by We live in a society of excesses. We need to drive the biggest and fastest cars. We need to have the finest things. We also have a tendancy to believe that we are indestructible (as a nation and as individuals) and that because we are allowed to do something that we should do it.
The Bible talks about things that we have liberty to do, yet choose not to because they are not expedient, and choosing not to do things because it would not be in the best interest of others.
Here in America, we let people play with fire all the time and hope upon hope that they do not get burned. In fact, we’ll specify how close to the skin the fire can come, and we’ll catch you if you do get burned, but we’ll celebrate the fire and talk about it like it could never happen to you.
What am I talking about? Alcohol. A new study has come out that was reported on by the UPI. The UPI states that even one drink can be dangerous, since even those that are mildly intoxicated (half the legal limit) were heavily compromised in their ability to notice an unexpected visual object while being focused on another simple task. This phenomenon is call “inattentional blindness.”
So, if not drinking because of the chance of liver damage, or the hangover, or loss of contol, or the addictive nature isn’t enough: why not add to it the fact that even 1 (one) drink can cause you to not be on your game and you could end up in a situation that you will remember for the rest of your life but wish you didn’t.
This has just happened to a teenager in our church. He’s in jail for drinking and driving. While drunk he ran into and killed the bartender that had just served him. Bad all around.
You know a lot of Christians go by that verse that says not to be drunk with wine, etc. They say it’s okay to drink as long as you don’t get drunk. Well, I agree that I won’t judge Christians that choose to drink sparingly, but like the point of your post above, I’m sure not going to give alcohol any chances. Who knows how addictive my personality is? If my love of coffee is any indication…well, enough said!
There was a case a month or so back involving the Bishop of Southwark. At first he claimed he had been mugged, but CCTV evidence emerged that showed him breaking into a vehicle and acting in a drunken manner. When questioned, he claimed he was suffering from amnesia, but it would be entirely out of character for him to be drunk.
However, in his defence he said: “I don’t get drunk frequently. I would not be able to do my job if I got drunk. I certainly don’t think it’s a resigning matter.”
“I don’t get drunk frequently” is a long way from it being entirely out of character!
So yes, I agree with you Mary, that total abstinence is a good position, even though we know that all things are lawful. All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful.
It was quite the controversy in our church a few years ago when, one Sunday night, the Pastor claimed it was anti-biblical to drink. He could definitely prove that the Bible talks about the negative consequences (and does not seem to have a positive thing to say about it!), but it wasn’t enough for some people.
Yes, abstinence in a lot of things keeps one from having more trouble.