Alcohol and chrstians

[Edward]

I'm known as a Christian in my circles. I have confirmed that I have liberty to drink, but that I avoid the culture of drinking. All my pagan (and Roman Catholic) friends seem fine with that.

Your position appears to be the exact opposite of that taken by the Reverend Winzer. (And I would note that you and I would find ourselves largely on the same page). Rev. Winzer would have you pretend to your friends and colleagues that you lack such liberty and drink only in secret.

 

[Jack K]

I do think it is possible for a community of believers to maintain a practice that the Bible does not mandate, and to do this in a way that is NOT pressuring or condemning.

Can you provide any examples of this kind of community?

With drinking alcohol, I saw something like this in the church in which I grew up, where my dad was a missionary pastor. The church was among American Indians, and those believers were acutely aware of the dangers of alcohol abuse. Many had been rescued from that lifestyle. Many others were tempted daily, or had experienced abuse due to the frequent drunkenness of those around them. In addition, that culture knew nothing of the concept that one could have a drink socially, or to relax, without having several drinks to get drunk. Alcohol consumption and drunkenness were inseperable, culturally. I suppose folks realized that in other parts of the world, and in Bible times, there were people who would drink without getting drunk. But they didn't personally know anyone like that. All drinking they knew was for getting drunk.

What's a pastor to do in that setting? Certainly my dad, born in Europe, did not take a European approach and have a beer or a glass of wine with dinner while among those believers. This would have been badly misunderstood. Instead, he chose to abstain altogether, as did every believer we knew there. I wouldn't say there was pressure or condemnation in the apporach; rather, there was a recognition that by their abstinance believers could be a good witness to the culture and supportive to others who were trying to stay sober.

My dad said many times that the Bible did not forbid drinking alcohol, and that only Christ—not staying sober—could make a man right with God. I don't believe he ever told the congregation that they should abstain (though he surely said this to certain, individual strugglers). But the culture of the church, in that setting, made abstinance an informal "rule" of life in Christ. My dad did not fight this. In fact, he joined in. He clarified the biblical position now and then, but he also embraced the way those believers applied Christ's command to be new people who left old and sinful lifestyles behind.

Might he have used the situation to make points about how it's possible to drink responsibly, or how Christ gives freedom, or how we should not add to God's law, etc.—by having an occasional drink and doing so responsibly? I suppose he might have tried. But he was far more concerned with demonstrating how good it is to flee sin, how necessary it is to to leave old lifestyles behind when coming to Christ, and how Christians hate anything which causes harm and pain in the lives of others. I think his priorities were right. I think that was a good place not to fight the abstinance culture in the church. And from what I could tell, he did so without heaping guilt or pressure or condemnation on anyone. Believers already sensed it was loving and wise to abstain in that setting. My dad affirmed those impulses while reminding folks not to turn it into a legalistic command.

My dad surely didn't pastor perfectly in this regard, but I think his overall approach was wise and biblical. I am always wary of legalism. But I think we need to not be so wary that we stifle efforts to take a tough approach to besetting sin.

 

[au5t1n]

Rev. Winzer would have you pretend to your friends and colleagues that you lack such liberty and drink only in secret.

I must have missed that post. If either you or the person who found your post helpful would care to point out where he said he would have anyone pretend to have no liberty to drink and then to drink privately, that would be great. Otherwise some consideration of the Ninth Commandment may be in order.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

Rev. Winzer would have you pretend to your friends and colleagues that you lack such liberty and drink only in secret.

I must have missed that post. If either you or the person who found your post helpful would care to point out where he said he would have anyone pretend to have no liberty to drink and then to drink privately, that would be great. Otherwise some consideration of the Ninth Commandment may be in order.

I would concur with Austin, I found no such inference in Rev. Winzer's post. I think we must be careful not to construct a theology of antithesis. Just because teetotlers are in error does mean that the complete opposite position must therefore be correct. Rev. Winzer, in my estimation, was merely recognizing the realities of the culture in which we all live, and we would all do well to do the same. Indeed we have liberty, but with liberty comes responsibility.

 

[Afterthought]

What is meant by "social drinking"? Do you mean "going out to have a drink"? Or "going out to get lots of drinks and get tipsy or drunk"? Or do you mean "going out to eat and get a drink along with the meal"?

 

[alexandermsmith]

in the media we often see individuals drinking after a hard day of work to take the edge off - is this taking the place of someone trusting in Christ and turning to him in prayer?

One might just as well ask whether drinking coffee in the morning is taking the place of personal devotions. For nonbelievers undoubtedly it can take the place of prayer, but I find that coffee pairs well with the Word. And similarly, I can come home and give thanks to God for a beer after a long day.

I think bobtheman's point was if people routinely go for a drink at the end of a working day to "take the edge off" or "relax", then that is clearly idolatry. Instead of resting on Christ they are resting on alcohol. And it's just the same with coffee. When things like these become "necessities" and we start having cravings or get into patterns then something's not right. We need to eat and drink to nourish the body but we should never need alcohol or caffeine.

ReformedReidian said:

"3. Does alcohol serve any purpose other than intoxication?
If people drink without getting drunk, then does that fellowship count as a "purpose"?"

Do they need alcohol to have fellowship though? If so, there's something wrong. It's the Spirit which unites, not alcohol. Or at least that's how it should be.

The drinking of alcohol in small amounts is lawful. But in reaction to those churches which prohibit it, there are many in the Reformed community who go to the opposite extreme and extol it and promote it in a way which is unseemly and sinful. For a start, Christians should not be going to pubs and other places where alcohol consumption is the focus and where it is promoted as an end in itself. Noisy, raucous venues where people routinely drink to excess- even if the Christian doesn't- are the venues of the world. They are where the world goes to talk about the things of the world whilst drinking the drinks of the world. This is no place for a Christian.

But even in our own homes we need to be careful. Some say that the drinking of alcohol aids theological discussion. I find this a very shaky argument. There was a Reformed Forum Christ the Center episode- no. 200 maybe?- which was just a 2 hour roundtable discussion. Throughout that discussion the men were imbibing (by their own admission and from the frequent openings of bottles) and, surprise surprise, as the discussion progressed they got louder, more raucous, more argumentative and it ended up becoming a most unedifying spectacle (for the ears). They were drunk and it was obvious they were drunk. It was really quite shameful. Is this the sort of theological discussion we want? And it's not just alcohol. Certain quarters in the Reformed camp also extol the virtues of smoking! And they combine the two. Smoking, which is basically a violation of the 6th commandment.

It is often from a spirit of licentiousness that the arguments in favour of these things is made. I think if arguments like "we need to watch to see when we might start slipping into drunkenness or have others watch" are problematic. We should never be in that situation in the first place!

 

[alexandermsmith]

I do think it is possible for a community of believers to maintain a practice that the Bible does not mandate, and to do this in a way that is NOT pressuring or condemning.

Can you provide any examples of this kind of community?

The Nazarites; the Rechabites in Jeremiah 35. Both groups are noted in Scripture for their godliness and piety. Whilst not requiring that all follow their example.

 

[earl40]

Just because teetotlers are in error does mean that the complete opposite position must therefore be correct. Rev. Winzer, in my estimation, was merely recognizing the realities of the culture in which we all live, and we would all do well to do the same. Indeed we have liberty, but with liberty comes responsibility.

Well I am not sure we "all" live in the same culture. In my surroundings (culture) the pagans know those that teach total abstinence from alcohol is not what is taught in scripture.

 

[KMK]

I do think it is possible for a community of believers to maintain a practice that the Bible does not mandate, and to do this in a way that is NOT pressuring or condemning.

Can you provide any examples of this kind of community?

With drinking alcohol, I saw something like this in the church in which I grew up, where my dad was a missionary pastor. The church was among American Indians, and those believers were acutely aware of the dangers of alcohol abuse. Many had been rescued from that lifestyle. Many others were tempted daily, or had experienced abuse due to the frequent drunkenness of those around them. In addition, that culture knew nothing of the concept that one could have a drink socially, or to relax, without having several drinks to get drunk. Alcohol consumption and drunkenness were inseperable, culturally. I suppose folks realized that in other parts of the world, and in Bible times, there were people who would drink without getting drunk. But they didn't personally know anyone like that. All drinking they knew was for getting drunk.

What's a pastor to do in that setting? Certainly my dad, born in Europe, did not take a European approach and have a beer or a glass of wine with dinner while among those believers. This would have been badly misunderstood. Instead, he chose to abstain altogether, as did every believer we knew there. I wouldn't say there was pressure or condemnation in the apporach; rather, there was a recognition that by their abstinance believers could be a good witness to the culture and supportive to others who were trying to stay sober.

My dad said many times that the Bible did not forbid drinking alcohol, and that only Christ—not staying sober—could make a man right with God. I don't believe he ever told the congregation that they should abstain (though he surely said this to certain, individual strugglers). But the culture of the church, in that setting, made abstinance an informal "rule" of life in Christ. My dad did not fight this. In fact, he joined in. He clarified the biblical position now and then, but he also embraced the way those believers applied Christ's command to be new people who left old and sinful lifestyles behind.

Might he have used the situation to make points about how it's possible to drink responsibly, or how Christ gives freedom, or how we should not add to God's law, etc.—by having an occasional drink and doing so responsibly? I suppose he might have tried. But he was far more concerned with demonstrating how good it is to flee sin, how necessary it is to to leave old lifestyles behind when coming to Christ, and how Christians hate anything which causes harm and pain in the lives of others. I think his priorities were right. I think that was a good place not to fight the abstinance culture in the church. And from what I could tell, he did so without heaping guilt or pressure or condemnation on anyone. Believers already sensed it was loving and wise to abstain in that setting. My dad affirmed those impulses while reminding folks not to turn it into a legalistic command.

My dad surely didn't pastor perfectly in this regard, but I think his overall approach was wise and biblical. I am always wary of legalism. But I think we need to not be so wary that we stifle efforts to take a tough approach to besetting sin.

Thanks for this, Jack. It sounds like this was not an 'official' church position, but more of an 'unofficial' practice led by example. Your father sounds like he had a true pastor's heart.

The problem with this kind of culture is it makes grape juice a necessary element of the Lord's Supper. This binds the consciences of those who have what we all agree are correct convictions about the use of alcohol.

 

[bobtheman]

I do think it is possible for a community of believers to maintain a practice that the Bible does not mandate, and to do this in a way that is NOT pressuring or condemning.

Can you provide any examples of this kind of community?

With drinking alcohol, I saw something like this in the church in which I grew up, where my dad was a missionary pastor. The church was among American Indians, and those believers were acutely aware of the dangers of alcohol abuse. Many had been rescued from that lifestyle. Many others were tempted daily, or had experienced abuse due to the frequent drunkenness of those around them. In addition, that culture knew nothing of the concept that one could have a drink socially, or to relax, without having several drinks to get drunk. Alcohol consumption and drunkenness were inseperable, culturally. I suppose folks realized that in other parts of the world, and in Bible times, there were people who would drink without getting drunk. But they didn't personally know anyone like that. All drinking they knew was for getting drunk.

What's a pastor to do in that setting? Certainly my dad, born in Europe, did not take a European approach and have a beer or a glass of wine with dinner while among those believers. This would have been badly misunderstood. Instead, he chose to abstain altogether, as did every believer we knew there. I wouldn't say there was pressure or condemnation in the apporach; rather, there was a recognition that by their abstinance believers could be a good witness to the culture and supportive to others who were trying to stay sober.

My dad said many times that the Bible did not forbid drinking alcohol, and that only Christ—not staying sober—could make a man right with God. I don't believe he ever told the congregation that they should abstain (though he surely said this to certain, individual strugglers). But the culture of the church, in that setting, made abstinance an informal "rule" of life in Christ. My dad did not fight this. In fact, he joined in. He clarified the biblical position now and then, but he also embraced the way those believers applied Christ's command to be new people who left old and sinful lifestyles behind.

Might he have used the situation to make points about how it's possible to drink responsibly, or how Christ gives freedom, or how we should not add to God's law, etc.—by having an occasional drink and doing so responsibly? I suppose he might have tried. But he was far more concerned with demonstrating how good it is to flee sin, how necessary it is to to leave old lifestyles behind when coming to Christ, and how Christians hate anything which causes harm and pain in the lives of others. I think his priorities were right. I think that was a good place not to fight the abstinance culture in the church. And from what I could tell, he did so without heaping guilt or pressure or condemnation on anyone. Believers already sensed it was loving and wise to abstain in that setting. My dad affirmed those impulses while reminding folks not to turn it into a legalistic command.

My dad surely didn't pastor perfectly in this regard, but I think his overall approach was wise and biblical. I am always wary of legalism. But I think we need to not be so wary that we stifle efforts to take a tough approach to besetting sin.

Thanks for this, Jack. It sounds like this was not an 'official' church position, but more of an 'unofficial' practice led by example. Your father sounds like he had a true pastor's heart.

The problem with this kind of culture is it makes grape juice a necessary element of the Lord's Supper. This binds the consciences of those who have what we all agree are correct convictions about the use of alcohol.

Assuming I understood your comment correctly

I don't think everyone here feels as convicted about the consumption of alcohol as you portray. An important aspect of this question, at least for myself, is the use of grape juice during communion ... like you referenced.

Part of me almost feels like the use of 'grape juice' during communion is sinful verses using actual alcohol. With, of course, the exceptions of those who cannot drink alcohol for health purposes or age restrictions. I dunno maybe im off my rocker here.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

This is, as it has developed, a rather complex and multi-textured discussion. I agree with the appropriate cautions expressed by several, especially given the debauched nature of much of culture in many quarters. I don't appreciate the judgmental statements, however (cf. Romans 14).

Here's an additional and somewhat different thought than offered thus far. While I fully appreciate Vic's response to his colleagues, for instance,and don't question its propriety, I would suggest that one might alternatively decide, on occasion at least, to join the colleagues for drinks and take the opportunity in such an occasion of interface share the gospel with said colleagues. This can be an opportunity to testify to the fact that our righteousness does not lie in eating, drinking and the like but in Christ alone. If this sounds far-fetched to some, I assure you that friends of mine have done such (as well as have I) to good effect. I can think of several instances in which someone said something like, "I was surprised that you had a drink with me, because I thought that you Bible-believing Christians were all opposed to that, but I've learned that something else is really your agenda [referring to the gospel that had been shared with them]."

Again, I appreciate all the cautions expressed by brothers (I am thankful especially for Jack's relating his father's experience), but wanted to offer a different approach that may be beneficially employed.

Peace,
Alan

 

[Edward]

I must have missed that post. If either you or the person who found your post helpful would care to point out where he said he would have anyone pretend to have no liberty to drink and then to drink privately, that would be great. Otherwise some consideration of the Ninth Commandment may be in order.

Rev. Winzer made a post. I wasn't sure that I understood what he was saying. I asked for a specific clarification. My post was acknowledged by Rev. Winzer in a subsequent post, but my understanding of the original post was not addressed, so it remains my understanding until HE indicates that I did, in fact, misunderstand. His comment was:

Non Christians might have dissociated alcohol from Christianity to such a degree that they will not take your witness seriously if they know you drink alcohol.

Which certainly does seem to me at this point to suggest that you should hide the fact that you consume alcohol, or as I phrased it above, put on a false face.

Certainly, if HE tells me that he meant something entirely different, my comment would be inapplicable. But until then, I certainly won't confess to a 9th Commandment violation at your behest.

Rev. Winzer, in my estimation, was merely recognizing the realities of the culture in which we all live, and we would all do well to do the same.

I would suggest that the culture of Australia, the culture of the Bible Belt might be significantly different.

 

[Edward]

If not, I fail to see how it can be living a lie to forego something indifferent for the sake of saving one you love.

I do not understand this post at all, particularly what you intend to communicate by the word 'save' here. I certainly hope you are not using it in the sense that 'saved' is use in WCF VII.3, as a sip of wine with dinner is certainly not capable of keeping from heaven one of the elect, and conversely refraining from a sip of wine with dinner would not enable one who is not elect to enter in. So you must be using it in some other sense.

 

[au5t1n]

Edward,
Your understanding is not consistent with what he has already said. The references to foregoing something indifferent and beating the body make it clear he is talking about actual abstinence for the sake of others, not lying about it and then consuming in private. Complaining that he did not specifically correct an uncharitable understanding which never had any basis in what he said misses the point.

I will concede, however, that it may not have been my place to weigh in, and supposing it were, I should have stated my objection directly ("He didn't say that") instead of couching it in sarcasm.

 

[Edward]

make it clear he is talking about actual abstinence for the sake of others, not lying about it and then consuming in private.

"...if they know you drink" suggests to me that the issue is the knowledge of the unbeliever, and not the conduct of the believer which is in issue. So what is clear to you isn't at all clear to me.

 

[MW]

"...if they know you drink" suggests to me that the issue is the knowledge of the unbeliever, and not the conduct of the believer which is in issue. So what is clear to you isn't at all clear to me.

I said, "Non Christians might have dissociated alcohol from Christianity to such a degree that they will not take your witness seriously if they know you drink alcohol." I did not use the simple condition you claim I used. It was a part of a complex possibility statement. I clarified in another post that your statement concerning education was undoubtedly correct in the long term; and it should have been fairly obvious that I used "save" in the sense it is used in 1 Cor. 9, which I had just quoted about being all things to all men. If all this still leads you to find fault, there is nothing I can say to help you to a better understanding; I will leave it there.

 

[VictorBravo]

While I fully appreciate Vic's response to his colleagues, for instance,and don't question its propriety, I would suggest that one might alternatively decide, on occasion at least, to join the colleagues for drinks and take the opportunity in such an occasion of interface share the gospel with said colleagues.

To further muddy the waters, I'll add another response I've sometimes used: "I don't go to bars because Washington law would require me to be disarmed...besides, I don't drink in public because it might affect my aim."

But your point is well taken. I'm fortunate to be in a small community where gospel discussions come up in offices and court breaks. I'm surrounded by quasi-charismatic Roman Catholics and hard-core Mormons. Many approach me in sincerity and we have candid conversations.

One day I walked into the prosecutor's office and I heard the elected prosecutor (a professing Catholic) arguing with the chief deputy prosecutor (a professing evangelical) about the Council of Trent. As soon as the senior prosecutor saw me, he said, "Vic's here, he can settle the history of this!" Which I did, not exactly to his liking. But there are very few public offices I've been where you can freely go back and forth about free grace as opposed to merit and works in a serious but friendly environment.

Word also gets around about how mild-mannered Vic can get pretty serious when our Lord is mocked or blasphemed. Such occurrences have led to some interesting quiet conversations too.

But on alcohol, the main reason I don't go out is that I'm a home body introvert when I'm off duty.

 

[Jack K]

I would suggest that one might alternatively decide, on occasion at least, to join the colleagues for drinks and take the opportunity in such an occasion of interface share the gospel with said colleagues. This can be an opportunity to testify to the fact that our righteousness does not lie in eating, drinking and the like but in Christ alone. If this sounds far-fetched to some, I assure you that friends of mine have done such (as well as have I) to good effect.

I agree. This is not far-fetched at all. I've found that many Americans appreciate a Christian who is willing to have a drink with them. It can be an effective way to show that faith in Christ is not about a "better-than-thou" approach to life, which is what they assume until shown otherwise. For this reason, I've had many drinks in situations where I didn't otherwise want one. (I'm a lightweight drinker; alcohol tends to give me headaches and mess with my sleep.)

 

[PaulMc]

I agree with many of the comments and insights made. It should be a matter of personal liberty, although individual circumstances and different situations may require wisdom in applying this liberty.
Sadly some do seek to bind one's conscience on this issue - members of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, for example, are required to completely abstain from alcohol.

 

[Edward]

I said, "Non Christians might have dissociated alcohol from Christianity to such a degree that they will not take your witness seriously if they know you drink alcohol." I did not use the simple condition you claim I used. It was a part of a complex possibility statement. I clarified in another post that your statement concerning education was undoubtedly correct in the long term; and it should have been fairly obvious that I used "save" in the sense it is used in 1 Cor. 9, which I had just quoted about being all things to all men. If all this still leads you to find fault, there is nothing I can say to help you to a better understanding; I will leave it there.

Thank you for doing your best to clarify your earlier statements. I rather side with Calvin on this - 'we must accommodate ourselves to the weak, not to the obstinate'.

 

[bobtheman]

It appears that the majority of people here believe that consuming alcohol is not prohibited in the word, and is not sinful when kept in check/moderation/etc.


I ask myself then: Why, for what reason, what purpose would any of us give to one another as to why we were to go home tonight and drink a beer, or mixed drink, or glass of wine?


Maybe my assumptions of alcohol, being the result of living in the deep south, are tainted. Maybe me hearing lots of calls to abstain totally from its consumption - and hearing the promoted reasoning as to why we should do such - have tainted my reasoning on the matter.

My first thoughts are this. Alcohol has a single purpose - The Ethanol, when consumed, travels to your stomach where around 15 percent is absorbed into your bloodstream. The other remaining portion is sent to your intestines. Once it's in your bloodstream, your brain slows down. The process is much more complicated than that but - what im attempting to state is: When you drink alcohol, any amount, you are impaired.

Drunk: having the faculties impaired by alcohol.

Different levels of intoxication? Sure. But the sole purpose of drinking alcohol is .. intoxication. Drunkenness.

So, what purposes do the followers of Christ have to need to escape ones mental faculties, to desire impairedness? Is there a legitimate reason, or is my outlook on alcohol misconstrued from my past teachings?


I will add, I am lead to believe that the bible does not teach a total refraining from alcohol - and I have ordered some of the referenced material to further research those arguments. But the question I posed above troubles me. And with that question, I can see the follow up questions for a newer generation (myself being a millennial) being something of the sort:


Marijuana is safer, less toxic, and has more health benefits than alcohol. It's current illegality is the results of corporate lobbying to preserve status quo's and bad policy from such. Marijuana is used recreationally, just like alcohol, for the same effect. Intoxication. Are we saying, or would we be forced to accept, that both can be consumed for recreational use without it being sinful when it is used in moderation, when you are in control of it, and when it doesn't interfere with your relationship and commitments with Jesus Christ?

This is a question I have already heard in the church, and something I expect we will continue to hear as state after state continues to march towards some form of legalization, rather it be for recreational use or medicinal. The former being, in my opinion, what the majority of society truly desires.

Some people can consume marijuana (rather via inhalation of smoke, tablet form, food, vapor) and only become slightly impaired, just like alcohol. So their concern, considering the flood of legalization movements around the U.S., is if marijuana would be a safer alternative to alcohol. This is one of the large marketing aspect of such movements. I often wonder what line the church will draw when this becomes more prevalent.

 

[Logan]

Psalm 104:15
And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart.

I guess one reason is because some people find a glass of wine or a dark beer after a long day quite pleasurable. I've never been able to figure out why, though I've certainly tried

 

[KMK]

So, what purposes do the followers of Christ have to need to escape ones mental faculties, to desire impairedness? Is there a legitimate reason, or is my outlook on alcohol misconstrued from my past teachings?

One legitimate reason would be the Lord's Supper. Other than that, I would encourage you to follow your convictions, but make sure your convictions are squared by what is taught in the Bible. The Bible teaches that there is a 'middle ground' between teetotalism and drunkenness. It may not be helpful for you, but it might be helpful for others. It is a gift from God after all. (Ps 104:15)

 

[bobtheman]

So, what purposes do the followers of Christ have to need to escape ones mental faculties, to desire impairedness? Is there a legitimate reason, or is my outlook on alcohol misconstrued from my past teachings?

One legitimate reason would be the Lord's Supper. Other than that, I would encourage you to follow your convictions, but make sure your convictions are squared by what is taught in the Bible. The Bible teaches that there is a 'middle ground' between teetotalism and drunkenness. It may not be helpful for you, but it might be helpful for others. It is a gift from God after all. (Ps 104:15)

Do you call it a gift from God because of Psalm 104:15 ?

 

[Edm]

Well, I for one, enjoy the taste of beer. The hoppier,the better. I used to enjoy the taste of red wine..the acidity and I don't mix now however. I don't think I have ever heard anyone say " I'd like to smoke a joint, because I really enjoy the complex blend of favors". So I would not see it as an accurate comparison of alcohol and marajuana. If someone said I could either get high or drunk, that is a comparison. But that is an extreme end and no one that Ive seen here is saying either of those is ok.

 

[Toasty]

If a particular person has problems with overcoming the temptation to get drunk, then it would be best for him to abstain from alcohol. However, this does not mean that no one should drink alcohol.

 

[alexandermsmith]

"And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart." Psalm 104:15

I wonder how many men apply oil to their faces to make them shine, while drinking their wine and eating their bread?

 

[bobtheman]

"And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart." Psalm 104:15

I wonder how many men apply oil to their faces to make them shine, while drinking their wine and eating their bread?

Hilarious

 

[bobtheman]

Well, I for one, enjoy the taste of beer. The hoppier,the better. I used to enjoy the taste of red wine..the acidity and I don't mix now however. I don't think I have ever heard anyone say " I'd like to smoke a joint, because I really enjoy the complex blend of favors". So I would not see it as an accurate comparison of alcohol and marajuana. If someone said I could either get high or drunk, that is a comparison. But that is an extreme end and no one that Ive seen here is saying either of those is ok.

I'm not sure how much weight this would add to the counterargument... but the establishments that are on the forefront of selling cannabis as a consumer recreational use product promote their products for the different distinctions each different strain carries. It's not all centered around the intoxicating effects. Flavor profiles, etc.

 

[VictorBravo]

"And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart." Psalm 104:15

I wonder how many men apply oil to their faces to make them shine, while drinking their wine and eating their bread?

Hey, I eat my bread with olive oil and sometimes it gets on my face. When I wipe it away is seems to spread all over my face and make it shiny. It turns out to be a fine moisturizer and hides the wrinkles. Tastes good, too, especially with a robust homemade Cabernet or a sun-baked and earthy Pinot Noir.