Here is a little food for thought...
'And you shall bestow that money for whatsoever your soul lusts after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever your soul desires: and you shall eat there before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice, and your household.' ~ John Calvin teaching on Deuteronomy 14:26
It seems Calvin was not against alcohol, rather preached moderation. It seems that when a "Calvinist" states that all alcohol is wrong he is at odds with Calvin himself. Even more so if Calvin had been a Southern Baptist... oh well!
For that matter Charles Spurgeon would not make a good Southern Baptist today either...
“I neither said nor implied that it was sinful to drink wine; nay, I said that, in and by itself, this might be done without blame. But I remarked that, if I knew that another would be led to take it by my example, and this would lead them on to further drinking, and even to intoxication, then I would not touch it.” ~ Charles Spurgeon
Such is appeasing the flesh with its rules "Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? (Colossians 2:20-23)
Be blessed,
iggy
'And you shall bestow that money for whatsoever your soul lusts after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever your soul desires: and you shall eat there before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice, and your household.' ~ John Calvin teaching on Deuteronomy 14:26
It seems Calvin was not against alcohol, rather preached moderation. It seems that when a "Calvinist" states that all alcohol is wrong he is at odds with Calvin himself. Even more so if Calvin had been a Southern Baptist... oh well!
For that matter Charles Spurgeon would not make a good Southern Baptist today either...
“I neither said nor implied that it was sinful to drink wine; nay, I said that, in and by itself, this might be done without blame. But I remarked that, if I knew that another would be led to take it by my example, and this would lead them on to further drinking, and even to intoxication, then I would not touch it.” ~ Charles Spurgeon
Such is appeasing the flesh with its rules "Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? (Colossians 2:20-23)
Be blessed,
iggy
8 comments:
And they were also cigar smokers ... I'm not sure why you focus on "Calvinists". I know Calvinists, Arminiens, and people that are neither that have problems with these things.
I think the SBC is a fair poke but you're not adding value with the Calvinism jab. It only stirs potential argument.
And of course, the fact that Calvin and Spurgeon did it doesn't make them right ... even though they are.
Rick,,
My focus is not just that they are "Calvinists" but that many who claim to follow Calvin and quote Spurgeon as if he wrote scripture, are legalistic... not all are, but many are. I know I meet them every day.
I am also familiar that many Arminians also hold to a very legalistic view... but in some ways that is just assumed. It is the Calvinist that teach the "Doctrines of Grace" then negate it by their rules. So in a way that is my focus.
Again, I have stated I think that Calvin was influenced by Platonist Dualism... YET still see my Calvinists brothers as that brothers and sisters in the Lord.
So... I hope you can read it as a slam against legalism... and not just Calvinism.
be blessed,
iggy
I knew that's what you meant and I fully agree with you ... I'm trying to keep you from using those words loosely like those that critique emergents, charismatics, etc... I think you are better than that.
Rick,
LOL!
I hope the big difference is that when and if one reads and assumes i am just hammering against Calvinist (which I admit I do at times... but it is to make people think out of their "box" a bit) that when they engage in a conversation that they see that I am not stating that "you are not saved if you are a Calvinist" or that "those Calvinists are ALL hypocrites and deserve the deepest darkest judgment God can dish out"... cuz I am in not way going there! LOL!
I was using Calvin because that was the quote... it was not a jab in the sense the "all Calvinists are against alcohol" because obviously many are not.
It is the extreme that many in the Calvinist camp push... and unfortunately, these are some of my biggest critics.
Now, I have posted thing about Benny Hinn and other "Arminian" types who are out of whack theologically... so I think I am fairly distributing all my “venomous hate”! LOL!
be blessed,
iggy
Good quotes. I think we see these traditional theologians and many simply think they believe in the far right, but it would be good for many to simply read the scriptures for what they say. I don't know how you can believe alcohol is a sin when the Bible never says that.
My teetotalling is cultural. I avoid things that would be a stumblingblock.
Rick,
I agree that it is contextual and a personal choice... and that I have absolutely no issue with. But, I know having been a heavy drinker, and non drinker, and hypocritical drinker, a shamed drinker a, free will in your face drinker and a moderate drinker who is careful who he is with if he decides to have a drink.
I enjoy a Guinness or Michelob dark... maybe one or two a week... I do not think that it makes me more holy (as I did when I abstained for that reason) and I do not see it makes me less righteous to have a drink... I do know that if I turn to a beer when stressed instead of God, I need to watch out... and that is just being realistic and honest.
The issue I have from any side, is the idea that if one "keeps a rule" it makes them a better Christian. That misses that it is God that makes us "better".
If we went out I would not have a beer our of respect for you, but if I went out with say, my pastor who also enjoys a beer (once in a great while like myself) we enjoy it and have a fun time discussing whatever...
Be Blessed,
iggy
It is not the drinking that is sin but what you after you have drunk. One should always ask family and friends if they were good after they drank since we are often poor judges of our selves. Alway good abstain though.
Post a Comment