Approving Alcohol, Prohibiting Marijuana: An Inconsistent Position
Wally Morris
One of the most significant changes in attitude and behavior among conservative Evangelicals and some Fundamentalists is the acceptance of the consumption of alcoholic beverages. The increase in consumption of beer, wine, and liquor is characteristic of the wider American culture and influencing Christians as well. One reason BJU published a book about alcohol was because incoming freshmen did not see anything wrong with drinking alcoholic beverages. Many students in our community’s Christian homeschool organization do not see anything wrong with drinking wine. I suspect that is because their parents do not see anything wrong with drinking wine.
John MacArthur’s personal position on alcohol consumption appears to be abstinence. Yet The Master’s Seminary allows its students to consume alcohol as long as they do not get intoxicated. (The exact phrase in the student catalog is “use of beverages for intoxication”, a somewhat vague phrase.) However, TMS prohibits its students from using tobacco and marijuana, substances that are legal in California. When I (twice) asked TMS to explain the reasoning behind allowing wine but prohibiting tobacco and marijuana, they never answered beyond my first email asking general questions.
Huntington University, a local Christian college owned by a Brethren denomination, allows its students to use tobacco and consume alcoholic beverages (assuming they are legally old enough) as long as they do so off campus.
Carl Trueman, church history professor at Westminster Seminary, openly talks (almost brags) about drinking scotch and brandy. Ben Witherington, professor at Asbury Seminary, sees nothing wrong with drinking whiskey unless a person is an alcoholic. That begs the question of how do you know if you’re going to be an alcoholic unless you start drinking alcoholic beverages. I could multiply these examples. (Please note that I am not a crusty curmudgeon who loves “naming names” for controversy. But giving specific examples is helpful in understanding the depth of the problem.)
Christians who accept the consumption of alcoholic beverages will find it difficult to justify prohibiting tobacco and, particularly, marijuana. One common argument used to justify drinking modern wine, for example, is that Christians in the early church drank wine. OK, if that is going to be the argument, then how is it possible to prohibit legal substances such as tobacco and marijuana, which the Bible never mention? What is the basis for that prohibition? Often, the basis for prohibiting these substances will focus on health concerns or possible addiction problems. Could we not argue the same concerning alcoholic beverages?
The consumption of modern alcoholic beverages cannot be justified today simply because people in Biblical times drank diluted wine. The consumption of tobacco and marijuana cannot be justified on the basis of Christian liberty. These positions (prohibiting tobacco, marijuana, and alcohol) are consistent with each other. But those who allow consumption of alcoholic beverages but prohibit tobacco and marijuana (or those who prohibit marijuana but allow drinking alcohol and using tobacco, such as the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) have produced an inconsistency which they will have difficulty defending. Therefore, I suspect that eventually you will see many of those Christians who allow consumption of alcoholic beverages eventually to allow consumption of legal marijuana. Consistency almost demands this result.
Wally Morris is pastor of Charity Baptist Church in Huntington, IN. The church blogsite is amomentofcharity.blogspot.com. He has also published A Time To Die: A Biblical Look At End-Of-Life Issues by Ambassador International.
I suspect TMS allows drinking, but not drunkenness, because alcohol is spoken of positively in the Bible. Most folks from our movement work around this by arguing that alcohol then wasn’t like alcohol now. That particular issue has been bandied back and forth enough, and I don’t want to argue for or against here. But, the fact is that alcohol is spoken of positively, and marijuana is not (nor is it even mentioned).
I personally suspect the abstinence position on alcohol dates from the temperance movement, and cannot be found in anything like its present form before the mid-19th century. I’m not interested enough to do any detailed research on the subject, but this is my hunch. If anyone knows any credible resources which address this issue, please pass them on.
Tyler, there really is no debate that alcohol was different in ancient times and drinking culture was different in ancient times. There also is no debate that modern technology makes the consequences of drunkenness potentially far more significant than before the Industrial Revolution. These arguments speak to the wisdom issue, NOT the theological issue.
It is foolish to assume that abstinence dates only from the temperance movement (as if that is a negative, if true). When Paul admonished Timothy about the medicinal use of alcohol, it clearly implies that Timothy held an abstinence position. I don’t think it would be hard to find others throughout church history who likewise abstained and advocated abstaining. Nevertheless, this speaks only to the historical argument, not the theological argument.
A theological case can be made from the Bible for the abstinence position on alcohol, marijuana, and all other intoxicating substances. I won’t take the time to go into it here, we have made the case in various articles on P&D to one degree or another. Perhaps we should do more. I recommend articles on the subject by Mike Harding from the early days of P&D. (His arguments are not exclusively theological.)
Finally, the point of this brief article is not to argue for or against abstinence primarily but to point out the hypocrisy of opposing marijuana while allowing alcohol. The most that many will say is that “marijuana is illegal,” but as we know that flimsy defense is swiftly passing in our culture.
It is passing strange to find Christians arguing for self-indulgence, seeking pleasure in substances rather than in God.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Don, a few things:
1. It is certainly not settled that alcohol then isn’t like alcohol now. There is a reason why that is a minority position.
2. Alcohol is spoken of positively in Scripture; marijuana is not. This is a problem for Wally’s article and the allegation of hypocrisy.
3. Paul’s advice to Timothy does not “clearly imply” an abstinence position. Rather, it clearly implies you WANT it to clearly imply abstinence.
4. The link to the temperance movement is significant, because (if true) it ties the abstinence position to a particular slice of time in Western culture since the mid-19th century, and not to the church catholic. When that happens, it’s always a potential red flag.
5. A better tactic is to argue for abstinence on the basis of holiness and prudence. I’ve never been convinced there is a good Scriptural argument to be made.
I advocate personal holiness, don’t drink at all, and advise others to not drink. I share your concerns about the lack of holiness, but I think its a bad tactic to argue for abstinence from alcohol with bad arguments. People see through them.
On number 1: minority according to who? I have read extensively in literature written by secular advocates of alcohol. They ALL agree with this point of view.
On number 2: marijuana is not spoken of in the Bible at all. There is no problem using the alcohol passages as a paradigm for marijuana or any other mind-altering drug.
On number 3: You’re wrong. Don’t know what else to say on that one.
On number 4: the link is irrelevant because church history is not authoritative. It is informative, but not conclusive. Only the Scriptures are conclusive.
On number 5: whether you’ve been convinced or not is also irrelevant.
I repeat again, it is passing strange to find Christians arguing for self-indulgence, seeking pleasure in substances rather than in God.
I would include those who claim to be for abstinence, but then attack those who argue for it.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Very good article.
Christians should have nothing to do with mind altering drugs for recreational purposes.
David R. Brumbelow
Don,
Thanks for posting this article. FBC Troy takes a clear position against the recreational use of intoxicating beverages. At fbctroy.org under “resources” and “documents” one can reference a lengthy paper I’ve written on the subject. Interestingly, I have recently had a marijuana user request membership. I told him that he would have to stop using it for us to admit membership. The man is saved, and he knows that using marijuana is wrong. We are helping him with this addiction. The same principles are involved in both issues.
I predict that many churches which encourage the recreational consumption of intoxicating beverages will eventually allow the recreational use of other intoxicating materials. It won’t stop with marijuana. Several months ago a young man who attends our church on occasion but belongs to a reformed church was arguing for the consumption of whiskey and vodka. These products of distillation were not even possible during the biblical era. “Alcohol” is actually an Arabic term originating from the Muslims who began distilling around the turn of the first millennium A.D. It is anachronistic to refer to the approval of “alcohol” in the biblical era. The Bible gives no approval at all to distilled liquor or “alcohol” per se. Beer in the biblical era was very low in alcohol content compared to the plethora of modern breweries today. Wine ranged between 8 and 10 percent during the biblical era and was often diluted 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 (water to wine). Fresh wine had little to no alcohol content. Wine boiled to a paste and then mixed with water had a very low alcohol content. Today we have the fruit of the vine pasteurized and refrigerated with no alcohol content. Wisdom suggests that we use that which does not enslave, intoxicate, or necessitated and use products that promote sobriety as opposed to those products which don’t.
Some have said that the temperance movement was just for a short time in 20th century America. I don’t buy that. Pastors of local churches have always been against alcohol, going way back to the Old Tesament: Jeremiah 1210 “Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard, they have trodden my portion under foot, they have made my pleasant portion a desolate wilderness.”
Mel, I am only approving one of your three posts, as they are all trending in the same direction and they all have this flaw: The article in question isn’t about defending our opposition to alcohol.
The article is meant to challenge those who are soft on alcohol with the question, “What will you do when marijuana becomes legal?”
In looking back over previous comments, I see that I allowed myself to be sidetracked by engaging the question, “What is right or wrong about alcohol?” That is a worthy question, one we have answered numerous times on Proclaim & Defend, one that we will no doubt engage again in the future. But this article is not about that question.
I will limit any further commentary to those that address the question the article raises. If you want to comment on the legitimacy or illegitimacy of alcohol, those comments will not be approved. There are plenty of other places to discuss that topic.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3