Should Christians drink alcohol, or is demanding total abstinence just Prohibition-era moralism smuggled into the gospel?

• Z

  Zara1mo ago

  Jesus made wine. Not grape juice. Wine. Fermented. If that's good enough for the Son of God at a wedding party, it's good enough for me on a Friday evening. The word oinos in Greek means wine. We can stop pretending otherwise.

  187Reply
• Y_

  Yuki _x1mo ago

  I am in recovery. Three years sober by God's grace. And I want to say clearly: moderate Christian drinkers have never once made my recovery harder. What makes recovery hard is shame culture and churches that treat addiction as a moral failure rather than a disease. The alcohol itself isn't my enemy. My own broken relationship with it is. Those are different problems.

  179Reply
• A

  Avery1mo ago

  My dad was an alcoholic. I watched alcohol destroy my family, my childhood, my mother's health. You want to sit here and debate whether Christians can have a glass of wine. Go ahead. I'll never touch it and I'll never apologize for that. Some of us made a vow before God for reasons you can't understand from the outside.

  167Reply
• R

  Reese1mo ago

  can we PLEASE talk about how American evangelical culture treats alcohol as the big taboo but has almost nothing to say about how Christians consume media, spend money, or treat employees??? we strain at a gnat and swallow a camel and feel super holy doing it

  162Reply
• H

  Hana1mo ago

  Here's what nobody wants to say: a lot of the abstinence culture in American churches is classism dressed up as holiness. Working class people drink beer. Middle class evangelicals drink craft beer but call it 'intentional fellowship.' Rich church folks drink wine at dinner parties and don't say a word about it on Sunday. The whole thing is inconsistent and everyone knows it.

  156Reply
• R

  Riley1mo ago

  Bottom line for me: the Bible condemns drunkenness clearly. The Bible does NOT command total abstinence. Anything beyond that is your tradition, your conscience, your pastoral context — and you need to be humble enough to admit which one you're actually appealing to.

  153Reply
• M

  Maya1mo ago

  That's a completely made-up standard. What testimony are you giving unbelievers when you eat too much at every church potluck? Gluttony is a sin too. We pick the ones that feel spiritual and ignore the ones that hit too close to home.

  148Reply
• Y

  Yuki1mo ago

  Someone once told me that the first miracle Jesus performed was making sure a party didn't run out of alcohol. I've thought about that for years. Whatever else you want to say about what that means theologically — that's where God chose to reveal His glory first. I don't think that's an accident.

  144Reply
• O

  Omar1mo ago

  I grew up in a Southern Baptist home where even mentioning wine at the dinner table was like dropping an f-bomb. Took me until my 30s to realize I'd been taught a cultural tradition, not actual scripture. That realization honestly cracked open a lot of other things I'd just assumed were 'biblical.'

  143Reply
• Q

  Quinn1mo ago

  The people most loudly demanding abstinence in my experience are often the same people with enormous blind spots about anger, pride, and cruelty in the name of doctrinal purity. I'll take the humble person who enjoys a glass of wine and loves their neighbor over the teetotaling bully any day of the week.

  139Reply
• I

  Iris1mo ago

  I think the most honest answer is: the Bible permits moderate drinking and condemns drunkenness, AND wiser Christians might choose abstinence in certain contexts out of love for others. Both things are true. The problem is when either side turns their position into a mark of true Christianity.

  136Reply
• M

  Marco1mo ago

  I'm a pastor in a rural community where alcoholism is genuinely devastating families in my congregation. I personally abstain — not because I think one sip damns you — but because I will not be the person who makes it harder for someone fighting addiction to trust that the church is a safe place. That's a pastoral decision, not a theological one. There's a difference.

  131Reply
• IB

  Iris B.1mo ago

  The thing that genuinely bothers me is young people leaving the church in part because they feel like the faith is built on arbitrary cultural rules with no real scriptural foundation. Abstinence mandates with no real biblical grounding are part of that. We need to be honest about what is Scripture and what is tradition, or we keep losing people to the gap between the two.

  128Reply
• R_

  Reese _x1mo ago

  Proverbs 20:1 says wine is a mocker and beer a brawler. Proverbs 31 says give beer to those who are dying and wine to those in anguish. The book of Proverbs itself is in tension on this. That should tell you this isn't a simple cut-and-dry issue and anyone who acts like it is hasn't actually read their Bible carefully.

  121Reply
• M

  Morgan1mo ago

  This whole debate makes me tired. Half the church is worrying about whether someone had a glass of Merlot and the other half is barely reading their Bible. We have priorities that are deeply out of order.

  117Reply
• RB

  Reese B.1mo ago

  Abstentionism is historically rooted in the American temperance movement, not in orthodox Christianity. The early church fathers drank wine. Medieval monks BREWED beer. Pretending teetotalism is the ancient Christian default is just factually wrong.

  112Reply
• NS

  Nina S.1mo ago

  Denominationally this is SO interesting to me. Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians — all allow alcohol, often including it in worship. Baptists, Churches of Christ, some Methodists — total abstinence tradition. The abstentionist position is honestly a minority view historically AND globally within Christianity. American evangelicals sometimes forget the church is bigger than their subculture.

  108Reply
• J

  Jamie1mo ago

  The verse in Ephesians literally assumes wine exists and can be drunk. It condemns DRUNKENNESS. Not drinking. If Paul meant total abstinence he could have said total abstinence. He was not a subtle man.

  104Reply
• R

  Riley1mo ago

  The question I keep coming back to: if Jesus were here in 2025, would he go to a wedding and order sparkling water? I genuinely don't think so. I think he'd drink wine. And I think a lot of our abstinence convictions are more about American cultural Christianity than about Jesus.

  99Reply
• A

  Alex1mo ago

  I'll tell you what makes me lose credibility in this debate: Christians who preach total abstinence and then admit they've never seriously studied biblical Hebrew or Greek. The 'it was grape juice' position collapses the moment you look at the original text. You cannot build a serious theological position on ignorance of what the words actually meant.

  97Reply
• L

  Liam1mo ago

  Romans 14 is literally the passage written for this debate. Don't let what you eat or drink destroy someone for whom Christ died. Paul isn't banning alcohol. He's calling you to be aware of YOUR BROTHER. Context, people.

  94Reply
• S9

  Sam 921mo ago

  Nobody said change truth. The person said be honest about what IS truth versus what is tradition. Those are completely different statements. Read more carefully before responding.

  91Reply
• S

  Sam1mo ago

  I converted from Eastern Orthodoxy to a Baptist church and the culture shock around alcohol was REAL. In Orthodoxy you literally drink wine at every liturgy. The Body AND the Blood. Wine is woven into worship. Coming into Baptist spaces and being told alcohol was somehow shameful felt honestly bizarre and almost like a different religion.

  89Reply
• C

  Casey1mo ago

  lmao at the people who think grape juice existed in first century Palestine in any meaningful quantity. Refrigeration wasn't a thing. You either drank wine or you drank water that might kill you. The whole 'it was really just juice' argument is historically absurd.

  88Reply
• Y

  Yuki1mo ago

  By that logic you can't drive a car, own a pool, eat fast food regularly, or do a hundred other things that carry communal risk. At some point Christian liberty means something or it doesn't.

  86Reply
• A9

  Avery 921mo ago

  I asked my pastor this question directly a few years ago. He said he abstains personally for witness reasons but has never preached it as sin. Thought that was a remarkably mature and honest answer. I could trust that man because he didn't inflate his personal convictions into divine law.

  84Reply
• P

  Priya1mo ago

  1 Timothy 3 says an elder must not be 'given to drunkenness' — which explicitly implies the standard for a LEADER is not total abstinence, just not being a drunk. If total abstinence were the Christian ideal, Paul would have said that. He said don't be a drunkard. Those are different categories.

  83Reply
• D

  Diego1mo ago

  ok but the 'Jesus made wine' argument gets used to justify everything. He also flipped tables and fasted 40 days. We picking and choosing which parts of His behavior to imitate now??

  78Reply
• I

  Iris1mo ago

  respectfully the person above me is conflating self-control WITH abstinence and those are not the same thing. I can drink a beer and not lose self-control. A person without self-control will find something else to abuse. The issue is the heart not the bottle.

  77Reply
• L

  Liam1mo ago

  My grandfather was a Methodist circuit preacher in Kentucky in the 1940s and kept a bottle of bourbon in his desk for snake bites and winter colds. He led more people to Christ than most pastors I've met. Not saying that proves anything. Just think the 'no Christian can ever touch it' crowd would have a hard time writing him off.

  74Reply
• J

  Jamie1mo ago

  My church does communion with grape juice and always has and I never questioned it until my late 20s when I started actually digging into history and scripture. Feels a little silly now. Like we sterilized the Last Supper to fit a Victorian social movement.

  72Reply
• A_

  Alex _x1mo ago

  That's completely fine and nobody's arguing with that. The debate is about whether churches should REQUIRE or STRONGLY IMPLY that abstinence is the only holy option. Personal preference is different from ecclesial pressure.

  71Reply
• M

  Morgan1mo ago

  The Nazarite vow was a special calling, not a universal standard. Rechabites were a specific clan. Stop proof-texting abstinence from passages that were never meant to be universal commands.

  67Reply
• A

  Alex1mo ago

  Okay but 'we're losing young people so let's change our standards' is a terrible way to do theology. Truth isn't determined by exit surveys.

  66Reply
• Z

  Zara1mo ago

  HARD agree with that last comment. I've traveled and worshipped with believers in Germany, South Korea, Ethiopia. Nobody was having this conversation. It's a very specifically American evangelical obsession.

  64Reply
• K9

  Kofi 921mo ago

  the person in recovery above said something really important and I hope people actually sit with it instead of using it as a debate point

  61Reply
• R

  Ravi1mo ago

  Ephesians 5:18 — 'do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery.' Paul literally uses wine as the negative example. He's not endorsing moderate drinking, he's contrasting it with being filled with the Spirit. I think that's worth sitting with seriously before you pour yourself a cold one and feel righteous about it.

  59Reply
• T

  Theo1mo ago

  Someone said this is 'just Prohibition-era moralism' — actually the modern abstinence movement has deeper roots in 19th century revivalism and genuine concern for working-class families being destroyed by alcohol. You can disagree with the conclusion without dismissing the pastoral heart behind it. History is more complicated than your hot take.

  58Reply
• T

  Taylor1mo ago

  I don't drink and it has nothing to do with legalism. I just don't like it. Can we allow that some people abstain simply because they don't want it, without assuming there's some deep theological neurosis behind the choice?

  55Reply
• HL

  Hana L.1mo ago

  Nobody ever talks about the fact that wine in the ancient world was diluted with water, often significantly. So the 'Jesus drank wine' argument might be technically true but the product was very different from a glass of Cabernet today. I'm not saying abstinence is required but intellectual honesty cuts both ways.

  53Reply
• JB

  Jamie B.1mo ago

  that's actually a fair point but even diluted ancient wine was alcoholic. we're not talking about Welch's. and the symposia culture of the ancient world involved plenty of undiluted wine too. it's not a clean argument for abstentionism.

  49Reply
• OM

  Omar M.1mo ago

  Here's my challenge: if you're comfortable with moderate drinking, explain why you're okay with the statistical reality that normalized alcohol use increases the probability that someone in your social circle will develop dependency. Not trying to be harsh. I just think we're bad at counting the communal cost of our individual freedoms.

  44Reply
• R

  Reese1mo ago

  I have never once had a sip of alcohol in my 61 years of life and I'm not embarrassed by that at all. The Bible commends self-control. Our culture is literally drowning in substances. Why on earth would I want to participate? This isn't legalism — it's just choosing not to normalize something that ruins millions of lives.

  43Reply
• N

  Nina1mo ago

  If you drink alcohol around unbelievers you are telling them the gospel has no power to change your desires. Full stop. That's the testimony question nobody wants to engage honestly.

  31Reply

More debates people can't stop arguing about