Is getting drunk a sin?

[Zebra1552]

On another thread started by JasoNnnN, about smoking, someone posted this. I thought it really applied to the conversation we were having here, so I'm reposting it in this thread as well.

Originally Posted by FreeInChrist88

Smoking is like a lot of things that the prevailing Christian culture calls SIN. There's nothing in the Bible that clearly states it as sin and yet it gets labeled that way just like alcohol does.

Smoking and drinking alcohol may not be advisable past times for health reasons and for the risks of addictive behavior, but to label it a SIN is going too far in my view.

It's amazing how different religious cultures call certain things SIN without any clear-cut scriptural reference. And then they ostracize those who break their manmade rule as if they had become vile heathens. In my 40+ years as a believer, I've come to realize that God is not the big "stick in the mud" that so many religious people make Him out to be.​

​

This isn't about drinking. This isn't about smoking- which by the way is a violation of something else Paul says about treating your body as the Holy Spirit's temple. Intentionally doing things to your body that damage it and can kill it are against that command. Which is another reason, besides that it is directly and specifically condemned, that getting drunk is a sin.

 

[cubinity]

JasoNnnN,

I hope the answer to "Is getting drunk a sin?" is clearer at this point:

If your Christianity is a strict religion governed by laws and commands you must follow in or to be right with God, then you better not drink, smoke, or post your cousin's jokes about your best friend.

However, if your Christianity is truly a personal relationship with your best friend, then only you and He can define what is a sin in that relationship, so really all three of these moral questions are related to one another because they are all questions you have to pray and seek an answer from that best friend (as I've done) to work them out.

Therefore, is your relationship with Christ personal? If so, who can possibly tell you what would be considered a sin in that relationship? If not, then let the laws and commands of others do the answering of this question for you.

Either way, I bless you, and I pray that God blesses you.

 

[Zebra1552]

JasoNnnN,

I hope the answer to "Is getting drunk a sin?" is clearer at this point:

If your Christianity is a strict religion governed by laws and commands you must follow in or to be right with God, then you better not drink, smoke, or post your cousin's jokes about your best friend.

However, if your Christianity is truly a personal relationship with your best friend, then only you and He can define what is a sin in that relationship, so really all three of these moral questions are related to one another because they are all questions you have to pray and seek an answer from that best friend (as I've done) to work them out.

Morality is not determined by your whims or anyone else's when there are already rules laid out in the Bible. Some things are up for individual discernment: smoking and getting drunk are not part of that, as demonstrated. Do you care to address that, or are you just going to keep trying to claim the moral high ground? Presumably if one has a personal relationship with God they'd still do what He says as His followers laid out in the Bible at His direction and not presume it magically goes out the window because they think it's bunk.

Therefore, is your relationship with Christ personal? If so, who can possibly tell you what would be considered a sin in that relationship? If not, then let the laws and commands of others do the answering of this question for you.

Anyone who has read and understood what the Bible defines as sin can tell you what is sinful. You or anyone else is not above accountability in matters of sin. John wrote about that:

1Jn 1:5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light and in him there is no darkness at all.
1Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him while we are walking in darkness, we lie and do not do what is true;
1Jn 1:7 but if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.
1Jn 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1Jn 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

 

[cubinity]

The arguments that the sins of others, as recorded in the Bible, are sins to all believers regardless of personal revelation from God sounds really great, until you get to Peter's personal revelation about dietary restrictions no longer applying and Paul's teachings about them and his recorded fight with Peter over them.

These men of god prove by their examples that kingdom living is not about eating or drinking, or smoking or joking for that matter, but about every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

Again, though, if a book is your God, then its pages are its mouth, and you should just do whatever it says. I call that religion, and I have no problem with that. I personal just don't subscribe that.

 

[AdamKane]

Ephesians 5:18
Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

Does that mean it's a sin to get drunk?

 

[cubinity]

Ephesians 5:18
Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

Does that mean it's a sin to get drunk?

As it turns out, that is the exact verse we are arguing over.

I say no.

Jaws 13 says yes.

It is a fun yet friendly dispute. There are great points on both sides!

Jaws13 favors the Scriptural defense, and is handling this role with consistency and sound reasoning. I am playing devil's advocate by taking the ''Christianity is a personal relationship'' approach. I have to admit this has been a tough role to play, and I've stepped in a few holes along the way!

 

[William_0]

Ephesians 5:18
Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

Does that mean it's a sin to get drunk?

It does only say wine. Beer is fair game!!!

 

[Zebra1552]

The arguments that the sins of others, as recorded in the Bible, are sins to all believers regardless of personal revelation from God sounds really great, until you get to Peter's personal revelation about dietary restrictions no longer applying and Paul's teachings about them and his recorded fight with Peter over them.

Those are dietary laws from the OT, not a law that spans both testaments. Furthermore, God revealed this directly to Peter. Again, taking Scripture out of context for your own argument. This again is not sound hermeneutics.

These men of god prove by their examples that kingdom living is not about eating or drinking, or smoking or joking for that matter, but about every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

...and ever command of God handed down to the apostles.

Again, though, if a book is your God, then its pages are its mouth, and you should just do whatever it says. I call that religion, and I have no problem with that. I personal just don't subscribe that.

Straw man argument. This is not about bibliolatry. This is about whether a command from the Bible is legitimate. You have provided no information that indicates otherwise.

As it turns out, that is the exact verse we are arguing over.

I say no.

Jaws 13 says yes.

It is a fun yet friendly dispute. There are great points on both sides!

Jaws13 favors the Scriptural defense, and is handling this role with consistency and sound reasoning. I am playing devil's advocate by taking the ''Christianity is a personal relationship'' approach. I have to admit this has been a tough role to play, and I've stepped in a few holes along the way!

A few? You haven't played it very well at all. You missed the interpretation argument, you missed multiple verses that could have been misused to support your position (everything permissible but not beneficial), and you missed quite a few other logical fallacies that could be employed. If you're going to play devil's advocate, you can do a better job, and next time do so without blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

 

[Philosopher61]

Getting drunk is a waste of time, resources, and life. That sounds like a sin to me.

 

[cubinity]

Getting drunk is a waste of time, resources, and life. That sounds like a sin to me.

I have found that insistent criticism and condemnation are also a waste of time, resources and life. I think I'll start a thread asking whether or not insistently criticizing and condemning a fellow believer is a sin...

 

[Zebra1552]

I have found that insistent criticism and condemnation are also a waste of time, resources and life. I think I'll start a thread asking whether or not insistently criticizing and condemning a fellow believer is a sin...

I've only talked about your arguments and your info. I've said nothing about you as a person. YOU chose to make it personal with comments like the above, and every time you did so I steered you right back to the topic. I believe your comment is completely unwarranted.

 

[William_0]

I've only talked about your arguments and your info. I've said nothing about you as a person. YOU chose to make it personal with comments like the above, and every time you did so I steered you right back to the topic. I believe your comment is completely unwarranted.

More warranted than your condemnation of anything that doesn't conform to your beliefs.

 

[cubinity]

.

 

[Montalban]

I have found that insistent criticism and condemnation are also a waste of time, resources and life. I think I'll start a thread asking whether or not insistently criticizing and condemning a fellow believer is a sin...

It is as well.

We're asked in Christian fellowship to look after each other. If it becomes a matter of "I'm better than you, and can tell you what to do" then it's harmful to one's self.

 

[cubinity]

I've only talked about your arguments and your info. I've said nothing about you as a person. YOU chose to make it personal with comments like the above, and every time you did so I steered you right back to the topic. I believe your comment is completely unwarranted.

Nothing personal. Do note the material fact that you are the only person on this thread arguing that it is a sin to get drunk.

As a matter of mature debate, I absolutely disagree with your interpretation of the verse you have used to defend your argument.

As a point of respect, however, you have chosen your words much more carefully than I have, as to successfully remain above reproach. Well done.

I prefer to interpret this and other moral dilemmas from the perspective of personal relationship, where my decisions are the result of private conversations I have with God, rather than autonomously doing what I think some book is telling me to do. I see the Bible as a guide to help me better understand the context of my relationship with God, not as an instruction manual on how I ought to behave in the 21st century.

Is that better?

 

[Zebra1552]

Nothing personal. Do note the material fact that you are the only person on this thread arguing that it is a sin to get drunk.

Popularity does not make one right or wrong, nor does lack of popularity.

As a point of respect, however, you have chosen your words much more carefully than I have, as to successfully remain above reproach. Well done.

The tongue is the rudder of the body. If one cannot control it, they cannot control other areas of life, and if one cannot control that then nor can they allow it under Christ's control.

I prefer to interpret this and other moral dilemmas from the perspective of personal relationship, where my decisions are the result of private conversations I have with God, rather than autonomously doing what I think some book is telling me to do. I see the Bible as a guide to help me better understand the context of my relationship with God, not as an instruction manual on how I ought to behave in the 21st century.

Without the Bible, your idea of God is no different than Islam's. It is the Bible we derive our theology from, it is the Bible that provides objective guidelines for what a relationship with God looks like, how one acts in that relationship, and what sort of behavior God wants from us. While automatically following the Bible without any intentionality or thought for what it says isn't best, nor is treating it as just another book helpful for a personal relationship with God.

The question of this thread is, "Is getting drunk a sin?"
We are therefore not dealing with moral or immoral, ethical or unethical, we are dealing by necessity with theology. Without the Bible to support that theology, it is nothing more than hollow opinion. It is not us who establish what is and is not sin, it is God, through the authors of the Bible. Anything not in the Bible is a matter of principle- does the Bible support the principle of the act or thought- and a matter of if one can personally handle it.

As I said, my stepfather is in the hospital right now. He's a recovered alcoholic who's drank for the sole reason of getting drunk and forgetting about the world. He got drunk enough times over enough years to be in the final stages of liver disease. He needs a new liver. If he doesn't get one in the next few months, he will die. Alcohol is a poison, and whether you go by medical information, psychological information, or biblical information, it is not healthy to constantly get drunk or to get drunk in general. Nor is it wise. From the Bible's perspective, it is a sin because one lacks self control that we are mandated to have in numerous places.

Jesus Himself said that we are His friends if we do what He commands (John 15), implying that we are not if we do not do what He commands, and He's commanded numerous things through numerous people.

You look at almost any story of someone getting drunk in the Bible and the result is always negative, as is any story of the Israelites turning away from God, as is any story about murder, as is any story about bearing false witness. That there are numerous instances in the OT against it and direct commands against the sort of lack of control being drunk produces speaks volumes about what the authors- who had a much more personal relationship with God than we have today- viewed as important for their relationship with God. That priests were not allowed to drink any wine also speaks to that.

Is that better?

Much.

 

[cubinity]

Without the Bible, your idea of God is no different than Islam's.

My compliments. I liked everything you said in your last post, except this line.

I would ask, "Why the negativity specifically about Islam?" but that would be off topic.

Instead, I will simply say that the substance of the comment itself doesn't really support your argument very well, IMO, since all the Muslims I've ever known or heard of are downright legalistic about the content of their bible.

So, while I will agree with you that a theology not built on a holy text is just opinion, I have to disagree that being opinionated rather than being loyal to the orders of an ancient text make me anything like a Muslim. In fact, I would say that the opposite is true.

 

[Zebra1552]

My compliments. I liked everything you said in your last post, except this line.

I would ask, "Why the negativity specifically about Islam?" but that would be off topic.

Instead, I will simply say that the substance of the comment itself doesn't really support your argument very well, IMO, since all the Muslims I've ever known or heard of are downright legalistic about the content of their bible.

That's precisely my point. You can't separate the relationship with God from that which tells you about it.

So, while I will agree with you that a theology not built on a holy text is just opinion, I have to disagree that being opinionated rather than being loyal to the orders of an ancient text make me anything like a Muslim. In fact, I would say that the opposite is true.

Muslims rely on a bunch of 'visions' from one man to support their 'relationship' with 'god'. A Christian's relationship with God without the authority of the Bible is nothing more than that: Unsupported opinion.

 

[Armistead14]

That's precisely my point. You can't separate the relationship with God from that which tells you about it.


Muslims rely on a bunch of 'visions' from one man to support their 'relationship' with 'god'. A Christian's relationship with God without the authority of the Bible is nothing more than that: Unsupported opinion.

Don't confuse biblical doctrine over scripture. We've had hundreds of different bibles, doctrines created by man based on how each bible was translated. I never read anywhere the many councils that created bibles were inspired by God.

So one must study scripture not based on man made doctrine. One must study the history and culture of biblical times. They all drank fermented wine..It was alcohol and they drank a lot of it, that's why we have so many scriptures on being a drunk. In fact, the bible doesn't condemn drinking, everything in moderation. Wine was used to calm the nerves then, to relax and to enjoy dinner then....nothing wrong it you use it that way. If Christ drank alcohol, you should be careful who you condemn.

The bible never says because someone sins using something then it's a sin for everyone. The only thing it states is with your actions don't be a stumbling block for someone that is weaker...as in don't take an alcoholic to the local bar.

 

[Montalban]

That's precisely my point. You can't separate the relationship with God from that which tells you about it.

Is the Bible the only source for knowledge about God? Can you show me where the Bible says that it is?

Muslims rely on a bunch of 'visions' from one man to support their 'relationship' with 'god'. A Christian's relationship with God without the authority of the Bible is nothing more than that: Unsupported opinion.

Actually Protestant Christians do similar to that too. They call on the Holy Spirit to guide them and then whatever conclusion they reach must be true because the HS guided them to it. They become their own sole arbiter of truth from their own beliefs in their own experiences. They each become their own pope.

Where's the Bible say it's the only authority? When people chose particular books to compile into the Bible did they do so because each book said "I authorise myself"?