Is it ok to drink alcohol...?

[doug yowell]

The argument techniques that are used against consuming alcohol really rely on pandering to large generalized statistic' date=' rather than any reasonable argument and end up blaming alcohol itself... as though alcohol is somehow "evil". It's an argument that detaches alcohol from human responsibility and turns it into a "drug".

quote']Prov. 20:1 disputes this conclusion,cool.Non-biblical tests (according to the CHP officer that was speaking about alcohol and driving)demonstrate that one of the immediate effects of alcohol is to create the perception that nothing has been affected by the drinking. This is why a drunk can believe that they are in complete control.So alcohol itself contains a danger in itself that the human cannot naturally perceive. Human responsibility should take this into account before declaring that alcohol is harmless.

[Dr. Shane]

I do wonder if the strong drink referred to in those days was the same thing as the industrial grade put out today?

Strong drink in Bible days was any where from 5%-10% alcohol. Fermented wine was around 2% - 3% alcohol. Today beer is about 5%; wine is 7%-14%; hard liquor is around 40%.

[phkrause]

Strong drink in Bible days was any where from 5%-10% alcohol. Fermented wine was around 2% - 3% alcohol. Today beer is about 5%; wine is 7%-14%; hard liquor is around 40%.

How do we know these are actual facts? or are we or you in particular just guessing? I've heard Doug Batchelor many times and never has he said a definitive on what percentage! I'm also guessing that as the grape juice ferments this creates the alcohol?

[Gerr]

Is this "pandering to generalized statistic"? ESV | 1 Co 6:19 "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body."

[Dr. Shane]

The Bible only, for me. If it can't be established from the Bible it's not doctrine - it's opinion at best.

I can't go to that extreme. While I don't take every word Ellen White wrote as if it came from the mouth of God, I can't deny her prophetic ministry.

"Quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (1 Thess. 5:19-21)

Without the Spirit of Prophecy, I would have a much harder time believing in the Christian God. Without it (SOP), that means the Christian God has been silent since the early church. I would have a real problem with a silent God. I don't have a problem with a God that was silent for the 1,260 years while the church was in the wilderness. That all makes sense.

So while I will not accept everything EG White wrote as if it is a "thus saith the Lord", I will not write it all off as being irrelevant either. I can't go to either of those extremes.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Shane

Strong drink in Bible days was any where from 5%-10% alcohol. Fermented wine was around 2% - 3% alcohol. Today beer is about 5%; wine is 7%-14%; hard liquor is around 40%.

How do we know these are actual facts? or are we or you in particular just guessing? I've heard Doug Batchelor many times and never has he said a definitive on what percentage! I'm also guessing that as the grape juice ferments this creates the alcohol?

One source I checked gave 14% by volume as the maximum alcohol content achievable by natural fermentation. That is because beyond that, the fermenting sugar becomes too toxic for the yeast. That's why alcohol can also serve as an antiseptic. So depending on where along thefermenting process the liquid is consumed, the alcohol content of wine in the ancient world could be from <1% to 14% max. Here's one I found:

" There's no doubt that alcohol affects brain function, but drinking alcohol doesn't kill brain cells, at least in the short term.

Does Alcohol Kill Brain Cells in the Long Term?

Despite the fact that drinking alcohol short term doesn't kill brain cells, there's mounting evidence that long term alcohol use can result in permanent impairment of the nervous system. It's unclear whether this is due to the direct impact of the alcohol on the brain or related to the nutritional deficiencies often seen in habitual drinkers. Not getting enough B vitamins can cause neurological impairment and up to eight out of ten alcoholics are deficient in thiamine which is associated with a serious brain disorder called Wenicke- Korsakoff syndrome which presents with mental confusion and coordination problems.

Using alcohol long term also affects the brain indirectly. Chronic alcohol use increases the risk of liver disease which can lead to a condition known as hepatic encephalopathy. This condition causes impaired brain function along with memory problems, personality changes, disorientation, and loss of coordination."

So, if longterm alcohol use may not kill brain cells but render them impaired and can't function properly, how much difference does that make?

[Dr. Shane]

Originally Posted By: Shane

Strong drink in Bible days was any where from 5%-10% alcohol. Fermented wine was around 2% - 3% alcohol. Today beer is about 5%; wine is 7%-14%; hard liquor is around 40%.

How do we know these are actual facts? or are we or you in particular just guessing?

The process to distill alcohol was not discovered until the 12th century so we know the term "strong drink" in the Bible is not referring to whiskey, rum, vodka, tequila or anything of that nature. The strongest wine the ancients could make was about 14%.

The ancients had a way of preserving wine by running it through a filter and making a paste. Later they would mix it with water. Similar to how we make juice from concentrate. That type of wine had a low content of alcohol like 2% - 3%.

[phkrause]

One source I checked gave 14% by volume as the maximum alcohol content achievable by natural fermentation. That is because beyond that, the fermenting sugar becomes too toxic for the yeast. That's why alcohol can also serve as an antiseptic. So depending on where along thefermenting process the liquid is consumed, the alcohol content of wine in the ancient world could be from <1% to 14% max. Here's one I found:

" There's no doubt that alcohol affects brain function, but drinking alcohol doesn't kill brain cells, at least in the short term.

Does Alcohol Kill Brain Cells in the Long Term?

Despite the fact that drinking alcohol short term doesn't kill brain cells, there's mounting evidence that long term alcohol use can result in permanent impairment of the nervous system. It's unclear whether this is due to the direct impact of the alcohol on the brain or related to the nutritional deficiencies often seen in habitual drinkers. Not getting enough B vitamins can cause neurological impairment and up to eight out of ten alcoholics are deficient in thiamine which is associated with a serious brain disorder called Wenicke- Korsakoff syndrome which presents with mental confusion and coordination problems.

Using alcohol long term also affects the brain indirectly. Chronic alcohol use increases the risk of liver disease which can lead to a condition known as hepatic encephalopathy. This condition causes impaired brain function along with memory problems, personality changes, disorientation, and loss of coordination."

So, if longterm alcohol use may not kill brain cells but render them impaired and can't function properly, how much difference does that make?

Thanks for the info on fermentation Gerry. And an excellent post altogether.

[LifeHiscost]

It is never 'nonsensical' when presenting truthful statements. Trying to change peoples behavior based innuendo or untruths does more harm than good. There are many good reasons for a person to not drink alcoholic beverages with out attempting scare tactics. Religion all to often goes down those roads when all else fails. Cardw is very adept at pointing out those fallacies.

Many are "scared" of the Bible for what it says. Would that be a good reason for disassociating regular use of it in order to understand all sides of common decency.

At least one person on this forum decries the Bible as useful for learning of a God Who is Love, then quotes the texts that reveal the works of the enemy of souls to prove his point, taking God's willingness to accept even the actions of the evil one, as a reason to relegate the God of the universe to mythical folklore, totally ignoring the Creator's promises to bring good out of even that which is patently evil, including abuse of alcohol, as evidenced in the beheading of John the baptist.

"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me."John 5:39 NKJV

"Then Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also want to go away?”

But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”"John 6:67-69 NKJV

God blesses!

[Bravus]

I agree with the points you make here, LHC. It's why it mystifies me that those here who are usually so strong on finding a Biblical basis for doctrine are so indifferent to what the Bible actually says on this issue.

[Bravus]

The percentages stuff is interesting, Shane, and relates to the history of technology and the way technology sometimes leads science rather than vice versa.

It goes to responsible use again, though: one standard drink of any alcoholic beverage contains about the same amount of alcohol. Beer is 5% and (sorry 'bout the metric) a glass is around 400 mL. Wine is around 12% and a glass is 200 mL. Spirits are 40% and a nip is 30 mL.

Abuse can happen, of course, but if used as intended the stronger concentrations possible still lead to the consumption of the same amount of ethanol.

[Dr. Shane]

I agree that the Bible does not forbid alcohol consumption although it does condemn drunkeness. I do however believe the church is correct in emphasizing total abstinence although it should be done in the same respect as vegetarianism is encouraged. It should be part of our health message that keeps us ever vigilant as we wait, afflicting our souls, for the second coming of Christ.

[LifeHiscost]

It's immature.

"Wine produces mockers; alcohol leads to brawls.

Those led astray by drink cannot be wise."

Proverbs 20:1 NLT

"After much thought, I decided to cheer myself with wine. And while still seeking wisdom, I clutched at foolishness. In this way, I tried to experience the only happiness most people find during their brief life in this world."Ecclesiastes 2:2 NLT

And I'm supposing to ignore this advice for the sake of a can of beer in the name of maturity, is highly mature?

Momentary satisfaction, because we're too wise to succumb to the foibles of the common person, has been the prevailing attitude of man since Adam chose to eat of the forbidden fruit as a result of the misconception that he would lose out on something worth keeping.

One thing I will agree on, none of God's counsels are based on demand, including the ultimate command, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all they heart and with all thy mind and with all thy soul, and thy neighbor as thyself.", for if it were true that God's commands were demands, we would be nothing more than robots.

It is true of alcohol consumption. And if one wishes to serve God with impaired mental capacity, probably no thunderbolt of lightning will proceed from heaven to remind us of the foolishness of imbibing in that which has probably done more to damage human beings, than any other activity save illicit sex.

Allow me to extrapolate for the sake of example.

"For on account of a (drink) one is reduced to a loaf of bread,

And (a drink)hunts for the precious life.

Can a man take fire in his bosom

And his clothes not be burned?

Or can a man walk on hot coals

And his feet not be scorched?

So is the one who goes in to his neighbor's (bottle);

Whoever touches (it) will not go unpunished."

Proverbs 6:26-29 NASB substituted parenthesis mine LHC

God blesses!

[John317]

For example you may say that God does not intend people to eat meat and drink milk... yet ... in the Bible he permits and in some case encourages both uses.

It's true that God never intended people to eat animals and drink milk, but that doesn't mean God prohibits eating meat or drinking milk today. The general principle is to eat to be healthy as possible, and if that means we must eat meat and drink milk, I believe God would want us to do it. It's far better to eat meat than eat sugar and junk foods. That was Ellen White's message too.

Let's suppose that the only thing we had to drink to keep alive was fermented wine. I believe there's no doubt God would rather have us drink fermented wine than die from lack of water. The same goes for pork.

[John317]

No one would ever be an alcoholic or die from alcohol if they didn't take that first drink. The problem is that no one thinks they're going to become addicted to it, or die from it, when they take that first drink. Millions of people have had their lives and the lives of their loved ones ruined from it. Not a single one of those people had any idea this would happen when they began to drink.

[doug yowell]

I agree that the Bible does not forbid alcohol consumption although it does condemn drunkeness. I do however believe the church is correct in emphasizing total abstinence although it should be done in the same respect as vegetarianism is encouraged. It should be part of our health message that keeps us ever vigilant as we wait, afflicting our souls, for the second coming of Christ.

There is a big difference, however,Adventism demands total abstinence as a requirement for church membership,it has never been optional.Since our inception the church and it's leadership has worked in unity to promote abstinence both within it's own ranks and in the community as well.If this total abstinence, as opposed to alcohol in moderation, infringes on a person's "Christian freedom", those SDA's who are convinced that abstinence is an unreasonable,unBiblical requirement should renounce their membership or work openly to change the official biblical understanding.

[John317]

No, it is called finding a good excuse to do what you want to do anyway, despite the clear counsel of God in the Bible and the Spirit of propehcy.

There are people who do the same with virutally every kind of sin there is. I have a close friend who does the same with adultery. Eve did the same at the Tree. God's command was clear but she found a reason to eat anyway. It's the same human story throughout history.

[Dr. Shane]

Given that we are living in the anti-typical Day of Atonement AND the Bible clearly teaches against drunkenness, I think the church's prohibition on drinking alcohol is reasonable. How many people that drink moderately can honestly claim they have never gotten drunk?

[Gerr]

The percentages stuff is interesting, Shane, and relates to the history of technology and the way technology sometimes leads science rather than vice versa.

It goes to responsible use again, though: one standard drink of any alcoholic beverage contains about the same amount of alcohol. Beer is 5% and (sorry 'bout the metric) a glass is around 400 mL. Wine is around 12% and a glass is 200 mL. Spirits are 40% and a nip is 30 mL.

Abuse can happen, of course, but if used as intended the stronger concentrations possible still lead to the consumption of the same amount of ethanol.

If ETOH lowers inhibitions and clouds judgment, for what possible reason would a Christian who is trying to gain victory over sin have for drinking when there are numerous healthful drinks to choose from? There are even non-alcoholic wines (several from Australia) and beer and champagne.

[Bravus]

No, it is called finding a good excuse to do what you want to do anyway, despite the clear counsel of God in the Bible and the Spirit of propehcy.

There are people who do the same with virutally every kind of sin there is. I have a close friend who does the same with adultery. Eve did the same at the Tree. God's command was clear but she found a reason to eat anyway. It's the same human story throughout history.

Not so fast, Mr. You are placing a requirement on believers, and calling their faith into question on the basis of it, that you have consistently and repeatedly failed to demonstrate is Biblical. How about you *first* establish that? Only then does it make sense to talk about rationalization.

[LifeHiscost]

Since our inception the church and it's leadership has worked in unity to promote abstinence both within it's own ranks and in the community as well.If this total abstinence, as opposed to alcohol in moderation, infringes on a person's "Christian freedom", those SDA's who are convinced that abstinence is an unreasonable,unBiblical requirement should renounce their membership or work openly to change the official biblical understanding.

The same fallacious principle was presented by Lucifer sometime before war in Heaven, advancing the notion that depriving him from creative powers was taking away his right to freely exercise his will.

Since we know that alcohol leads often to murder, not to mention

the baleful results of consequential damage to physical wellbeing, maybe the church should change it's requirements for membership to only so many murders a year, for the sake of personal freedom to choose how we are allowed to live our lives, while still receiving all the benefits of church membership.

"If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are."1 Corinthians 3:17 NKJV

"So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God."1 Cor 10:23 NLT

God blesses!

[doug yowell]

Not so fast, Mr. You are placing a requirement on believers, and calling their faith into question on the basis of it, that you have consistently and repeatedly failed to demonstrate is Biblical. How about you *first* establish that? Only then does it make sense to talk about rationalization.

After a plethora of Biblical texts that warn against the inherent dangers of alcohol you keep claiming that the case for abstinence is not Biblical.Many other stories in the Bible illustrate the deceptive nature of alcohol yet not a single Biblical argument has been put forward to repudiate that conclusion. The Biblical admonitions have not been addressed nor has the Biblical case for "moderation" been made. If one demands a "thou shalt never drink alcohol" (like that would stop anyone)in order to understand what God's will for the believer is then good luck with the rest of life too.If the lack of such a prohibition automatically translates into a "drink responsibly" then who needs the Bible in the first place?Just check out a beer ad!

[doug yowell]

Bravus, myself and others have pointed out that we are not 'for' alcohol consumption but against using the Bible to prove the point that it is forbidden when the Bible simply gives us guidelines and does not forbid alcohol, but against drunkenness.

Help me understand this,Co. Are you supportive of alcohol consumption as long as it isn't drunkenness? Since Bravus has already told us that he consumes alcohol are you suggesting that he is NOT "for" something that he is practicing and defending? Are you saying that the Biblical "guidelines" are,"it's ok to drink (responsibily)"? Can you post a few passages that illustrate this? If the scientific evidence presented by Gerry and others is accurate concerning the measureable effects of alcohol, are you suggesting that the Bible permission to be responsible will nullify the impairments that may accompany it's moderate use?Or are you disputing the truthfulness of the scientific evidence?Don't throw away your soapbox just yet!

[John317]

Can I safely assume that those who think it's ok to drink have absolutely no use for the prophet, Ellen White?

I think that's kinda the way it seems to me to be stacking up here. There definitely seems to be a relationship between the two.

[olger]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Can I safely assume that those who think it's ok to drink have absolutely no use for the prophet, Ellen White?

I think that's kinda the way it seems to me to be stacking up here. There definitely seems to be a relationship between the two.

Good observation, John. In spite of our modern sensibilities, Ellen's words will rise up to outlive her pallbearers.