John MacArthur, Norman Geisler, John Piper, and Charles Ryrie answer “Yes.”
MacArthur states why he totally abstains from drinking: “In Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8, Paul warned against doing anything that would cause another believer to stumble. I am certain that if people thought I drank wine, they would say, ‘Since John MacArthur drinks wine, then certainly I can.’ Some of those people might lose control, do something irresponsible that hurts other people, or even become alcoholics. I do not want that to happen, and I do not want the fear of that weighing on my conscience” (Pastoral Ministry: How to Shepherd Biblically, p. 76) (click to open).
Mark Driscoll takes the opposite view
The reason I am highlighting Mark Driscoll, although, he is now off the scene, is because of his impact on New Calvinism and its promotion of moderation. Mark Driscoll gives his testimony that before and right after his conversion to Christ, he was a teetotaler (a total abstainer of alcohol). But after he entered the ministry he was “studying the Scriptures for a sermon about Jesus’ first miracle of turning water into wine, as reported in John’s gospel, a miracle that Jesus performed when he was about my age. My Bible study convicted me of my sin of abstinence from alcohol. So in repentance, I drank a hard cider over lunch with our worship pastor.” [1] When I read his testimony, I must admit, that was a first for me. Usually, the testimony is the opposite, that, having come to Christ, the drinker surrenders his drinking habits or addictions. Driscoll's promotion of drinking was dangerous and unbiblical.
Driscoll boasted that he trained the young men in Seattle “what it means to be a godly man. So far, our training is on everything from how to study the Bible, get a job, invest money, buy a home, court a woman, brew beer, have good sex, and be a pastor-dad to their children has been very successful for hundreds of young men.” [2]
Driscoll would say some things in culture are wrong such as homosexuality and extramarital sex, but drinking is not only not wrong, it is Christian: “I personally long to return to the glory days of Christian pubs, where God’s men gather to drink beer and talk theology.” [3] According to Driscoll, it is not a sin to drink but it is a sin to drink light beer. The title of chapter six in Driscoll’s The Radical Reformission is “The Sin of Light Beer.”
Three Views on Social Drinking
There are three views on social drinking which Driscoll explains. I will give Driscoll’s discussion of the three views, and then my response to Driscoll’s preference.
The first view is Prohibitionism
Prohibitionism holds all alcoholic consumption in the Bible is a sin. Therefore, Jesus created and drank grape juice. Driscoll argues that since Jesus created and drank real wine so should believers today drink distilled wine. [4]
The Sword of the Lord's [a magazine published by Sword of the Lord Ministries, a non-profit organization based in Murfreesboro, Tennessee] position is prohibitionism and criticized the book by Dr. Randy Jaeggli, professor of Old Testament at Bob Jones University Seminary entitled The Christian and Drinking: A Biblical Perspective on Moderation and Abstinence. Both groups believe Christians should abstain but the Sword of the Lord believes in prohibitionism and Bob Jones University believes in abstentionism.
The second view on social drinking is Abstentionism
Abstentionism advocates drinking alcohol is not prohibited in Scripture but the believer should still abstain. One reason to abstain is to avoid leading a weak believer into sin. Driscoll states that Jesus drank (Mt. 11:19) undoubtedly in the presence of alcoholics. If that did not stop Jesus why should it stop believers today? [5]
The third view is Moderationism
This is Driscioll’s view: “Alcohol itself is neutral and can be used in both good and bad ways. When used in a right and redeemed way [moderately and carefully], alcohol is a gift from God to be drunk with gladness.” [6]
After discussing the wine issue in the Bible, Norman Geisler came to a much different conclusion: “Therefore Christians ought not to drink wine, beer, or other alcoholic beverages for they are actually ‘strong drink ’ and are forbidden in Scripture. Even ancient pagans did not drink what some Christians drink today.” [7]
Modern Distilled Wine is Different From Wine in the Bible
One of the reasons for coming to this conclusion that believers should not drink wine today is because modern distilled wine is not the same as the wine in the Bible. Wine in the Bible was more like purified water because the wine was diluted with water. On average, for every one part of the wine, there were three or four parts of water mixed with the wine to purify the unsafe water. Jesus was not a teetotaler but we should be because the alcoholic content was different in the wine he drank and the wine society drinks today.
Drunkenness is clearly and repeatedly condemned in Scripture (Dt. 21:20-21; Eph. 5:18; Gal. 5:19-21). Yet, pastors and deacons were not forbidden from drinking some wine (1 Tim. 3:3, 8) and the reason was that with water being unsafe, wine was used as a medicine as Paul reminds Timothy in the same Pastoral Epistle: “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your often infirmities” (1 Tim. 5:23).
The same truth is found in the Old Testament which repeatedly condemned drunkenness (Hab. 2:15). Wine could, however, be used to relieve suffering. After the writer condemns leaders drinking wine and strong drink in Proverbs 31:4-5, he advises to “give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts” in verse six. We accomplish the same result today when doctors give suffering patients morphine to lessen great pain.
The Gamble of Moderation
One of the arguments for moderation is that it may lead a weaker brother into sin. This truth is found in Romans 14:21: "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby your brother stumbles, or is offended, or is made weak.” Geisler made this observation: "A believer should ask himself, ‘Will my drinking cause anyone else to sin? Even if it would not be a problem to me, is it possible that it would cause someone else to stumble?’ The writer knows of former alcoholics who have attended church communion services in which fermented wine has been served, and just the taste of a little bit of it drove them back into alcoholism.” [8] For this reason, it is best not to use wine in communion services today.
The proper elements used in the communion service should be unleavened bread and “the fruit of the vine” as Christ stated in Matthew 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18. While the Bible refers to “the cup” being used at the first Lord’s Supper (Matthew 26:27; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25-27), the Bible never uses the Greek word oinos [wine] for the communion service.
“Of course, it was juice from the grape, but whether fermented or not is not stated. Unfermented wine was used more in the time of Christ than most suppose. Nevertheless, if this was fermented some of it was apparently diluted with water. For the sake of converted alcoholics or even to forestall anyone beginning to drink, unfermented juice is preferable in the light of today’s worldwide problem with alcohol” (Ryrie, Basic Theology, page 425).
An argument for abstinence is that social drinking can lead to alcoholism. Geisler stated that one out of ten social drinkers will become alcoholics. [9] Why gamble or cause someone else to gamble with alcoholism with those odds?
John Piper has a sermon entitled Total Abstinence and Church Membership (click to open). Here is part of his argumentation:
“Some people rank alcoholism as our second greatest health problem in America …. There are about 10 million alcoholics and 20 million persons who consume an immoderate amount of alcohol. About 70% use alcohol as a beverage. As a result, alcohol contributes to 205,000 deaths each year. Life expectancy of the alcoholic is reduced by at least a decade. One-half of all traffic fatalities are the direct result of the abuse of alcohol. It is directly connected to one-half of the homicides and one-third of the suicides. It costs business alone 19 billion dollars a year. And now one out of every twelve marriages comes apart over drinking.” [10] In this sermon, Piper listed for reasons he is a “teetotaler”:
1. First, I choose not to drink because of my conscience.
2. The second reason is that alcohol is a mind-altering drug.
3. The third reason why I choose total abstinence is that alcohol is addictive.
4. The fourth reason I choose total abstinence is to make a social statement. Piper concluded his sermon: For these four reasons, then, I am a very happy teetotaler, and I think you should be too.
I have heard men justify their drinking by saying, “I am not hurting anyone but myself.” Ask the wife and children of the alcoholic if he is only hurting himself. Even if he were only harming himself, he is dishonoring God with his body and life and that is reason enough to quit. But the drinker is not just hurting himself, he is destroying his marriage and family. If Jesus lived today, I believe he would be a teetotaler, and so should we.
[1] Mark Driscoll. The Radical Reformission (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 146.
[2] Ibid., 184.
[3] Ibid., 147.
[4] Ibid., 149
[5] Ibid., 150
[6] Ibid.,150.
[8] Ibid., 53.
[9] Norman Geisler. Criswell Theological Review-Volume 5, Issue 2, 2008.
[10] John Piper, Total Abstinence and Church Membership, Sunday Evening Message, October 4, 1981. (click to open)