Testimony, judgmentalism, and designated drivers.

[Timothy]

A couple months back I came across a young lady while soulwinning who was no longer attending  church.  She gave a credible profession of faith, but was soured on ANY church-goin'.  It seems she had a bad experience with what she perceived to be judgmental pharisees.  She had volunteered to be the designtated driver for her friends who were going out to get smashed at a local bar.  They weren't Christians, but were her friends, and she thought it was the responsible Christ-like thing to do in order to make sure they got home in one piece, and didn't kill anybody else either.  Her church got wind of her "runnin' the bars" and told her that she needed to stop such activities.  She claimed they conveyed such info in a judgmental way, and so she left the church and now just doesn't go at all because most Christians seem to jump to conclusions before hearing the matter.

What would you do if an impressionable new/young Christian member of your church were to go out regularly to the bars in order to be the designated driver for their friends?

1 John 3:18 "Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth."

Galatians 6:1 "Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted."

Matthew 26:41

 

[ALAYMAN]

Implications of what risky behavior?  What's risky about being a designated driver? 

It's not risky to be a designated driver, but what goes on in bars typically is considered by most folk as risky/questionable/dangerous.  And of course there's the possibility that in such an environment a person may give in to weakness that they didn't believe they were succeptible to.

And the designated driver isn't "eating" or "drinking" or doing anything that would cause a brother to stumble.

Enabling a person to get drunk and have a free ride home certainly might do that.

  Indeed, the whole point of being a designated driver is to abstain.  Nor is it necessarily true that a designated driver approves of drunkenness.  To assume so says more about the person who judges than the person who volunteers to be a designated driver.

Well, the fact that a person "approves" of something certainly may be inferred by their presence at a bar.  The same defense is offered up for attending gay weddings..."I don't approve of gay marriage, but I want to be a friend".  Really no difference IMHO.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]Well, the fact that a person "approves" of something certainly may be inferred by their presence at a bar.  The same defense is offered up for attending gay weddings..."I don't approve of gay marriage, but I want to be a friend".  Really no difference IMHO.[/quote]

One could certain infer that Jesus approved of getting sloshed and have adulterous affairs by His company. But that's "really no difference IYHO".

 

[ALAYMAN]

One could certain infer that Jesus approved of getting sloshed and have adulterous affairs by His company. But that's "really no difference IYHO".

Yes, why that's exactly what a meant, an apples to apples comparison you've made Obi-wan.  :

Do you reckon Jesus would have encouraged the drunkard by placing another pint in his hand?

 

[rsc2a]

One could certain infer that Jesus approved of getting sloshed and have adulterous affairs by His company. But that's "really no difference IYHO".

Yes, why that's exactly what a meant, an apples to apples comparison you've made Obi-wan.  :

Having problems being consistent in your stance?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]Do you reckon Jesus would have encouraged the drunkard by placing another pint in his hand?
[/quote]

Because that is clearly what a DD is doing, right?

 

[ALAYMAN]

Having problems being consistent in your stance?

Can't get nothin' past you ol' boy.  An imperfect designated driver = Jesus ministering to sinners.  Yep, can't get anything over on you.

[quote author=rsc2a]

Because that is clearly what a DD is doing, right?
[/quote]

Well, sometimes when people engage in sinful behavior, they reap what they sowed, and the consequences of their actions sober them up, pun intended.  Maybe the caring DD could talk with their friends about the responsible thing to do, and help the drunks to see that their ways will end in death, and they don't want any part of enabling them in their debauchery.

 

[Castor Muscular]

It's not risky to be a designated driver, but what goes on in bars typically is considered by most folk as risky/questionable/dangerous.

Who is this "most folk" you're talking about?  And who is participating in this risky behavior?  Not the designated driver.  Therefore it has no bearing on his or her testimony. 

Enabling a person to get drunk and have a free ride home certainly might do that.

Nobody is enabling them to get drunk.  In this situation, they're were already going out to get smashed with or without a designated driver.  The person volunteered to be a designated driver to make sure they don't get drunk AND killed (and endanger others). 

Well, the fact that a person "approves" of something certainly may be inferred by their presence at a bar.  The same defense is offered up for attending gay weddings..."I don't approve of gay marriage, but I want to be a friend".  Really no difference IMHO.

The inference is entirely in your head.  That says more about you than it says about the designated driver or the friend of a gay couple.  As I pointed out earlier, the Pharisees accused Jesus of being a winebibber and a friend of sinners.  That didn't stop Jesus from drinking wine or spending time with sinners, now, did it?  Apparently he didn't care what inferences the Pharisees had in their heads. 

I knew a doctor who hated psychedelic drugs and what they did to people.  He attended rock concerts to help talk people down out of bad trips, and administer medications when necessary to help them.  Yet by your logic, you'd infer from his presence at a drug-infested rock concert that he approves of drug use. 

EDIT: By the way, the doctor was NOT a Christian.  Yet -- speaking of testimony -- if I were to compare his behavior with the behavior of someone who judges his behavior based on where he is (or judges the designated driver's behavior), I'd be a lot more attracted to the doctor's belief system than that of the Pharisee. 

 

[ALAYMAN]

Who is this "most folk" you're talking about?

Call it anecdotal if you will, but I know plenty of alcoholics, lived with one, and been in enough bars myself.  What goes on in most bars?  Immorality of all sorts.  Such immorality leads to danger, spiritual and physical.

The reality is that as I pointed out earlier, wisdom comes into play in some decisions, rather than labeling an activity in and of itself as sinful.  In this case, Proverbs 23:20 is clear enough to warn a conscientious Christian away from participating in alcoholic debauchery.

  And who is participating in this risky behavior?

By placing one's self in relation to the seedy element of bar scenes it only stands to reason that you won't be able to always extricate yourself from bar-fights, lewd behavior, etc.

[quote author=CM]

Nobody is enabling them to get drunk.  In this situation, they're were already going out to get smashed with or without a designated driver.  The person volunteered to be a designated driver to make sure they don't get drunk AND killed (and endanger others).  [/quote]

The same libertarian-leaning philosophy says that since teens are going to have sex then we might as well give them condoms to make sure they (and/or others) don't face the consequences of their sinful behavior.  I ain't buying it.  It might be more merciful to let them drive drunk and reap their seeds, or better yet, wait outside the bar and call the cops when they get ready to break the law and/or kill somebody because of their reckless behavior.  It is when a person sees their sin for what it is, and they come to an end of theirselves, that they turn to the remedy from their misery.

The inference is entirely in your head.  That says more about you than it says about the designated driver or the friend of a gay couple.  As I pointed out earlier, the Pharisees accused Jesus of being a winebibber and a friend of sinners.  That didn't stop Jesus from drinking wine or spending time with sinners, now, did it?  Apparently he didn't care what inferences the Pharisees had in their heads. 

So you think that attending a gay wedding isn't tantamount to at least tacitly endorsing the celebration of what God sees as an abomination?

I knew a doctor who hated psychedelic drugs and what they did to people.  He attended rock concerts to help talk people down out of bad trips, and administer medications when necessary to help them.  Yet by your logic, you'd infer from his presence at a drug-infested rock concert that he approves of drug use. 

EDIT: By the way, the doctor was NOT a Christian.  Yet -- speaking of testimony -- if I were to compare his behavior with the behavior of someone who judges his behavior based on where he is (or judges the designated driver's behavior), I'd be a lot more attracted to the doctor's belief system than that of the Pharisee.

Again, your over-reaction to this scenario, so as to label everyone who don't line up with your reasoning to be a pharisee is part of the problem in the discussion. 

 

[BandGuy]

If saving the life of some innocent bystander is enabling, I guess I will just have to be an enabler.  Never been to a liquor store or bar, but went to plenty of parties in college where my sole reason for being there was to save people's lives.  I am not sorry for doing so and believe that God is probably happy with that decision.  Interesting thing to think about:  Would Jesus have ever gone to where the sinners were?  But yes, I do agree that if never share the Gospel with them (which I did and still do on a regular basis), then you probably have no basis to compare yourself to Jesus and what He did.

If the person merely wanted to "associate with sinners" so as not to isolate themselves from "the world", couldn't they do this by other means that were less questionable?

I don't see anything questionable about saving some innocent person's life. 

  And as others said, if their care was for the safety of the individuals and people on the road who might encounter drunk drivers then couldn't they just call <them> a cab (of give them money for one)?

I was a college student, not part of the cast of Silver Spoons.  I didn't grow up with a lot of money.  Also, I realize that you were probably so sheltered in your legalistic upbringing that you don't realize this, but people who are drunk don't typically make the best decisions like calling a cab.  Once they are at the party, it is their choice as to what to do unless someone is there holding their keys.  I once went to a party where a guy was about to leave drunk.  I told him no that I would drive.  I probably saved a few lives while you sat around judging me for it.  Feel better now?

 

[BandGuy]

Giving them money for a cab is just as enabling as volunteering to be a designated driver.

I agree.  I wouldn't do it, but I was presenting the option from the perspective of those advocating the bar-hopping.

Yes.  He would rather stay home and feel all self righteous while his buddy down the hall killed some innocent pedestrian.  You're a true hero of the faith.

But here's the most important question, IMO:  Specifically, what sin or overt act of defiance against God is the designated driver committing that would affect his or her testimony?

Did I define this situation as someone engaging in sin?  I think some situations fall into the category of wisdom and foolishness, but not necessarily sin.  This being one of them.

What I do find a bit amusing is that the argument for being a designated driver was pitched as some form of altruism, when what is actually behind the motive often times is a desire to be around the party scene and not feel left out.  Young people are extremely succeptible to peer pressure.

You are an idiot if you think I was there with my bottle of Snapple in my hand because I wanted to fit in and belong.  I had plenty of friends within the band and within religious organizations.  I didn't need to drive drunk people home to fit in.  I probably saved some lives and certainly created some friendship with lost folks which helped bring them to the Lord later in life.  What did you do in college?  Shun those like me who didn't fit your legalistic, man-made rules?

 

[ALAYMAN]

I don't see anything questionable about saving some innocent person's life.

Except that the context for the discussion isn't some random do-good event, but a systematic perpetual enabling of one's friend's drunken partying every weekend. 

I was a college student, not part of the cast of Silver Spoons.  I didn't grow up with a lot of money.  Also, I realize that you were probably so sheltered in your legalistic upbringing.......  Feel better now?

lol, you're still an idiot I see.  I grew up in an alcoholic home where my mom had to go to the bars on occasion to drag my dad out.  He took me to bars on his babysitting duty.  I saw him passed out more days of the week than I care to remember.  I wasn't raised in anything close to a Christian environment moron.  I partied up until I got saved as an adult, and then did some more afterwards for awhile.  I could go on, but your presuppositions and strawmen would prevent you from hearing anything other than what you want to believe. 

 

[BandGuy]

lol, I'm still an idiot ...

Yes you are.

  I grew up in an alcoholic home where my mom had to go to the bars on occasion to drag my dad out.  He took me to bars on his babysitting duty.  I saw him passed out more days of the week than I care to remember.  I wasn't raised in anything close to a Christian environment moron.  I partied up until I got saved as an adult, and then did some more afterwards for awhile.  I could go on, but your presuppositions and strawmen would prevent you from hearing anything other than what you want to believe.

This would explain a lot about why you are the way you are today.  Tell me, was your mom enabling your dad by staying married to him, going to the bar and dragging him home?  That's the thing about legalists:  They are ALWAYS more concerned with their own reputation and their own man made rules than they are with saving people's lives and actually making a difference in the world for Christ.  Christ was not concerned with any of those things and neither are His followers.  Perhaps, that is just the big difference between the two of us.

 

[rsc2a]

I don't see anything questionable about saving some innocent person's life.

Except that the context for the discussion isn't some random do-good event...

So? Better yet - Bandguy was consistently looking out for other people by trying to save lives.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]...but a systematic perpetual enabling of one's friend's drunken partying every weekend.  [/quote]

Enablement...no.

Systematic...sure. The God I serve doesn't give up on people and stop picking them up when they keep falling down. He systematically and relentless pursues them. Does your god give up on others that easily?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]lol, you're still an idiot I see.  I grew up in an alcoholic home where my mom had to go to the bars on occasion to drag my dad out.  He took me to bars on his babysitting duty.  I saw him passed out more days of the week than I care to remember.  I wasn't raised in anything close to a Christian environment moron.  I partied up until I got saved as an adult, and then did some more afterwards for awhile.  I could go on, but your presuppositions and strawmen would prevent you from hearing anything other than what you want to believe. [/quote]

Still gracious towards others I see...

If you want to compare "drunk experience cred", I'll be happy to weigh mine with yours but either one doesn't change the fact the DDs save lives, but I guess killing someone and being thrown in prison would "sober them up", right?

 

[ALAYMAN]

This would explain a lot about why you are the way you are today.  Tell me, was your mom enabling your dad by staying married to him, going to the bar and dragging him home?  That's the thing about legalists:  They are ALWAYS more concerned with their own reputation and their own man made rules than they are with saving people's lives and actually making a difference in the world for Christ.  Christ was not concerned with any of those things and neither are His followers.  Perhaps, that is just the big difference between the two of us.

lol, take your Dr Phil 10-cent psychology and go pedal it somewhere else bandboy.

 

[ALAYMAN]

So? Better yet - Bandguy was consistently looking out for other people by trying to save lives.

Maybe (well, no maybes about it) he was a spineless weasel who was afraid of confronting his friends in their sin, but rather thought that loving them into the kingdom by ignoring their depraved activities would someday give him the permission to speak to their bankrupt lives.

Systematic...sure. The God I serve doesn't give up on people and stop picking them up when they keep falling down. He systematically and relentless pursues them. Does your god give up on others that easily?

Did he give up on Pharaoh?  Esau?  Or is your God a universalist that always gets every man?  Does your God tell you to shake the dust off your shoes, ever?

Still gracious towards others I see...

lol, still willing to turn a blind eye to your own ox being gored.  Beam and mote, beam and mote.  Go read what he wrote (which you ignored completely) about me before I responded in kind.

If you want to compare "drunk experience cred", I'll be happy to weigh mine with yours but either one doesn't change the fact the DDs save lives, but I guess killing someone and being thrown in prison would "sober them up", right?

Ever seen "Scared Straight"?  Sometimes tough love is necessary, and works.  And enablers are a real category of people.

 

[rsc2a]

So? Better yet - Bandguy was consistently looking out for other people by trying to save lives.

Maybe (well, no maybes about it) he was a spineless weasel who was afraid of confronting his friends in their sin, but rather thought that loving them into the kingdom by ignoring their depraved activities would someday give him the permission to speak to their bankrupt lives.

I know we touched on this in another thread but can you cite Romans 2:4 for me?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

Systematic...sure. The God I serve doesn't give up on people and stop picking them up when they keep falling down. He systematically and relentless pursues them. Does your god give up on others that easily?

Did he give up on Pharaoh?  Esau?  Or is your God a universalist that always gets every man?  Does your God tell you to shake the dust off your shoes, ever?[/quote]

I'm a pragmatic "Hell's hot and lasts forever", hopeful "God will eventually save everyone by the blood of Jesus" individual.

I also think the Bible speaks for both arguments and am smart enough to know that I don't know all the answers.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

Still gracious towards others I see...

lol, still willing to turn a blind eye to your own ox being gored.  Beam and mote, beam and mote.  Go read what he wrote (which you ignored completely) about me before I responded in kind.[/quote]

Is this a habit of his? Yours?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]

If you want to compare "drunk experience cred", I'll be happy to weigh mine with yours but either one doesn't change the fact the DDs save lives, but I guess killing someone and being thrown in prison would "sober them up", right?

Ever seen "Scared Straight"?  Sometimes tough love is necessary, and works.  And enablers are a real category of people.[/quote]

Kind of hard to show tough love to a dead person. Or I guess we should allow someone to kill themselves (or others) to prove some kind of depraved point you are making? You aren't talking about behavior that could get them in trouble. You are talking about behavior that could result in death.

 

[ALAYMAN]

I know we touched on this in another thread but can you cite Romans 2:4 for me?

Rom 2:4  Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

I'm a pragmatic "Hell's hot and lasts forever", hopeful "God will eventually save everyone by the blood of Jesus" individual.

I also think the Bible speaks for both arguments and am smart enough to know that I don't know all the answers.

You don't know whether the Bible speaks about a universal, or a limited atonement?

Is this a habit of his? Yours?

You mean pointing out your hypocrisy?  Yes, it happens all too often.  You should work on that before the next time you chide me whilst overlooking the same alleged offense in the instigator.

Kind of hard to show tough love to a dead person. Or I guess we should allow someone to kill themselves (or others) to prove some kind of depraved point you are making? You aren't talking about behavior that could get them in trouble. You are talking about behavior that could result in death.

Well, good luck with handing out those condoms and passing out these needles.  Wouldn't want people to have to resort to abortions nor die of hepatitis from dirty needles (translation, "death").

 

[rsc2a]

I know we touched on this in another thread but can you cite Romans 2:4 for me?

Rom 2:4  Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

This another one of those passage you prefer to ignore?



[quote author=ALAYMAN]

I'm a pragmatic "Hell's hot and lasts forever", hopeful "God will eventually save everyone by the blood of Jesus" individual.

I also think the Bible speaks for both arguments and am smart enough to know that I don't know all the answers.

You don't know whether the Bible speaks about a universal, or a limited atonement?[/quote]

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. - 1 John 2:2

For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. - Rom 11:32

- Dozens more -

~ or ~

And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name. - Rev 14:11

Then he will answer them, saying,

 

[ALAYMAN]

This another one of those passage you prefer to ignore?

Maybe, but if I were wise, it would be your posts that got the ignore feature.

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. - 1 John 2:2

For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. - Rom 11:32

- Dozens more -

~ or ~

And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name. - Rev 14:11

Then he will answer them, saying,

 

[rsc2a]

This another one of those passage you prefer to ignore?

Maybe...

Telling...



[quote author=ALAYMAN]

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. - 1 John 2:2

For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. - Rom 11:32

- Dozens more -

~ or ~

And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name. - Rev 14:11

Then he will answer them, saying,