On Baptists and Booze
Friday, June 23, 2006 at 09:38AM 
At the annual meeting of the Southern Baptists, the following resolution was approved. The spirit of prohibition lives on!
________________
Resolution No. 5
ON ALCOHOL USE IN AMERICA
WHEREAS, Years of research confirm biblical warnings that alcohol use leads to physical, mental, and emotional damage (e.g., Proverbs 23:29-35); and
WHEREAS, Alcohol use has led to countless injuries and deaths on our nation's highways; and
WHEREAS, The breakup of families and homes can be directly and indirectly attributed to alcohol use by one or more members of a family; and
WHEREAS, The use of alcohol as a recreational beverage has been shown to lead individuals down a path of addiction to alcohol and toward the use of other kinds of drugs, both legal and illegal; and
WHEREAS, There are some religious leaders who are now advocating the consumption of alcoholic beverages based on a misinterpretation of the doctrine of "our freedom in Christ"; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Greensboro, North Carolina, June 13-14, 2006, express our total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages; and be it further
RESOLVED, That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Southern Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages.
RESOLVED, That we urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our communities and nation; and be it further
RESOLVED, That we urge Southern Baptists to be actively involved in educating students and adults concerning the destructive nature of alcoholic beverages; and be it finally
RESOLVED, That we commend organizations and ministries that treat alcohol-related problems from a biblical perspective and promote abstinence and encourage local churches to begin and/or support such biblically-based ministries.
_________________________
For a thoughtful and pastoral response from Justin Taylor, Click here: Between Two Worlds: The SBC Resolution on Alcohol
_______________________________________________
Meanwhile, I went shopping for a new refrigerator. I think I found the one I want.
Any thoughts?
Reader Comments (115)
How do you know for sure, without a shadow of a doubt, that wine in the 1st Century was less potent than today's? One passage from Homer hardly counts as evidence. Have archeaologists (I know I killed the spelling on this) found documents that explain the alcohol levels of 1st century wine? Not that I know of. Please stop making accusations and provide arguments (premise 1+ premise 2=conclusion). Bottoms up!
frank:the aea code thing is in relation to the latest post by riddlebarger. i am not so new to posting and still find it a drag! don't worry about being confused because i am too often. i can appreciate your wanting to remain anonymous. i probably have given enough clues as to my identity to anyone who even cares! but since i am a deacon at my church perhaps it's best for me not to directly announce it.
chris: if you have visited CRC (which i did once, too) and what you hear at home is the same as there i would say you're in good shape; in fact, i would say you are well ahead of the game if you are in a non-denom church! however, i would go a few further and contend that form and style are not inseparable. i would suggest you pick up The Lord's Service by Jeffery Meyers. my jaw dropped when i visited CRC, but in a good way. the form there puts its money where its mouth is, so to speak. there needs to be a recovery not just of the doctrinal aspect of the reformation (i.e. WHI) but the expression of such (i.e. reformed liturgy). the unspoken form of worhsip is just as instructive as the spoken and didactic form of the doctrinal and theological. in fact, calvin himself put the reform/importance of worship ahead of the doctrinal. we can "say all we want about God" but if we are worshiping incorrectly it will be our end.
i suggest reading Recovering Mother Kirk and With Reverence and Awe both by DG Hart. Hart has become another hero of mine personally.
i am not sure what more i can say about the gutenberg thing. i am an idiot, too. so i stop short of telling someone they are missing something as if i know. if i say anymore i would feel like i am trying to explain a color.
cornerstone is a broadly evangelical institution with strong baptistic roots. so not much of any of this is a surprise but pretty predictable.
the cardinal sins of fundamentalism seem to be: smoking, drinking, dancing, movies, and card playing. i may have forgotten a few, but i think that covers the main ones. cornerstone, inasmuch as it is a contemporary form of ages past fundamentalism (fundamentalism with a smile), seems to have progressively dropped some its once cardinal sins. you can now play cards and dance; movies is the next one to likely fall, which all makes me wonder:
if things like dancing and card playing were blatant sins but now are not, what of the remaining cardinal sins? if some in the group of cardinal sins can come to ruin as time moves forward, are the ones still held onto questionable?
i always seem to smell relativism afoot in these circles. the cardinal sins were such because there was an assumed eternal nature to their validity; now they get dropped. one can only conclude that there was no eternal nature to their validity then. (lying and cheating and killing and sexual sins are of an eternal nature.)
so how are cornerstone employees to really consider the leftover sins of smoking and drinking? give it a couple more generations and they will fall as well. the old timers will lament that the times are going to hell in a handbasket (like all old timers). but what really gets revealed is that these were always the traditions of men and not of God. times are not especially going to hell in a handbasket (since there is nothing new under the sun--things are always progressing to their end equally, not especially) in these situations but perhaps the legalisms are revealed for what they are.
thus, outposts like cornerstone ironically reveal the embracing of relativism they so vigorously battle in the wider world. when absolutes fall it is relativism that has always been at work in the first place.
I don't sense a sincere question on your part, but for those want proof (not 40 Proof), then I recommend John MacArthur's sermon #1937 "Be Not Drunk with Wine Part 2 Ephesians 5:18a". I'm not going to type it all out here, but he lays it out in that sermon.
I was being completely sincere! (Maybe with a tad bit of sarcasim)
Do you know the URL or link to Dr. MacArthur's sermon? I would be interested in his evidence and arguments. Thanks.
I found Dr. MacArthur's sermon here:
http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/sg1937.htm
I must admit, after reading it, that Dr. MacArthur does make some good historical points about wine in the 1st century. I wish he would have provided some footnotes on his sources so that others could look them up for themeselves.
Despite this evidence, it still does not make sense of Paul's commands not to be drunk. If the wine couldn't get them drunk, then why would Paul command them not to do so?
http://www.bpnews.net/bpcolumn.asp?ID=2298
BP News
FIRST-PERSON: The Case for Alcohol Abstinence
Friday, Jun 30, 2006
By Daniel L. Akin
http://www.bpnews.net
ken
Actually, I have been on the Grace To You blogs defending the responsible usage of alcohol, but apparently that crowd equates any drinking as prohibited for Christians. Hopefully I represented the Reformed Faith well.
That is an outstanding way to put it!! I got all the snarkey, sophomoric replies on the Grace To You blogs. Currently John Macarthur was doing a series on young, restless, and reformed, but was lesser making a case for abstention of alcohol, which is taught nowhere in the Bible, unless you took a Nazirite vow.