Wise Up About Alcohol

Hello Friends, The response to the message, "Wise Up About Alcohol," given January 31, 2010 has been rather remarkable. Remarkable in the number of comments, the great questions and the wonderful spirit with which those questions were voiced, even by those who see the matter differently. Most interesting was the number of INCREDIBLE stories from people who have been delivered out of unbelievably painful and heart-wrenching situations by the grace of God. It was so moving to read story after story. In the message of January 31, I'd mentioned that time would not enable me to touch on every aspect or question related to the topic at hand. I indicated if you would give me enough time, I'd seek to response to any questions that you sent in and see that this was posted online. (It seemed like a good idea at the time!) Many of you did just that. The following questions and responses are a reflection and a compilation of those questions. The questions may not be expressed exactly as you wrote them, but they reflect similar questions that others also raised in that area. Thank you for sending them along. I trust that my responses will be of some help as each of us seeks to discover what it means to be a fully devoted follower of Jesus Christ who walks in wisdom and seeks to embrace that which is best. So, here we go: QUESTION: I personally see nothing wrong with the consumption of alcohol in moderation, and it's not for other Christians to judge. (OK, so this wasn't a question, but it's worth a response). RESPONSE: I would certainly concur that this is NOT a matter for one believer to judge another about. I sought to make that clear in my message. I would go further and state that one would look in vain for support in Scripture flatly stating that it is wrong to drink alcohol. It's just not there. One, in fact, could make a case that drinking, wine in particular, was commonly done throughout the Old and New Testament. That was neither my argument nor my reason for advocating total abstinence. Rather, I sought to communicate that while the Bible doesn't require total abstinence, I believe that it certainly recommends it as the highest and best course. You might recall that I concluded the message by noting that given the destructiveness of alcohol across our nation and principle of total abstinence is a wise choice (Proverbs 20:1); a loving choice (Romans 14:13,15-17) ; an edifying choice (Romans 14:9); and a supportive choice (Romans 14:21). As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 6:12, "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of anything." QUESTION: How do you explain the passage in John about Jesus making wine? And wasn't wine frequently used throughout the New Testament including the Last Supper? Surely Jesus must have drunk wine since He was charged with being a "drunkard and glutton." RESPONSE: Christians are clear everywhere that drunkenness is a sin. No question about that. But it needs to be said in order to be true to Scripture that the Bible does not prohibit alcohol, only drunkenness (please note: I do not believe that that negates the arguments about what is best or wise). We should assume that all the biblical figures drank wine except when the Bible explicitly tells us otherwise. The Nazirites were just a small group within Israel. One of the things that distinguished them from the rest of Israel is that they did not drink. The implication is that most everyone else did. Jesus distinguishes Himself from John the Baptist as someone who drinks, while John the Baptist did not. "John the Baptist came not drinking, you said he had a demon; I came drinking, you say I'm a drunkard." Jesus turned the water into alcoholic wine. Paul tells Timothy to drink a little wine for his stomach's sake (note the medical/drug intention); and so forth. Now, having acknowledged this, let me share with you four reason why Jesus drank wine and I don't (with special thanks to Denn Guptill for his insights on this matter): 1. It was a different time. Imagine what it was like to live 2,000 years ago when water supplies were used for bathing and washing clothes, and there was no effective way to treat waste water. There was no refrigeration. Drinking untreated water would have been dangerous and the most practical solution was to use the antiseptic qualities of alcohol. There weren't many options then. That is not the case today. I don't drink because I have other options. 2. It was a different place. In Jesus' day, wine was an important part of everyday life—from meals to celebrations. Drinking alcohol, however, was not recreational. Our culture's view on drinking today is typified by writer Stephen King: "I found the idea of social drinking ludicrous—if you didn't want to get drunk, why not just have a Coke?" Drinking a little in our culture can easily become drinking a lot. As Francis Scott Fitzgerald said, "First you take a drink, then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes you." When does having a drink become drunkenness? I'm not exactly sure where that line would be for me—or whether when I got close to the line I would be able to keep on this side of it (As I'm writing this, I can't help but think of a recent headline in The Sentinel. I'm certain that the individual mentioned did not intend to take his drinking as far as he did. Yet once drinking begins, it gets cloudy to distinguish where that "line" is). So, I don't drink because my culture doesn't require it and often abuses it. 3. It was a different brew. I seldom hear people exploring this matter, but from all the reading that I've done, one can't help but conclude that the wine Jesus drank 2,000 years ago wasn't a whole lot different than the wine that is around today—somewhere between 3 and 11% alcohol content. BUT is was mixed with water. Some say anywhere between 2 to 5 parts water for 1 part wine. It was diluted. To not dilute one's wine was considered barbaric in the Greek world. There was nothing stronger than wine. Distillation was not discovered until about 1500 A.D. When the Bible speaks of strong drink, it's referring to unmixed wine. Are you going to follow Jesus' example by drinking? Then you should be willing to limit your alcohol consumption to what His would have been. And by the way, if you intend to copy Him, keep in mind that He also prayed with devotion, studied the Word of God, fasted and tithed—not to mention that He gave His life for others. I don't drink because it's not even close to what Jesus was all about. 4. It hurts others. I'll not spend much time here as I think I clearly communicated that in the message. I would only say this: I don't want my example in this area to cause another to stumble. "It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another believer to stumble." (Romans 14:21, NLT). I don't drink because I will not support an industry that contributes to destroying lives, wrecking marriages and killing people. The Bible doesn't order you not to drink, but it does say, "Don't be drunk with wine, because that will ruin your life. Instead, be filled with the Holy Spirit, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs among yourselves, and making music to the Lord in your hearts" (Ephesians 5:18-19, NLT). QUESTION: What about using wine for health reasons? RESPONSE: To begin with, Dr. Ken Schenck of Indiana Wesleyan University notes that The Wesleyan Church already allows alcohol for medicinal purposes. Given the spate of studies showing that moderate drinking of red wine is good for our health, Wesleyans can technically already drink red wine moderately (though the argument is still on-going about whether the medicinal value is actually found in the alcohol or, rather, in the grapes—specifically the skin of the grapes themselves). Still, Dr. I.J. Goldberg, writing in an editorial for the New England Journal of Medicine, articulates another perspective: "There is, however, insufficient information to encourage patients who do not drink alcohol to start. The data on alcohol and cardiovascular disease are still correlative, whereas the toxic effects of alcohol are well established. Perhaps that is why some studies show a reduction in cardiovascular disease, but not overall mortality, in patients who drink alcoholic beverages. Substitution of one disease for another is not a medical advance. This is especially the case with respect to the prevention of cardiovascular disease, since a number of preventative therapies, such as exercise, smoking cessation and lowering of cholesterol levels and blood pressure, do not have the undesirable effects of alcohol. If alcohol were a newly discovered drug (instead of a drink dating back to the dawn of human history), we can be sure that no pharmaceutical company would develop it to prevent cardiovascular disease. Nor would many physicians use a therapy that might reduce the rate of myocardial infarction by 25 to 50 percent, but that would result in thousands of additional deaths per year due to cancer, motor vehicle accidents and liver disease." (I. J. Goldberg, "To Drink or Not to Drink?: New England Journal of Medicine 348 (2003): 163, 164). QUESTION: I strongly disagree with your statement that alcoholism is not a disease. Would you like to reconsider your position? RESPONSE: Of everything that I stated in the message, this is the one point that I wished I had presented differently. I am ready to do some re-consideration at this point, but with some hesitation and reservation. As I understand it, there are varying views on the "disease concept" within the behavioral health field, but the majority do recognize it as such; especially the genetic link concept telling us that those from families with alcoholic members have a statistically greater chance of alcoholism than those from non-alcoholic families (seems to me, though, that this is one more reason for promoting abstinence!). It was properly pointed out to me that there are many sin-induced or lifestyle-induced illnesses, i.e. smoking leading to cancer; obesity-related diseases such as type II diabetes and heart disease. However, experts say that the "disease concept" would certainly endorse abstinence. The biological reaction within an individual actually threatens their ability to drink responsibly. Hence the AA mantra: "I am powerless to the disease without abstinence." I think that if I were addressing this again, I may have tempered my remarks to go something like this: "Alcoholism IS a disease, but it's so much more than that." I would NOT want someone dealing with alcoholism to forego necessary medical treatment because of thinking that alcoholism is not a disease. Drinking itself is not a sin, rather abusive excessive drinking is. However, neither would I want that individual to think of "excessive drinking" (alcoholism), as ONLY a disease. Alcoholism (excessive drinking) does have moral consequence for which each one needs to take personal responsibility. And if alcoholism is a disease, I find myself wrestling with two other thoughts: 1. It's sure treated in a unique way by the government in terms of its encouraged use, taxation and distribution and 2. I know of an easy way to never, ever get this disease: total abstinence. Having said this, I would have done a better job crafting how I said this and tried not to come across as dogmatic, as I may have about alcoholism not being a disease. QUESTION: If I or someone I know and love has a problem with alcohol, where can I go for help? RESPONSE: This was my biggest blunder (I think, I hope): that I could go through a whole message like this and not highlight places to find help. I'm really sorry for dropping the ball on this one. There are many fine places to seek help here in our community. I'll mention just four: 1. Alcoholics Anonymous (still one of the best places for help with alcoholism) 616.392.3360 2. OAR 616.396.5284 3. Holland Hospital 616.395.3926 4.The Watershed (a nationwide treatment program. The number listed here is the local chapter) 1.866.549.5989 QUESTION: I've heard that you are seeking to encourage Central Wesleyan's and The Wesleyan Church's stance of abstinence for church membership to be reconsidered. With all the reasons you've given promoting total abstinence from alcohol, why are you doing this? RESPONSE: Let me try to respond to this in three parts. First, I do strongly encourage total abstinence from alcohol as the best and wisest choice for Christians. I do this for all the reasons noted in the message, and more. In fact, without elaboration, allow me to give you a few more reasons: 1. Abstinence is a great conversation starter when you're with people who drink. 2. The thought of addiction scares me. 3. Alcohol is hard on the body. 4. I can't afford to drink—ever check out those wine prices?! I'd rather spend my money elsewhere. 5. I don't mind being different. I even kind of like taking a counter-cultural position on a matter like this. 6. Alcohol induces destructive behavior. My position on abstinence has not changed one iota. Second, I firmly believe that our Church/Denomination SHOULD clearly express our position promoting total abstinence as the wisest and best approach for the follower of Christ and that it should be declared in the area of our Discipline under "Special Direction." These are the expressions declared by The Wesleyan Church for the purpose of bearing witness to contemporary society of matters concerning Christian life and character and their interaction with the culture. These are important declarations regarding such matters as equal rights, substance abuse, peace, human sexuality, abortion and so forth. But they are NOT membership commitments. Furthermore, there are many who look at what is asked of membership, i.e. total abstinence from alcohol, giving food to the hungry, visiting those in prison, etc. not as a legalistic "this is necessary for membership" list (by the way, when did you last visit those in prison?) but rather as a denominational declaration that we embrace (we don't fight against those principles) and as principles consistent with a strong Christian stance. There's much more to be shared about this. Third, for all the reasons listed above and in the message of January 31, I am a very happy teetotaler, and would like you to consider being one also. But that brings us to the principle question: should total abstinence be a requirement for church membership? My answer is, no. The reason is this: the New Testament allows for a difference of conviction and practice on this issue in the church and, therefore, it is wrong to not allow for that same difference in the church today. Romans 14:20,21 puts wine-drinking in the category of eating meat sacrificed to idols and leaves the ethical judgment with the believer to grapple with whether his/her behavior will make the brother stumble. Our church and denomination have always sought to be sensitive to the nature of biblical ethics and their relation to church membership. When others were silent, we were not. It is my contention that we continue to honor our commitment to Scripture and its interaction with culture, that we continue to declare the wisdom of total abstinence from alcohol and that we continue to embrace the authority of Scripture. I believe that would involve not requiring total abstinence as a condition for membership. It would, in addition, align us with the clear declaration in The Wesleyan Discipline says "No person who loves the Lord Jesus Christ, and obeys the gospel of God our Savior, ought to be deprived of church membership" (272), and, "Every person has an inalienable right to private judgment in matters of religion, and an equal right to express personal opinions in any way which will not violate the laws of God or the rights of others" (274). LAST WORDS Well, I've just put in nearly four hours on a Saturday afternoon responding to these questions. I'm sure that there are others that yet remain. But I do hope that my responses will be of some help to you as you seek not only to follow hard after Christ, but also to influence your children to do so as well. You might find it helpful to copy off this question/response section and to secure a copy of the message (you can purchase a CD in our Media area by the library). Maybe your kids are young and the timing isn't right to share with them, but I promise you, it's coming, so be prepared. Thank you for grappling with these challenging issues. I realize that not everyone will agree with all of my positions. And, as I said in the message, these are "my positions." But I hope that wherever you are in this matter that you will refrain from casting judgment on another for taking a position contrary to yours (that would lead to a host of other issues!) and that you will not blindly pursue your position just because "that's the way you've always believed." Our collective desire would be to build convictions based upon the expressed Word of God and the principles contained therein. It remains a pleasure to shepherd such a wonderful flock as this. Paul