;)
tagged: Alcohol, Baptist Life, Church, Church Life, Culture, Current Events, Geoff Baggett, Missions, Pastoral Issues, Resolution, SBC, SBC Issues, Theology, You Make the CallYou Make the Call! – Episode 1
Posted by Geoff Baggett in IMPACT Features
A Brief Word of Explanation …
I’m going to experiment with a new form of post today. Viewers of 1980′s-era Monday Night Football or This Week In Baseball might remember a segment called “You Make the Call”, sponsored for quite some time by IBM. They’d showed a brief video clip from an actual game, and you had to play the part of the referee (or umpire), and decide what the correct call was.
So, we’re going to do sort of the same kind of thing … from a church/faith perspective. I’m simply going to present a hypothetical scenario that could occur in church life, or in denominational life, and then allow readers to “make the call.”
There will be no editorializing on my part. I will merely lay out the hypothetical then turn it over to you. Use your knowledge, your beliefs, and the Scriptures to make your case … and “You Make the Call” Of course, there may be some differing opinions. And some may be emotional about these issues. So, please, review our standards and interact with grace.
*Note – All “You Make the Call” scenarios are purely hypothetical. They are the products of my imagination. Any resemblance to actual persons or events is purely coincidental.
***
Episode 1 – You Make the Call … on Alcohol
A Southern Baptist pastor has faithfully served his church for eleven years. The church is stable and growing. The pastor is well-loved by his church family, and well-respected in the community.
A deacon in the church hears a rumor that a local trash collector noticed empty wine bottles in the pastor’s trash. He recruits a fellow deacon go go with him and confront the pastor about this rumor. During the course of the visit, the pastor admits that he and his wife enjoy a small glass of wine each night before they go to bed. He stated that they do so in the privacy of their own home. Furthermore, he states that they drink this nightly glass of wine on the advice of their physician, because of the histories of heart disease in both of their families. The deacons seem shocked at the pastor’s admission. They tell the pastor that they may have to bring this information before the church. The pastor informs them that he believes this very private evening routine is not sinful and it is no one’s business but his own.
Now … You Make the Call! Has this pastor violated his peoples’ trust? Is he disqualified from pastoral service? Is he guilty of unrepentant sin? What should these deacons do next? Should this pastor be allowed to continue in his leadership role at his church? Or is it no one else’s business?
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
First of all why is this a deacon issue and not an elder issue? Second, leave it to the trash man to start the rumor mill. I guess when the deacon heard the rumor he had to call Mabel the town operator to get an outside line to call the other deacon? Then he had to crank the front of his car in order to drive to the pastor’s home.
What these deacons should do next: Get out and sacrifically serve the Body and tell the trash man to do his job as unto the Lord.
What these deacons will do next: act out in the flesh, get a big church fight going and bring dishonor to the Name and cause unbelievers to thank whomever that they’re not like these guys.
This is not, IMHO, sin. I would try to avoid it myself, but I would not condemn the pastor in this situation.
However.
Many, many, many church covenants contain some really old language about abstaining from the use and sale of alcoholic beverages. My church covenant contains this language. I personally have a problem with it and would never hastily enforce it on someone else. But, if this man has agreed to live under a church covenant that contains this language, he is in violation of it and it would be fair and right to bring his attention to that fact. If he chooses to repent of violating a covenant that he has agreed to keep, I feel that the church should accept his repentance – as God does – and move on. If he chooses to continue violating the covenant, I don’t see any “correct” way for him to remain as the pastor of that church.
Without that language in the covenant, the deacons need to leave well enough alone and tell the trash man to serve God without pretending to be His policeman
I think it depends on whether or not an agreement was signed (church constitution, etc) stating they would not consume alcohol. If an agreement was made, they should have honored it. If no agreement was made, they need to start burying the used wine bottles in the back yard!
May His face shine upon you,
From the Middle East
Okay … I see where you guys are going. So, let’s clarify … In our imaginary scenario, there is no such wording in any constitution or covenant, and the pastor has signed no such agreement.
And to muddy the waters … one of the deacons on the “board” is the manager of the local Wal-Mart, which has alcoholic beverages for sale.
Brother Geoff,
Then it is not a problem.
His peace be with you,
From the Middle East
Has this pastor violated his peoples’ trust?
- Depends on what he’s been preacing over the years on this issue. Has he contradicted his preaching by his actions? Has he been “hiding” this practice knowing the people wouldn’t approve.
Is he disqualified from pastoral service?
- In simple reference to the drinking of wine,no. If he is found to be in some type of unrepentant sin, then maybe. That must be addressed before he can continue. Even then, it depends on each case by case scenario as to whether the sin disqualifies or not.
Is he guilty of unrepentant sin?
- Depends. If you simply mean in the drinking of wine, no. If he has contradicted his own preaching, yes. If he has knowingly broken the covenant he has made with the church, yes.
What should these deacons do next?
- Follow Matthew 18 until there is an understanding and/or reconciliation.
Should this pastor be allowed to continue in his leadership role at his church?
- If he is not in unrepentant sin, yes. If he is, no.
Or is it no one else’s business?
- I don’t believe this is a biblical view. The body of Christ cares about what is happening amongst the body parts. It is okay that the deacons are interested in what is going on.
Has this pastor violated his peoples’ trust?
Only if he told them that he wouldn’t drink. Otherwise, any expectation they had of him was unbiblical.
Is he disqualified from pastoral service?
Not at all.
Is he guilty of unrepentant sin?
Maybe, but not because of the alcohol.
What should these deacons do next?
Ask for forgiveness and be put under Church discipline for gossiping and back-biting.
Should this pastor be allowed to continue in his leadership role at his church?
I can see no reason why they should fire him from his job (given the extra information that it does not go against the man-rules of the church).
Or is it no one else’s business?
I think it is all our brothers and sisters business. But not in the tattle-tale sense, in the sense that we should be apart of each others lives… perhaps they should have known their pastor well enough to know that he had a heart condition and needed to pray for him and his wife.
I made the call.
God’s Glory,
Lew
The Pursuit Online Store
Lew,
I knew you would chime in on this one.
Several statements from Jesus come to mind.
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (Matt 7:12). Would you want somebody digging through your trash and reporting on what they found? Would you want the church discussing and passing judgment on what you do in the privacy of your own home with a clear conscience?
“Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7).
Then a paraphrase of God’s words through Jeremiah to the exiles in Babylon, “Get a life!” (Jer 29:4-7). Apparently the ministries of “gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to” is not reserved for the female members of the congregation (1 Tim 5:11-13).
Such arrogance, pettiness, and judgmental spirit is far more damaging to the congregation than anything the pastor has done.
Geoff,
Yeah, I can’t resist a good talk about booze
.
I’ve been out of town the past couple days on business, sorry I haven’t been around to get y’all riled up.
God’s Glory,
Lew
The Pursuit Online Store
Deacons: Pastor, we have been told that someone found wine bottles in your trash.
Pastor: Yes, my wife and I drink a glass of wine with our evening meal per doctor’s instructions.
Deacons: We don’t think you should be drinking wine.
Pastor: I’m glad you came to talk to me about it. Why do you think I shouldn’t drink wine?
Deacons: (explanation)
Pastor: Again, thank you for coming to me with your concerns. I really appreciate it. I thinking drinking wine is okay because (explanation)
Deacons: We don’t agree.
Pastor: Okay, I won’t drink wine anymore.
Deacons: You’ll just stop even though you think its okay? Why?
Pastor: Because I love you more than wine.
Deacons: Well, we still think you were wrong, so we’re going to take this to the church and have you fired.
Pastor: Okay. Since you didn’t know that I drink wine with dinner, I obviously haven’t spent enough time with you. Do you and your families want to come to dinner tomorrow night?
Deacons: Didn’t you hear us? We’re going to get you fired!
Pastor: Yes, I heard. I’ll start looking for another job. So, does next week for dinner work better for you?
-Alan
Ok Geoff, you got me to bite on this one.
I believe the hypothetical pastor is wrong because:
1. As it turns out, his drinking was not so private after all. We should carefully guard our influence.
2. If not before, now the whole church and community know about the pastor’s drinking. It is not just the pastor’s private business.
3. The healthful benefits of wine are even greater in unfermented wine, and the negative aspects are absent. Remember that the biblical terms for wine are generic and could mean fermented, unfermented, fermented or unfermented wine that was greatly watered down, boiled down or evaporated syrup, etc. You have to study the biblical context to determine if the wine was alcoholic or not. And our alcohol today is generally much more alcoholic than even the strong drink of biblical days.
I have a bottle of non-alcoholic wine in my refrigerator and drink a glass most every day. It helps my stomach and my occasional infirmities. Grape juice is good stuff. Eat (or drink) your fruits and vegetables!
4. The negative consequences of beverage alcohol are huge. So huge it could cover several posts. Consequences covering such subjects as medical, criminal, unwanted pregnancies & STDs, traffic fatalities, fetal alcohol syndrome, etc.
5. By privately drinking, the pastor is leading his family and now his church down the road that so often ends in ruin. The stats vary, but some say one in nine drinkers will become a problem drinker. If you were about to fly on a plane and were told eight out of nine planes safely reach their destination – would you take it?
6. The pastor is wrong if his church takes a stand against alcohol.
7. The Bible speaks against the use of beverage alcohol. I believe the Bible speaks directly against alcohol, as well a indirectly against alcohol. A few verses to get started: Proverbs 20:1; 23:29-35; Isaiah 28:7; Jeremiah 35; Daniel 1:8; Habakkuk. 2:15; Romans 14:19, 21; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19-20; 8:9; Ephesians 5:15; 1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 5:8; etc.
8. The pastor is supporting an evil industry that has been the ruin of so many.
9. Someone is going to say, “That pastor is the best man I know. If he can drink, so can I.” And that person may not be able to handle it. I think the devil is most proud of upstanding moderate drinkers, because they are more likely to lead others astray.
10. The pastor may be called upon in an emergency just after he has imbibed. A Christian and especially a pastor should be sober and vigilant in season and out of season.
11. Even a moderate drink of alcohol kills brain cells that will never be replaced. If the hypothetical pastor is like this pastor, he has no brain cells to lose.
I’m sure I could come up with a few other reasons given more time. I’ll let you guess which side of this issue I’m on
.
David R. Brumbelow
What should these deacons do next?
Ask for forgiveness and be put under Church discipline for gossiping and back-biting.
David B.,
I’m going to respond to your points for the other commenters and readers to think about.
1. What does “Carefully guard our influence” mean? Are you saying that the Pastor was ok, but just needed to take extra precaution in hiding his used wine bottles?
2. I agree, what a great opportunity for the Pastor to teach the community that God teaches that wine is not sin.
3a. Discussing health benefits isn’t really the point. Unless you condemn drinking soda which has little to no health benefit.
3b. I agree, words like yayin and oinos can be generic in which stage of fermentation wine is in. We should definitely be careful in with how we translate the word.
3c. You said, “And our alcohol today is generally much more alcoholic than even the strong drink of biblical days.” That is pretty much unfounded. And even if it is true, it doesn’t change the problem. They’d just have to drink more to get drunk. And since the Bible talks about people getting drunk (with wine – John 2), then we know that some people did it.
4. Those are not negative effects of Alcohol. Those are negative effects of the misuse of Alcohol.
5. When the stats vary, it’s time to throw away the stats. Yes people abuse alcohol, the problem is not the alcohol, it’s the people. We should work together to help the people, putting a band-aid on the bottle is not a good fix.
6. What if the church is wrong?
7. Actually the Bible only speaks against the MISuse of beverage alcohol. My three favorite alcohol verses are, 1) Proverbs 31:6-7, where the writer tells us to give wine and strong drink to the depressed and dieing; 2) Deuteronomy 14:26 where God tells the Israelites to sell their tithes to buy wine and strong drink (and food) to eat and drink in worship of him; and 3) or Luke 7:33-34 where Jesus shows the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, they claimed that John the Baptizer was demon-possessed because he didn’t drink wine or eat bread, but they said Jesus was a sinner because he drank wine and ate bread.
Unless you think the Wisdom Literature is wrong, God is evil, and Jesus was a sinner, your position cannot be maintained with scripture.
8 & 9. I see no scriptural or logical basis for these objections.
10. I agree, we should be sober-minded. What does this have to do with drinking a glass of wine with dinner?
11. Everything kills brain cells… breathing air kills brain cells.
God’s Glory,
Lew
Why, everybody in the Church ought to get out the stills and make shine and start drinking. They should get out the coolers and fill’em up with Bud Lites(dont want anyone having a big belly) and drink at Church picnics, fellowships, etc. After all, if the Pastor does it, why shouldnt they all do it?
So, let’s serve pre-worship cocktails so that everyone will be happy as they enter into the sanctuary. After all, God gave us wine to make the heart happy. So, let’s all be happy by drinking in the foyer before entering the Sanctuary. We should enter into His courts with praise and joy, afterall. So, swig it down….put down a shot glass of Jack Daniels, or sip a glass of Three Sisters wine….should the Church buy it, or should it be brown bag?
And, let’s put in the Church constitution and by laws at what age we’re gonna let the little ones get involved in all of this joy. I mean, should we let’em drink white lightning when they’re five, or eight, or fifteen? Well, let’s get that settled.
Seriously, I agree with Kevin Peacock to a certain degree. People ought to leave the Pastor’s personal and private business alone. They ought to leave it personal and private. I dont imagine that any Pastor would like to have their entire life put under a microscope by the church, nor by the town.
David
ps. Geoff, tell that Pastor to put the wine bottles in little baggies so that the garbage men cant see it. And, tell him to quit drinking alcohol….grape juice would probably have the same benefit…and, it would cause a lot less headaches.
Deuteronomy 14:26 seems to be a favorite with the social drinking defenders. While I may not have time to deal with all objections, I did want to deal with this.
Deuteronomy does seem to give a tough argument. You mean God told His followers to drink strong drink or beer? But let’s look at it a little closer.
The word translated “strong drink” or “beer” is the Hebrew word “Shakar.” The English transliteration is sometimes spelled differently. Many, but not all, authorities believe shakar is always to be translated as some form of strong drink. But, like the biblical words for wine, shakar is a generic word.
Shakar is distinguished from wine in that shakar is not the fruit of the vine; it is not derived from grapes. Shakar may be the product of dates, pomegranates, other fruits, or grains. Like wine, it may be fermented or unfermented. I grow pomegranates and can highly recommend drinking the fresh juice, which could also be called shakar.
By the way, wine is not the only modern day word that can mean either a fermented or unfermented drink.
.
.
Liquor is usually thought of as alcoholic. But people refer to pot “liquor” the juice left behind from cooking green beans, etc. It’s down right good for you and if consumed in moderation will not adversely affect your judgment
Punch can mean either a non-alcoholic or alcoholic drink.
Cider is expressed apple juice. It is called cider when it is first squeezed out of the apples. And, if made to rot and ferment, it is then still called cider. I admit my prejudice is showing in that previous line
Eggnog is non-alcoholic or alcoholic. It depends on what you do with it, or add to it.
Just so, yayin, oinos, and shakar can be non-alcoholic or alcoholic. When we see them in Scripture, we have to study the immediate context and the whole of the Bible to determine which they were meant to be in that passage.
We may come down on different sides of the issue, but both translations of shakar would be a matter of interpretation. Why is it that so many immediately assume the word is alcoholic. To assume it is alcoholic is at least as much of an interpretation as to assume it is not alcoholic. By the way, before refrigeration the ancient folks had numerous ways of keeping wine from fermenting.
Granted, most translators and authorities translate shakar as strong drink, but not all.
I believe the esteemed translators of the New King James Version got it right when they translated Deuteronomy 14:26, “And you shall spend that money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen or sheep, for wine or similar drink [shakar], for whatever your heart desires; you shall eat there before the LORD your God, and you shall rejoice, you and your household.”
And, I believe the esteemed translators of the Holman Christian Standard Bible got it seriously wrong. In my humble opinion.
OK, one more quick comment. When Jesus was called a glutton and a winebibber, both were untrue. This slander was made by those who hated Him. It in no way proves Jesus drank the hard stuff. If you believe this, will you also believe their accusation of Jesus that, “He hath a devil”?
As, I think, Tim Rogers has pointed out, no one can show chapter and verse where Jesus drank alcoholic beverages. But so many today just assume it’s in the Bible somewhere.
David R. Brumbelow
June 4, AD 2008
PS – For those who wonder, I do not have a blog. I am pastor of a small church, Northside Baptist Church, 317 Barbers Hill Rd., Highlands, TX 77562 and author of a book about my dad, The Wit and Wisdom of Pastor Joe Brumbelow.
Lew and David,
Good exchange. And way to show people that you can disagree and still be nice people.
Good plug on the book there, David. I’ll make that link hot for you.
You mean I accidentally mentioned my book?
.
Thanks Geoff. I’m too old to know how to make a link. And thanks for the comment.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
Regarding Luke 7:33-34, I want to clarify my position. I do not think that the Pharisees were correct in calling Jesus a winebibber and glutton. Rather, Jesus himself admits to drinking wine (by logic).
This is the verse (nasb):
33 – For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine (yayin), and you say, ‘He has a demon!’
34 – The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’
Jesus is comparing his actions with John the Baptizers actions and showing the Pharisees how their reactions are hypocritical. John came “drinking no wine (yayin)” and “eating no bread”… but Jesus was “drinking” and “eating”. The logical extension is that Jesus was drinking wine and eating bread. More importantly he was doing it with the immoral and with a beverage that the Pharisees recognized as something that could get someone drunk. I believe this is the closest verse you can get where we can see Jesus drinking, but it is purely by logic (and Greek word extension). Apart from that I think the logic behind the wedding feast at least supports that Jesus created alcoholic wine.
I think this is the similar to the post. The hypothetical deacons heard of a bottle of wine in the pastors garbage can. They therefore assumed he was doing something wrong.
Regarding shakar, I have never heard of anyone (until today) who has questioned the the strength of shakar. I will definitely be looking into it.
At this point the only problem I have is, if yayin, shakar, and oinos all are questionable, then it seems like our tradition will inform what Scripture says. If we believe that drinking alcohol is wrong, then we will always translate yaying, shakar, and oinos as non-Alcoholic (Apart from those text that talk about someone getting drunk).
Frankly, I don’t really care about alcohol. I don’t hold to the moderation position because it allows me to have a drink every night. I don’t like wine or beer. The last time I had a drink was at a wedding feast last year – and it was one small drink over a two hour period. The point is, I don’t hold to this position for me, I hold to it because I sense it is best supported by Scripture.
I can’t remember what else I had to say… so that’s good for now
.
God’s Glory,
Lew
David,
If you are still reading these comments. Could you direct me to some resources to get information on how the ancients were able to stop the fermentation process. I remembered this morning that I had a question about that. Apart from the Welch’s process (only developed a couple hundred years ago) I have never heard of anyone being able to stop (or even wanting to try to stop) the fermentation process.
As far as I know of the history of Welch’s the only reason they tried to stop the fermentation process was because of the abolition of alcohol. When you make your money of grape wine and all of a sudden alcohol is illegal you need to do something quick to make a living.
Anyways, if you could direct me to some resources as to where you go this information. I would be greatly appreciative.
Thank you,
Lew
Lew,
Thanks for your question. Something we modern folks forget is how intelligent folks were in ancient times. With our modern day reliance on refrigerators and freezers we think the people of 100 years ago, or 2,000 years ago, were helpless. They had many ways, however, to preserve meat, vegetables, and beverages. They preserved them by smoking, drying, using salt, canning, keeping things in a cool dry cellar, keeping them immersed in water, etc. A lot of country folks still do that today.
Grapes and grape juice could be preserved without fermentation in several ways.
1. They could preserve some kinds of fresh grapes for long periods by simply hanging them in a cool, dry cellar. In that way fresh grapes could be used throughout the year, even long after harvest time.
Some fruits and vegetables are valued even today for their “keeping” qualities. Seed catalogs sometimes refer to a vegetable as a “good keeper.”
Guess how Pharaoh drank his wine? As fresh as you can get. This is from a dream but it tells of a common ancient custom.
.
“Then Pharaoh’s cup was in my hand; and I took the grapes and pressed them into Pharaoh’s cup, and placed the cup in Pharaoh’s hand.” -Genesis 40:11
I’ll guarantee that was unfermented wine. And that was a long time before Welches grape juice. You married men might want to start requesting that your wife prepare you this kind of wine
2. Grape juice (unfermented wine) will not ferment if the air is completely excluded. This could be done by sealing jars with pitch as well as other ways.
3. There were ways the wine could be filtered to prevent or exclude fermentation.
4. The wine could be boiled down or evaporated into a thick syrup. This wine would be so thick that bacteria could not get into it and it would not ferment or go bad. This would keep for very long periods of time. When they were ready to drink it, it would be mixed with water. Some ancient writers spoke of wine so thick they had to scrape it out of the wineskins.
Honey is a good example of this. Honey is so thick that it will not spoil. When you buy honey at the store or at a roadside stand, that honey contains no preservatives, because it needs no preservatives. Honey is so thick the bacteria cannot get into it.
5. Wine, whether fermented or not, could be heated to a certain temperature and then sealed and it would not ferment. Fermentation will not occur below a certain temperature or above a certain temperature.
6. Closely related to #5. Wine, whether fermented or not, can be heated to a certain temperature and the alcohol content boils or evaporates away. Alcohol will dissipate at a lower temperature than water or the unfermented wine.
7. Apparently there was also a way where they could prevent fermentation by gravitation. They would put wine in a large jar or vat and put oil on top of the wine. The oil prevented air from getting to the wine to cause fermentation. Over time, the part of the wine that could cause fermentation would settle to the bottom. The wine on top, unfermented, could then be poured off.
8. I think there was also a way they would mix wine with sulfur and evidently that would arrest fermentation.
By the way, many of the ancient people looked at fermented wine as a defective product. The fermented wine was rotted and spoiled. Certainly not all held this view, but many did. (The Old Testament Baptists undoubtedly held this view
.) But they could easily preserve unfermented wine in multiple ways. At least some of the ancient people looked at fermented wine as containing leaven, something to especially exclude in religious observances.
A great reference is “Bible Wines” by William Patton, printed c. AD 1871. It is available at amazon.com for about $14. Someone may say, “That book is so out of date.” But that is one of the strengths of it. One of the big points of all this is, how could they preserve non-alcoholic wine before the days of electricity and refrigeration? Who would know better than those who lived in those days before our modern ways of preserving food and drink?
This book goes into detail about this subject, as well as what the Bible teaches about wine. Anyone on either side of this issue, if they really want to be informed, should get this book. I expect there may be another book or two published along these lines in the near future.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
I will check to see if my local library has that book. But the only review on Amazon isn’t a very good one.
“I bought this book after it was recommended to me as THE authority on the ‘Two Wine Theory’ – I almost feel that I wasted my money, but at least I have documented proof that the “Two Wine Theory” is completely absurd (which is THE ONLY REASON I give it 2 stars).
Much of the material for this book (originally published in 1874) came from two articles (Bacchus and Anti-Bacchus) which were thoroughly refuted in 1841 by John McLean in the April and October issues of the Princeton Review.
This book begins with false ‘facts’ about fermentation, which are then used as a basis for ‘proving’ that much of what was called wine 2,000 years ago could not possibly have been fermented. The book describes several ancient processes for preventing fermentation. But John McLean clearly documented that they are actually methods of improving fermentation. The truth about fermentation can be found easily by researching fermentation, or even winemaking, in a local library, encyclopedia, or internet search engine.
The book also makes claims about the Hebrew and Greek words for wine and ‘strong drink’ (that they are only alcoholic when they are ‘bad’). As I mentioned above, Rev. John McLean showed from Pliny, Aristotle, Columella, and others from the time of Christ and earlier, that these claims are false.
If you’re really interested in the subject, enter ‘Two Wine Theory’ (including the quotes) into a search engine and start reading.
”
I’ll try to check it out for myself.
God’s Glory,
Lew
Lew,
I stand by my previous statements about alcohol. From your preceding post one guy doesn’t like the book and some don’t believe wine could refer to fermented or unfermented wine.
Was unfermented grape juice referred to as wine in ancient times? Yes. Many quotes could be given such as Nicander, a Greek poet and physician of the 2nd century BC said, “Aeneus having squeezed the juice into hollow cups, called it wine [oinos].” Sounds like the previously quoted Genesis 40:11. Examples of other words that can be understood either way have been given: liquor, cider, eggnog, etc.
I am well aware that not everyone agrees with this view. Not everyone agrees with anything. But some of the most intelligent, wisest people in the world do believe the Bible directly or indirectly (or both), condemns drinking alcohol as a beverage.
Anyone interested can find solid evidence both inside and outside the Bible for totally abstaining from beverage alcohol. I’m proud the SBC had taken this position for well over 100 years. I think most Southern Baptists would be very impressed with “Bible Wines” by William Patton, although some may not like the drawing from Pompeii of the man squeezing grapes into a cup. But then the artist from Pompeii probably was not a Southern Baptist
.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
I checked and my library carries the book. I haven’t gotten around to get it yet, but it is on my list of things to do. I agree, not everyone agrees
. Afterall, some of the most intelligent, wisest people in the world also believe the Bible neither directly or indirectly (or both), condemn drinking alcohol as a beverage 
.
By the way, I should point out that the mere act of squeezing grapes into a cup does not tell us whether or not the drink was fermented. Grapes ferment on their own, they have all the necessary components already contained within each little grape skin. For all we know, they squeezed sour grapes.
God’s Glory,
Lew