Dr. Mohler has written another brilliant article: The Case for (Early) Marriage.
I think this is a hot issue for Southern Baptists… Hopefully, everyone by now is aware of the problem of sex in the youth of America, including our churches. The youths approach to sex, relationships, and marriage has been catastrophic in some regards. I echo Mohler’s words below:
At the end of the day, the most important fact about this article is that it appears as a cover story for Christianity Today. In that sense, the cover has been blown when it comes to the crisis of evangelical young people and the delay of marriage. It’s about time.
Many people wait until they are close to 30 to even consider marriage. It seems that in our youths minds marriage is not of great importance. We need to remember that this isn’t just an “American problem” this is a problem in our own churches.
What are your thoughts on the issue? What can we do in our churches to “turn the tide?”
{ 157 comments }
What can we do in our churches to “turn the tide?”
Start promoting marriage and quit telling younger Christians how stupid it is to marry young.
Preach all of Scripture and quit obsessing about alcohol and Calvinism.
Just a couple of thoughts before I head to bed.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cash for Clunkers: Congress should sit in the corner =-.
I got married at 19 and am glad I did so..
I don’t think it is at all unwise to articulate the virtues of early marriage, but I think it is a mistake to say it is wrong to delay marriage, simply because you can’t make a clear biblical case for that.
I think Christians need to be careful when saying someone should do something or shouldn’t do something unless doing or not doing that “something” is clearly sinful.
There has been a great deal of talk lately about Courtship in our circles. There are different definitions concerning courtship. Some equate courtship with engagement. I don’t think the old-timers viewed it as such. At any rate, I believe Courtship, not dating is the way to go. Dating simply paves the way to fall.
Having said that, one key ingredient in seeing our young people “stay true” until marriage, is the pure and passionate loving presence of a faithful dad.
.-= Bob Schembre´s last blog ..The Power of God =-.
According to the Five Point Calvinists, what does it matter what you do, or what you preach, or teach? Whatever the youth do, or dont do, is gonna happen anyway. Besides, if they’re not the elect, what does it matter what they do, or dont do? They better party and live it up down here, because hell is coming. They have only hell and punishment to look forward to in eternity. Listen, if I were not saved, then I’d be living for the pleasures of the flesh. It’s the only pleasure that you’ll ever have.
Besides all that, let’s teach them to drink alcohol…boy, then they’d really have more sex outside of marriage. Much sexual sin has been stirred up by alcohol use. So, let’s by all means stay away from teaching that abstain from fermented wine preaching. Youth, go ahead and drink it up, and get ready to party. But, after you’re feeling “good,” dont commit fornication…ok? Use good, sound judgment at the parties you attend. lol.
David
David
I’m glad to see you’re starting to come to your senses and see things as they really are. Haa
.-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..A Mathematical Arguement for God’s Existance =-.
David,
Ummm . . . have you been drinking some of that fermented wine before taking to your keyboard?
.-= Todd Burus´s last blog ..Sunday Devotions- Penitential Thoughts on Psalm 25 =-.
Todd,
Does the truth stagger you when it hits you right between the eyes?
David
David,
Glad to see you are trying to have productive conversation…
I notice that my statements were not talked about, and my questions were not answered.
David
I choose to use my time wisely… You are not having productive conversation, therefore, I am not going to spend time responding to nonsense.
I’m glad no one is obsessed with Calvinism or alcohol. That would certainly detract from the topic at hand.
Bill,
From your logic and point of view, what’s it matter? What will be will be. Que sera, sera. So, why would a five pointer get all bent out of shape over what the youth are doing? The elect will be saved and live a life that backs up their profession, and the non elect will live according to their flesh like a dog out in the yard.
David
David,
Why do you insist on making this about Calvinism? You again are misrepresenting Calvinism by making it seem like Calvinists believe it doesnt matter what you do… What is funny about you David is that from what I have seen on this blog you are more passionate about your anti-calvinism than ANY “cage calvinist” I have ever met…
I choose to believe that you do actually know what Calvinists believe, but in believing that it makes me realize you willfully misrepresent them. It is unhelpful for every discussion.
Now, may we discuss the topic at hand?
Matt,
Do Five point, Tulip theory, Calvinists believe that the elect will be saved, and the non-elect will not be saved….and, that the non elect will not be saved….that Jesus’ death was not for them… that the Holy Spirit does not truly call out to them for salvation? Are there people out there right now….youth included….who absolutely have no hope of salvation?
David
David
I love you to pieces, man. I’m not Matt, but:
Do Five point, Tulip theory, Calvinists believe that the elect will be saved
Yes
, and the non-elect will not be saved….
Yes
and, that the non elect will not be saved….
Um, didn’t you just ask that.
that Jesus’ death was not for them…
Yes
that the Holy Spirit does not truly call out to them for salvation?
Well, yes, although I don’t know that I’d describe it that way.
Are there people out there right now….youth included….who absolutely have no hope of salvation?
Now I can’t speak for every single Calvinist out there and I’m not the brightest bulb on the tree, but no, I wouldn’t say this. I would say that every person who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved and that means every person without any exception whatsoever who calls on the name of the Lord. That is why it is our responsiblity and privilage to preach the good news of the forgiveness of sins to those who will repent and trust Christ as Savior and Lord. I would say that anyone who rejects Christ, does not place their faith in Him, and does not repent of their sins has absolutely no hope of salvation.
.-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..A Mathematical Arguement for God’s Existance =-.
Thank you, Joe. Then, if I held to a strong, five point, tulip theory, Calvinistic view….why is the conversation about youth and sex even necessary? I mean, the elect will be saved…no matter what. And, the non elect will not be saved no matter what…..and why should we try to impose our Biblical morals on a lost heathen who is bound for hell? And, is that not legalistic to try to get that non elect youth to be pure and not participate in sexual sins? Why should a non elect youth stay pure?
David
PS. BTW, Joe, I love you, too, man.
David,
I am not a 5 point Calvinist. I do believe that Jesus died for everyone. I hold to the sufficiency/efficiency view of the atonement. Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient for all people, but efficient for only those who believe… (All who believe are those that God foreknew, which Scripture is crystal clear about.)
Then, Matt, my arguement has nothing to do with you. You believe that all people can truly be saved. I’m talking to the Stan’s of our world, who said what he did in the very first comment.
David
It seems 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 is a good place to start:
To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..D.A. Carson on: What does inerrancy mean? Is it essential to Christian belief? =-.
Stan,
That is a good start. When I read that verse and think of the culture we live in it leads me to believe that fewer and fewer people are able to exercise self-control.
Again, what does it matter if people get married, or dont get married; if some are going to be saved, while others have no hope of being saved? What does it matter beyond that?
Also, who cares if someone exercises self control, or not if ole Joe down the road has no hope of salvation? Why dont you just leave him alone to enjoy sexual sins? And, if he’s one of the elect, then he will get saved and want to live a pure life…so, what’s the point of trying to legalistically get ole Joe to exercise moral control over his sex drive?
David
David,
I specifically am talking about people in our churches, which a majority is proclaimed Christians… Notice that my post put emphasis on how the church ought to handle this as in “in house issue.”
Matt,
Amongst the Christian crowd, I would say that waiting so late to get married would lead to strong temptations to sin against God….especially if they have drunk a beer or two.
I got married when I was 21 yrs. old. I’m glad that I did.
David
I understand what Paul is saying here, but marrying because you want to have sex is most likely not a recipe for a long lasting marriage.
This isn’t my blog but my advice is not to feed the trolls.
Bill,
Are you calling me a troll? Do you know how big I am?
David
Troll: In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional or disciplinary response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. (Wikipedia)
What I said was on target and relevant…especially in answer to Stan’s comment #1.
Again, do you know how big I am.
David
David
Then, if I held to a strong, five point, tulip theory, Calvinistic view….why is the conversation about youth and sex even necessary?
Because of the Great Commission which calls for us to go make disciples. Part of that discipleship will involve teaching what God has revealed about holy living in scripture. It’s not a matter of “Whatever God decides is going to happen” it’s a matter of “God has given His command to serve Him. Because I love Him, I will do that. Heck, because I love Him, I want to do that”.
You share the gospel and teach the Bible out of love for your Savior and the lost and a recognition of your responsiblity to be obediant to His call to service. I’m an old 5 pointer who won’t let flowers grow in my garden unless they’re TULIP’s and that’s why I do it. See, we’re not as different as you thought.
.-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..A Mathematical Arguement for God’s Existance =-.
Joe,
I understand what you’re saying. You do it ought of obedience, because you love the Lord. That’s why I do it, too. And, I do it knowing that more might be saved. I know that the more we do to get the Gospel out to the world, then the more people will get saved. The more light they have, then the more conviction they will have.
But, also, I do understand teaching Christians to be pure. And, I understand what Matt is saying here about age possibly leading to sexual sins amongst Believers. Because, a long time ago, our grandparents got married at 14, or 15, or 16, or so. Now, people are waiting until they’re in their 30′s. So, the temptation on a young person full of hormones can get quite strong.
David
matt, i’m glad you brought this subject up; it’s very near & dear to my heart, something i’ve tried to address in both my pastorates.
i think something that gets left out is that adults are also promiscuous, even in churches. this problem is not just a youth one. churches are (generally, but not totally) past the point where they actually address & do something about promiscuous members & attendees. i’ve personally had to address more retired singles living together, unmarried, under the same roof & having relations than youth having sex. and there’s the justification – “if we marry, our social security will be adjusted” and things like that. and it often gets to the point where people say, “God knows our hearts” or something similar.
i’m glad dr. mohler was willing to punch on the youth a bit, but without having read the article . . . did he happen so spend even MORE time hitting adults? it will be difficult for adults to lead youth to places the adults themselves have yet to reach.
.-= mike´s last blog ..the basics of matthias krieg’s "Mutmaßungen über Maleachi" =-.
by the way, i realized AFTER i made the above comment that the discussion above it is pretty much about calvinism again. sorry i steered the discussion 180 degrees
.-= mike´s last blog ..the basics of matthias krieg’s "Mutmaßungen über Maleachi" =-.
Mike,
Don’t apologize. It wasn’t meant to be about calvinism.
I’m late to this discussion, but I agree with Stan’s sentiment in the very first comment: “Start promoting marriage and quit telling younger Christians how stupid it is to marry young.”
The problem isn’t limited to the culture. Many people in the church also advise young people to put off getting married and some even discourage having children. The church needs to say, simply, get married, and start your family.
“Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
the fruit of the womb a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children of one’s youth.
Blessed is the man
who fills his quiver with them!”
(Psalm 127:3-5)
.-= Barry Wallace´s last blog ..To Every Human Being: “God Loves You” =-.
Amen, Barry…
I was very surprised by how many people in the church had a very negative reaction to my wife and I getting married when I was 19 and she was 20.
Barry: “The church needs to say, simply, get married, and start your family.” Can and should the church really command this? Especially in light of Paul’s thoughts on marriage? Getting married is not like getting a haircut. You can’t just decide to do it. There are two people involved and it isn’t always that easy to find someone with whom you want to spend your life or who is willing to spend their life with you. I agree that the church should not discourage early marriage, but beyond that I think it isn’t our business unless clear biblical injunctions are being violated.
The church has plenty to teach about the sanctity and honor of marriage, of love, submission and fidelity within marriage, and about raising children. But when to marry and when to have children is between the individual and God.
Bill,
I think you make a good point. There seems to be a type of fad in Christendom of “if you’re godly you get married and have a family” while Paul first preaches a different message- “1 Corinthians 7:8-9.
Could it also be that the church as “idolized” the family in response to our cultures absolute disregard of the family? This has got me thinking…
That’s a good question, Bill, and your concern is valid. I didn’t mean to imply that the church should make that statement as some sort of mandate, but rather that it should be clearly communicated as the norm.
I’m not so sure I would go so far as to say that it is between the individual and God, because the parents and the Christian community should probably also play a significant role in that decision. I’m not too enthusiastic about any form of individualistic discipleship.
I do agree, though, that there are some who should remain single in order to serve the Lord without distraction. I just don’t think that’s the norm.
Back to my original concern. I think the church has, unfortunately, adopted the cultural norm, rather than the biblical norm, and needs to recognize the importance of not postponing getting married and having (a quiver full of) kids.
.-= Barry Wallace´s last blog ..To Every Human Being: “God Loves You” =-.
Matt: I think you may be right. Marriage is a calling, as is singleness. Is being a pastor better than not being a pastor? Only if you are called to it. Some are called early and some are called late. CS Lewis married very late, in very unusual circumstances, and did not father children. Was he in sin? I don’t think so. We live in a time where most children are expected to go to college, which I think is a good thing. Waiting until graduating can be a wise choice. There are just too many variables and special circumstances and individual choices involved for the church to say “Get married.”
Bill,
I agree with a lot that you are saying, but I think marriage should be a priority in young peoples lives. Marriage isnt something that should be pushed completely to the side with an attitude of “well, I’ll consider that after I have my degrees and get my own life started.”
We are dealing with kids so we need to first look at the parents. What are we in the church really going to do though? We can’t mandate a specific age to marry.
I’ll throw some ideas out. We can teach God’s plan for the family. The sacredness of marriage and how this relates to the Gospel. If they aren’t ready for marriage teach them to serve the body of Christ. This should be taught prior to when they understand they aren’t ready for marriage.
Bottom line: It’s a Gospel issue. Until our homes and congregations at large are reflecting the Gospel no amount of “rules” nor verbal osmosis is going to change these teens.
.-= Mark Lamprecht´s last blog ..Link Us =-.
Well put, Mark. Ultimately this and every other issue are Gospel issues.
.-= Barry Wallace´s last blog ..Logos Premium Bible Giveaway =-.
The Gospel is the easy fall back.
It’s still the truth though.
.-= Mark Lamprecht´s last blog ..How To Meditate On Scripture =-.
One more thought on the issue:
Sadly, too many so-called “Christians” counsel their unwed daughters to dismember their babies rather than encourage them to marry the child’s father.
That was the situation I was in before I got married. My (now) wife was 18 and pregnant. I was 20. We both became Christians (literally) two days after our son was conceived.
Our church (Lakeview Baptist Church in Auburn, AL), including staff and members, encouraged us to get married.
I had one friend who joked that at least I would not have to go bald trying to have a child.
Other than that, every “friend” or relative who said anything encouraged us to dismember our baby.
Very sad.
Our baby is now 23 years old.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Big Brother at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave =-.
This is getting quite ridiculous. First have more kids, now early marriage? All this is going to lead to is divorce statistics among Christians is going to go higher than it did before. Doesn’t anyone find Southern Baptist leaders who are promoting this a tad Neroish?
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..Doctrines Of Grace =-.
Debbie,
Are you serious? In the last few years/decades the divorce rate has gotten higher than it ever has and that has been under the mindset of “dont have many kids and wait a long time until you get married.”
I think you have gotten it quite backwards here. At least, according to history.
And how in the world is believing in people getting married early and having more than 1-2 kids Neroish?
Dead serious. How is it being Neroistic. By sticking their noses where it doesn’t belong. Marrying younger is not the answer, that is between that person and God. People have enough pressure put on them to begin with by this nonsense teaching, now we add to it have more children, marry younger…give me a break. It’s this type of teaching that is having people either worn out by keeping up with these ‘suggestions/commands’ or leaving because they can’t in good conscience do these things.
It is definitely going beyond what scripture demands of us as believers.
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..Doctrines Of Grace =-.
I should qualify, Neroisitc: Dictatorship
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..Doctrines Of Grace =-.
Debbie,
It is about demanding it is about making marriage and family a priority.
.-= Matt Svoboda´s last blog ..Plant a church or a campus? =-.
Matt: Our primary focus should always be Christ. Christ only. Our primary focus should be promoting the command that Christ gave that is the greatest, loving the Lord God with all our heart, soul and mind. That alone would take a lifetime to teach and preach. The rest falls into place.
You call the article brilliant, I call it going beyond the scriptures and it is dictating. Or attempting to dictate. How many children a couple has is between that couple and God. Early or late marriage is between a couple and God, not between a couple and the Southern Baptist leaders or churches. It is adding a burden that I can tell you quite honestly we don’t need.
There is a difference between putting marriage and family first and spelling out that people need to marry early(whether they are mature enough for marriage or not) and spelling out that one must have more than 2 children, and putting marriage first. They are worlds apart. Stick to the scriptures, stick to the original goal of the Great Commission Resurgence as found in the document that is posted. The rest will fall into place. That I can guarantee 100%. But don’t begin telling when to marry and how many children to have. That is none of our business and certainly not what the church is called to do.
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..Doctrines Of Grace =-.
Of course, what the church is called to do is accept anyone, no matter what they believe, right Debbie?
.-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..300th Post-Needy Children: WIll You Help? =-.
Debs,
Can i call you Debs?
“Our primary focus should always be Christ. Christ only.”
No one is disagreeing with that. In a culture where the importance of family is minimized it is important for Christians to CONTINUE to emphasize marriage and family. That is what Mohler and others are doing.
There is not a burden being added, at all. You are making the burden up. The only thing that is being “added” is an emphasis on marriage and family. What is wrong with that?
Debs, the Scriptures talk greatly about marriage and family… These people aren’t adding to the Bible you are taking away from the Bible.
No one is saying “Get married by 22 and have 6 kids.” You are merely interpreting what they are saying wrong. If marriage is a major priority obviously people arent going to wait until they are 35 to get married. They will get married younger. It appears to me that you are taking what they are saying wrong.
Wow, the Round Mound of Rebound on SBC Voices? That is too cool. I enjoyed watching you play all those years. Hated that you ended it without a ring and all.
I agree that much ado about nothing is being made about this very sound biblical advice from Dr. Mohler.
.-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..Book Review: The Hole in Our Gospel =-.
Debbie, You call it going beyond the scriptures and it is dictating.
Regarding sexual temptation and marrying young, as I stated before, it seems Paul’s advice in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 is a good place to start:
To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..I am a fishy guy and would like to report myself to the Thought Police =-.
Thanks dawg…
We got to remember that people like Deb are like commentators… Whenever I got T’d up(a technical for you fools that dont watch bball(thats basketball for you fools that dont even know bball stands for basketball)) the commentators would go on and on being overly-analytical saying things that werent true, but that they thought were true just because a vein appeared to be coming out of my forehead and I was yelling at some idiot ref. To many times people hear or see something and instead of just taking it for what it is they feel it necessary to put their own spin in on…
Stop the spinning Debs… Watch O’rielly a few times, he really helps with that.
Stan: Where does it say to marry young. God also gives us a brain.
“Charles”: Spin? hardly. I call them as I see them.
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..My Prayer =-.
Debbie, Please note that I said it seems Paul’s advice in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 IS A GOOD PLACE TO START.
But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
Young people are not excluded from temptation. Paul did not set some arbitrary age at which one is old enough to marry rather than to burn with passion.
For those, including young people, who CAN exercise self control they can remain single until the cows come home. Neither Paul nor I would have a problem with that.
At the same time, you, sister, should not have a problem with Paul’s instruction to young and old regarding sexual temptation, self-control, and marriage.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..I am a fishy guy and would like to report myself to the Thought Police =-.
Any of you who are fathers and mothers who want your sons or daughters to marry at 18-20 raise your hands.
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..My Prayer =-.
I don’t know of an emoticon that expresses a raised hand, but I just raised both hands. Of course, my son is 23 so I don’t actually qualify. That said, I would have been most pleased had he married younger. If he comes over tonight to tell us he is getting married this weekend I would be thrilled.
Marriage isn’t like shooting craps in Vegas. We don’t play the numbers, the statistics if you will.
Character, godliness, faithfulness, love, the power of God. These things and more keep marriages together. Statistics keep no one together.
My dad left my mom the day before their 24th anniversary. He was 28 when they were married. I was married at 20 and my wife was 18. Our 24th anniversary will be in February.
It seems you are bitter. What’s up with that?
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..I am a fishy guy and would like to report myself to the Thought Police =-.
Bitter is the perfect adjective to describe mainstreamers. They’re bitter about the Conservative Resurrgence. They’re bitter about the BFM 2000. They’re bitter that our seminaries no longer teach that the Bible is just a collection of ancient fairy tales that “contains” the word of God.
I don’t know, but if I was so bitter at an organization and what it stood for I would extricate myself from said organization. Of course, then they woudn’t get the thrill of trying to retake the convention. As Darth Maul said “At last, we shall have our revenge.”
.-= Joe Blackmon´s last blog ..Matthew 6:26-30 Our Trust Proves Our Faith =-.
Mine is raised… Because that means his level of maturity and responsibility is well beyond your typical 18-20 year old.
.-= Matt Svoboda´s last blog ..ESPN Preseason top 25 =-.
The Apostle Paul had it right. I would’nt pressure a couple to get married young, but if they are serious about making the marriage work, I’m happy for them to marry young. My parents married young (17 & 20) and their very happy marriage lasted 51 years, until my dad’s death.
A lot of parents hope their child does not marry too young, then wind up wondering if they will ever get married
.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Brief History of the SBC Conservative Resurgence =-.
Interesting comment string…
First to those who link all evil in the world to a drinking John Calvin…
“When your self-image is based on having correct doctrine, you will loathe people who disagrees with you.” ~Tim Keller
Just for thought…
Second….I’m not sure that we should be encouraging people to marry just because they want sex. This is like twisting scripture to stay that Jesus turned water into grape juice because we’re afraid everyone in the church will get drunk.
I struggled with remaining pure, and failed at it, in the early years of being a believer not because I didn’t love Jesus, not because I drank and not because I was predestined to struggle…but because no one ever discipled me in this area. The church is afraid of sex, and only knows how to say…”stay pure, don’t have sex”…meanwhile the world teaches us more than we want to know. The church has a long way to go in this area and I don’t know if the solution is a blanket “get married early, have all the sex you want” statement to every young couple in the church. I would have married the first girl I dated after becoming a believer if this advice was given to me.
.-= Grady Bauer´s last blog ..It’s not the masses that lead, it’s the zealots =-.
Grady,
I’m not sure that we should be encouraging people to marry just because they want sex.
I may have missed it, but I don’t think anyone has suggested that.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..I am a fishy guy and would like to report myself to the Thought Police =-.
Stan,
I re-read the article and it points out the following….Christians are marrying later in life…and they’re not waiting until marriage to have sex. The solution they present is to encourage Christians to marry earlier so that it is easier to stay pure until marriage (which will happen earlier). I married at 27 and am grateful that I waited. I dated other girls before my wife…and struggled with purity…but I see the lives they live now and realize they were not the one. If some one had encouraged me to marry one of them in order to maintain purity I probably would have….and who know how that would have turned out.
We need to look beyond Sunday group times for this type of instruction and realize that personal one-on-one discipleship is the best way to teach bibilcal purity…not another campaign or program but relationships.
.-= Grady Bauer´s last blog ..It’s not the masses that lead, it’s the zealots =-.
I am not bitter. Fed up a little? Yes. Either we believe all the Bible or we don’t. Freeing people is what Christ is about not binding them up with extra rules that are not in the Bible. I agree with Grady and Dave had a good comment too. Once again our focus is changing from Christ to more laws and rules. History has shown this will blow up in our face. Let’s either get fully back to the Bible or let’s throw it out and be honest about it.
Let’s just say after over fifty years of listening to this dribble, getting my hopes up that the GCR is a step in the right direction, it’s frustrating to see leaders take two steps forward and ten steps back.
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..My Prayer =-.
Joe: You keep mentioning the CR which in my opinion brought down innocents along with the guilty. It was a wrong approach. Liberals did need to be gone. I agree. It was the method I have a problem with. And I meant GCR in my comments I just forgot to put the G, but since you are constantly looking for the worst in my comments, your magnifying glass wouldn’t allow you to ask me. Joe, a heart change for you is something I am praying for. You are the one who is bitter, not me. Heresy hunters usually are.
.-= Debbie Kaufman´s last blog ..My Prayer =-.
Can anyone of us here look any young person in the eye and say “if you don’t get married young, you are sinning?” or to a young couple “if you wait to have children, or don’t many children, you are sinning?”
It seems that we need to be cautious about telling people what they should, can’t, or must do unless the alternative to the should, can’t, or must is a sin.
Paul says that sexual urges must be fulfilled within marriage or not at all. To extrapolate beyond that is unwise.
There is a world of difference between not denigrating early marriage or having children, and urging or mandating them.
The point about drinking and sex or immorality is this – the first thing alcohol affects is your judgment. In other words, it takes away your inhibitions and your good judgment.
Therefore, put together teenagers, alcohol, and too much time alone and guess what happens? It can happen without the alcohol, but alcohol can sure contribute to immoral situations.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Brief History of the SBC Conservative Resurgence =-.
..the first thing alcohol affects is your judgment.
It doesn’t affect my judgment or that of my wife. Alcohol is not the enemy. Sin is the enemy.
If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations– “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)–according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. (Colossians 2:20-23 ESV)
No value.
And he said, “Are you also still without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. (Matthew 15:16-19 ESV)
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..This has to stop! Extremists protest the President with signs that say WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE. =-.
Amen Stan…
One or two beers in no way(or possibly a Margarite) affect my judgment. Maybe if I had 5 or so then it would be a problem, but this legalism is ridiculous.
It’s really sad to see young men like Stan and Matt to be so deceived by whoever led them to think this way about alcohol. I sincerely hope that one day, you two will not be reaping the whirlwind.
It’s not legalism, Matt. It’s the commands and teachings of the Scripture. It’s also just plain, old, common sense.
And, you can say what you want to, but there’s many a young man out there hoping that young girls will drink alcohol with them; because the girls that will drink it become….shall we say….more willing. It affects their judgement.
David
“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch”
It IS legalism.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Anti-alcohol legalism is of NO VALUE in stopping the indulgence of the flesh =-.
David, it wasnt anyone, but the Holy Spirit himself.
It is a medical, scientific fact that alcohol affects your judgment. As a matter of fact it can so affect your judgment, that you do not think it is affecting your judgment. That’s one of reasons so many who drink feel qualified to drive.
Is the enemy alcohol? Well, it is one of the enemies. Proverbs 20:1 says wine IS a mocker. Proverbs 23 sure makes it sound like an enemy and says not to even look at it. 1 Thessalonians 5:6-8, 1 Peter 5:8, etc. tell us to be sober. That first drink of alcohol ends your sobriety.
It is not legalism to follow God’s Word. It is not legalism to be concerned with setting a godly example.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
David B.,
We are living in a day when people, Christian people, are turning to a type of anti-nomianism. They want to live in sin like the world, and they want it to be okay that they are living for the pleasures of the flesh. And, if you challenge them to holiness, then they cry, “Legalism! Pharisee!”
We aint talking about smoking cigs, nor how long your hair should or should not be; we’re talking about something that the Bible clearly addresses. We’re not talking about whether you should play cards, or not; or, whether you should go to R rated movies, or not. We’re talking about drinking alcohol….when the Bible clearly teaches that we should not be intoxicated on it, but rather, be filled with the Holy Spirit.
The joy of the Lord is our strength….not the joy of Jack Daniels, or Bud Lite.
David
I’m not crying “Legalism! Pharisee!”
That would be the apostle Paul.
The joy of the Lord is our strength.
I agree completely, noting it was God who gave us wine to gladden the heart of man.(Psalm 104:15 ESV)
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Anti-alcohol legalism is of NO VALUE in stopping the indulgence of the flesh =-.
They want to live in sin like the world
And you know this how? Are you the omniscient God of the universe? Or are you simply judging his servants?
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Anti-alcohol legalism is of NO VALUE in stopping the indulgence of the flesh =-.
That first drink of alcohol ends your sobriety.
Your first bite of food begins your gluttony!
It is not legalism to follow God’s Word.
You’re correct. You, however, have gone beyond God’s Word and have added a requirement that is inconsistent with Scripture.
Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers, with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15:22-29)
You, sir, have troubled believers with words, unsettling their minds, although the apostles and the elders gave you no such instructions.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Anti-alcohol legalism is of NO VALUE in stopping the indulgence of the flesh =-.
Stan,
Is surfing the internet the first step towards internet pornography?
I’m just asking….
.-= Mark Lamprecht´s last blog ..John Hagee Clarifies: Jesus is Messiah =-.
Mark,
Excellent point!
I never thought about that but I guess it is.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Anti-alcohol legalism is of NO VALUE in stopping the indulgence of the flesh =-.
If one or two beers does not affect your judgment, maybe you would like to have your airline pilot have a beer or two while flying you across country. Maybe you would like to have your surgeon have a beer or two while operating on you.
Take two equally classed athletes. All else being equal, the one not drinking will invariably defeat the one who is drinking.
By the way, a preacher has a much more serious job than pilots, surgeons, or athletes. And before you say off duty – a preacher is always on duty.
David W., what you say about guys hoping the girl will start drinking is exactly right. And now we have preachers telling them the drinking is OK.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Matt,
To say that the Holy Spirit has led you to drink alcohol is a remarkable, concerning, radical statement that I would expect from some young man who hasnt thought thru what he’s saying. You really need to think hard about making statements like this. He is the Holy Spirit, not the spirits of liquor and drunkeness.
Secondly, I’d imagine that you learned this wrong view of alcohol from some of the people that you’ve heard speak at some seminar, or from reading thier books. They will answer to God for all the people they harm with this erroneous teaching.
In my family, Matt, I had an uncle who just “social drank” at parties. Not getting drunk. Just drinking at parties. Alcohol got a hold of him, and he became a drunk. He lost his wife, his farm, and everthing else that he had. After sending him to several dry out places, finally, a retired missionary led my uncle to Christ. God changed his life. He remarried his wife, and he’s farming again. He sings in the choir at the Church he belongs to. He does not drink alcohol anymore. And, thank God that his Pastor does not tell his people that drinking alcohol is ok…in moderation.
And, this story could be told over and over and over and over…. how people started out just social drinking…moderate drinking… not getting “drunk.” But then, alcohol gets a hold on them….as it tends to do. I choose to not be a part of people being enslaved to alcohol. I choose to rather believe the Scripture that drinking fermented wine as being foolish, and being buzzed on it as sin.
David
David,
I like you, but at this point I think it is best for us to agree to disagree. Clearly, neither of us are budging.
Matt,
I love you in the Lord, Brother. And, if you dont want to discuss this with me anymore, then that’s how it’ll be. Now, I will still discuss this issue when the situation warrants it, because I think it’s that serious. But, you and me can talk about other things.
God bless you,
David
David,
I find nothing remarkable (out of the ordinary) about Matt saying the Holy Spirit led him to drink alcohol.
Paul, moved by the Holy Spirit instructed Timothy to use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments (1 Timothy 5:23).
Jesus turned water into wine and Scripture says that in so doing he manifested his glory (Matthew 2:11).
In Joel 3:19 the Holy Spirit says an abundance of wine is a good thing: And in that day the mountains shall drip sweet wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the streambeds of Judah shall flow with water; and a fountain shall come forth from the house of the Lord and water the Valley of Shittim.
A popular verse from Isaiah (moved by the Holy Spirit as he wrote) is often quoted leaving off the last sentence: Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. (Isaiah 55:1)
God commanded Moses in several places to offer wine for the drink offering (Numbers 15 for example).
The Psalmist, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit tells us that God gave man wine to gladden man’s heart: You cause the grass to grow for the livestock and plants for man to cultivate, that he may bring forth food from the earth and wine to gladden the heart of man, oil to make his face shine and bread to strengthen man’s heart (Psalm 104:14-15).
It seems rational to conclude that God endorses the use of alcohol.
I’m not sure from whom Matt learned that drinking alcohol (not to drunkenness) is acceptable to God but I know where I did and it was NOT from some of the people that (I)’ve heard speak at some seminar, or from reading their books. We learned it from years of prayerful Bible study.
Sorry about your uncle. My dad was an alcoholic as were several relatives of his. That has no bearing on whether alcohol is good or evil. Similarly, many morbidly obese people eat cake and ice cream, hamburgers, pizza, salad, fruits, vegetables, etc… Because these items are consumed by gluttons does not make the food items evil. It is gluttony, like drunkenness, that is evil.
If you want to make a vow to God to never drink alcohol, that is great. I’m happy for you. I encourage you to keep any such vow you have made.
Insisting that others live by your preference, however, goes beyond Scripture and I cannot support that. I encourage you to lay on (them) no greater burden than these requirements: that (they) abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If (they) keep (them)selves from these, they will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15:22-29)
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Exactly what I predicted! =-.
Stan,
I love you in the Lord, as well. I think that you are very, very, tragically wrong in your misinterpretation. You should read Peter Lumpkins book.
David
David,
Thanks for the thought. I’ve read enough of his writings to know his position and arguments. I think he’s a very sincere gentleman. I also think he’s misguided and doing harm to the Body of Christ by attempting to enslave others to abstinence from alcohol which the Bible in no way endorses. Rather, the Bible speaks positively of wine notwithstanding the warnings against drunkenness.
Grace and peace to you.
Stan
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Exactly what I predicted! =-.
Very well said Stan…
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
A lot of this has to do with how we treat families in churches in the SBC: the expectation in the mainstream body of the denomination is that children are to be segregated from their parents into “sunday school”, so basically at an early point we teach our children that they don’t need to be part of a family unit for worship, but rather should be herded off for “entertainment” and light-weight Biblical teaching (or, self-righteous moralism, to be more accurate). Is it really a wonder that children grow up in that model and don’t want to hurry into marriage or have children of their own?
I pray for revival in the SBC; particularly, a turning to the FIC model, father-led, which is the best example for children in our churches.
.-= Rob´s last blog ..Wilford Brimley and a “remix” of ‘The Firm’ =-.
Stan,
It’s incredible and almost unbelievable to hear someone like you say the things that you do about alcohol. It’s disturbing, to say the least; especially if alcohol has done as much damage to your family as you say. Sad.
Also, for you to say that Peter Lumpkins is harming the body of Christ because of his excellent exegesis on the verses concerning alcohol is beyond absurd. It’s absolutely silly. Have you read his book? If you havent, I suggest that you get it and read it, so that you can at least see how well it’s written, and how good exegesis will prove that your wrong on those verses about wine. My guess is, though, that you’re not interested in considering opposing views, because you like to get high on alcohol too much.
Anyway, have a great day, Stan.
David
David,
If you’re ever in the Central Florida area let me know. We could have some exciting arguments over dinner (my treat, of course).
…It’s disturbing, to say the least; especially if alcohol has done as much damage to your family as you say. Sad.
Don’t be sad. Christ will deliver me from this body of death.
Again, alcohol is not the problem. My dad drank without self control and crossed the line into the sin of drunkenness. My wife and I exercise self control and do not get drunk.
It’s no different from the self control to stop eating after consuming reasonable portions and not becoming morbidly obese. I also have (had) several family members that were morbidly obese. Food was not the evil culprit that caused their condition. It was their inability to stop eating.
Even though they had many health problems associated with their weight I still eat food. I understand the urge to keep eating. I struggle every day with it. Sure, I look healthy. I can honestly say one of my toughest struggles is to NOT buy and consume one or two containers of ice cream each and every day.
Also, for you to say that Peter Lumpkins is harming the body of Christ because of his excellent exegesis on the verses concerning alcohol is beyond absurd. It’s absolutely silly.
I stand by my comments. Also, there is a huge difference between exegesis and eisegesis which is what Mr. Lumpkins has demonstrated.
Have you read his book? If you havent, I suggest that you get it and read it, so that you can at least see how well it’s written, and how good exegesis will prove that your wrong on those verses about wine.
I’ve read enough of his book to know there is no need to finish it. Well written? In your (subjective) opinion perhaps. I disagree. I also stand behind my comments.
My guess is, though, that you’re not interested in considering opposing views
You apparently aren’t aware of my reading habits. I’m currently reading about seven books by a variety of authors on a variety of topics. In addition to that and reading several blogs I also read journals regularly.
because you like to get high on alcohol too much.
That was unnecessary. In fact, it is slanderous. I have been nice enough to engage your comments in spite of the fact that you appear to be an anonymous commenter.
Due to your rudeness our conversation is over.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
Stan,
When people drink alcohol, they get high on it. You say that you drink alcohol and like it. Thus, the comment…..
I’m not an anonymous commenter…I am David Worley.
David
David Worley,
Why no link to a website/blog?
Why the rude comment above?
When people drink alcohol, they get high on it. You say that you drink alcohol and like it. Thus, the comment…..
I also enjoy ice cream, Diet Sprite, gluten-free bread, tea, Crystal Light, pizza with gluten-free bread, fruit smoothies and many other foods.
I don’t get high on it!
Do you enjoy the internet? Are you getting high on it? I doubt it.
I’m sure you mean well but your disregard for truth makes conversation difficult if not impossible. Why do you insist on judging other believers? Rather than spend your time and effort on judging others who drink alcohol use that energy and time to put to death the judgmental attitude you possess.
If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks? So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. (1 Corinthians 10:30-31 ESV)
As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. (Romans 14:1-6 ESV)
Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? (Romans 14:10 ESV)
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
Stan,
I dont get high eating a Quarter Pounder with cheese, but a person does get high drinking Bud Lite. Alcohol makes a person high. I used to drink before the Lord saved me and gave me life. I know about alcohol first hand. Drinking alcohol makes a person high. So, I was not being rude, nor mean. I was simply making an observation. I’m sorry that you have such thin skin and took the comment so bad. But, it was just a simple observation. People drink alcohol to get high on it. People smoke weed to get high on it. People eat food because they are hungry, and it tastes good. It does not make you high, nor drunk to eat a Sonic Blast.
David
David,
People drink alcohol to get high on it.
Some people do that. I’m not one of those people. To charge me with such a thing is a false accusation.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
Stan,
You are to be commended for your respect for, and submission to, the authority of the Word of God in your life. I say Amen to your comments Brother!
Hold firm to the sovereign Word of God, and be not enslaved by the foolishness and ignorance of man, who by their very comments prove they love not the commandments of God, but by cunning and deceitful words seek to render the very commandments of God of none effect.
Grace Always,
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
Greg,
Thanks for your kind words.
Do not touch. Do not handle. Do not eat. Do not drink.
It’s legalism and they can’t even see it.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
oh brother.
Stan,
Could you give your definition of legalism?
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Matt summed it up nicely.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
My definition of moral legalism would be, “Adding burdens and demanding law in places the the gospel demands grace.”
More broad definition of legalism would be, “Going beyond Scripture in matters of faith and practice.”
Such as alcohol. It is fine for a person to choose not to drink, but to go beyond Scripture and say no one should drink at all, for purposes of pleasure(although wine was given to gladden the heart) is legalism. There is not one verse in the Bible that explicitly says alcohol is wrong. Yet, there are passages that speak positively of alcohol and Paul even encourages Timothy to drink wine for his health. If alcohol was all around bad, Paul would not of told Timothy to drink some for his health. That is like me saying, (hypothetically) well studies show cocaine helps with depression and your depressed so do cocaine. It would be absurd. Instead, if alcohol was all around bad, it makes the most sense, that Paul would encourage Timothy to seek after some other form of medical help.
Anti-alcohol people, I love you, but you dont have a solid leg to stand on in this issue. Every argument I have heard comes back to something like this, “Alcohol can help in taking a persons life in drunk driving, therefore, it is unchristlike to ever condone drinking.” OR “Once you have one sip of a beer, you are high out of your mind crazy and you cant make a good judgement if your life depended on it.” OR “I was an alcoholic and I can tell you how bad it is… stay completely away from it, its biblical to stay away(I know its in there somewhere).
Everyone, including David
, are welcome to respond. But please just give me chapters and verses to be discussed: no more nonsense of one drink and you are crazy kill somebody high, alcohol has the ability to take life and you call yourself pro-life, or any other arguments that hold no weight and are a BIG waste of time. Chapter and verse.
Matt,
I just came across an excellent article on this topic: The Bible and Alcohol by Daniel B. Wallace.
Following is a brief quote from that article:
What is truly remarkable here are the many positive statements made about wine and alcoholic beverages in the Bible.7 Wine is so often connected with the blessings of God that we are hard-pressed to figure out why so many modern Christians view drink as the worst of all evils. Why, if one didn’t know better, he might think that God actually wanted us to enjoy life! Unfortunately, the only Bible most of our pagan friends will read is the one written on our lives and spoken from our lips. The Bible they know is a book of ‘Thou shalt nots,’ and the God they know is a cosmic killjoy.
I think the best balance on this issue can be see in Luke 7:33-34: John the Baptist abstained from drinking wine; Jesus did not abstain [indeed, people called him a drunkard! Although certainly not true, it would be difficult for this charge to have been made had Jesus only drunk grape juice]. Both respected one another and both recognized that their individual lifestyles were not universal principles. One man may choose not to drink; another may choose to drink. We ought not condemn another servant of the Lord for his choice.
As well, Romans 14 is a key passage for gleaning principles about how we ought to conduct ourselves in relation to one another on this issue: weaker brothers ought not to judge those whose freedom in Christ allows them to enjoy alcoholic beverages; stronger brothers ought not to disdain weaker brothers for their stance. Whether we drink or not, let us do all things to the glory of God.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
The whole issue of whether Christians are forbidden to consume alcohol rises and falls, in my opinion, with Israel. The Jews were given painstakingly and minutely detailed instructions as to how they were expected to live their lives, especially in regard to their dietary habits. If God expected Israel to be a teetotaler nation, Moses would have clearly spelled it out in the Law. He did not, quite the contrary. I would welcome any biblical support to show that the Israelite nation was forbidden from drinking beverage alcohol. They grew grapes. They made wine. Alcoholic wine. Vinegar was a staple and you don’t get vinegar without first having alcohol. That’s just chemistry.
If you can turn the Jews into a teetotaler nation, you have a solid case for Christian abstentionism. But it can’t be done.
Bill,
Read Peter Lumpkins book. He shows that the Bible teaches abstention very clearly. And, he’s not alone. There are many, many others.
David
Stan,
My blog is fromthehillsandhollers.blogspot.com. I live in Tennessee.
David
Thanks.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
I have made this comment on this blog before… that what David and Peter Lumpkins would have us believe is that every English translation of the Bible is altogether untrustworthy concerning this issue. And that every single one of the hundreds, if not thousands, of Bible Scholars and Language Scholars who have worked on the various English translations throughout the years, from Tindal until this present day, were alltogether “WRONG” when it comes to the proper translation of the text that deal with this issue in the Bible! Both these men (and others in the legalistic teetotaler camp) would have us believe that they alone have correctly translated the Word of God concerning this issue and that we should not trust our Bible Scholars and Language Scholars, but trust them to tell us what the Word of God truly says.
My response to this “astonishing display of arrogance” is to shake my head in utter disbelief and sadness that men who clearly love the Lord Jesus Christ should display so very little respect for the Word of God.
Grace Always,
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
Greg,
Well said. I’m dropping out. This isn’t a conversation. It’s a couple of gentlemen trying to enslave others with doctrines of man. Shame on them.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
Greg,
I guess I join with thousands of other Southern Baptists thru out history who have stated over and over and over again that the Scriptures teach that drinking alcohol for pleasure…to get high…is wrong.
David
Stan,
Your response about enslaving men would be comical, if it were not so tragic.
David
David: I know you find this hard to believe but many of us are unconvinced by Mr. Lumpkins’ scholarship on this issue. You seem to think his book is the final word on the subject. For every time you wave his book at us, we could wave any of a number of scholarly works that refute his arguments. (e.g.: God Gave Wine, Ken Gentry)
David, do you believe the Jews were a teetotaler nation? If so, could you provide biblical support?
David
From Daniel B. Wallace’s article I quoted above:
If this were only grape juice, why would excess in drinking it be condemned? If this were only grape juice, why are certain mental effects attributed to it (cf., e.g., Psalm 60:3)? One can’t have it both ways. You can’t say that wine is always grape juice, for then the negative statements in scripture make no sense; those who say that it is only grape juice tend to focus just on the neutral and positive passages, conveniently allowing them to condemn the drinking of real wine at all times. But even this position is not logical: If the Bible only speaks of grape juice, then it makes no comment about alcoholic wine. And if so, then it does not directly prohibit it. And if we are going to prohibit something that the Bible does not address, why stop at wine? Why don’t we include the ballet, opera, football games, country-western music (actually, I might be in favor of banning this one!), salt water fishing, zippers on clothes, etc. Once legalism infests the soul it doesn’t know where to quit.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
Stan,
This is a strange argument. I have never known of anyone who believes all the wine in the Bible was non-alcoholic; not one. So what is the point of that argument?
Wine was used in the Bible to refer to: grapes on the vine, that which was just pressed out of the wine press, vinegar, that which is alcoholic, and that which is non-alcoholic. They could easily keep wine in an unfermented state.
People have two choices today in their drinking. They can either drink that which is intoxicating, or that which is un-intoxicating. They had the same choice in the ancient world.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Brumbelow,
“They could easily keep wine in an unfermented state.”
Please enlighten us?
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
Stan: Abstentionists would take the (faulty, imo) position that all positive descriptions of wine refer to grape juice and all negative descriptions refer to fermented wine. I consider that eisigesis but it is the only way to make their system work. There are just too many positive attributions to wine in the bible for them to dismiss.
Abstentionists make much of the fact that the word “wine” can refer to unfermented grape juice and I have no doubt that it is true. There is a reason for that. Our society considers grape juice and wine as two distinct things, but it is clear that the Jews did not. For them, it was a common household product that underwent a gradual transformation as it aged, in much the same way that cheese does.
Bill,
There are verses…as David B. pointed out…that refer to grapes on the vine as “wine.” There are verses in the Bible where grapes freshly crushed in the vat were called “wine.”
David
David: That’s what I said. The Jews did not distinguish between fermented juice and unfermented. They called it all “wine.” That fact in no way diminishes the moderationist position, but rather supports it. The Jews grew grapes. They picked them, crushed them, and bottled the juice. It stayed unfermented for awhile and then fermented. They drank it all. The Jews were not a teetotaler nation.
And, besides, the joy that the Israelites felt in their heart was over the harvest of grapes…that they had grapes….so they could mix it in their water. It was something that could purify thier water, and it gave flavor.
I rejoice today over sweet tea, and my heart is made glad over cherry coke from Sonic. That does not mean that I like it because it makes me high, or drunk.
David
I don’t believe unfermented grape juice would do anything to purify water.
It’s an example of eisegesis in the extreme.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Keith Krell answers the question: What does the Bible have to say about alcohol? =-.
Stan,
It is a clear case of allowing one’s predetermined conclusion to determine one’s eisegesis instead of allowing one eisegesis to determine one’s conclusions.
I am sure glad these guys did not translate the Bible for me… For if they can’t be trusted to speak the truth concerning such a small thing as wine in the Bible… then…???
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
BTW, Stan, are you saying that drinking alcohol does not make you high? Really? C’mon now. You’re talking to a former drinker.
DAvid
You were how old when you were a “drinker”?
If you were not able to drink without getting high it doesn’t sound like you drank alcohol in a very mature manner.
And for you to continually suggest I am lying… you sound like a troll.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
I am with Stan, one drink has never made me “high” or impaired my judgement in any way.
I have found a term, previously unknown to me, being used on several blogs to describe the position of the legalists:
teetotalitarianism
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Cambridge TNIV Popular Text Edition heading my way =-.
From The Great Divorce—Separating “Truth From Love” (1 Cor. 8:1-13) by Bob Deffinbaugh:
All too often today, the “weaker brother” is defined as the one who does not grasp his Christian liberties. While alcoholism and drunkenness are surely wrong, drinking a glass of wine is not forbidden. When a “tee totaler” saint insists that another Christian must not drink even a glass of wine, he should also be willing to accept the label of the “weaker brother.” The one who insists you cannot exercise a liberty is the one who is weak and poorly informed. The one who insists that another must refrain from a matter of liberty because that liberty is offensive has missed the point of the Scriptures. You may find smoking offensive, but you are not a “weaker brother” unless you are so weak that you will follow the example of the one who lights up. Most of those who insist that others refrain from alcohol or tobacco (because partaking of them is sin) are not those who are truly weak, and who will violate their consciences by following the example of the one who partakes.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Keith Krell answers the question: What does the Bible have to say about alcohol? =-.
Matt (#103),
OK, a few thoughts. First, just because you proclaim an argument about alcohol is invalid, does not mean it is invalid. There are good solid arguments against drinking a recreational mind altering drug based on biblical principles, science, medicine, and common sense. And that is true whether you accept it or not. The huge majority of Southern Baptists have recognized this for many, many years.
Second, the Bible both directly and indirectly condemns alcohol. But chapter and verse are given and you guys just ignore them. Then you turn around and say there is not a verse in the Bible that says alcohol is wrong. Again, we point them out, as I did briefly above, and you totally ignore them. You ignore them, then condemn us for not having a biblical argument and call us legalists. By the way, you are not using a valid definition of legalism.
Maybe you can facilitate a discussion first by acknowledging that we do have a biblical argument. Disagree if you want, but it can get pretty annoying to have someone just disregard everything you say. It is also just factually incorrect.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
David B: Were the Israelites a teetotaler nation? If so, could you point to that portion of the Law of Moses that contains those prohibitions?
I shoot them down? Can you show me when I have done this? I think not… So- Chapter and verse please?
Maybe you can facilitate a discussion first by acknowledging that we do have a biblical argument.
Not even a hint of an argument, unless you’re arguing that a Nazarite should abstain.
By the way, medical research demonstrates that drinking 1-2 drinks per day is healthier than not drinking at all. The data form a “J” curve. Fascinating stuff.
Stan (#132),
The biblical arguments have been given numerous times. Debate them, disagree with them, argue with them – but don’t be so dishonest as to then turn around and say we have no biblical arguments. We give the arguments over and other, and you just pretend they are not there. And then you guys say you want to have a fair discussion. That is like me saying, “You can’t use any of your arguments for moderate drinking because they are all invalid – now, lets have a fair discussion of the drinking issue.”
I will again give some of the biblical arguments below. The ones you all say are non-existent.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
What is legalism? To some, it is when you are against something that they’re for.
Some say that legalism is making a requirement that is not explicitly stated in the Bible. If that is true, then those who oppose slavery are legalists. Those who oppose pornographic DVDs are legalists. The list of legalists would be endless. The biblical loopholes would also be endless (Ah, the Bible doesn’t exactly, precisely, in so many words, say not to do it, so go for it!)
The true definition of legalism is when a person is trying to earn merit with God by their good works, thereby promoting pride.
“…characterizing Judaism as legalistic, a religion of achievement, giving ground for human pride (cf. Rom. 3:27-28; 9:11, 32; 11:6).” -Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, Intervarsity Press. 1993; p. 843.
“…legalism, the attempt to merit favor with God by good works.” -Ibid; p. 976.
“The Jewish legalists had perverted the divine intention of the law and made it into a way to gain God’s favor based on personal merit.” -Robert H. Mounce, The New American Commentary, Broadman; p. 208.
“More precisely, legalism is the false belief that keeping certain laws – whether biblical or not – can be used as a condition for meriting God’s grace, whether for justification or sanctification (see Galatians 3:3). But one can legislate wise laws about human behavior without being legalistic in the biblical sense of the concept. Otherwise, laws against drunk driving and illegal immigration – and a host of other things beneficial to society – would be legalistic and, thereby, wrong.” -Dr. Norman L. Geisler.
Despite the accusations, maybe Southern Baptists are not legalists after all.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Bill,
No, the Israelites were not a teetotaler nation.
Some, however, speculate that they may have not had much problem with alcoholic wine until later (well after Moses’ time) in their history. First, the Bible doesn’t say much against intoxicating wine until you get to the wisdom literature and the prophets. Second, alcoholic wine, at least that with a pretty high alcohol content, was expensive.
Yes, I know about Noah and Lot, but this view would say they seem to have been exceptions rather than the rule. I’m not making a big issue of this point, it is just a possibility.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
David: Thank you. I’m not playing gotcha, but you are the first to finally answer my question. I think any speculation about whether they had a problem with alcohol is most likely dubious. If people can abuse something, they will. We haven’t really seen any evidence that the Jews were any more virtuous or self controlled than anyone else.
Bill,
You said, “The Jews grew grapes. They picked them, crushed them, and bottled the juice. It stayed unfermented for awhile and then fermented. They drank it all.”
I think many have a false conception of the ancient peoples. That they pressed the grapes, poured them into vessels, and were helpless to the process of fermentation and putrefaction. Imagine one saying, “Margaret, I do declare something strange is happening to that wine. It was fine before but now it is bubbling and starting to smell.” A few days later, “It’s a miracle, that stuff has turned into vinegar.”
They were not ignorant, as most of us are today, about preservation of food and drink. Do you think they killed a cow and just stood around cutting pieces off of the carcass when they were hungry, until it was so rotten it could not be used? Of course not. They knew well how to preserve meat, grain, vegetables, and wine. They knew how to preserve wine unfermented without electricity and refrigeration. It was easier to store unfermented wine than it was to store fermented wine. Of course they also knew how to make the intoxicating stuff.
Bill, this is not just directed at you. But most seem to be uninformed about ancient methods of preservation. They think since they don’t know how to do it, the people in Bible times did not know how to do it either. That is a false assumption. If we had to start growing and storing all our food without electricity, we would learn a lot real fast.
You are right that the product of grapes, in all its stages, was referred to as wine.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
David: I wasn’t suggesting that they couldn’t prevent fermentation, although I’m not convinced they could, or even wanted to. My point was that they used it at all stages.
Brumbelow,
So just when can we expect to see your new King David Version (the Teetotalitarianism Bible) on the bookshelves at Lifeway.
I mean if you are serious and what you say is true then Dude we need a new English translation of the Bible…
Also, we really need to refute all those who wrongly translated all these previous English translations, so I guess we need to find out just who all these men were and avoid anything from them… I mean to have been responsible for wrongly leading so many young men into believing that drinking a glass of wine is ok these men should be blacklisted… we can start with William Tyndale.
- – - Beam me up Scotty – - -
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
Greg,
You asked me to please enlighten you about how they could easily keep wine in an unfermented state. There were numerous ways, but I’ll mention two.
1. They could keep grapes fresh for months after harvest and press them when they wanted wine. Pharaoh’s wine was pressed directly into his cup (Genesis 40:11). Yes, I know that grapes from the grocery store will not last long. But there are grapes that are known for keeping well and this has been practiced through the centuries. If you want more detail on this I can give it.
2. It was very common to boil wine down to about one third of its consistency. This concentrated unfermented wine kept easily and well. Kind of like honey or snow cone syrup; it is so thick it can just about last forever. When they wanted to drink this wine, they just mixed it with water.
“Concentrating grape juice down by heating is still used to make the popular shireh of modern Iran and was known to the ancient peoples of Mesopotamia as well as the Greeks and Romans. It enables fruit to be preserved, and, diluted with water, it produces a refreshing, nonalcoholic beverage.” -Ancient Wine: The Search For The Origins Of Viniculture by Patrick E. McGovern, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 2003; p. 54.
This book is very pro fermented wine. But notice it reveals a common way today, and in ancient times, to preserve wine in an unfermented condition.
My blog, Gulf Coast Pastor, July 21, 2009, has more information about this and more will follow.
Ancient people, as well as country folk today, possess a wealth of information about preserving meat, fruit, vegetables, and drink. Just because some don’t know how to do that today, they mistakenly think it could not be done in ancient times.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Greg,
Your comment (#138, though the numbers seem to change) about Bible translations seems mainly just sarcastic.
But I will say this. The modern English translations basically use “wine” to translate the biblical words for wine (yayin, tirosh, oinos, etc.). The English word wine was used generically 400 years ago when the KJV was translated. Though wine is primarily thought of today as only alcoholic, it is still used generically even by the modern translations. For example, Proverbs 3:10 is obviously referring to fresh unfermented wine (grape juice, you don‘t press fermented wine), yet the modern English translations translate it with the word “wine” or “new wine.” so, just as the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin words for wine were used generically, so is the English word wine, even today.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Brumbelow,
Did McGovern cite any references for this practice? Just because someone says something in a book does not necessarily make it true. I would like to know what he is basing this comment upon, and just how wide spread this practice was, and at what time in history this was being done?
I can find absolutely “NO” Scriptural reference to suggest (not even a hint toward) this ever being the practice of making wine mentioned in the Bible. Does McGovern specifically state that this practice was being done in Israel, and during the O.T. & N. T. times? If not then your claim is based upon pure conjecture and can hardly be taken seriously.
Without far more substantial evidence from the written histories of that day (The N.T., Josephus, Philo, etc) than what you have given, I am afraid that I must remain highly skeptical and unconvinced.
….
You still have yet to explain how all our Bible Translators to date have managed to get this wrong in the English Translations of the Bible?
Grace Always,
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
Brumbelow,
I posted my last comment before I hit refresh…
“the modern English translations translate it with the word “wine” or “new wine.” so, just as the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin words for wine were used generically, so is the English word wine, even today.”
That’s mighty thin excuse… We do have a word for Wine and words for Grape Juice in the English language today. I certainly hope they were more careful with the weightier matters of the scriptures than they were with this… It sounds to me like if what you are saying is indeed true then these guys did a very “Sloppy” job of translation and that we should really get some better scholars to translate a new version for us. Don’t you agree?
Grace Always,
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..The Power of Giving =-.
Greg,
Well, now you have changed your view. Before you were saying I disagreed with all the translations, now apparently you are disagreeing with them.
Maybe you should translate the King Alford Standard Version
.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Stan, Matt, all,
A few biblical arguments against the recreational use of a mind altering drug (beverage alcohol):
Proverbs 20:1. Notice it says wine itself IS a mocker. Unfermented wine is not a mocker; fermented wine IS a mocker. This is a direct condemnation of alcoholic wine.
Proverbs 23:29-35. Hebrew did not have a word for alcohol. So Solomon gives a detailed description of the kind of wine to which he is referring (the intoxicating kind of wine); and he says not to even look at it (v. 31).
1 Thessalonians 5:6-8 tells us to be sober. It even contrasts drunkenness with sobriety. Any amount of alcohol make us less than sober. Moderately drink, and you will be moderately sober. Ask Alcoholics Anonymous; their definition of “sober” allows absolutely no alcohol.
2 Timothy 4:5. We are to be sober.
1 Peter 1:13. Sober.
1 Peter 4:7. Sober (same Greek word, may be translated “serious”).
1 Peter 5:8. Sober.
Proverbs 20:1; Ephesians 5:15; etc. Those deceived by wine are not wise. We are commanded to be wise.
1 Corinthians 6:19-20. Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. Alcohol destroys that body. A new study this year (2009) reveals women who drink moderately, significantly increase their risk of multiple kinds of cancer.
Matthew 22:37. The Bible says you are to love God with all our mind (Matthew 22:37). Our minds are altered and damaged by alcohol. We should love and serve God with clear minds.
Romans 14:19, 21; 1 Corinthians 8:9. The law of love, as A. T. Robertson called it, teaches us not to drink.
Revelation 1:6; 5:10; Proverbs 31:4-5. Scripture proclaims believers in Jesus Christ to be kings. Kings are not to drink lest they pervert justice.
Jeremiah 35. God commended the Rechabites for not drinking wine.
1 Corinthians 8:9; 10:23. Don’t abuse your Christian liberty.
Leviticus 10:9
Daniel 1:8.
Isaiah 28:7
Habakkuk 2:15
Titus 1:7
The Bible often gives the appalling results of alcohol. It tells of Noah, Lot, and others getting drunk and the terrible consequences.
Is it biblical for a believer to support the alcohol industry that has wrecked so many homes and lives?
From the overall teaching of the Bible, do you really believe God condones the recreational use of a mind altering, dangerous drug? Whether it is alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, prescription drugs, the answer is obviously, no.
Biblical wisdom and truth would compel us to recognize the incredible damage alcohol does to society. Alcohol contributes greatly to traffic accidents and deaths, unwanted pregnancies, fetal alcohol syndrome, the spread of sexually transmitted disease, all types of criminal behavior, cirrhosis of the liver, destruction of brain cells, cancer, addiction, breakup of homes, and on and on.
I’m sure I’ve left out some things. But this is some of the biblical evidence against alcohol.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Greg,
The Bible never explains how they preserved wine, whether fermented or unfermented. It never explains how they processed and preserved beef, mutton, venison, fish, fowl, grain, vegetables. But somehow the ancient biblical people survived without starving or dying from rotten food. The Bible does not explain a lot of things that we might wish it did.
I heard years ago that the most detailed description of ancient sailing is found in Acts 27. The ancients did a lot of shipping and sailing, they just didn’t write much about it. They knew well how to do it, they just didn’t write about it; or the writings have been destroyed or not yet discovered.
Some of the ancients did write about these things. One even referred to wine so thick it had to be scraped out of the wineskin. L. C. Field, William Patton, William M. Thayer (1800s), Charles Wesley Ewing (1980s), and Peter Lumpkins (2009) all get into these details and quote numerous ancient sources.
Patrick McGovern’s book, that I quote above, is published by Princeton University Press. The book is the 2004 Grand Prize Winner in the History, Literature and Fine Arts Category, Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin; the 2004 winner of a Reasearch Prize of the Asociacion International de Historia y Civilizacion de la Vid y el Vino; in 2003 received Honorable Mention, Geology and Earth Science Category, Professional and Scholarly Publishing Award, Association of American Publishers.
McGovern is a Senior Research Scientist in the Museum of Applied Science Center for Archaeology (MASCA) and is Adjunct Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania. So I think he would know a little about the subject he was writing about. As I stated above, he is obviously pro drinking, but he brings out the common middle eastern ancient practice of preserving wine in an unfermented state.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Dos and Don’ts #1 =-.
Let’s look at a couple of the verses you referenced.
Proverbs 20:1. Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise.
Proverbs 23:29-35. Those who tarry long over wine.
1 Thessalonians 5:6-8 those who get drunk, are drunk at night You say “Any amount of alcohol make us less than sober. Moderately drink, and you will be moderately sober.” Are you partially a glutton after one bite of food? Of course not. But according to your reasoning maybe you are.
2 Timothy 4:5. You say: “We are to be sober.” No problem there. Actually I think we’re told to be “sober-minded.”
Ephesians 5:15. I assume you mean verse 18. And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit. Actually, this is one of the verses referenced previously where it doesn’t make sense to caution against being “drunk with wine” if someone insists (which I don’t believe you have done) that “wine” in the New Testament is grape juice as in when Jesus turned water into wine.
1 Corinthians 6:19-20. You say: “Alcohol destroys that body.” Consuming too much alcohol has a detrimental effect on the body. So does too much cake, ice cream, stake and even vegetables. Do we ban food items?
Matthew 22:37. You say: “Our minds are altered and damaged by alcohol.” Too much alcohol? Yes. One or two glasses of wine? No.
Romans 14:19, 21; 1 Corinthians 8:9. Are you saying that those, like yourself, who think drinking alcohol is wrong are the weaker brothers? You stated: “The law of love, as A. T. Robertson called it, teaches us not to drink.” Does that mean that the law of law teaches us not to eat since the first bite is the beginning of gluttony?
Revelation 1:6; 5:10; Proverbs 31:4-5. You stated: “Scripture proclaims believers in Jesus Christ to be kings. Kings are not to drink lest they pervert justice.” The kings were not to drink lest they drink and forget what has been decreed and pervert the rights of all the afflicted. I feel very confident that one or two glasses of wine was not going to cause a king to forget what has been decreed and pervert the rights of all the afflicted.
That being said, are you prepared to follow Proverbs 31:6-7? Give strong drink to the one who is perishing, and wine to those in bitter distress; let them drink and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more.
1 Corinthians 8:9; 10:23. You stated: “Don’t abuse your Christian liberty.” Does that mean I do in fact have liberty to drink wine?
To be honest, with all the posts going back and forth I forgot what your position is on alcohol. Are you suggesting it is wrong for any Christian to consume any alcohol in any quantity? Or are you trying to suggest that others consider that it may be harmful for any Christian to consume any alcohol in any quantity? Or is it something else?
Regardless of your position or mine, it seems wise to employ Romans 14:1-12 which states in part: As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand…Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind…Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; …each of us will give an account of himself to God.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Random thought: Jimmy Carter’s legacy in two words and one (unrelated) picture =-.
Stan,
OK, you have given your biblical arguments and I have given mine. I do not, and will not, claim you have no biblical arguments. I just disagree with your biblical arguments. I would greatly appreciate it if you and those who agree with you would afford me the same courtesy.
I am perfectly content to stick by my comments made above, and will let the readers, under the leadership of the Holy Spirit, decide the wise course of action.
David R. Brumbleow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Do and Don’ts #2 =-.
David,
I am perfectly content to stick by my comments made above, and will let the readers, under the leadership of the Holy Spirit, decide the wise course of action.
I can live with that. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind
Have we both been under the impression that the other was trying to force his opinion on the other?
I was under the impression that you were trying to impugn the integrity of anyone who drinks any alcohol and trying to bind others’ consciences by your convictions. Looking back at some of the posts it seems I was grouping your comments along with the other David (volfan007) who appears to have crossed the line of cordial communication.
My sincerest apologies.
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Random thought: Jimmy Carter’s legacy in two words and one (unrelated) picture =-.
Stan,
My main gripe has been that those who disagree with the view against beverage alcohol, keep saying we have no biblical argument. I view that as unfair, untrue, and condescending. As I’ve said before, disagree with the abstentionist argument all you want. But don’t tell me I have no biblical arguments or biblical evidence; I do.
Now, as for the rest. I pledge to continue my attempts to convert all you guys to my point of view
. And I think you and David W. need to kiss and make up. Me? No way I’m going to kiss either one of you.
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Do and Don’ts #2 =-.
David,
My main gripe has been that those who disagree with the view against beverage alcohol, keep saying we have no biblical argument.
The cause for the disagreement is becoming clearer to me.
When I previously stated you had no biblical argument, I was thinking in the context of binding someone else’s conscience to your convictions. I can see how someone could come away from the text and be convinced that they should not drink alcohol. I think the text doesn’t require, or even encourage, abstaining but I have no problem with someone who is convinced that they personally should not drink any alcohol and wishes to abstain. In fact, my wife and I did for years.
I pledge to continue my attempts to convert all you guys to my point of view.
I would expect, or wish for, nothing less!
Thinking further on all of this… I think I probably brought some old baggage from some past experiences with anti-alcohol legalists (in the sense of trying to bind my conscience to their convictions; I would include KJV-Only folks in the same category) and got overly defensive. I apologize for that.
As for the kissing…my kisses are reserved for my wife!
.-= Stan McCullars´s last blog ..Random thought: Jimmy Carter’s legacy in two words and one (unrelated) picture =-.
Stan,
Don’t we all have old baggage? I’m sure we all will disagree in the future; may we at least be halfway civil about it.
Thank you for reserving your kisses for your wife
.
And hey, I’m not all bad, at least I’m not “KJV Only.”
David R. Brumbelow
Greg Alford,
Happy Birthday!
David R. Brumbelow
.-= David R. Brumbelow´s last blog ..Church Buildings – Do and Don’ts #2 =-.
Thanks Brother David
.-= Greg Alford´s last blog ..Is NAMB a "Relic of the Past"? =-.
Trying to get back to article…
The first thing christians need to do is stop hiding our sins behind everybodies backs, especially our childrens backs! We pretend we are righteous and pious (from our early years until present time) and don’t tell our kids the truth of our sinful pasts. Or, rather, we try to just omit our previous sins and not have any discussions at all. Omission is as much a sin as any.
Our family is following the practice of courtship. Our daughter is 17, with three young brothers, and none of them have “dated” except with mom and/or dad. I won’t say there haven’t been rebellious moments, and in the end it does have to be the young adults choice to follow or you will have full on rebellion. Our daughter is going to college and she will have to choose to follow what she has chosen at home. I pray she does.
We do not think there is anything wrong with young marriage as I was 19 when we were married. The feminists would say different but I do believe things are different for a girl. My daughter is willing to skip college should the man God has for her asks her father for her hand. That man, and our own sons, need to understand they have to provide a stable home and income for their wife. They will probably be older (5 or 10 years maybe — i.e. 7 years difference between my husband and I, and my parents have 11 years difference) but that doesn’t mean they need to be in their 30′s or whatever either.
Be blessed!
Sallie
.-= Sallie´s last blog ..Action and Timing… Timing and Action =-.
Greetings.
With regard to sex and marriage,
you are accosting the wrong people group.
A non-virgin is joined to ALL their partners, (1Cor 6:16),
BY GOD. (Matt19:6),
just as Adam and Eve were joined, (Gen 2:24).
The tide you need to turn is the
satanic teaching of the church,
not the valid marriages of virgin teens.
There’s a lot of verbiage here, and I apologize if I repeat anything (still catching up on my reading from a very busy summer).
When I was in high school, students drove busses and those who hunted brought their rifles to school. One friend had a significant gun collection and even made his own ammo. It seems that in the recent past responsibilities were conferred on people at a younger age. it also seems that people married younger then as well, fully capable of assuming the responsibility of developing a healthy relationship with a spouse.
Today, it seems that parents fear so for their children’s safety, if even for being legally liable to the state, that our children are not taught the relationship between responsibility and trust having been sheltered from such for such a distorted view of their own protection. It’s an issue beset with cultural, social and legal forces. Would that we could cast off the shackles of such foolishness to instruct our children in the honor of taking responsibility for their actions even as they trust God in his grace as Christ took the responsibility for our sins on himself.
This, I believe, is the matter at hand and must be overcome for each individual and couple to assume the responsibilities of marriage at a suitably younger age.
.-= Jim Pemberton´s last blog ..What Kind of Marriage Advice have You Heard? =-.
Comments on this entry are closed.