This Buds For You, Jesus.
If you’ve read some of my previous posts you’ll know that I’m heading to this Christian party where drinking is going to take place. Says it right on the invite: “we gonna get our drink on”. Well, it doesn’t say it quite like that, but it’s a cocktail party and while some people say that all the references to wine in the Bible were actually references to grape juice, the word cocktail in this passage actually means alcoholic beverage. In fact, I wanted to bring beer—specifically PumpKing from Southern Tier Brewery—but was informed hard drinks were the order of the day.
Originally this party was supposed to be attended by 5 couples. Sadly, various bureaucratic Church issues have lead two of the couples to drop out. It’s a nasty piece of gossip that I won’t slim you with. Suffice to say, not everyone in this group, or the affiliated Churches the groups represent, are okay with Christians consuming alcohol.
When I heard about this, about how some of the people invited to this event were up and arms about other Christians having a drink, my mind shot to the scripture about not being a stumbling block. I gnawed on it for a while (without actually cracking open the Bible—big mistake) and made a case for why I felt you’re not actually being a stumbling block for another believer if that believer doesn’t have a problem with drinking beyond disagreeing with your theology on it. I’m talking purely about orientation to drink here, not addiction temptation, not battle with alcoholism, just the belief that drinking is evil and therefore it should never be done by anyone, especially not by a Christian.
I drink. I’m okay with it. I don’t think it’s sinful to do it. So when I found out it was going to be this big issue, and that people who found drinking wrong were going to be coming to a drinking party while those who found it okay were going to avoid it, I did what anyone would do in my situation: I brooded. I paced the house and monologued about fundamentalists killing my good time. I conjectured about how ridiculous it is for Christians to declare drinking bad when the first miracle Jesus performed was turning hundreds of gallons of the water in stone basins into the good stuff so people could get smashed at a wedding party. I decried of how preposterous it was these abstainers should come to a cocktail party in the first place! I comforted myself with thoughts of how weak their faiths were and how I might flaunt the strength of my own by drinking… Show up with a keg, scream, “No body leaves till we finish this baby! Woo-hooooo!”
In summation, I acted like a jackass. What I didn’t do during all this time, however, was consult the Bible.
It turns out that this isn’t the first time this issue has come up. There have always been, and will always be, people who are diametrically opposed to the consumption of foods and their related spiritual consequences. In Romans Chapters 13, 14 and 15, Paul tells the Church in Rome that it’s not about food or drink but about the kingdom of God. That you can drink and not sin before to the Lord if you know in your heart that drinking is okay. Or you can not drink, and honor the Lord in your heart if you feel it’s unclean. Basically, it’s your call. Every man, according to his faith on the subject, is free to do what he thinks is okay (abstaining from excess—like my keg idea—because wanton drunkenness is never looked at as okay).
The real issue is not the consumption. In the passage of scripture that ends chapter 13, Paul talks about how love fulfills the commandments. If you love someone, you’re not going to tear them down or burden them, or quarrel, judge, or condemn them. Next chapter, Paul says, “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.” Paul later says, “the Kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.”
Paul does refer to the one who abstains because they feel it’s unclean and sinful as the weaker in faith and the one who sees no reason to abstain from anything God has made clean as the stronger. When I first read this I was like, “Ha! I’m the stronger believer.” Then, promptly after that went through my head, I felt like an ass again. It’s true that the person who sets legalistic rules on their behavior is a burden to those who don’t have them. Yes, it can feel pretty unfair to the stronger believer. But it’s not about what’s fair or who is strong. It’s about peace, righteousness, and joy. It about not despising the person who abstains. It’s about, as Paul also says, living in such a way that builds up your brother. “For Christ did not please himself…” Therefor, Paul says, it’s the obligation of the “strong” to bear with the failings of the weak—which also means keeping your mouth shut and ego in check because thats not helpful either.
If you look at all the chapters together it’s remarkable how they mirror this present day party issue. People divided over consumption. One party despising the other for weakness, the other party being judgmental concerning to much liberty. The issue is not consumption, it’s faith. It’s one party trying to honor God by abstaining from anything that may cause them to sin, and the other party trying to honor God by relishing the freedom they have in him. Paul says fairly plainly that the those who are on the freer end of this should do whatever they can to help their less free brothers and sisters along for the sake of unity and love. And while doing that, Paul also says “the faith you have, keep it between you and God.” Which I take as an admonishment not to rub someone else’s lack of freedom in their face, or, conversely fly the flag of condemnation when someone consumes something you may believe unclean but scripture say isn’t.
It really isn’t about superior or inferior here. It’s about not being divided. If that means you have to abstain, then do it because you know that by doing so you are honoring God and helping unify the Church, which, if we’re honest, has more than enough reasons to divide as is.
After I read this passage a couple of times, I realized more about the true nature of the Church, or at least what it’s called to be—love, constant understanding, the strong breaking themselves down for the weak, peace making, no despising, no judging, believers going without so that others may come closer to a God who loves them and learn interdependence on one another. I wish we saw that more in our society. Then I realized that we can, at just about anytime we want too. Following in Jesus’ foot steps—a homeless, impoverished, son of a Carpenter—doesn’t require much more than making the choice to do it.
(visit my Facebook page for more comments and insight)
Juat curious if you see a difference in a believer drinking lightly and drinking heavily? I’m a believer and certainly enjoy a few beers in a week, no conviction there. However, I would certainly see it to be a sin if you allowed yourself to become intoxicated. The bible references wine in a positive light in various parts, but speaks down on getting drunk. This also, to me, just seems obvious because of the change it brings about. If our purpose is to build up the kingdom of Gosd, I certainly doubt we carry the ability to do so when completely inebriated.
Thoughts Dirk?
Brendon,
I think it’s as you say, although I know of ancient customs where Jews god hammered drunk while praising God. I think you can get drunk and not be a sinful bastard when it happens. I also think you can be a sober, pious, and useless Christian. I think though, as a rule, we should abstain from getting drunk, drunkenness, and putting our brothers and sisters in situations where they feel lead to condem us.
I could get hammered now and belt out worship songs for hours right now, doesn’t make it right imo. And yes, plenty of sober useless Christians, agreed.
As far as the entire bible goes, do you consider it to be inerrant? I believe it is 100% the inspired Word of God, completely God breathed whether its Jesus’ words or not.
I don’t know, Brendon. I’m not a biblical scholar. I know there are some errors in it, historically speaking, but I also know the errors don’t change the scope and message.
Historically, I would agree there are some factual things in a few areas which may not be 100% correct. I’m more talking about the inspired Word of God-things like how we are to live, what is edifying and what isn’t-right from wrong types of things. Obviously, God doesn’t change, He remains consistent and always will. Galatians 2:20 – “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” So the indwelling of Christ, and influence of the Holy Spirit would also remain constant, and wouldn’t be subject to cultural shifts over the past 2,000+ years. This is a comfort to my faith, as I don’t have a way of justifying anything that is a black and white biblical issue. The black and white will remain black and white (heavy drinking), whereas a grey area (light drinking) would be a personal conviction thing, because obviously there are people who struggle with alcohol, where even small amounts would be an issue and hinder their ability to glorify Christ. Personally, I know someone like this, so to take it a bit further, I think it would be a sin for me to drink around, with this person, as it is a spiritual stumbling block for my brother. On the flip side, I love a cold one when watching a Jays game solo, or with other people, and see no issue in it whatsoever.
Long winded, I apologize, appreciate your back and forth Dirk.
Brendon
Hmmm….I don’t know about this one, Dirk. Normally I find myself reading your blogs and nodding but this one feels uncomfortable. First of all, regardless of what Paul says, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that both the drinkers and the abstainers see themselves as the “stronger” Christians in this situation. Now, what if your invitation had read “Grape Juice Party” rather than “Cocktail Party”? Would you, as a drinker, have felt offended enough to refuse the invitation? Would you have derailed the event by showing up with a bottle of Vodka and spiking the punch? Childish! Rude! So why make Biblical excuses for the abstainers who have drawn a line in the sand over an issue that is not a sin? There has been no effort to deceive. Drinks will be served. You don’t have to drink. You don’t have to come. But don’t expect the party to change because you have chosen to put a greater priority on a self-imposed sin than on fellowship. And don’t expect those that enjoy a good cocktail to eventually concede to calling themselves jackasses. If this were a “Chocolate Feast Party” and people started opting out or laying on the “too many calories, decadent, gluttonous, hyperactivity” guilt trip – in the name of saving their brothers from obesity and loud, rapid conversation – would changing it to a “Salad Party” make the hosts stronger Christians? Pushovers? Or just highly resentful? (Especially since these jackasses were trying to do something fun and nice, and now it isn’t anymore, and furthermore they probably won’t offer to host anything, ever again – and why would they after they did all that work and no one showed up to their stupid “Salad Party”?). How come it seems ludicrous to claim that eating chocolate is a sin, but it somehow becomes pious to claim that consuming alcohol is a sin? If the real issue is truly about “how love fulfills the commandments” then it should be a two way street – and then, of course, none of this would ever have happened. Instead, this situation is coming across as bullying behind the mask of Scripture – and that can only divide the Church further.
Beth,
I’ll try and address this in the oder in which it came. First, I don’t think you can say “regardless of what Paul says…” since I’m pretty sure what Paul says— directions for us believers to follow—is a big part of this process. Paul says that nothing is unclean as far as consumption goes, and that we should try not to make what God has declared clean unclean, then use it for a reason to divide. He has laid out the verdict by which we should handle situations like this by: don’t judge those who consume, don’t despise those who don’t. Furthermore, because the burden is always on the stronger (because they are more aware) they also get the added responsibility to bear the burdens of the weak, help them become stronger, not tear them down, abstain in moments when consuming is divisive, and still continue walking the path God has set for them. No one said it was easy or fair or that it was a recipe for a perfect evening out. But then again, as Mother Theresa said, “we aren’t called to be successful, we’re called to be faithful” and in this instance, we’ve been called to abstain if it’s helpful. If you haven’t, I encourage you to read the section of scripture I was talking about here as I think Paul speaks to your exact feelings about the situation. I think Christians do a fantastic job of coming up with hypotheticals for why actually doing what the Bible says could be counter productive so that we don’t have to do it. In this case, the focus isn’t so much on the alcohol as it is on the division that conflicting thoughts on something like alcohol can create.
Dirk, I appreciate your perspective.
To be clear, when I said “regardless of what Paul says” I was not questioning what Paul himself believed to be true. I was postulating that, no matter what stance you choose to take, you must, in your heart, believe that you are on the side of right/the strongest argument. Otherwise, why take that stance? With that in mind, if abstainers were to read this passage from Paul, would they change their minds or would they take offence? Or is there another Scripture that gives an equally convincing argument in favour of their stance (I don’t know, there just always seems to be a Scripture to support every argument).
In terms of hypotheticals, I don’t think it’s always a matter of trying to avoid responsibility, it’s a matter of trying to determine where to draw the line. At what point do you shift from strong Christian to doormat? At what point do you stop defending your position because you worry about weakening someone else when, in actual fact, sticking to your guns may serve to strengthen another person? It’s a fine line and it may, indeed, be situational in nature and dependent upon the personalities involved. A bit of a judgement call.
Which brings me to another thought which has been dodging me recently. As much as the Bible gives us an interesting insight into the fact that human behaviour and attitude has undergone little change over thousands of years, it is composed of letters and writings that were motivated by current events. In any writing there is an intended audience and an ultimate motivation and I think it is dangerous to forget that. So was Paul addressing a specific situation that, at the time, required a certain stance and certain language? Again, I don’t know, but it seems to me that assigning labels of stronger and weaker is divisive and is going to get someone’s back up. Maybe the situation he was addressing required it at the time. Maybe he was the kind of guy who liked a good debate. But isn’t there a danger in starting to believe that we, as individuals, are stronger or superior models of the faith? Even worse if we make sure that others know it? Shouldn’t believing that Christ died on our behalf put us all on the same humble footing?
Anyway, I appreciate your thoughts, Dirk, and I will re-read the passage to the Romans when I can give it a proper amount of attention.
I sometimes wonder if, during discussions like this (i.e., between your friends who want to drink and others who look down on it) if we’re in the latest version of the Pharisees and the like. You know, arguing over how large candles should be, when they should be lit, replaced, and trivial things like that while losing sight of the larger issue (i.e., trying to find our way into a loving relationship with God). I think it’s a symptom of the human condition that we look upon these issues as something more than they are, the exercise of freewill that we’ve all been blessed with. Sometimes that exercise leads to bad results such as addiction, abuse, and ruin, but those are the result of our God-given freewill. Not trying to trivialize the results, but seems kind of silly spending so much time worrying about other folks when we’ve got our own issues to deal with.