Southeastern Seminary On Alcohol…Again! by Peter Lumpkins

I have a question: why is it when abstinence-oriented believers breach the subject of alcohol, they are accused of obsession with an issue which divides rather than unites? How interesting, however, when those who have no necessary scruples with imbibing intoxicating substances breach the subject--and do so over and over again--they are heaped with praise, endowed with courage in tackling such a timely issue, and estimated as possessing the moral aptitude to "speak out!"  >>>

I have another question: if alcohol use is not an issue at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary as our president has assured us, why does the subject keep coming up? Not only did Dr. Akin put up two back-to-back posts concerning alcohol use on the seminary blog (see here and here), now adjunct professor, J.D. Greear has put up a post on alcohol on his blog. Entitled, “Christians and Drinking Alcohol,” Greear deals candidly with the issue, even stating his church's policy to be moderation for both its leadership and church members.While it is fairly common for Baptist churches to not make abstinence a "deal-breaker" so far as membership goes (at least in this century), it remains rare for a Southern Baptist church to allow its pastors to moderately consume intoxicating substances for pleasurable purposes.

Additionally, Greear stands contrary to Danny Akin's strongly worded abstinence-oriented position. Pertaining to the consumption of intoxicating substances, Dr. Akin unquestioningly wrote on the seminary blog,

"As Bob Stein has carefully documented, “The term “wine” or oinos in the ancient world, then, did not mean wine as we understand it today but wine mixed with water… To consume the amount of alcohol that is in two martinis by drinking wine containing three parts water to one part wine [a fairly common ancient ratio], one would have to drink over twenty-two glasses. In other words, it is possible to become intoxicated from wine mixed with three parts water, but one’s drinking would probably affect the bladder long before it affected the mind.” It should also be noted that children would have drank this diluted mixture of water and wine. It seems clear that there is no one-to-one correspondence with first century wine and twenty first century distilled liquor. Concerning the latter I believe the Lord Jesus would have no part (link, emphasis mine)

However, Greear is more uncertain about the same, ultimately placing the decision to drink in the category of I-like-vanilla-you-like-chocolate morally adiaphorous nonsense:

To be frank, I no longer find the argument that ‘drinking wine in Biblical times was fundamentally different than in our time’ noted above to be that compelling. Isaiah, the Psalms and Proverbs, and the Gospels are reasonably clear that God-loving people drank what we would consider to be “mixed drinks.” It may be true that they had no choice, but, nonetheless, they did it….

…It is not technically sinful to have a loaded crossbow in my house. That doesn’t mean it would be wise to keep one laying around, especially with my 4 kids running around. That said, alcohol is celebrated in the Bible, and can’t really be put in the same category with a loaded crossbow…

At this point, I still choose not to drink, personally, to be on the safe side for the reasons I note above… unless I am in a situation where I feel like not drinking would hurt the cause of the Gospel. If my not drinking would be a stumbling block for an unbeliever, I drink. But, to be honest, I would still rather have a culture of non-drinking around our church than one of drinking…” (embolden added)

So, I’m now wondering once again: if alcohol use is not an issue among students, why so much fodder on imbibing alcohol from Southeastern (including adjunct faculty)? Just a question, mind you. Even more, if Dr. Akin is attempting to construct an atmosphere of abstinence on campus, how does Greear’s promo for non-abstinence fit into Akin’s goals?

As I’ve indicated elsewhere, sending morally mixed signals concerning issues like alcohol only makes for ethical confusion not moral stability, especially when one is dealing with institutional policy on student/faculty behavior.

With that, I am…

Peter

Up Next: On J.D. Greear’s View of Alcohol: Inadequate, Naïve, Relativistic, Unbiblical Balderdash: And That’s Putting it Mildly by Peter Lumpkins

Comments

[Tim G]

Peter,
There you go again making sense out of something! The issue is indeed an issue. I realize that culturally it is huge and maybe that sheds some light into the constant bringing up of this issue. Yet, when faculty of any type do so, one must ask the question why? I would think that we should hear a clear "on the record"defining response to hopefully put an end to the this issue once and for all!

[peter lumpkins]

Tim,

Thanks for stopping by. Unfortunately, SE just won't let this alone. I wrote a book-length treatise on this issue published June 2009. Since, I've hardly even breached the issue. In fact, I haven't mentioned it at all as I recall unless in response to something specifically spoken and/or written by someone in a position of great influence. As many blog-articles that have gone up over the past 18 mos. since the book's publication, I have chosen to simply say, "I rest my case."

On the other hand, those who increasingly fire up the rhetoric about abstention from intoxicating substances for pleasurable purposes being little more than "moral legalism," or as Greear, suggesting "adding to Scripture" know few limitations. For some reason when they deal with it, it's a good thing but when those contrary to their moderationism counter, they are being divisive.

For me, this is both frustrating and unacceptable. Hence, I'm probably no longer going to just "rest my case." If they want to put up the posts, I'll be glad to accommodate them.

Thanks again, Tim.
With that, I am...
Peter

[Robin Foster]

Peter

This has now moved to faculty (I believe Greear is an adjunct prof) kicking against the stated policy of the Seminary and the stated position of the Convention. I can only guess that is the policy of the seminary since Dr. Akin has stated his opposition to alcohol.

I am also amazed at the relentlessness of the pro-imbibing group to stay on this subject. Why can't Greear just keep this to himself and his church? Why does he need to come out of the "closet" so to speak on this issue?

But a bigger issue is at stake. Southeastern now has two profs who have spoken out on two controversial issues against the convention: Finn suggesting a neutral statement on the Lord's Supper in a new confession and Greear's stance on on alcohol. One must ask if these beliefs are fostered in the minds of young seminarians at SEBTS will the convention in twenty or thirty years reverse its long held biblical stance on both these issues?

[peter lumpkins]

Robin,

I think you are correct. And, not only is Dr. Finn on record calling for an examination and perhaps a change of the BF&M's expression on the Supper, we also unfortunately have Dr. Finn publicly defending moderation along with his colleague, J.D. Greear.

Honestly, I do not think this has trickled down to grassroots Southern Baptists yet. Had it done so, my information gives me reason to believe fireworks would have already sparked in Wake Forest.

I do not yet know where this thing is headed. but for my part, I remain frustrated while we wait.

Grace, brother.
With that, I am...
Peter

[Jared Moore]

Men,

Concerning whether or not this has trickled down to grassroots Southern Baptists, I think that it has. At the last church I pastored in Soddy Daisy, TN, my church requested that I teach on the subject of alcohol. Roughly half of this rural country Southern Baptist church believed that drinking in moderation was biblically acceptable. I was surprised, considering they had 3 previous pastors that were teetotalers. I am a teetotaler as well by choice, not conviction. I personally HATE alcohol; however, I don't know how anyone can argue that drinking alocohol without getting drunk is always a sin due to Deut. 14:26. I don't understand how God can permit the Israelites to enjoy Him by drinking strong drink; and it still be "unwise"? Lumpkins, do you deal with this verse in your book?

[peter lumpkins]

Jared,

Thanks. You may be correct. Perhaps it is at grassroots now and Greear, Finn and others are only reflecting what masses embrace. I do not think so but I very well could be mistaken.

Second, yes I deal with Dt 14 in my book. Nor is Dt. 14 the 'loophole' moderationists appear to think.

Third, I nor anyone with whom I am familiar in my research do not argue drinking alcohol without getting drunk is always a sin. Rather, I argue moral abstinence from intoxicating substances for pleasurable purposes. There are believable, significant scenarios when such [i.e. consuming intoxicating substances] is not sinful (as an obvious example, medicinal purposes).

In addition, one must consider the nature of ethical absolutes, especially conflicting moral absolutes. Personally, I follow along the lines of N. Geisler, J. Feinberg & P. Feinberg, and other ethicists in a form of conflicting hierarchicalism.

With that, I am...
Peter

[Jared Moore]

Peter,

I think the reason why Southern Baptists are lax on the issue (I think it's near 50%, but at the least, somewhere around 40% in favor of drinking in moderation) is because it's the argument that takes the last effort. With the shallowness of our churches, it is easier to say, "The Bible only condemns drunkenness, never drinking." This of course isn't always the case, but I've only ran into a few lay persons that exhaustively studied the subject. Furthermore, much of the preaching against the subject has been "cut and dry." Bad arguments beget shallow belief. Truly teaching the subject in context takes much time and effort, regardless which side you're on.

Finally, as goes the culture, so goes the church. My home town, Sparta, TN, just voted in "Liquor by the drink." I never thought I'd see the day. I don't understand how Christians can be in favor of liquor, even if they are capable of drinking in moderation; because, many drinkers are not. I don't understand how it's possibly good for a community.

[peter lumpkins]

Jared,

I couldn't agree with you more, brother. I do have a question: you mentioned with the SBC it's "near 50%, but at the least, somewhere around 40% in favor of drinking in moderation." I'd be extremely interested in that. I honestly have never seen any polls on this, especially among SBC. I'd really like to know whether Lifeway or another polled the SBC for future reference.

Thanks.

With that, I am...
Peter

P.S. It's nice to agree, my brother ;^)

[Jared Moore]

Peter,

Lifeway did a study 3 years ago on the subject. Concerning Southern Baptist Laity, 35% agreed and 23% somewhat agreed with this statement: "Scripture indicates that all beverages, including alcohol can be cosumed without sin."

Also, concerning Southern Baptist laity, 28% strongly agreed, and 25% somewhat agreed with this statement: "When a Christian partakes of alcohol in reasonable amounts, they are simply exercising a biblical liberty."

Here's the link to the pretty exhaustive study: http://www.lifeway.com/file/?id=4146.

[peter lumpkins]

Jared,

Thanks for the link Jared. I'm sure it will be helpful.

With that, I am...
Peter