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

blackhole said:

I've wondered about that verse too. I assume that it means much more immediate tempting, e.g. peer pressure to sin rather than merely allowing the possibility for your excess. I have varied reasons for saying that, but primarily because of this example: Wal-Mart is then evil, because it tempts people to steal. And that's not hypothetical; there's A LOT of theft from Wal-Mart in the U.S.; I spoke to an employee who explained the law and the store's policy, and the crazy amount of theft.

Click to expand...

Albion said:

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.

Click to expand...

BNR32FAN said:

Paul being a Jew is forbidden to eat meat sacrificed to idols. The Gentiles however were permitted to eat meat sacrificed to idols if they didn’t know that it was sacrificed to an idol.

Revelation 2 Jesus rebukes the Church in Pergamum for allowing the sons of Israel (Jews) to eat meat offered to idols.

Click to expand...

Albion said:

This part explains the diff.

Click to expand...

Albion 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.

Click to expand...

blackhole said:

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.

Click to expand...

blackhole said:

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.

There's your governing principle, along with Rom 14:23 (and previous verses). You're supposed to care about the others, and not offend them (where possible - lots of Christian things are "Offensive" to folks these days).

However, IF YOU CAN'T DO IT IN FAITH (which obviously you couldn't since you asked if it was O.K.) then for YOU it's SIN. Simple as that.

IF you're moving in Biblical FAITH, you don't have to ask anybody anything - just DO IT.

Click to expand...

blackhole said:

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.

Click to expand...

chevyontheriver said:

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.

Click to expand...

Sketcher said:

How does Wal-Mart tempt people to steal? Also, that seems to be more of a reach than the example of owning a liquor store.

Click to expand...

blackhole said:

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?

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

Why is this even a question?

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.

Click to expand...

blackhole said:

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.

Click to expand...

charsan said:

Of course it's okay, no different from anything else or any other business

Click to expand...