Some Thoughts on Christian Liberty: Specifically in Regard to Drinking Alcohol
Lead singer / songwriter Mark Hall said well last week at the Casting Crowns concert that Christian liberty often becomes a question of how far we can push the envelope. In other words, “what can I (me, me, me) do or not do in this (fill in the blank) situation.” In more words, the issue of Christian liberty often muddles the fact that Law-keeping is intimately entwined in love which is the essence of self-denial / self-sacrifice. “God so loved the world, that He GAVE His only Son.” When it comes to justification, we don’t have to keep any of the Law and couldn’t even if we wanted to. In fact, any attempt to be justified by keeping the Law (or thinking you are “good” enough to enter heaven) is a rejection of God’s gift. Sanctification is another story; in sanctification (setting apart for a specific purpose), we keep the Law to love God and others.
This is what Paul said about Christian liberty: “Everything is permissible—but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible—but not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others”(1Corinthians 10:23,24).
Because the primary goal of Law-keeping is love, and the essence of love is self-denial / self-sacrifice, we are commanded in Scripture to forfeit our right to partake in what is lawful if it would offend another believer or cause a new believer to violate their conscience which may not be biblically trained.
This brings me to an issue that God has dealt with in my own life recently. Moderate drinking, though lawful, is not beneficial for those in my life, but this is not the trite matter we make it in today’s super-grace mentality. However, to say that moderate drinking is against the Law of God or a biblical principle is patently untrue, and what is true matters. Look, forget all of that stuff about the disciples drinking alcohol because the water was bad in the Middle East during the first century. You don’t even need a course in Bible History to refute that; just read the historical account of Jesus talking to the woman at the well. Besides that, one of the biblical qualifications of an elder (which are very high) is that they are “not a drunkard” (or drinking alcohol in excess. I Tim. 3:3, Titus 1:7). Why wouldn’t the Holy Spirit plainly say “drinker of wine” rather than specifying drunkenness? In fact, Paul goes on to say: “Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in *much* wine….”[emphasis mine]. I’m sorry, but that alone ends the argument though many more biblical arguments could be introduced.
Not acknowledging a true perspective on any given biblical principle always leads to a slippery slope resulting in extremes. I once visited a widow who was confronted by her pastor for working at a restaurant that served alcohol. Does that same pastor shop at Krogers? Does he fly United?The situation led to an unnecessary offense that resulted in her leaving that particular church. Also, while some Christians will not eat at Applebees because they serve liquor, they will go to Bob Evans instead, and rip the waitress from top to bottom for not serving them to their expectations. I even know of Christians who will leave the waitress fifteen-cents to add insult to injury. But Law-forbid that we would eat at a restaurant where drunks know more about mercy than we do. Actually, I leave bigger tips when I get lousy service; it’s called “undeserved merit,” sound familiar? Here is my point: our goal as Christians is not Law-keeping, it’s keeping the Law for the purpose of love. Law-keeping without love in mind always leads to hypocrisy and legalism.
But in contrast, clinging to what is lawful for our own selfish satisfaction, and to the detriment of others is breaking the greatest of all the commandments. In fact, the breaking of the greatest commandment (which by the way is God’s Law with love, not a nebulous definition of love that replaces the Law) often carries with it the greatest threat of punishment. Jesus said that it would be better to tie a millstone around your neck and cast yourself into the sea than to cause a young believer to stumble. Paul even said that leading other believers in violating their conscience (perhaps they would see you drinking, but it would be a violation of their own conscience) could actually destroy their faith (Romans 14:13-15). Therefore, the issue of Christian liberty in the Bible is not an endeavor to learn how far we can push the envelope for our own satisfaction, but rather a solemn / weighty consideration with fearful ramifications.
Hopefully, the following examples will be helpful in making additional points on this subject. In a Sunday School class I attended some time ago, a wife shared an objection her lost husband presented in regard to her persistence that he go to church with her. He said that if he didn’t quit drinking before he went to church, he was being a hypocrite. How she should answer this objection was the question. I asked a few questions. Was his drinking a source of tension in their marriage? She answered yes. What was her goal in getting him to come to church? Was it for the purpose of him being saved? Again, the answer was yes to both. My suggestion: stop inviting him to church and start modeling the sacrificial love of Christ he doesn’t have. First, he cares more about the satisfaction that beer gives him rather than having a stronger marriage. Ie., he loves beer more than her. Secondly, he cares more about what other people think of him than what his own wife thinks of him. Her opinion is expendable. Neither of these are sacrificial love. Unfortunately, it is clear that his view of the gospel is works salvation rather than coming to grips with the fact that he’s so wretched, that he actually loves beer more than his wife. Seeing the sacrificial love of Christ in her, and thereby realizing that he does not have that kind of love is her best shot at getting him saved.
Lastly, the example from my own life. My girlfriend, Susan, has had a horrible life experience with alcohol at the hands of another. She has seen what alcohol can do to peoples lives and the power it can have over individuals. With a variety of other beverages available for enjoyment and her knowledge of the destructive power that alcohol can have, it is understandably, and wisely, banished from her immediate realm of life, a life I want to be a part of. Hence, my decision to totally abstain from any form of alcohol use. But not because the Bible prohibits its use altogether for that is not the truth, and only the truth sets us free. But rather for the most important Biblical command of all, to love God and others the way we want to be loved, and with the same intensity as we love ourselves, “for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it….” (Ephesians 5:29).
paul
Holy Spirit Leads Bible Study at Front Gate of Casting Crowns Concert
Guess what I got for my birthday this year? Tickets to the Casting Crowns Louisville, KY concert. Susan, who procured the tickets for us, showed-up with me at the front gates thirty minutes early for the concert. That’s when things started getting weird. People ahead of us who had gone through the gates where tickets were being scanned were coming right back out. I began processing that while still trying to process why arena officials were at the front gates giving away free tickets. Then our tickets were scanned, and I began to process the following from the attendant: “The stage was moved, so the seats are different, so you need to go over there and get your tickets replaced.”
I then thought to myself, “couldn’t they have moved the stage in such a way that this would not be necessary?” We then went back outside to the official who was giving away free tickets and asked, “where is ‘over there?’” He pointed to a building that was on the other side of a construction area which provoked the following thought: “Are you kidding me?” So, Susan and I hiked through a dirt area to another building where we were directed to a booth with a large table covered with replacement tickets. A young lady took our tickets and began perusing the hundreds of tickets in neat rows on the table. I then began to think to myself, “you can do it honey, just look for row 10, seats 3 and 4.” She then came back to us and said, “we don’t have a match, you will have to go over there and have your ticket’s replaced.” She pointed to a row of ticket windows on the other side of the building. We then arrived at one of the windows and handed our tickets to an older lady who asked, “do you have ID and the Credit Card you used to purchase these tickets?” I already knew Susan left her purse in the car which was at least, or what would seem like, a mile from where we were now located. At this point, my mind was full of all sorts of things: visions of black and white Keystone Cops movies, total confusion from process overload, and yes, Mr. Anger was ringing my doorbell.
That’s when I knew, especially when things get that ridiculous. Yes, it took hundreds of failures and Bible lessons throughout my Christian life to come to this point, so I knew what to do: settle down, put your thinking cap on, and measure your responses because the Holy Spirit has called another class on Christian living to order.
Part one in the outline is “Evangelism.” This was a “Christian” concert, and most of the stadium workers were probably unbelievers. Would they see a different response from what would be experienced if it was a Punk-rock concert? So then, I replied to the attendant: “ok,” and reached in to temporarily take back our tickets. She then said something like the following: “No, you don’t understand, we can’t replace these tickets without ID and the Credit Card you used to purchase them.” I then said, “I understand, but if we need to walk back to our car to get those items, we had better get started.” She then looked at me as if she saw a ghost. That’s a good thing.
When we returned, it got better; in addition to everything else, we discovered that Ticket Master sent Susan the wrong tickets! And this as we could plainly hear the opening act performing. Part two, “Non-hypocritical worship.” One of my favorite Casting Crowns songs is “Praise You in this Storm.” Sooooo, was I going to act like a Punk-rocker and then go inside and raise my arms in praise as they performed that song? Besides, as bad as this was (possibly not getting into a concert that we drove 3 hours to see), could it even really be considered a “storm?” If we won’t praise God in a drizzle, what will we do when a real storm comes? Part 3, “How to Praise God in a Storm.” Unlike the goofy doctrine going around today that judges spirituality through emotions, praising God in difficult situations will always be preceded by right thinking, or *biblical thinking.*
First, God is up to something in every circumstance of life. In fact, he is usually taking care of all kinds of business in every event. For starters on this point, read the book of Esther and Jonah. Secondly, we are here on assignment as ambassadors; sometimes ambassadors get called away from fun activities to do the kings business. That’s not always pleasant, but take heart, I hear we have a great retirement package that will more than make-up for it. Thirdly, we should delight in the fact that the Lord is willing to trust us with difficult assignments. However, if we are focused on our own agenda, it won’t be very pleasant, and the Lord will keep sending the same assignments till we get it right. You ever see a route map of where God led the Israelites in the wilderness? He was running them around in circles until they started having light-bulb moments, and some of them never did make it out of the wilderness.
I’m sure Susan has figured out by now that one of the things she is going to have to consistently remind me of is our weekly Bible studies. But more importantly, both of us must remember that life is theology, and if life is lived in a way that pleases God, it will be lived out in good theology. That’s what our Bible studies are all about, learning good theology for living. And don’t worry, God will always supply the circumstances that show us what we have really learned, and to give us opportunity to accomplish His will.
paul
Jerry Bridges Proffers Gospel-Driven Bondage
“….they’re going to show pastors how to *see justification only* throughout the whole Bible. If they were forthright, that’s how they would state it.”
“’Jesus / gospel‘ replaces ‘justification,’ and masks the real intent: to make every verse in the Bible about justification and thereby eradicating the use of the Law in sanctification.”
Let me begin with some groundwork. As John MacArthur said in his book “Truth War,” to fight error in our day takes determination, perseverance, and tenacity. This is because today’s propagators of false doctrine are masters of nuance. In regard to those who propagate the antinomian doctrine of Gospel Sanctification, the goal is to eliminate application of biblical imperatives by referring to such a use of God’s word as “living by lists,” “reducing the Bible to a book of rules,” etc. Of course, they don’t mention that the Bible has “rules” that are often stated in list form. Therefore, they carefully word their presentation so you will assume they are talking about people who use the Bible in a legalistic way. Meanwhile, they ignore practical application of the Scriptures while heavily emphasizing grace. Soon our particular efforts in sanctification will be buried and forgotten (out of sight, out of mind) while subtle / negative references to the application of biblical imperatives slowly throws one more shovel-full of dirt on the hole that obedience is buried in.
This method is also accompanied by synthesizing justification and sanctification. Obviously, if we are sanctified by the same monergistic gospel that saved us, we can’t do anymore with the Law in sanctification than we did with it in justification. After all, one of the Gospel Sanctification mantras is “the same gospel that saved you also sanctifies you.” D.A. Carson, in an interview with Tim Keller concerning the T4G 2011 conference, shared that the main thrust of that conference will be to teach pastors how to “drive toward Christ and the gospel” and to show what “Biblical Theology [ie., Geerhardus Vos hermeneutics] looks like” in order to “read the Bible in such a way that you [always] get to Jesus.” Let me rephrase that. What D.A. Carson really means is they’re going to show pastors how to *see justification only* throughout the whole Bible. If they were forthright, that’s how they would state it. If the “same” gospel that saved us also sanctifies us, then sanctification is monergistic. If it’s not monergistic, then it’s not the same gospel that saved us. They can only have it both ways until people start asking questions. Later in the interview, D.A. Carson disingenuously notes that several perspectives on preaching will be presented at the same conference; supposedly, unlike other conferences (who only present the Grammatical Historical perspective). In saying this, he assumes the listeners will not associate the term “Biblical Theology” with hermeneutics. Let me also add that it’s not really about always getting to Jesus; it’s about always getting to “what Jesus has done, not what we have done” (another GS mantra often used by Micheal Horton). “Jesus / gospel” replaces “justification,” and masks the real intent: to make every verse in the Bible about justification and thereby eradicating the use of the Law in sanctification.
This now brings me to the significance of an excerpt from the Jerry Bridges book, “Transformed by Grace.” Jerry Bridges (who coined the phrase, “we must preach the gospel to ourselves everyday”) is not any different from most GS advocates; it’s difficult to find definitive grounds for argument in their nuanced approach. Most of the time you will have to read several pages in order to find clear statements that reflect what they really believe. In this case, another blogger supplied the following excerpt from the above mentioned book. My comments are in brackets:
“Paul’s call to stand firm in our freedom in Christ and not let ourselves be burdened by a yoke of slavery is just as valid today with our rules as it was in the Galatians’ day with the Mosaic law… God gave us our spiritual Magna Charta.
[Paul’s call to freedom in Christ regards freedom from being justified by the Law. Here, Bridges extrapolates that idea into the realm of sanctification. As I mentioned above in my introduction, we see Bridges slight the idea of applying biblical rules to life, but doing so subtly by calling them “our” rules. But since the Mosaic Law is part of scripture, and he makes that comparison, he is really talking about the application of the Mosaic Law (where applicable, ie., Ephesians 6:1) to life. Also, though Jesus’ yoke is light, we, in fact, are His slaves and were “bought with a price.” ]
Through Paul, He called us to be free: ‘You, my brothers, were called to be free.’ In fact, God doesn’t just call us to freedom, he actually exhorts us to stand firm in our freedom – to resist all efforts to abridge or destroy it.
[Yes, in regard to justification, BUT as Christians, we actually find our freedom in aligning our lives with God’s law:
James 1:25
“But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it—he will be blessed in what he does.”
James 2:12
“Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom….”
Furthermore, Jesus said that the “truth will set you free,” and “thy word is truth.” Freedom comes from applying God’s word to life. We are set free by being slaves to Christ’ lordship, that isn’t the same as being in bondage to the Law in an attempt to be justified by it.]
Despite God’s call to be free and His earnest admonition to resist all efforts to curtail it, there is very little emphasis in Christian circles today on the importance of Christian freedom. Just the opposite seems to be true.
[But we are called to freedom on two fronts: freedom from the Law for justification, and freedom from the bondage of sin by obeying the perfect Law of liberty. Bridges only refers to the one. Why? Because in his mind, they are both the same, that’s why. However, in our day, the freedom that is not being emphasized is freedom for the believer by PROPERLY aligning his or hers life with the word of God.]
Instead of promoting freedom, we stress our rules of conformity.
[They’re not OUR rules, they are the Lord’s rules. Please note that a “lord” usually has rules he wants you to follow.]
Instead of preaching living by grace, we preach living by performance. Instead of encouraging new believers to be conformed to Christ, we subtly insist that they be conformed to our particular style of Christian culture. Yet, that’s the bottom line effect of most of our emphases in Christian circles today.
[ Living to love Christ by keeping His Law and striving to please Him accordingly is not “living by performance,” that is a typical GS red herring. Paul said whether in the body or apart, “we make it our goal to please Him,” and obviously, the word of God is the standard for that. Also, notice the *us against them* mentality in the suggestion that supposed graceless living is a “Christian culture” in most “Christian circles today.” This is indicative of the GS mentality that believes they are on a mission from God to save the church from the Dark Ages of synergistic sanctification.]
For example, many people would react negatively to my quoting only part of Galatians 5:12, ‘You, my brothers, were called to be free.’ Despite the fact that this statement is a complete sentence, they would say, ‘But that’s not all of the verse. Go on to quote the remainder: ‘But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love.’…
[Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, the Galatians were being tempted to go back to a system that taught you had to keep the Law to maintain your salvation, NOT the idea that you keep the Law to love Christ and to please Him. We believe that we are kept by the power of God, but that does not negate our call to uphold the Law of God!]
The person who reacts this way has made my point. We are much more concerned about someone abusing his freedom than we are about his guarding it. We are more afraid of indulging the sinful nature than we are of falling into legalism.
[Here, Bridges makes the shocking suggestion that being concerned with keeping the Law is not “guarding” our freedom, and that being more afraid of indulging in the sinful nature than guarding our “freedom” is legalism. This troubling assertion should speak for itself.]
Yet legalism does indulge the sinful nature because it fosters self-righteousness and religious pride. It also diverts us from the real issues of the Christian life by focusing on external and sometimes trivial rules.” – Jerry Bridges, Transforming Grace, pp. 121-122
[ In this last statement, Bridges notes another GS staple often propagated by Paul Tripp and David Powlison; namely, our efforts as Christians to uphold the Law leads to self-righteousness and religious pride, and to make such an effort is “focusing on external and sometimes trivial rules.” Instead, we should supposedly only focus on “what Jesus has DONE rather than our OWN efforts,” which supposedly leads to an automatic kind of obedience earmarked by a willing and joyful spirit / attitude.]
How can bridges talk so strongly about one freedom without at least mentioning the other? Because that’s the freedom (through the Law in sanctification) he doesn’t want to emphasize even though his audience is Christian. Therefore, what Bridges is actually teaching is a gospel-driven bondage that averts Christians away from an effort to apply God’s word to life. Not only that, we now have conferences that are teaching leaders to propagate this approach wholesale throughout the church; true freedom as bondage. Buyer beware.
paul
James 2:14-17: Prayer Without Works; That Was Easy!
A typical Christian prayer meeting is scary these days: “Pray for Molly, she’s afraid to leave her house.” “Pray for Bob and Darcy, they are going through a divorce.” “Pray for Joe, a guy I work with, the doctor just told him he has 2 weeks to live.” And my all-time favorite, the “unspoken” prayer request. A revealed list of those would be interesting.
James said the following in 2:14-17;
“What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.”
Whenever I read this verse, I am reminded of a married couple who went to their pastor for counseling because their marriage was on the rocks. The pastor told them the following: “We are going to pray about this, and after one week if you still think you need counseling, I will counsel you.” And shazaam! God answered their prayer! The marriage was healed! Not really, the spouse who didn’t want counseling became a super-spouse to avert the counseling. Eventually, they divorced.
In regard to Molly, if we only pray for her and do not also meet her needs with the word of God, is that like pronouncing a blessing on someone who needs food and warm clothing without meeting their physical needs? Absolutely. James used this as an example to illustrate faith that is worthless. By the same token, to only pray for a person to whom something can be done is also worthless.
Undoubtedly, this mentality comes from inept leadership, ignorance in regard to the sufficiency of Scripture, and spiritual laziness; getting involved in people’s lives can be hard work and very messy. Therefore, in many cases, prayer has become the sanctified Staples’ easy button. Just pray for ’em; “that was easy!” (and plus, it makes us feel like we really care). It is also indicative of the huge disconnect between what we claim to believe in Scripture and our willingness to apply it to life. Matthew 4:4 says that man only finds true life in every word that comes forth from the mouth of God. Ephesians 1:19,20 says we have the same power from God that raised Christ from the grave, but yet, we think the only thing we can do is pray for Molly.
But leadership is probably the primary problem. I have been to pastor’s conferences and listened to leaders brag about “not being distracted from the ‘gospel’ by counseling.” Gag me, gag me, gag me, as if the world is going to be interested in a god that doesn’t have anymore answers for living life than Opera Winfrey. 1Peter 3:15 says to always be prepared to give an answer to those who ask about the hope we have as Christians. The implication by Peter is that they see something in our lives that provoke them to ask. Whatever it is that they see, it doesn’t come from pushing our way through life with a spiritual easy-button.
paul
The Gospel Onslaught Against Discipleship
Meet Jim. He is in the midst of a very disturbing problem that torments him day and night, the kind of problem he never dreamed would inflict a believer. But he often says to himself: “maybe I’m not a believer after all.” In desperation he went to his pastor for help. His pastor seemed shocked and perplexed in regard to the revelation, and suggested that they pray about it (James 2:15-17). But Jim had already been praying intensely for many days with no end to the problem in sight.
Now we find Jim at a larger Baptist church on a Sunday morning; “more resources to help people” had been the reasoning that brought him there. He walks into the spacious foyer and peruses the many well-dressed people engaged in pleasant conversation. As he works his way through the crowd, he scans the faces of many people walking about while looking for something in their demeanor that would indicate that they could help. He then walks up to the Information table and opens a brochure about the church. He reads the information regarding the pastoral staff and wonders to himself: “Can these men help? Do they know what God would say about my situation? And if they can, will they have time? After all, they look like very important men and are probably very busy.”
Then Jim hears a call to worship through the elegant glass doors between the foyer and the large sanctuary. The sanctuary has a pricey, new, and contemporary feel which is impressive, but does little to arouse a glimmer of hope that Jim is looking for. Jim suffers through the praise music that lifts up the God that seems so far away from him, and anxiously awaits the sermon which may convey the answers he is looking for. The message is about the gospel. Is this what Jim needs? “Perhaps,” Jim thinks. “Maybe I missed something the first time; I certainly don’t feel saved!” But Jim has re-examined his original commitment to Christ and what he believed over and over again. Not only that, when he relocated from New York, he didn’t tell his present church that he was a Christian, but made a new profession of faith and was baptized, just to make sure. Jim gets in his car to go back to the chamber of dread he calls home, and as he watches the cheerful parishioners leaving for their own destinations, he wonders: “Why can’t I be like them? Whats wrong with me?”
Even as a new believer I found it bazarre: the whole evangelical mentality of “get people to come to church so we can get them saved” routine; it just didn’t jive with everything I was learning in the Scriptures as a new believer. Getting people saved was all that mattered while members in “good standing” were living with others out-of wedlock, and Christian couples who were married talked to their pets with more respect than they did each other. My first Halloween party as a Christian was also a dose of reality as I arrived at the church dressed like Moses holding a wooden image of the Ten Commandments, only to be mocked by vampires and werewolves. But most telling was the time I led a married couple / schizophrenics to the Lord and demanded that they be baptized and accepted into membership the following Sunday. The church reluctantly agreed, but I was approached by the church leadership afterward who stated the following: “Now that they are saved, we need to send them away where they can get help.”
This “gospel only, bag-em and tag-em (sanctifi-what?),” mentality that began in the 1950’s started to see the chickens coming home to roost around the time I got saved in 1983. Christians were not looking to the church to solve any of life’s deep problems, but were gathering at the well of philosophy with the rest of the world while chanting “all truth is God’s truth.” That’s when Dave Hunt published his book entitled, “The Seduction of Christianity” which sent shock-waves throughout the Evangelical community. While his book was a huge, and necessary challenge (he refuted the idea that Sigmund Freud was smarter than the Holy Spirit), it only stated the problem and offered no specific solutions.
How to use the Bible to help Christians with deep problems came via Dr. Jay Adams in the early 1970’s, but his biblical approach didn’t really pick-up steam until the 80’s. Barely anybody who is aware of the impact that this biblical counseling / discipleship approach had on the church will call it anything less than a reformation. But what was the church’s response to this rediscovering of biblical sanctification? While the first gospel wave made so much of salvation that sanctification was forgotten, the second wave claims that salvation and sanctification are the same thing. If you can’t beat-em, join-em together. Hence: “The same gospel that saved you also sanctifies you.” “We must preach the gospel to ourselves everyday.” “So brother, you really think you’re saved by the gospel and then you move on to something else?” [envision person saying that with knowing smirk on their face].
Either way, the results are the same. The church wants to sell the idea that God has the power to save our souls, but He can’t save a marriage; the idea that he can save schizophrenics, but must leave them in their present condition (First wave). Or, the idea that mediation on the gospel alone empowers the Christian for holy living (Second wave). Trust me, the world ain’t buyin’. Christians should get a grip because “gospel” means “good news.” “News” means the same thing in the Greek as it does in English: it’s something that you hear that you haven’t heard before; once you embrace it as your own, it’s no longer “news.” This would seem fairly obvious. Furthermore, 2Corinthians 5:18-21 makes it clear that the gospel is a ministry of “reconciliation” entrusted to those who are already reconciled. Therefore, if we are already reconciled, do we “move on to something else?” Absolutely, and please take Jim with you.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment