Part 1: Introductory Comments
Part 2: Sola Scriptura and the SBC
Part 3: What Does Scripture Say?
Part 4: Abstinence in Scripture

“I know there’s nothing wrong with alcohol, but I abstain for the weaker brother.”

What is wrong with that statement? Absolutely nothing, in the right context. However, if that means abstinence as a lifestyle, and categorizing everyone who disapproves as the weaker brother, it demonstrates ignorance of the Scriptural principle involved.

Romans 14 and 1Corinthians 8 speak of meat, which, for our purposes, can legitimately be replaced with wine and strong drink. Both are good things, given by God for our nourishment and pleasure, which, let us not forget, serve the ultimate purpose of God’s glory. The meat sacrificed to idols was perfectly good to eat, not defiled in any way by having been sacrificed to pagan gods, since those gods did not exist; but some immature Christians, in their ignorance, could not eat it with a clear conscience. Wine and strong drink are good, commended to us in Scripture; but some Christians, ignorant of what Scripture teaches concerning alcohol and conditioned by their home and/or church to believe it is sinful, worldly, or unwise, cannot enjoy it with a clear conscience. Some, but not all, of those Christians are called “weaker brothers,” and are deserving of our consideration as we exercise our right to enjoy God’s gifts.

The only Scriptural call for purposeful abstinence is when doing otherwise will cause a brother to sin. How can doing something that is clearly not a sin cause another to sin? God is far more concerned with the activity that takes place in our minds than what we do with our hands. If we mistakenly believe something is a sin, and willfully do it anyway, we have rebelled against God even though the particular activity is good. If a brother, for any reason, believes drinking alcohol, or eating chocolate, or playing baseball is sinful, and we persuade him to do it without first convincing him of the truth, we have caused him to sin.

Who, then, is the weaker brother? He is not just anyone who doesn’t drink and thinks you shouldn’t, either. He is not one who is annoyed that you would drink in his presence knowing he doesn’t. He is definitely not one who has read Romans 14 and 1Corinthians 8 and has decided that he is the weaker brother because he disapproves of drinking wine. Odd as that sounds, such people do exist. They believe others should comply with their preferences based on those passages. They are not the weaker brother. These people are not going to follow the example of others; they are offended that others do not follow their example.

The weaker brother is ignorant of his liberty and bound to a false standard of morality, but could be persuaded to violate his conscience by the example of a mature believer exercising his liberty inconsiderately. What constitutes “exercising liberty inconsiderately” depends on the situation. The best I can do, following the guidance of Romans 14 and 1Corinthians 8, is give a few examples as they may occur in my experience. You will have to make your own application.

Example 1:
We are acquainted with the local IFB pastor and his family. They are total abstainers, but I don’t think he would call drinking a sin. We are also acquainted with the local SBC pastor. I have heard him give a less dramatic rendition of the caricature I presented in Part 3 of this series. If I was sitting on my deck sipping a Warsteiner Dunkel and either of these good men dropped by for a visit, I wouldn’t tuck my bottle out of sight in shame, or in fear of offending a weaker brother. Neither of them would have a beer even if I offered it. At least one of them would probably die a martyr’s death first. They are not weaker brothers. They would not violate their consciences at my urging.

Example 2:
Now, suppose a member of either of those churches stops by, and I am sampling my home-made wine. I offer him a taste, and he declines. Seeing by his expression that he is uncomfortable with it,…

…I say, “How about a Coke, then, or a glass of water?” Then, when I go to get his drink, I take my wine glass away and return with a soda for myself as well. Maybe some other time we’ll have a conversation about wine, and I’ll be able to show him what Scripture says. At the same time, I’ll emphasize the fact that, whatever he does, he needs to be fully convinced that it is right. Until that time, I won’t rub his nose in my liberty.

Or,

…I say some thing like, “Ah, come on, it’s good! Try it!” I cajole and prod him, challenging his abstentionist scruples: “You don’t think there’s something wrong with it, do you? That’s just legalistic nonsense!” Perhaps I coerce him until he gives in, but without full conviction.

Obviously, the first choice is the right choice. I am respecting my brother’s conscience, and leaving the door open for discipling him toward a stronger, better informed faith. In the second scenario, I am bullying him into sinning against his conscience.

Example 3:
I take my family to dinner after church. Our normal habit is pizza and a pitcher of beer (not really, but let’s pretend). This Sunday, a family joins us whom I know or suspect are abstainers. That alone doesn’t make them “weaker brothers,” but rather than place what might be a temptation before what might be a weaker brother, we’ll have root beer instead.

I could go on with countless examples, and you have probably thought of a few, also. This is a principle that must be addressed with wisdom and charity on a case-by-case basis. The motivation for abstinence in these cases is not to be more righteous, or to adhere to some imagined “higher standard.” It is love for our brother. We are not to stubbornly insist on exercising our rights at the expense of our brother’s sanctification. When we do so, we sin.

The other side of this coin is the admonition to those who abstain to not judge those who don’t, just as those who drink should not despise those who do not. “Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him” (Romans 14:3). Those who abstain are not to think of themselves as more righteous, more mature, or wiser that those who do not.

Whether we eat or drink is irrelevant to the kingdom of God. Scripture tells us clearly which things are sin and which are not. When considering those things that are not clearly sinful, the rule is “live and let live.” Love one another, and live at peace with one another. Make no rules to bind the conscience that are not clearly found in Scripture, and do not encourage others to do what they cannot conscientiously do.

Read more on the question of offense and the weaker brother in the following interestingly titled Fide-O posts:
When All Else Fails Quote a Bible Verse by Scott Hill
Weaky Weakerton by Scott Hill
Larry Legalist Goes to Corinth by Scott Hill
Hercules Henderson by Scott Hill
Off The Fence On Offense by Tony Langdon

In the next post, which should be the last, I will answer questions and objections that have been raised here or elsewhere. It might be a somewhat redundant post, but hopefully, it will tie up any remaining loose ends. Now is the time to bring up any questions or objections that you think have not been adequately addressed. Last call!

Part 6: Answering Objections