears I have struck more chords over that phrasing than any of my other comments. It caused confusion, so I ask for your forgiveness. I trust it won't cloud my points of emphasis which are being sensitive to those who struggle with alcohol, that we have a problem with alcohol in our society, and it is not necessary to promote alcohol as part of the Christian faith. And I'll tell you what. In order to avoid further confusion, I'll quit posting comments and hold to those three points. I care for you all.

---

On Jul 19, 2007, Rich Dunbar said:

What exactly constitutes something being one of God's good gifts? I have heard this used a number of times in these posts and have yet to see anyone challenge it. I can think of many things myself that would have been God's good gifts and all of them would have occurred naturally in the garden of Eden and still occur naturally today. Alcohol however is not one of God's good gifts. It does not come about on it's own in nature. Now I know some may argue that point and that is fine, but to be consistent let them commit to only drink the alcohol they can go out and find occuring naturally in the great outdoors. Secondly, I again will remind everyone that the most common words used for wine in the Bible do not necessitate an alcoholic interpretation. If you study how people in those time periods used those words you will find they used the same words for alcoholic wine as well as many varieties of sweet juice which was non alcoholic. Good exegesis requires placing the interpretation of the text within the original cultural context and not our own modern definitions.

---

On Jul 23, 2007, SBCer in OKC said:

Rich- May I suggest you look at the following passages for answers to your questions about God and wine: Psalm 104 (esp. verses 14-15), Ecclesiastes 9:7-10, and Isaiah 24-25. The Isaiah passage is particularly poignant because in devastating the city God removes wine and in restoring it he gives wine. Your arguments about wine and fermentation are addressed best in the book "God Gave Wine." It is a little newer than the 1800's pamphlet you suggested. I close with a quote from Martin Luther "Men can go wrong with wine and women. Should we abolish women?"

---

On Jul 24, 2007, Mitch said:

I love this article! It has caused me to do a great deal of thinking... I think Baptists should reject guns too. Guns kill and harm much more people than alcohol ever did. Ice cream too, with all its glorious fat- heart disease is the #1 killer of adults in the US. And they're both about as necessary as alcohol. I know Jesus never drank alcohol (it was Welch's grape juice, just as the Bible states). He never fired a gun or ate ice cream either, so they should both be banned. I'm canceling my subscription to the baptist messenger specifically because of this article. Because the quality of the logic that this article employs and the editorial staff who has deemed this logic to be acceptable, I can no longer take any other article published in the messenger as serious.

---

On Aug 4, 2007, Scott said:

So, we should pile into a truck with a keg, dozens of Big Macs, armloads of guns... and go witnessing.

---