Jeremy:

Hey,

Thanks to everybody for coming last night.  I had a fun time.  I think it's tennis ball from here on out!

Posted on June 3, at 10:49 AM

---

Katie:

It's American Craft Beer Week!

Though that the group would like to know;
it's a whole week of celebrating micro-brews!

check out the website:

http://www.beertown.org/events/acbw/index.html
www.beertown.org is the home "domain"

Posted on May 19, at 9:05 PM

---

Jonathan:

AMAZING concept. I'm starting a microbrewery with 2 friends from my church in Atlanta and we're doing something a little similar (bringing God and beer together). Check us out (http://mondaynightbrewery.com) and let me know what you think.

Posted on April 30, at 7:00 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

You laugh, but it might actually help!

And the only way for "good" and "cheap" to come together with beer is to make it yourself!

I'm curious, what is the Chinese Christian church's attitude towards alcohol? 

Posted on April 11, at 5:29 PM

---

Jan Wilcosh:

What a riot.  hey, have you ever thought of coming to China,  maybe this is our answer to reach the men,  they love a good cheap brew!

God bless,

i bet the discussions will be more interesting than most based on the brew factor.  lol 

 

Posted on April 3, at 12:27 AM

---

Beer Dinner.:

Well, I am sad and happy to say that we are pretty much sold out for the beer dinner.  We still have a little money trickling in.  For anyone who didn't make this one, hopefully there will be more in the future.  Looking forward to it.

Posted on March 17, at 10:45 AM

---

Brett Maxwell:

Well hey, at least we don't have to consider Romans 13 when it comes to RiverBrew, meanwhile in Alabama homebrewing and beers over 6% are illegal, though they're currently trying to change those laws despite resistance from Southern Baptists:  http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-beer10mar10,0,7360379.story?track=ntothtml

Posted on March 11, at 11:13 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

That sounds great Troy, talking face to face is always much better.

Posted on March 11, at 4:38 PM

---

Troy Eaton:

Brett

I may be up in your area the first week in April (if Dan & Suz don't mind us dropping in for a short visit)  I would love to meet up...

I totally get your last point

Posted on March 11, at 2:18 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

Troy,

First of all, I do appreciate the way you are approaching this discussion.

I suppose you are correct to call my first question a "debating tactic", but I don't think that invalidates it.  My purpose was to show that there are extremes to which this passage could be applied and I think it perfectly valid to consider all the logical extents of our interpretation.  The brief summary of my understanding of 1 Corinthians 8 would be that this is not a black and white issue for modern application but rather a spectrum of possibilities ranging from drums to overtly pagan worship.  Somewhere in the middle there is the alcohol issue, and in making that wisdom decision we find alcohol to be on the safe end of the spectrum, largely by looking at the example of Jesus.

I agree that the people Jesus is speaking against in Matthew 11 and Luke 7 were Pharisees, not weaker brothers.  However, I think it is safe to assert from the context that Jesus' eating and drinking was very public in such a way that weaker brothers would have seen as well.

I won't claim to be an expert on 1 Corinthians 8, particularly on how to apply it, but we must insist on a hermeneutic and application which does not condemn Jesus also.

Posted on March 11, at 1:32 PM

---

Troy Eaton:

First thing I want to make perfectly clear is that this discussion is completely theological in nature.  In other words I would never expect nor want Riverview to do anything based upon my postions.  I am in Indiana and not at Riverview.  Riverview has a wonderful board of elders that can handle any practical application matters that may arise from RiverBrew.  I am simply interested in working through this as a Pastor with fellow Christians who I know come from a theologicaly conservative background.

That being said Brett you are an idiot -JUST KIDDING!

As far as your questions to me:

#1 the drums were not a stumbling block because each member that was opposed to the drums clearly stated that they did not think it was a sin (it was a small church less than 200 and less than 50 had any problems).  Like I stated  drums were used in all the canned music and in the music they listed to outside of church and for that matter the concerts they attended outside of the church - A big Gaither contingency attends there.

In theory I understand what you are saying but I think it's more of a debating tactic trying to win an argument than a real discussion.  We are talking about Beer consumption and the use of that as a ministry- I don't want to get too sidetracked into sub points - I can't type that fast.

#2  In Matthew the people complaining are the pharisees.  Yes pharisees were religious people but they were not believers Jesus called them "sons of hell". 

btw one of my pet peaves is when christians call each other pharisees because a pharisee was a son of hell not a believer - we should be very careful about saying that to a fellow christian.

I suspect that, as it happens so much even today, they could not debate the scriptures with Jesus because he was always way ahead of them (imagine trying to debate God...) they then resorted to calling him names and tried to discredit him that way.  Off the top of my head I don't recall any "common" people having a problem with Jesus drinking.

The issue Paul is dealing with involves weaker and stronger Christians.  Both parties are believers.  What would the stronger Christian be willing to give up just to keep unity and to not violate the conscience of the weaker brother.

Brett as best I could in this manner I hope that answers your questions.  I'm looking forward to your thought on the 1 Corinthians 8 application.

This, I believe, is a huge part of the Christian growth process.  Not trying to claim victory in a debate but to have a conversation from two different vantage points (although I suspect we really aren't that far off from each other as it may appear that I am).

Brett I know time is precious so I appreciate what you are doing - thanks man.

Posted on March 11, at 10:49 AM

---

Brett Maxwell:

Troy,

Thank you for your thoughts.  You refer to a perfectly valid point from 1 Corinthians 8 that Paul talks about the mere possibility of being seen dining in a feast worshipping a pagan god.  I don't have time at the moment to reply at length about 1 Corinthians 8 application, so for now can I leave you with 2 questions? 

First, why can drums not be a stumbling block in this context and where and how do you draw that line?  Perhaps someone came out of a lifestyle of rock music that also included drug use and sexual promiscuity and to them drums may only remind them of a pagan past, even a pagan form of worship, and for them to see drums used in church may encourage them to participate in worship they can not separate from pagan.  This could even be applied to a sermon using video clips or pop-culture refrences from movies.  It could really be applied to any activity that someone may think of as pagan from smoking, tattoos, haircuts and clothes to such things as shopping at the mall, reading a non-KJV Bible, and sending your kids to public school.

Second, why would 1 Corinthians 8 discourage us from this public ministry but not apply to Jesus in Matthew 11 and Luke 7?  Jesus clearly ate and drank (alcohol) with the "sinners" in full view of society and allowed this part of his ministry to be recorded and widely spread.  It would be silly to think that alcohol abuse was not a problem in the first century or was never associated with a pagan lifestyle.

Posted on March 11, at 2:23 AM

---

Kevin Stacey:

I'm going to try to make it!

Posted on March 10, at 9:48 PM

---

Jeremy Mason:

I think I am down for Founders on Saturday!

Posted on March 10, at 9:59 AM

---

Troy Eaton:

Brett

I know it's hard sometimes to take and defend a position outside of the "norm" but don't get discouraged - not saying that you are - this conversation helps in the study of scripture no matter what postion is taken.  I appreciate everything you are saying.

I understand about the misuse of stumbling block - it was used as an argument to keep drums out of the church I grew up in.  Drums were accepted in canned music and in the music that the antidrum crowd listened to outside of church they were just not allowed inside the church walls.  I argued until blue in the face that no one thought drums in a church was sin they just didn't prefer them therfore the stumbling block was not an issue.  Submission, Christian love issues like that in play? yes, stumbling block? no.  I must admit that this disagreement forced me to study the stumbling block issue backwards and forwards.

One small point of contention I have is that I don't believe you have to hand someone a beer to be a stumbling block.  Paul was never talking about forcing someone to eat the meat offered to idols he was talking about eating the meat yourself in a public way which could cause another brother to eat the meat violating their weaker conscience.  Thoughts?

we can go to email if you prefer (troyeaton@fellowship-community-church.com) I just thought others may benefit from this conversation...

I really appreciate your last post

Posted on March 10, at 9:47 AM

---

Brett Maxwell:

Awesome Dan, I think we should go a little before it starts at 7.  Who else is in?

Kentucky Breakfast release party

Posted on March 10, at 1:27 AM

---

Brett Maxwell:

Anonymous,

I thought it was clear that I was speaking in generalities when calling the common interpretation of a stumbling-block "cliche".  I may have meant by "cliche" something other than you interpret it as, so perhaps it was a poor word choice.  I was speaking to the common use I have encountered which seems to be devoid of actual study.  Being in full-time ministry has nothing to do with it (in fact I am technically only part time) and neither does my Bible degree.  If you have studied the passages I would love to dialogue about it.  I am merely expressing the understanding myself and the elders of Riverview have come to.

There may come a time to be "done with this" because we simply agree to disagree while maintaining Christian unity, but if you are "done with this" because you  feel the proper understanding of scripture has been ignored I would hope we could continue a conversation (which incidentally might be easier by email: brett@eriv.net).

Posted on March 10, at 12:15 AM

---

Anonymous:

It's funny that my arguments are cliche while yours are not.  I know nothing and my "interpretations" are wrong, must be that I am not in full time ministry.  Sorry about this.  Moderate this.

I'm done with this. 

Posted on March 9, at 10:17 PM

---

Dan:

I'm hoping to make Founders on Saturday!

Posted on March 9, at 9:10 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

AAAAnnnyways...
this "brewchat" feature was never intended to exist to debate with people outside the ministry, so, guys and gals that actually come to RiverBrew, did you see the Beer Dinner announcement above?  Think you'll be able to make it?  This is going to be an awesome time and Kevin and Sarah are great chefs.

Posted on March 9, at 6:29 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

Anonymous,

It "gets real old" because I hear the same misinterpretation of scripture over and over while having open and honest discussions.  It seems to have become a cliche little phrase that constantly gets used out of context with very few people actually studying the relevant passages and reading commentaries.  You'll notice that despite my feelings about this phrase I still continued on to discuss it at length.  I do want honest and open discussion.

As for your first (stumbling block) question,  that comes back to the meaning of that phrase which I have discussed at length here in the last few days, have you read all those?

Regarding your second ("open to me") question, the answer is in the Announcements section, "Anyone is welcome, as long as you are of age and willing to drink responsibly."

Finall, your  third (why a ministry) question, my short answer would simply be "why not?"  We have groups that gather around various other hobbies, why not this one?  A more lengthy answer would be to look at our Objectives listed above.  If you would like me to expound on those feel free to shoot me an email.

Posted on March 9, at 6:25 PM

---

Anonymous:

I would just like to say, after thinking about my last post, I have no problem with Christians getting together and brewing/drinking beer.  Why does it have to be a ministry?  Why actively seek people using this ministry?

Posted on March 9, at 1:10 PM

---

Anonymous:

First off, the fact that someone's argument "gets real old" to you, shows that you don't seem willing to have an open and honest argument.

Second, I have heard our church claiming that people are coming to our church because of this ministry and that is so fantastic.  So how do YOU know that you are not placing a stumbling block in front of someone you know nothing about?

This has nothing to do with offending people.  There is a clear distinction between having drinks with people that you know and trust and attracting people to this church, using this ministry, as an outreach service, that you know nothing about.  

If I am not a member of this church and I don't know anyone, is this ministry open to me??????

I am also glad you are receiving good emails about this ministry.  I don't doubt the good intentions behind this.  It is a fine line. 

Posted on March 9, at 12:55 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

I would draw a clear distinction between encouraging behaviour and allowing behaviour to be known.  The implications of your understanding are that we can not ever do anything that someone of weak faith may ever think is wrong, lest they might see and stumble into sin.  That could be anything. Some new Christians get deeply convicted of materialism.  Do you have a car or clothes that could possibly be seen by such a person as more than a Christian should rightly own? Do you go to a church that has pot-luck dinners?  Do they broadcast this information to everyone including those that may struggle with gluttony? 

Apply your interpretation of Paul to Jesus.  Jesus found good reason to drink alcohol with sinners, some religious people got offended, and he allowed it to be reported by Matthew and Luke.  Sounds familiar, except that report has been given a lot wider circulation than the Lansing State Journal.  The difference is that Jesus didn't offer the weak in faith a drink, and likewise neither do we.  

If you read Gordon Fee's commentary (which happens to be online here) you can see that the issue Paul was addressing was much larger than eating food, rather he is refrencing attending cultic and demonic ritual meals.  There's a big difference between going to the Satanic church for communion and drinking a beer with a group of Christians, and it has nothing to do with the things consumed.  Fee writes, "In this case love takes the form of 'the stumbling-block principle,' which does not have to do with 'offending' someone but with causing people to fall by urging on them an action they cannot freely do."

As for quoting 1 Corinthians 10:23-24, or any passage about wisdom, that is a non-sequitor.  You must first show that our actions are unwise or not for the good of others before you can quote verses talking about those things.

Posted on March 8, at 9:49 PM

---

Scott From Minnesota:

Brett,

The stumbling block argument gets "real old" because you are failing to understand it. The rational has nothing to do with personally "offending" anyone; nor does it have anything to do with a "weaker conscience" or a weak will as you suggest ("a weak conscience about alcohol"). It has everything to do with a weaker faith.

Things like cushy pews or carpet color will always provide occasion for offense to someone but really have little to do with creating a stumbling block to our faith because they concern things; not behaviors. However, if these benign things should somehow become associated with promiscuous behaviours; then they indeed become a potential block of stumbling to a saint with weak faith.

"Weak faith" may be better understood as "faith that is not fully matured". It is characteristic of a person who struggles to differentiate between matters of moral law and gospel freedom. The "rush to blame" which has always been prevalent in the world, does not quickly fall away when someone gets saved (comes to faith in Christ). In fact, the "righteous activity" as you call it (I would simply call it freedom), is a major inhibitor in the maturing of one's new-found faith because of the confliction of soul he experiences when something he sees with his eyes does not line up with the voice in his heart.

This is easily understood by the example of a Dad who rightly teaches his young son that "curse words" are bad; but then the young lad finds out that his Dad watches movies with "curse words" in it. The Dad's maturity justifies his behavioral freedom but he evidently became careless in the use of that freedom. Granted, it may have been unintentional but the damage is done regardless. How much moreso when it's broadcast to the world.

I'm curious to see if you will deal with this post or just minimize it; or skirt it altogether as has been done with my previous posts. Unless you respond with a genuine biblical refutation, I bid you farewell and leave you with 1 Corinthians 10:23-23:

"Everything is permissible"--but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"--but not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.

Posted on March 8, at 5:55 PM

---

Brett Maxwell:

From Decision Making and the Will of God by Gary Friesen
(http://www.peacemakers.net/peace/gfriesen.htm)

Categories Of Differing Brothers

Weaker Brother

He differs from my opinion at times
He is not fully convinced
He is sincere
He needs teaching and is open to it
He is surprised at my use of freedom
He does not think he can teach me
He is influenced by my example I can cause him to stumble into sin
He is caused to sin by my wrong use of freedom
When I cause him to stumble it is an "offense given"


Convinced Brother

He differs from my opinion at times
He is fully convinced
He is convinced and humble
He has been taught but is open to correction
He accepts me with my differing opinion
He is willing to discuss why he differs
He is not improperly influenced by my example I cannot cause him to stumble into sin
He is not caused to sin by my use of freedom Since he does not stumble, there is no offense at all


Pharisee

He differs from my opinion at times
He is fully convinced
He is convinced and proud
He has been taught, but is not open to correction
He judges or rejects me for my differing conviction
He seeks to make me conform to his viewpoint
He is not influenced by my example
His pride will cause him to stumble
He becomes upset by my use of freedom
When he stumbles over my freedom, it is an "offense taken"

Posted on March 8, at 12:51 AM

---

Brett Maxwell:

I wish you guys could all see the positive emails I've been getting. 

 

The "stumbling block" argument gets real old.  We are not placing a stumbling block before a weak conscience by allowing a righteous activity to be known.  We would be placing a stumbling block to hand a beer to someone we know to have a weak conscience about alcohol, which we do not do. 

The logical conclusions of interpreting a "stumbling block" as anything that offends someone are preposterous.  I remember when my childhood church went from pews to chairs and some people were offended, was that placing a stumbling block before them?  If we are to be so paranoid about challenging or even offending a weak conscience we better just lock ourselves inside our homes (except that would probably offend someone also).

Posted on March 7, at 11:20 PM

---

Scott From Minnesota:

Dan,

See post below. (forgot to I.D.)

Posted on March 7, at 7:16 PM

---

Anonymous:

Dan,

I'm NOT just expressing my dislike of the ministry (I, in fact, don't dislike it). My very first post had plenty of biblical challenge to this issue but Jeremy Mason didn't even address them; he skirted them. If your staff does not see the parallel between the use of alcohol in our society and food sacrificed to idols in the Corinthian society, one may conclude your discerment is impaired which is what the Proverbs 31 post is all about.

Concerning that matter of associating beer consumption with the glory of God; it was meant to be a rhetorical statement. If such a day ever comes, it will not be because the Church has succeeded in teaching people how to drink responsibly. The entire notion of such a thing is preposterous.

And finally, regarding your community where beer is NOT "associated with a particular lifestyle and all its attendant corruption", I say "Praise the Lord!" I am mature enough not to judge another brother's freedom even though I may not personally embrace it; but to that I say, "Keep it out of the public view where beer is clearly associated with promiscuity and debauchery; away from those who MAY have difficulty with it." Allowing your freedom to be on public display through the media or this website is enough to place sufficient stumbling blocks in front of many others.

Posted on March 7, at 7:14 PM

---

Anonymous:

Hey Dan,

 That might be cool if you have time!  Shoot me an email if you get a chance: albertdarryl@gmail.com

 

Posted on March 7, at 6:31 PM