To answer some of these objections I will defer to Joel McDurmon:
There is only so much alcohol an individual can consume before enjoyment cedes to inebriation, and then sickness. One can die from alcohol poisoning. On top of this natural limit, God has decreed an ethical limit. Indulging oneself to the point of such inebriation—we commonly call it “drunkenness”—is an infraction of God’s right way of living. Thus, drunkenness trespasses both kinds of boundaries—it defies God in both His created order and His revealed Word.
It should go without saying in any Christian discussion of the use of alcohol—at least, any discussion that honors Scripture as God’s Word—that drunkenness, excess, or abuse of wine is detestable to God and clearly a sin. Whether on the conservative side of the Christian spectrum (like me) or on the more liberal side—heck, even liberals who deny the inspiration and truth of Scripture—all parties would acknowledge that the Bible forbids and condemns drunkenness. Liberals would probably be more likely to make mainly social and pragmatic arguments against it, however, whereas some fearful and misguided believers like to extend God’s condemnation of abuse into a blanket prohibition on use.*
Many Christians take what appears to be a compromising position on the subject of alcohol. Acknowledging the Bible’s clear position on the subject, they refuse to take the ridiculous line of forbidding all alcohol. Good so far. But then, caving under who knows what social and/or religious pressures—and there are many—they then argue that Christians should voluntary abstain from alcohol. This devious moral swindle is the back door to prohibition. While not formally forbidding alcohol, it practically forbids it. Under the guise of freedom they forbid. Giving permission, they prohibit. This view pays little more than lip service to God’s revealed will, but has little intention of growing to maturity in it.
These backdoor prohibitionists remind us that Paul said “‘All things are lawful for me,’ but not all things are helpful. ‘All things are lawful for me,’ but I will not be enslaved by anything” (1 Cor. 6:12). By this reference we are expected to make the analogy: “Drinking alcohol is lawful, but not helpful. It is lawful, but I will not be enslaved by it.” In order to enforce this application, they will then pour out streams of evidence that alcohol has bad effects on society, or can possibly have bad effects for the Christian...
To what, then, does the verse in 1 Corinthian 6 really refer? What is the context? From verse 9 through the end of the chapter, Paul is dealing with things that are clearly excess and clearly forbidden sins. He is not using the argument “all things are lawful,” he is debunking it. After all, this passage is preceded by Paul teaching,
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Obviously, not all things are “lawful.” Many behaviors will keep you out of the kingdom. In verses 13–20, Paul deals with prostitution—it’s obviously not allowed in the Christian life. When Paul addresses the saying again in chapter 10 verse 23 of the same book, the issue is now idolatry—eating meat sacrificed to idols. None of the sins involved here are an issue of being lawful for the Christian yet merely “unprofitable,” or “not helpful.” These sins are sins that are transgressions of the law of God whatever word you choose to call that law.
In short, Paul is refuting antinomianism—the view that Christians have no law as a guide to their living, and thus are free to do whatever as long as they “believe.” This “lawful but not helpful” passage, therefore, does not apply to the practical issues of areas in which God has clearly already given us freedom, it applies to the false belief that God has given us freedom in every area.
But this is never to deny that God indeed has given us freedom in many areas, not the least of which is in the enjoyment of alcohol.
That the saying “but not helpful” should not be used as a guide for determining behaviors that God has already qualified as free strengthens when we see Paul apply it to himself—and then ignore it. In 2 Corinthians 12:1, Paul begins a passage about his experience of being caught up to “the third heaven,” receiving unutterable revelations from God, and then being given a “thorn in the flesh” to keep Him humble. Paul begins this mysterious passage by saying this: “I must go on boasting. Though there is nothing to be gained by it, I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord.” The phrase “there is nothing to be gained by it,” is the equivalent Greek phrase to “not all things are helpful” (1 Cor. 6:12). Boasting about his experiences, in other words, was lawful but not helpful—yet Paul did it anyway. Why? Because, first, “lawful but not helpful” is not a binding guide to Christian freedom to begin with; and second, because there was a deeper lesson to be learned through the humility that came with Paul’s reason for boasting. There was a level of maturity to which the Corinthians needed to advance.
While I have hardly said all that could be said about the misuse of this passage and its attendant fallacies, I hope you can see already how misguided it is. It is an argument of fear, masquerading as charity. It creates a back door to let in the very prohibition these guys know the Bible does not teach. It’s a way of using the Bible to ignore the Bible.*Soli Deo Gloria!
For His Glory,
Fernando
*McDurmon, Joel; Wilson, Douglas (2011-08-19). What Would Jesus Drink? A Spirit Filled Study (Kindle Locations 1125-1136). Tolle Lege Press. Kindle Edition.
*Ibid, Kindle Locations 1413-1509
No comments:
Post a Comment