Is it okay for a U.S. christian to own a liquor store?

[blackhole]

1Co 9
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.

1Co 10
27 If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience— 29 I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?

--------------

I am not interested in owning a liqour store. However, my interest is a near-direct correlate. I am not going to explain what it is, because that will derail the thread.

My question: is it acceptable for a Christian to own a liquor store? It seems that it would make it difficult to share the gospel with a lot of people, because of our society's negative view; they assume a Christian shouldn't do such a thing. However, immediacy does seem to be a major function. If Paul was a Jew to the Jews, and something else when dealing with others, then clearly those role would contradict. If the Jew found out about Paul's behavior before others, he would be offended; Paul didn't seem to be worried about this (unless Paul took an inclusive approach, and did nothing that would offend anyone, anywhere, at any time). It seems that Paul's concern was for the immediate; for example, he might not eat sacrificed meat in front of them, but he might eat it in private. Or he might own a liquor store, but he might not purchase it in front of the offendable parties.

And what about quasi-immediacy? Specifically this: if you decide that it's okay to own the liquor store and you buy it, but then someone that you're speaking to directly finds out and lets you know that they think it's wrong, do you have to sell the store?

Lastly, how far do we take this? If we own a beautiful car and someone says we should have instead spent that extra money to feed the hungry, do we have to sell it and do just that? cf. Pro 31 and also the coat of many colors. Regarding which issues (cars? liquor stores?) or in which situations (immediacy?) or other factors (majority opinion?) do we become all things to all people?

And remember that Paul publicly stated (in the Bible) that Timothy was to drink an alcoholic drink (wine). This offends many Christians.

 

[Albion]

1. It is not wrong in itself, although it may be against the rules of your particular church/denomination.

2. It may reduce your ability to witness, but running almost any business in which you regularly meet the public would pose the same problem.

3. If someone finds out that you own a liquor store and complains, you are under no obligation to sell it because owning one isn't a violation of the Gospel.

4. You said, "...my interest is a near-direct correlate. I am not going to explain what it is...."
Because you have not revealed what your interest actually is, it is not possible for us to be more precise in answering you.

 

[Acts2:38]

I would say, and only due to scripture, that it would be wrong for a christian to own a liqueur store, or even work in one, selling people drinks to support habits etc.

This link provides more in depth of my same exact reasoning about alcohol with scripture
http://www.seektheoldpaths.com/pdf/stop/stop618.pdf

Even secular studies find that even if you have 1 beer, you begin to lose function. Basically, you would be 1 drink drunk aka not sober regardless of how you feel you are.

Its best to stay away from those things and not support them or anything of the sort.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I would say, and only due to scripture, that it would be wrong for a christian to own a liqueur store, or even work in one, selling people drinks to support habits etc.

This link provides more in depth of my same exact reasoning about alcohol with scripture
http://www.seektheoldpaths.com/pdf/stop/stop618.pdf

Even secular studies find that even if you have 1 beer, you begin to lose function. Basically, you would be 1 drink drunk aka not sober regardless of how you feel you are.

Its best to stay away from those things and not support them or anything of the sort.

You and Paul should talk.

 

[Acts2:38]

You and Paul should talk.

You couldnt possibly read the article by now.

Why dont you take a look?

 

[blackhole]

3. If someone finds out that you own a liquor store and complains, you are under no obligation to sell it because owning one isn't a violation of the Gospel.

3) Neither however was it sinful for Paul to eat sacrificed meat; he said that we know an idol is nothing (and therefore eating sacrificed meat was nothing). But he abstained for the conscience of the other; to be able to witness, I believe.

You stated that it doesn't apply with the liquor store principle. In what situations does this principle apply?

 

[HTacianas]

1Co 9
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.

1Co 10
27 If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience— 29 I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?

--------------

I am not interested in owning a liqour store. However, my interest is a near-direct correlate. I am not going to explain what it is, because that will derail the thread.

My question: is it acceptable for a Christian to own a liquor store? It seems that it would make it difficult to share the gospel with a lot of people, because of our society's negative view; they assume a Christian shouldn't do such a thing. However, immediacy does seem to be a major function. If Paul was a Jew to the Jews, and something else when dealing with others, then clearly those role would contradict. If the Jew found out about Paul's behavior before others, he would be offended; Paul didn't seem to be worried about this (unless Paul took an inclusive approach, and did nothing that would offend anyone, anywhere, at any time). It seems that Paul's concern was for the immediate; for example, he might not eat sacrificed meat in front of them, but he might eat it in private. Or he might own a liquor store, but he might not purchase it in front of the offendable parties.

And what about quasi-immediacy? Specifically this: if you decide that it's okay to own the liquor store and you buy it, but then someone that you're speaking to directly finds out and lets you know that they think it's wrong, do you have to sell the store?

Lastly, how far do we take this? If we own a beautiful car and someone says we should have instead spent that extra money to feed the hungry, do we have to sell it and do just that? cf. Pro 31 and also the coat of many colors. Regarding which issues (cars? liquor stores?) or in which situations (immediacy?) or other factors (majority opinion?) do we become all things to all people?

And remember that Paul publicly stated (in the Bible) that Timothy was to drink an alcoholic drink (wine). This offends many Christians.

In middle Eastern countries where alcohol is not illegal most liquor stores are owned by Christians. Muslims do not sell alcohol because of Islamic prohibition against it. Alcohol has never been prohibited by Christianity.

 

[Albion]

3) Neither however was it sinful for Paul to eat sacrificed meat; he said that we know an idol is nothing (and therefore eating sacrificed meat was nothing). But he abstained for the conscience of the other; to be able to witness, I believe.

You stated that it doesn't apply with the liquor store principle. In what situations does this principle apply?

Well, alcohol is not, in itself, sinful. Some Christians talk as though it is, often citing drunks and people who are hooked on drugs, etc. But Christ himself drank wine and even agreed to make some specifically for the wedding guests at Cana when asked to do something about their wine running short!

There are, however, businesses which are illegal or which knowingly harm the patrons. All sales of recreational marijuana are, by definition, illegal in this country. And escort services, although legal in some localities, are not moral.

When we get into assessing other businesses, the rightness or wrongness of owning them might be tough or tricky to decide, but that's made the worse by us having to speak about this in hypothetical terms.

 

[Sabertooth]

I am not interested in owning a liqour store. However, my interest is a near-direct correlate. I am not going to explain what it is, because that will derail the thread.

You are the OP. You cannot derail your own thread by being more specific in your intentions. And alcohol may not be a completely accurate analog for the issue that you are really questioning.

 

[chevyontheriver]

You couldnt possibly read the article by now.

Why dont you take a look?

You and Paul should still talk.

Your article basically says wine is really grape juice and that if it were actually wine Jesus would have sinned by making wine. It's a hermetically sealed argument that does not allow words to have their normal meaning.

 

[blackhole]

Well, alcohol is not, in itself, sinful.

Right, but neither was eating sacrificed meat; yet Paul abstained. So again, in what kinds of situations do we apply the principle?

 

[Hank77]

I would say, and only due to scripture, that it would be wrong for a christian to own a liqueur store, or even work in one, selling people drinks to support habits etc.

I agree. Profiting off of someone's addiction and knowing that this addiction is the cause of death, broken marriages, abuse of a spouse and children, etc. can't possibly be acceptable imo.

 

[topher694]

I think the more appropriate question would be: is it wise for a Christian to own a liquor store?

There are clearly greater opportunities for problems than with many other businesses.

 

[Albion]

Right, but neither was eating sacrificed meat; yet Paul abstained. So again, in what kinds of situations do we apply the principle?

Wait a minute. You started by asking if X is acceptable. Now it has become a question of it being prudent.

If you are asking if owning a liquor store is likely to be counter-productive for a person who aspires to meet the public and spread the Gospel, I'd say yes. It wouldn't be advisable. It wouldn't be the best course of action. It would be asking for difficulty.

But that is different from deciding that it's immoral, unscriptural, or the like.

 

[blackhole]

Wait a minute. You started by asking if X is acceptable. Now it has become a question of it being prudent.

If you are asking if owning a liquor store is likely to be counter-productive for a person who aspires to meet the public and spread the Gospel, I'd say yes. It wouldn't be advisable. It wouldn't be the best course of action. It would be asking for difficulty.

But that is different from deciding that it's immoral, unscriptural, or the like.

I see the confusion.

I take Paul's statement in 1Co 10 to be a command: do not eat meat in this context, for the sake of the other. If it's a command, then it's immoral to do otherwise.

Have I misinterpreted? If so, will you please explain your understanding?

 

[Albion]

I see the confusion.

I take Paul's statement in 1Co 10 to be a command: do not eat meat in this context, for the sake of the other. If it's a command, then it's immoral to do otherwise.

Have I misinterpreted? If so, will you please explain your understanding?

It is as you have said. Paul was not commanding anything; he was speaking for himself and saying that his choice was to avoid scandalizing other people even though he was free to do what they might think wrong. So he decided against doing it. This is not the only situation, by the way, in which Paul speaks about his own choices as opposed to dealing in absolutes.

 

[faroukfarouk]

It's to do with with your conscience.

Not to do with finding ecclesiastical excuses...

 

[blackhole]

It's to do with with your conscience.

Not to do with finding ecclesiastical excuses...

Actually, it had to do with the onlooker's conscience; not Paul's.

 

[Sketcher]

I drink responsibly, and I believe Christians should know what it means to drink responsibly. The one reservation I would have against owning a liquor store is there would be customers that abuse alcohol, and abuse their families. And as a consequence, my conduct could be on the wrong side of Matthew 18:7-8.

 

[BNR32FAN]

1Co 9
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.

1Co 10
27 If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience— 29 I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?

--------------

I am not interested in owning a liqour store. However, my interest is a near-direct correlate. I am not going to explain what it is, because that will derail the thread.

My question: is it acceptable for a Christian to own a liquor store? It seems that it would make it difficult to share the gospel with a lot of people, because of our society's negative view; they assume a Christian shouldn't do such a thing. However, immediacy does seem to be a major function. If Paul was a Jew to the Jews, and something else when dealing with others, then clearly those role would contradict. If the Jew found out about Paul's behavior before others, he would be offended; Paul didn't seem to be worried about this (unless Paul took an inclusive approach, and did nothing that would offend anyone, anywhere, at any time). It seems that Paul's concern was for the immediate; for example, he might not eat sacrificed meat in front of them, but he might eat it in private. Or he might own a liquor store, but he might not purchase it in front of the offendable parties.

And what about quasi-immediacy? Specifically this: if you decide that it's okay to own the liquor store and you buy it, but then someone that you're speaking to directly finds out and lets you know that they think it's wrong, do you have to sell the store?

Lastly, how far do we take this? If we own a beautiful car and someone says we should have instead spent that extra money to feed the hungry, do we have to sell it and do just that? cf. Pro 31 and also the coat of many colors. Regarding which issues (cars? liquor stores?) or in which situations (immediacy?) or other factors (majority opinion?) do we become all things to all people?

And remember that Paul publicly stated (in the Bible) that Timothy was to drink an alcoholic drink (wine). This offends many Christians.

A liquor store is a stumbling block to many people and alcohol is the cause of so much sin and ungodliness. Personally I do think it would be a sin for a Christian to own a liquor store.