This topic of abstinence toward alcohol is a highly controversial one. For anyone who reads this, I first hope that there would not be any preconceived or a post-conceived notion that I am against those who drink and those who discerned it well to consume alcohol. But the word of God is my source of hope. My source of salvation. And it is all I trust in. So when God speaks through the word and reveals to me the part of the attributes of being holy I will hold fast to those words for God has told his children to “Be Holy, For I am Holy” (1 Peter 1:16, Lev. 11:44)
My hope now is not to give anyone a rational-personal argument, but a biblical argument that garners authority past rational, traditional, and charismatic. Therefore I will present passages from the Bible and whoever my audience is or it can just be me to remind myself… ahha. can take what they want, but I have faith that the selected passages will be read and though at the utmost integrity to not be trapped in a miopic view of the text, but a clear sight seeking the context of the passage and even the book.
The Nazirite
Numbers 6:1-21
1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man or woman wants to make a special vow, a vow of separation to the LORD as a Nazirite, 3 he must abstain from wine and other fermented drink and must not drink vinegar made from wine or from other fermented drink. He must not drink grape juice or eat grapes or raisins. 4 As long as he is a Nazirite, he must not eat anything that comes from the grapevine, not even the seeds or skins.
5 ” ‘During the entire period of his vow of separation no razor may be used on his head. He must be holy until the period of his separation to the LORD is over; he must let the hair of his head grow long. 6 Throughout the period of his separation to the LORD he must not go near a dead body. 7 Even if his own father or mother or brother or sister dies, he must not make himself ceremonially unclean on account of them, because the symbol of his separation to God is on his head. 8 Throughout the period of his separation he is consecrated to the LORD.
9 ” ‘If someone dies suddenly in his presence, thus defiling the hair he has dedicated, he must shave his head on the day of his cleansing—the seventh day. 10 Then on the eighth day he must bring two doves or two young pigeons to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 11 The priest is to offer one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering to make atonement for him because he sinned by being in the presence of the dead body. That same day he is to consecrate his head. 12 He must dedicate himself to the LORD for the period of his separation and must bring a year-old male lamb as a guilt offering. The previous days do not count, because he became defiled during his separation.
13 ” ‘Now this is the law for the Nazirite when the period of his separation is over. He is to be brought to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 14 There he is to present his offerings to the LORD : a year-old male lamb without defect for a burnt offering, a year-old ewe lamb without defect for a sin offering, a ram without defect for a fellowship offering, [a] 15 together with their grain offerings and drink offerings, and a basket of bread made without yeast—cakes made of fine flour mixed with oil, and wafers spread with oil.
16 ” ‘The priest is to present them before the LORD and make the sin offering and the burnt offering. 17 He is to present the basket of unleavened bread and is to sacrifice the ram as a fellowship offering to the LORD, together with its grain offering and drink offering.
18 ” ‘Then at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, the Nazirite must shave off the hair that he dedicated. He is to take the hair and put it in the fire that is under the sacrifice of the fellowship offering.
19 ” ‘After the Nazirite has shaved off the hair of his dedication, the priest is to place in his hands a boiled shoulder of the ram, and a cake and a wafer from the basket, both made without yeast. 20 The priest shall then wave them before the LORD as a wave offering; they are holy and belong to the priest, together with the breast that was waved and the thigh that was presented. After that, the Nazirite may drink wine.
21 ” ‘This is the law of the Nazirite who vows his offering to the LORD in accordance with his separation, in addition to whatever else he can afford. He must fulfill the vow he has made, according to the law of the Nazirite.’ “
Jesus did not drink.
Luke 1:15
15for he will be(A) great before the Lord. And(B) he must not drink wine or strong(C) drink, and(D) he will be(E) filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.
The high priests did not drink before the presence of the Lord.
Leviticus 10:6-11
6Then Moses said to Aaron and to his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, “(A)Do not [a]uncover your heads nor tear your clothes, so that you will not die and that He will not (B)become wrathful against all the congregation. But your kinsmen, the whole house of Israel, shall bewail the burning which the LORD has brought about.
7“You shall not even go out from the doorway of the tent of meeting, or you will die; for (C)the LORD’S anointing oil is upon you.” So they did according to the word of Moses.
8The LORD then spoke to Aaron, saying,
9“(D)Do not drink wine or strong drink, neither you nor your sons with you, when you come into the tent of meeting, so that you will not die–it is a perpetual statute throughout your generations–
10and (E)so as to make a distinction between the holy and the profane, and between the unclean and the clean,
11and (F)so as to teach the sons of Israel all the statutes which the LORD has spoken to them through Moses.”
The Rechabite’s Obedience
Jeremiah 35:1-19
1The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD in the days of (A)Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, saying,
2“Go to the house of the (B)Rechabites and speak to them, and bring them into the house of the LORD, into one of the (C)chambers, and give them wine to drink.”
3Then I took Jaazaniah the son of Jeremiah, son of Habazziniah, and his brothers and all his sons and the whole house of the Rechabites,
4and I brought them into the house of the LORD, into the chamber of the sons of Hanan the son of Igdaliah, the (D)man of God, which was near the chamber of the officials, which was above the chamber of Maaseiah the son of Shallum, (E)the doorkeeper.
5Then I set before the men of the house of the Rechabites pitchers full of wine and cups; and I said to them, “(F)Drink wine!”
6But they said, “We will not drink wine, for (G)Jonadab the son of (H)Rechab, our father, commanded us, saying, ‘You shall (I)not drink wine, you or your sons, forever.
7‘You shall not build a house, and you shall not sow seed and you shall not plant a vineyard or own one; but in (J)tents you shall dwell all your days, that you may live (K)many days in the land where you (L)sojourn.’
8“We have (M)obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab, our father, in all that he commanded us, not to drink wine all our days, we, our wives, our sons or our daughters,
9nor to build ourselves houses to dwell in; and we (N)do not have vineyard or field or seed.
10“We have only (O)dwelt in tents, and have obeyed and have done according to all that (P)Jonadab our father commanded us.
11“But when (Q)Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against the land, we said, ‘Come and let us (R)go to Jerusalem before the army of the Chaldeans and before the army of the Arameans.’ So we have dwelt in Jerusalem.”
12Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying,
13“Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, ‘Go and say to the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, “(S)Will you not receive instruction by listening to My words?” declares the LORD.
14“The (T)words of Jonadab the son of Rechab, which he commanded his sons not to drink wine, are observed So they do not drink wine to this day, for they have obeyed their father’s command But I have spoken to you (U)again and again; yet you have (V)not listened to Me.
15“Also I have sent to you all My (W)servants the prophets, sending them again and again, saying: ‘(X)Turn now every man from his evil way and amend your deeds, and (Y)do not go after other gods to worship them Then you will (Z)dwell in the land which I have given to you and to your forefathers; but you have not (AA)inclined your ear or listened to Me.
16‘Indeed, the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have (AB)observed the command of their father which he commanded them, but this people has not listened to Me.’”‘
17“Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of hosts, the God of Israel, ‘Behold, (AC)I am bringing on Judah and on all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the disaster that I have pronounced against them; because I (AD)spoke to them but they did not listen, and I have called them but they did not answer.’”
18Then Jeremiah said to the house of the Rechabites, “Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, ‘Because you have (AE)obeyed the command of Jonadab your father, kept all his commands and done according to all that he commanded you;
19therefore thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, “Jonadab the son of Rechab (AF)shall not lack a man to (AG)stand before Me always.”‘”
All Scripture cited is from the ESV translation of the Bible collected from Biblegateway.com
I hope these selected passages helped as it certainly opened my eyes to see a clearer picture of how I present myself to the Lord. It’s not that alcohol itself is the root of sin, but as scripture points out, it is in association with uncleanness and joyous recklessness. It is foolhardy to seek holiness yet being caught in the rifts of impetuous behavior.
One prevalent argument I hear today is that Christians want to be culturally relevant to those who drink. Christians say they want to be a witness to those who are “in sin.” But the Bible never EVER teaches us to be culturally involved to that extent where we might have to play with fire and conform. Instead 1 John 2:15-17 says
Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.
We are called to reach out in a way of being witnesses (see Acts 1:8). As in bearing a genuine witness of the character and the life of Christ by abiding in his words (see John 8:31-32).
My goal out of this blog post is not for people to hate on alcohol. I see it acceptable at a joyous occasion such as a wedding to celebrate with toast of wine. But on doing it with “moderation” to be culturally relevant such as drinking with friends and in bars for the sake of “witnessing” through what Christians think is “fellowship” I am not one to judge, but one who is pursuing holiness, but playing with fire is dangerously close to being burned and caught in flames.
Lastly Jesus himself did not come to bring salvation under the strategy of being relevant with culture. Rather He was one to proclaim the good news that the Father has sent him to save the world of gentiles and Jews to salvation through grace in order so that the Father may receive glory, honor, and praise.
The Devil’s temptation for Christ to become relevant.
And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” But he answered, “It is written,
“‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”Matthew 4:3-4
What is bread used for? Even in the ancient days I’m assuming is was a source of substenance; a source of food. If Christ was to turn stones into food he would be able to feed the entire population of Jerusalem let alone the world. Why didn’t he? I mean people would surely have come to him then and seek him out for he is one who does miracles and provides all provisions needed… right? Well surely Christ answers to the temptation by giving glory back to the Father. Jesus responds in an intricate way that is pertinent to all heard this message. It is not important for him to adhere to every beings humanistic needs as it is pivotal to manifest the reality of the truth of the Gospel which is understanding the the word of God is the only source of substenance that will ever matter.
So why. Why try to be so relevant. With alcohol, smoking, or cussing. Are you willing to reach out at the cost of discrediting or setting back your pursuit of holiness. Are you willing to “evangelize” or “witness” at the cost that the good news given by Jesus Christ is spin-doctored.
The world does not need Christians who are friends who do the same things they do.
The world needs Christians who are friends that adore God and live the life in pursuit of holiness.
The world needs Christians who continually reveal the beautiful truth of the Gospel.
-Alex Yi
6 responses so far ↓
Joshua Lim // December 28, 2008 at 9:53 pm |
Hello Alex,
Very nice blog.
While I agree that Christians ought not compromise holiness while seeking to be relevant to the culture around them, I’m wondering whether there is any biblical warrant for abstinence from alcohol. The passages cited above apply to particular circumstances in redemptive history, whether they be to the Levitical priesthood, the Nazarenes, the Rechabites, or to John the Baptist. To be consistent in binding those particular rules to Christians today would require that you do so wholesale, that is, include the rest of the laws that came with them (i.e. Levitical priesthood laws, OT sacrificial laws, etc.). In the same way that we believe that certain spiritual gifts are no longer in the church because they belonged to a special and particular period of time in redemptive history, so too, OT laws pertaining to the Israelites were abrogated and are no longer binding on NT believers.
Of course, I’m not saying that people should go out and get drunk until they’re blue in the face, the New Testament explicitly condemns that, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that being holy requires abstinence. Christ drank wine (he was accused by the Pharisees as being a drunkard–an accusation that would not have much weight if he denied any consumption of alcohol–, he also made water into wine!–you’d think he would make it into grape juice or something). John Murray, in reference to alcohol and Christian ethics, says that we ought not be wiser than God by binding the consciences of Christians by laws that were not sanctioned by God himself.
As far as the gist of what you’re saying, I think you’re right. Christians shouldn’t go against Scripture just to be relevant. And if certain Christians are getting drunk to be cooler or hipper, that’s just silly. The only issue is whether drinking (apart from getting drunk) is condemned by Scripture. Obviously, I don’t believe it is, and I think we miss the point of the bible if we’re scavenging for various proof-texts to find whether this or that thing is a sin. The main point of the Bible is that Christ came, lived obediently and died for sinners (“the beautiful truth of the Gospel,” as you very well put it). We live obediently in response to that free gospel, but obedience is determined by the clear teaching of Scripture, not by sporadic passages that support what we think morality should consist of.
Anyway, it’s a lot to ponder. I hope you’re doing well, Alex. And keep up the good blogging!
alexyi // December 29, 2008 at 1:23 am |
Hello Josh,
Thanks for the comment Josh. I don’t know if you’ll ever read my reply, but I feel a need to reiterate the point of my entry and also respond to your helpful criticism. I’ll start from the top to bottom.
I still feel that my given scriptural backing from the old testament about the Rechabites and the Nazirites are proper evidences to a pursuit of holiness by means of abstinence. I’m not saying you can achieve holiness through abstinence, but it will sure help a lot. A lot to a point, where it is worth seeking this abstinence over “obligatory” drinking to be relevant with culture. I am absolutely not advocating one to become a Nazirite or one like a Rechabite. However I am showing scriptural evidences of those pursuing holiness and a quality and attribute of those who were pleasing to God.
I completely agree that OT laws are not binding to those under the new covenant. However we see this episode with Paul in Acts 18:18 ( way after he converted)
Paul of course knew that this might have been impractical in Gentile lands. However he didn’t do this for the Jews or the Gentiles, but a personal vow before God in his own right. This type of vow is very comparable to the Nazirite description in Numbers 6:1-21. R.C Sproul refers to this as an expression of gratitude to God. In that sense I would say that the practical influence by the characteristics of old testament traditions is an acceptable behavior as seen in Paul’s, what many might think a whimsical act of following an unwholesome strive to have a title.
Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:34 refers to what your talking about regarding the Pharisees name calling toward Jesus. And you’re right, rhetorical evidences show that Jesus probably drank wine. But even He made a Nazirite type vow shown in Mark 14:22-25 where Jesus says “Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” Right after this, his greatest trial begins. Also Jesus turning water into wine is not evidence of him drinking wine, but a simple acknowledgment that wine is indeed acceptable. Of course I should also note that historical evidences show that wine in the new testament days are nothing like alcohol now in terms of the level of alcohol content.
Jesus, in reference to the Pharisees name calling, says that wisdom is justified by all her deeds. This parable referred to Jesus’ authority in his wisdom is proven by his children. A pragmatic example of this is that at least today, the most respected people of the faith I know today is living in a way of abstinence. And if they are drinking time to time, I do not know about it. That alone is an evidence for me that these respected men are at least taking some measures to making sure that what is acceptable stays acceptable and guarded from causing an act of stumbling. as wisdom is justified by her deeds, His disciples will be witnesses justifying the reality of the living God.
I agree. Alcohol is not mandated by God to be prohibited.
I also think my entry did not support this fact. However I am advocating that these type of “vows” and “measures” to pursue holiness is warranted in scripture.
I originally wrote this as a response to my own convictions why I didn’t drink. I just didn’t, but I didn’t know why. So I have to discover what my convictions were based on truth. In that, I did not hunt for these verses to prove a point, because I also have confidence that the bible is not meant for that purpose other than the sole revelation of the Father, Son, and Spirit. However alcohol is a very specific means to a search of my means to pursue holiness. Am I doing it out of morality? Or am I doing it because this is truly a means to love God more. And then I remembered the Nazirite vow. And the Rechabite vow. And the vow of John the Baptist, Jesus, and Paul.
I understand my heading is blunt saying the abstinence is necessary. But it’s pertinence relays most solely to me because I understand my choice of abstinence will assist in my pursuit of being a witness to my peers and acquaintances of non-belief. My choice of abstinence will assist my pursuit of practicing what is profitable over what is acceptable. My choice assists me in my pursuit to obey the primary commandment to love the LORD with all my heart, soul, and mind.
I ask you then. Am I responding to that free gospel, by picking out sporadic passages based on my “moral” opinions.
OR.
Is this a means to seek out the “beautiful truth of the Gospel,” by searching for “what is Holy” and “what is a pursuit of Holiness” Because this goal of pursuing holiness is not to up my moral points but to adhere the “beautiful truth” in where I am seeking to obey and please the Lord with all my being.
Thanks for this beneficial means to ponder the magnificent call to pursue holiness. I hope you are also doing well. And pursuing holiness by your means of activities and that you also are benefiting and profiting others as you have profited me with your response.
Thanks and keep up the faith.
Joshua Lim // December 29, 2008 at 2:32 am |
Hey Alex,
Thanks for the response. Just a few things:
First, regarding the Nazarene vow, I’m saying that you can’t go by that vow, nor can you find assurance that keeping that vow is pleasing to God. God’s mandate was to those specific people, just like his mandate for sacrifices was for a specific time and place. To apply the Nazarene vow of abstinence to anyone other than the Nazarenes is to misapply Scripture. So I’m not saying that we shouldn’t do it, I’m saying that it’s not possible to do it, since those vows were never meant for us. While the principle of devoting oneself to a certain vow is certainly commendable, the specifics of that particular vow are no longer binding (and if they were, it would only be to those particular people to whom God appointed it to be binding).
To give a rather plain example: in the OT a man was considered unclean if he ate certain foods. If we’re consistent with what you’re saying, following “scriptural evidences of those pursuing holiness” we should also deem it more glorifying to God to eat only clean foods now, since it was pleasing to God then. Of course, both of us would not agree with that since the OT Levitical order has passed away. Similarly, to apply any part of the OT out of its immediate context and take it as something that God is more or less honored by is to misinterpret and misapply Scripture.
Regarding the example of Paul. I’m sure we can both agree that the contexts of the book of Acts was that which no longer applies to us. That is, the New Covenant church was being born and the OT economy was passing away. So there were still some questions within the Apostolic Church as to which laws applied (meat sacrificed to idols, blood, circumcision, etc.). So to cite an example from Acts, or to seek to imitate any biblical narrative, I would say, is to miss the point. Going back to the example of spiritual gifts: based on using the narrative of Acts as a guideline for the Christian life, it would make sense to try to speak in tongues, to raise people from the dead, and to heal the sick. Of course, we understand that the purpose of Acts is not to give us rules or guidelines on how to do certain things, but it provides us an account of how Christ’s promise of the Holy Spirit and of his Church was fulfilled. An event that bears no repetition, but is as unique as Christ’s death on the cross. So to pick an event from Acts and use it as a rule is to miss the point.
I fail to see how Mark 14:25 is a Nazarene vow. Christ is not making a vow of abstinence, he’s talking about his ascension.
When Christ talks about wisdom being justified by her deeds, there’s no mention of abstinence from alcohol. I believe you’re reading your assumption into the text that alcohol is unwise which is really begging the question of whether or not it’s biblical to drink or not drink. (Maybe you saw this one coming) but Paul even recommends that Timothy drink a little wine.
The whole point of all this is not that everyone should go drink alcohol. No, that’s far from it. In fact, I would take issue with anyone who makes drinking an obligation for the Christian. However, I would also take issue with anyone who thinks that not drinking is somehow more pleasing to God than not. I do believe that there are certain issues that the Scripture does not speak to directly, nor does it attempt to. For some it may be wiser not to drink, for others it may be better to drink. We know whether we ought to or not, individually, based on wisdom, not based on any explicit NT command. And what works for us personally should not be pressed on others, unless it is explicitly or clearly implicit (maybe an oxymoron) in Scripture.
Summing up, (much to sum up on), if you’re not going to drink, that’s great. But please don’t cite scripture texts to make it seem that not drinking is somehow more pleasing to God (unless, of course, the Scripture passages are there–which I don’t believe they are). Nothing is wrong with drinking, nothing is wrong with not drinking. Neither is more pleasing or less pleasing to God. Again, we should not be wiser than God.
If not drinking makes for a better witness in front of your peers, that’s great. But it may very well be that your peers have a false understanding of piety (i.e. not drinking) that needs correction. And if we both agree that Scripture does not bind the conscience of man in regard to drinking, we shouldn’t seek to make it so.
Long comment. Apologies.
Goodnight,
Josh
alexyi // December 29, 2008 at 3:55 am |
Hey Josh,
I wanna give my last words before I go to sleep also.
First, also regarding the Nazirite vow. I also agree that one cannot fulfill that vow, because it was regarded toward the Israelites. However my purpose of both the example of the Rechabites, Nazirites, John the Baptist, and Paul was to show that “vows” and symbols of “dedication” whether it’s abstinence or head shaves, are certainly commendable as you affirmed. No vow is ever binding. And if you got it from my previous response it truly is a personal dedication in that pursuit for a discipline.
Because I already agreed on that fact I’m hoping we can discount the irrelevant example of the food being unclean or not because scripture shows evidence in the book of Acts that all food can be consider clean in the dream Peter had. and that’s scriptural evidence rather than a misapplication of discrediting old testament values and pursuits which are highly beneficial to the new testament which is also corroborated by the Apostle’s reliance and affirmations in the commendation of not only messianic text, but also vows such as the real life example of Paul pursuing a personal vow whether or not it was a new covenant church getting out of the OT ways.
It seems as though you are also discrediting many new church means to seek after God. And I agree with your points, but I am convinced through scripture that these vows and spiritual gifts as old fashioned as they were; simply a means to know God and love God to a higher maturity. Simply a means to obey the greatest commandment. In our present age: prayer, qts, small group, and other stuff are all means for that like the NT times. The point I am picking from acts and any OT scripture is that these vows are valuable and my goal to make vows and such are backed up now only from something I created on my own, but people in the past have done it. It is a past precedent. So if you were to discredit the importance of vows which clearly you are not than I’d say that point has truly been mistaken.
My point isn’t to show every single nazirite vow (i’m not saying nazarene on purpose if you noticed by now because there is a lot of confusion up in the air about the two meanings behind it) portrayed in the NT. But to show the purpose of Vows.
And I would agree that Christ is not making a complete Nazirite vow, but it is definitely a partiality of it’s whole in the notion of wine. And I would half agree that I do think he’s talking about his ascension, but to discredit the original statement is also false interpretation and resulting in a subjective pretense.
What I said about Christ talking about wisdom being justified by her deeds was not talking about abstinence at all. because if it did he would be contradicting himself (if he actually was a drinker). I was talking about the fact that whatever he did in his time in the NT showed that he had many followers and that proved that he was one with certain authority. Then I gave you an example of me and those who I respect. And I have confidence in their discipleship under scripture and that they too are results of Jesus’ authority. All those I respect highly respect type of abstinence, where there is at least abstinence before those who may be stumbled.
In the end you said neither is more pleasing to God. I would disagree in that literally neither is. However, if one wholeheartedly pursues abstinence as a means of being a witness having a desire for God to be known in such a way it is such a noble pursuit.
How then, will abstinence be a means. You see it that it might just promote a false piety. I see it in a way where foremost I am preventing myself of course from being drunk. Because we can both agree that being drunk is an explicit missing the mark. (also a clearly implicit one as well). Of course I can sin by means in my sober form. But stepping away from drunkenness is one less sin to struggle against and furthermore consider the evidence of God’s grace shown in his delivery from such a sin as drunkenness. Of course I’m going to have to take the same path to deal with many of my sins which will be of course be all the more great because it will always serve as a reminder of God’s grace and the grandiose reality of Christ’s righteousness.
To respond to that sum up. I cited sources about the Nazirites and the Rechabites, but my purpose was to show the very detail of such a vow and commitment as a personal commendation to these men who were considered righteous before the Lord. If you noticed I didn’t focus on the drinking aspect. But I selected the entirety of the passage for the very reason, that such detail carries a significant importance that is pragmatic to our very lives.
Holiness takes dedication and much grace from God. Alcohol happens to be in it. And for me to discredit it just because it was a specific obligation to the Nazirites in the OT and that we can just discredit it altogether to the point of not respecting it. Is what I truly count as foolishness. I have two reasons to peaceful about. One is that I am thankful and at peace that I no longer am and was never under the obligation to fulfill these expectations. But I am also thankful for their precedents for me to see at least what was holy before and God and pleasing before God in the past. And I do have faith in the immutability of God in where his tastes on what pleases him does not change over time. Hosea 6:6
affirmed the NT commandment of loving God. And that was the purpose of it all from the past to present and to the future. If you remember the characteristics of the Rechabites, rhetorics show that passage enlightened with a unique type of love for the Lord via dedication. They loved the Lord first and as a response they dedicated not the other way around. All throughout scripture as much as there is no mandate on alcohol other than what you see as discredited evidence (contrary to what I think) scriptures often shows a derogatory implication against alcohol. Especially in our culture today alcohol is definitely seen as part of a negative stigma.
In my personal response to that I always have knowledge that alcohol is not inherently wrong, but drinking in front of people to affirm what I believe is not going to truly be beneficial to anyone. Especially the youth in the faith. If we go by context alcohol in the past culture does not seem inherently evil, but one thing for sure is that in this day and age even those of nonbelief perceives it negatively because they saw the result of an individual struck with drunkenness.
To say not drinking is the same as drinking before society. I have to count it as irrelevant and unrealistic to this day and age. And you’re right there is that chance that my peers have a false understanding of piety, but my hope is based on the Spirit of the Lord stimulating the condition of the human soul.
Abstinence is simply just one of my personal character traits, but my advocacy in my demeanor is not based on refuting other Christians moral values, but to live as a witness of the truth of the Gospel which is dependent on his grace and righteousness on a daily basis.
My conscience is free of drinking, but like i pointed out in my original entry. I’m not writing to express my conscience on drinking, because I do believe in the freedom of doing so. But my disagreement is in the usage of drinking in order to be relevant with culture. To conform to culture by any means whether it is drinking or not such as smoking, intense gaming, and etc. is not beneficial to the kingdom. Because they might simply see the opposite version of what you said as a false form of piety.
My conscience of your concentrated personal individualism is at rest, however in regards to fellow brothers who seek to spread “the gospel” by means of cultural relevance, I cannot rest because this is my holy discontent. Because ultimately the true means of being a witness of the Gospel is being polluted with a notion of a type of God that is tolerant of sin. A God tolerant of sin is an idea that paradoxical to a point that He can not be revered.
eeek that was long I wish I could have made it shorter. But I felt all be necessary for a proper response to your response.
-Alex
Joshua Lim // December 29, 2008 at 9:35 am |
Here we go:
My point, again, is that if you want to be pious, you better do it the way God appointed. Not every sign of worship is glorifying to God no matter how heartfelt or “genuine” it is. We worship and glorify God on his terms, not our own. And yes, that may mean that doing devotions, reading scripture, having small groups, are not glorifying to God as we make it to be. God desires obedience and not sacrifice.
If we’re going to cite the OT, let’s look at the golden calf incident with Israel. Here’s a principle regarding how we approach God that remains pertinent to us since it’s a similar circumstance. When Moses went up for a while the Israelites wanted to worship God in their own way, so they made a golden calf. I’m sure they were genuine in their worship, but it was not seen as glorifying in God’s eyes, was it? What about Nadab and Abihu, they got a little creative, worshiped God the way they saw fit, and they were consumed. God is not worshiped when we use ways he has not appointed. It’s not enough that you “mean it” or that your heart is in it. If you want to worship God, you worship him the way he commanded, otherwise you may be worshiping committing the sin of idolatry. Let’s look at the NT where certain Judaizers are telling Christians that they must be circumcised. Is God glorified through circumcision? Well, if according to you something that was required by God before can still be a way to glorify him now, than sure, why not. Of course, that’s not how the Apostle Paul saw it. He told the Judaizers to go emasculate themselves.
Moderation and self-control are commended by scripture. So it shouldn’t be a choice between complete abstinence or revelry, but a middle way. God gave us things to enjoy on this earth. Self-discipline means that we should control ourselves, not simply abstain from all things that might be bad. Wordly pleasures (such as drinking) are legitimate. There are certain things that God has given that we share in common with unbelievers that are not sin. And to deny those things is to deny the fact that it was God’s creation is good. Sure, there are bad things–no one’s arguing that–but there are also genuinely good things that are to be enjoyed. Sex is good, but it needs to be in the proper context (i.e. marriage). But there is a negative stigma attached to it outside of marriage, should I avoid marriage and sex altogether? Certainly, this would be more pious, wouldn’t it? This was the mentality of the monks during the medieval age, and it’s not much different from the mindset that you have.
In any case, I don’t think I’m the one who is misapplying scripture by not seeing the value of vows via the nazarene vows or the other passages. To strip them of their value would be to take away their redemptive-historical significance and make them into mere moral guidelines, which is what you have done. If you want morality don’t go to scripture, go to Aesop’s fables. I assure you, the latter has more morality than scripture. But if you want the story of redemption, how it is that God saved sinners, look to Scripture. If you want to see an example of the Nazarene vow, look at Samson and his inability to act as a righteous judge of Israel. In his failure, we see an arrow pointing to the more perfect and righteous judge who kept God’s commands in our stead. The Bible is a book chiefly concerned with redemption of sinners, not a moral code book on how to categorize every aspect of one’s life.
You’re familiar with the pharisees and how they made extra laws in order that they might not break the Scriptural laws. Despite what many might think, these pharisees were perhaps more pious than the rest of us (according to your definition of piety, at least). Yet Christ’s rebuke of their lives are evidence of the fact that God is not pleased by our own autonomous rule keeping.
In the end, we seem to differ in our understandings of piety. I say piety is chiefly receiving what God has given to us in the gospel, namely, the benefits of Christ presented in the gospel and the sacraments. You, however, say that piety consists of doing, given that it is genuinely expressed. Is this accurate? Is our piety determined by works (even love is a work)? Or is it determined by the fact that Christ kept the works for us? I’m not saying that we don’t need to keep the law, or be obedient, but I’m asking whether it’s consistent for anyone who affirms justification by faith alone, to think that a Christian can grow in piety by any other way but by receiving rather than climbing and working. To say that our works contribute in any way to our sanctity is Roman Catholic. We obey out of gratitude, not because we think we can reach up to God through our own ways. We’re not building a tower to reach the heavens, we’re receiving what God has given us in his Son, a piety which is received, not by doing more, but by doing less. I’m not advocating any sort of quietism. It’s not through inaction that we receive Christ’s benefits, but through that gaze that looks not to our own righteousness or performance, but to the righteousness of Christ, that is, by faith alone.
You can respond or not, but I’m done.
Josh
alexyi // December 29, 2008 at 2:17 pm |
This is also my last:
I agree that a person being “genuine” is not good enough if there is no obedience. In OT times there were many laws that needed to be obeyed and was disobeyed in the incident of Aaron’s sons and the golden calf (first of all, i don’t think you should stretch it so far to say that the Israelites thought the golden calf as God). But in NT times we are mandated to obey two fundamental conditions which are to love the lord with all your heart and love your neighbors as yourself.
I think I’m starting to see the significant difference in our language and points. The thing is I completely agree well at least in the major issue that works cannot substitute the faith. Me being abstinent does not make me holier. But the thing I never said that in the first place. Rather I said one may pursue abstinence to seek what is profitable for their peers and community. Why do modern day pastors require a degree of abstinence? Is it because they do not understand the importance of self control and the freedom of the gospel? Or is it because they see a certain responsibility to be above reproach in front of their entire congregation?
You said the human being was meant to live in a middle way.
Scripture discredits that thought:
Romans 13:14
1 Corinthians 10:12
That risk of abusing drinking is just not worth it. Proverbs 31 affirms this.
1 John 2:15-17 also affirms this idea
It’s not for us to play with that fire.
You say I have a mindset that restricts me from good things. But I did previously say that drinking is at most an acceptable activity. Traditionally practiced in weddings, commemorations, and etc. But my focus was on, like a said a multiple times, absolutely unacceptable if it is a means to be relevant to culture. A consistency of controlled drinking may also be disadvantageous to the church (if it is controlled at all). To give an example abstain from sex all together with my mindset can be absolutely falsified because sex is beneficial not only for the building up of the kingdom with the gift of an offspring, but also as a sign of physical intimacy and love toward a spouse. Also past precedent also acknowledges by many off springs of the prophets of old.
When you say I am looking in the bible for a moral code. I can assure you that I too have an absolute faith that the bible is not about morality. But what does Redemption save us from? If Redemption saves us from the holy wrath of God in recompense for our innumerable sins on earth we must examine what these sins are. What does regeneration lead us away from. If you know where I am getting at. In at least a small portion of what we are getting away from is worldliness and bad morality. Paul’s messages were always based on the significance of Christ’s redemptive value. I am always reminded by this statement of Paul in the book of Romans
My conclusion is that my discernment has led me to think that this form of abstinence will assist me in leading my flesh away from this particular sin of drunkenness and worldliness. This is something that came out of earlier discipline. “Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, nor stand in the way of sinners, nor sit in the seat of scoffers” right?
My Response to God for his glorious gift of grace is doing works out of gratitude. If you see that it is not. Then so be it. I’m not trying to make myself a heavier crown. This is simply a natural response in my being. I understand that I’ve been justified solely on that grace. Nothing more nothing less. My response to that for the rest of this life is to share that my personal salvation with the world. Abstinence is a minor means to control myself and abstaining from a possible sin to live a life above reproach as a witness in the truth and in spirit.
In the end this type of discipline I’d say is beneficial. Look at 1 Timothy 4:7 saying “Discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness”. James 1:2-3 says
v.12 also says
James advocated that faith without works is dead.
Because in the end. Works is not for personal gain. I don’t think it ever will be. But for the building up of believers and non. I still see a very individualistic mindset in the way you think. At best your way of thought will just benefit you. But not others around you. That in contrary to the great commission.
I’m saying works does not inherit salvation by any means. God does not love you more. You do not become ever so more pious. But works is beneficial in that God may use certain events and pour upon the Spirit which leads a man into a certain salvation. God does not need the works of course. But history shows that God used humane works many times as part of his grand plan to have things accomplished. Look at the prophets. Look at our apostles they have all been used by God in such a way.
The truth is the simple gospel was already enough from the beginning. The beauty of it never changed. Meditating on it more does make me more pious because it is a reminder of the glorious beauty already wrought from the beginning. To say that you’re going to receive more redemption in your “gaze” is to almost say you were not satisfied completely in the first place.
I see fit that the Gospel has already satisfied any of what I saw as discomforts and even comforts. Now the rest of what i “do” is out of a discernment of what is the will of God through Biblical text. In hopes that I may be obedient to the great commission and the great commandments.
I guess that’s it. If you still disagree then oh well. I hope that our greatest commonalities will always seek foundation on man’s need of redemption and Christ as our representative before the Father. Our responses may seem to be different, but if these means leads you to love God more than I hope you will cling to it, but at these ends, these are my means to “gaze on the perfection of the Father, Son, and Spirit” My love for the Lord results in obedience to the Father, grace and salvation in the son and reliance on the Holy Spirit to lead my spirit and flesh for the rest of this life.
Thanks
-Alex Yi