My wife and I went through a very beneficial marriage class a few months ago. It was based on the book His Needs, Her Needs by Dr. Willard Harley. While doing our homework one night, things became pretty heated. My wife is very offended when it comes to cigars, and I'm not against the occasional puff on a stogey with a great friend or family member (and you can imagine how that conversation went). However, I made a promise to my wife after we had spoken our peace: I would never smoke another cigar.
Why? My decision was based on offense, not on health. It wasn't that cigars were intrinsically sinful, or that I saw them as such, or to smoke a cigar would put my soul at risk of eternal damnation. It WAS about a perceived offense that was causing a strain on our marital relationship...a strain that resulted in the expulsion of this perceived "offense" from my life. I chose not to do it because I love my wife.
In my previous post, I said that I would never "condemn a new father lighting up a celebratory stogey at the birth of his firstborn." I wouldn't. It doesn't bother me. It's not an offense to me. Now, could I light up a stogey when my son is born this June, and it be alright? No. Why? Because it IS an offense to my wife, and a violation of my promise to her.
Smoking the occasional cigar is a liberty, a choice. It has to be. In Romans 14, we have what has been defined as the "stumbling-block principle." Some were eating meat that was sacrificed on altars to other gods. Was that a sin in, and of, itself? No. Nothing in the Lord Jesus was unclean (Romans 14:14). It was a liberty...a choice. Thus, if the stumbling-block principle is applied to this discussion, then smoking that stogey MUST be defined as a liberty...not a sin.
Now,"it is good not to eat meat or drink wine that causes your brother to stumble," (Romans 14:21) but "blessed are those who don't feel guilty for doing something they have decided is right." (Romans 14:22). If you perceive this liberty as a sin, then don't do it. If this liberty is perceived as a sin to others, then don't flaunt it in front of them. Keep that liberty between yourself and God (Romans 14:22). Remember, liberties cannot be sinful within themselves...they are defined as such based upon environment and circumstance.
My husband went from dipping to smoking cigers. Do they offend me, yes. Does his clothes, truck, and body smell, yes. Will he stop smoking the cigers, no. When he had his kidney removed due to kidney cancer and the doctor learned he smoked cigers he was told ciger smoking was the worse thing you could do to your kidneys. My husband was told to stop smoking cigers because he only had one kidney and he needed to take care of it. Who would have thought!
ReplyDeletehe should've stopped simply because you were offended by it. the marriage relationship demands that he be sacrificial, and that he lay down his life for you...(Ephesians 5:25-28)
ReplyDeleteOkay so I'm going to point to a previous discussion we had Josh about killing yourself being a sin and that tabacco use is technically slowly killing yourself at any rate it isn't helping anybody's life span so would tabacco not be sinful since it is killing yourself slowly by using it. I mean do you see where I'm coming from on this one or do you think it to be too far fetched?
ReplyDeleteWell Herndon unlike others I personally agree with your deep fried tobacco views. As to the comment about "beinging seen by others" I answer this "judge not that you be not judged". Everyday we intake things that we know are not good for us yet we do it anyway all while critizing those who have the occasional smoke or drink. We all want to look for the spek in our brothers eye while looking past the beam in our own. As for the offensiveness to Lacie your so sweet! Lets face it most men would have told her to get over it. The bottom line is our body is the temple of God and if we hurt it we sin. Ithink if we all would consider that we would be better off.
ReplyDeletethanks again, for all you comments. christina, i appreciate your stance and the logic of your argument (you and kacie are agreed). for some reason, i don't think beau is of the same reasoning though. :)
ReplyDelete"Smoking the occasional cigar is a liberty, a choice. It has to be"...."Thus, if the stumbling-block principle is applied to this discussion, then smoking that stogey MUST be defined as a liberty...not a sin."
ReplyDeleteHow can you compare smoking...inhaling PROVEN toxic, cancer causing, addictive chemicals into your body to a religious practice that was once a commandment of God. The early church and the Gospel were demanding MAJOR changes in the lives of God's people. It was a huge deal for people who lived under the old law and couldn't eat certain things...to finally be free from that law and have the "liberty" to now eat of it. They struggled with it.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the use of tobacco, or alcohol, or anabolic steroids, or the misuse of prescription medication, or any other substance that is proven to harm your body. That is comparing apples to oranges.
You say that is "has to be" and "MUST be" defined as a liberty. Where are we authorized to cause any harm to our body? Where are we authorized to partake of something that is addictive and can overpower our own will? In what other aspects of your life, do you not make sure you are as far from sin as possible? Why push the envelope with tobacco? I have a feeling that your determination for this to be a liberty has to do with the fact that you are a farmer...from a farming family...that grows tobacco...and makes money from it.
Josh...answer these questions. Would you order wine at a restaurant with your meal? Would you bring a 6 pack of beer to share with everyone at the next UFC fight? Would you give me a 6 week supply of Testosterone and HGH?(you have a farm and can get it easily) It wouldn't offend me...so that makes it ok, right? I would love to be 5'9", 235 lbs. and 3% body fat, benching 500 lbs. It is my liberty to do so, isn't it? At the next elder's/preacher meeting...would you offer the elders a shot of whiskey?
If tobacco use is strictly a liberty...then which factors determine what is liberty and what is sin? In your mind...dependence, bodily harm, and causing death are not factors. If "offense" is the determining factor, then each of us will have different stumbling blocks. Where is the standard unit of measure?
And come on...telling the lady her husband should have stopped smoking simply because she didn't like it...NOT because he has CANCER and it can cause kidney failure? Sheesh...getting close to the deep end there.
And for those who say "judge not that you be not judged"...that ALWAYS comes from someone trying to defend what they are doing. The very next verse, Matt. 7:2 says "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you". I would never place a judgment on someone that is more harsh that what I place on myself. In Luke 12:56-57 Jesus asked "why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?" We are supposed to be able to judge what is right.
If we have NO ability to judge...anyone...then how will we know if anyone is doing what is right? If we don't make a judgment on ourselves and others...how will we know when we need to change...or when we need to teach someone else that they need to change?
So yes Josh...and whoever agrees with him on this topic, I am judging you. Judge me back...
Caffeine has many metabolic effects. For example,
ReplyDeleteIt affects the kidneys, increasing urination, which can lead to dehydration. Caffeine is in coffee, tea, soft drinks, chocolate. Whether high caffeine intake increases the risk of coronary heart disease is still under study. (americanheart.org)
It's still under study as to if there's a direct link between caffeine, coffee drinking and coronary heart disease. The results are conflicting.
Caffeine-habituated individuals can experience "caffeine withdrawal" 12–24 hours after the last dose of caffeine. The most prominent symptom is headache. They can also feel anxiety, fatigue, drowsiness and depression. DEPRESSION!
Is drinking coffee a liberty? Soft drinks? Is it something harmful to the body? Does it have addictive affects? if i see it as an offense, does that warrant the removal of it from your life? Ridiculous, right? But what happens when that American Heart Association "expert" releases a study that links caffeine to heart disease? Bye-bye Mountain Dew?
Tobacco gets a bad wrap, while other things (of similar nature) don't. I don't want people to use tobacco, I don’t tell people to use tobacco, but i do believe that the logic people use to go "all-in" against it...is flawed. Check your fridge.
Please come check my fridge. Have you ever seen me drink a mountain dew, coffee, or anything with caffeine? Ask Mandy, my parents, anyone around me and you'll find out I am very ANTI-caffeine. I don't even like Mandy to drink decaf coffee....because drinking decaf today could lead to drinking caffeinated coffee later. My mom has drank coffee for years and has many problems with bladder infections, etc. I'm sure it is due to the years of caffeine and lack of hydration. I agree with you on caffeine.
ReplyDeleteEven though I am anti-caffeine....you are still comparing apples to oranges. Caffeine is being studied to see if it is linked to many things. Tobacco is a PROVEN cause of MANY things...even death.
Here is just a portion of the 300 or so chemicals that are in tobacco:
Acetone
Cyanide
Aluminum
DDT/Dieldrin
Ammonia
Ethenol
Arsenic
Formaldehyde
Benzene
Hydrogen cyanide
Butane
Lead
Cadmium
Methanol
Would you ingest these into your body in ANY other form? No. Would you let your kids get anywhere near them or take the chance of them being ingested? No. But put it in a cigarette, cigar, dip, chaw, etc....and you're ok with it?
How can you continue to compare this to food or even caffeine?
And you haven't answered any questions about alcohol in moderation either. Even your lone supporter in this blog recognizes that tobacco and alcohol are in the same category..."the occasional smoke or drink".
I'm still waiting for my testosterone and growth hormone, btw...
Once again...logic flawed. Misrepresented information and statistics. Cigarette companies that mass produce are very guilty of adding products which are detrimental to one's health. The additives are bad for you, but none of the additives listed by the top 5 major Tobacco Corporations (who were under Federal Investigation at the time in 1994) were violations of what couldn't be put into food! (wikipedia.org/wiki/cigarette). a fact i find very interesting.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the natural compostion of a tobacco leaf contains nicotine (which highly DECREASES during the curing out period), and residual nitrates from fertilizer (but so do my tomatos in my garden when i put chicken manure on them)...and (to add one to your list) it also contains what is known as a NORM (natural occuring radioactive material). Uh-oh. But these NORM's are in your everyday granite countertops (NY Times-Murphy - 2008). Those fancy rocks have RADON in them! Kids eat on those things! They should be banned.
Smoking is bad for your health. It's smoke! Tobacco has addictive properties. I don't wish for anyone to become addicted to it. But once again, the conflict I have is with those who wish to pass an overall judgment with "so called" facts (reported by totally unbiased reseacrh i'm sure), which are simply overexaggerations or misrepresentations to push an agenda.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." That's what the government did with tobacco...they took it from the private sector, made it taboo among society, and now sits back and reaps the benefits of the billions of dollars in taxes and penalties flowing in every year. but that's another story.
as far as the drinking question...that's for a future blog. thanks for all the time you put into your response. appreciate it.
Hmmm...my comments disappeared.
ReplyDeleteLet me try this...
ReplyDeleteSo now it's political? I am a business owner in the private sector and sure don't want the government regulating everything we do. I'm as republican as they come. But what in the world would the government have to gain by "misrepresenting" information and statistics about tobacco? Tobacco is a sold good...that brings in tax money. It's a multi-billion dollar business that provides billions of tax dollars. If tobacco isn't being produced and sold, the government has no tax money from it. Why would they want to make up information that would attempt to discourage people from using it and take money out of their own pockets?
Let's just say you're right. The government has made up all kinds of bogus info. about tobacco. What about all the doctors and studies in the medical field? Is the medical field tied to the government? Are they all conspiring against tobacco farmers? What doctor, what scientist, what counselor would have positive things to say about tobacco? What about the people you know who use or have used tobacco and have lung cancer, emphysema, COPD, etc. Are their problems caused by our government and misrepresented facts?
I'm not exactly sure who Barry Cooper is, that posted in your other blog...but there is a Barry Cooper who is a former narcotics officer. (I may be way off on the assumption that we're dealing with the same Barry Cooper) He mentioned tobacco "contains nicotine and other chemicals that bind to our nervous system and drive the body to unnaturally seek more of those chemicals"..."A person who has one cigarette a day will soon have two smokes a day, and then three, and soon more as their body grows tolerant of the chemicals and their hold over your nervous system gets stronger. That's the key component of chemical dependence." CHEMICAL DEPENDENCE. Unnaturally seeking more. Why would any Christian touch it with a ten foot pole?
...continued...
ReplyDeleteTo quote yourself..."Smoking is bad for your health. It's smoke! Tobacco has addictive properties. I don't wish for anyone to become addicted to it." You can wish all day long, but the FACTS prove that tobacco use is VERY addictive and so unhealthy it kills. Ask any user of tobacco and ask them how easy it is (or was) to quit. Why would any Christian touch it with a 10 foot pole?
I am very curious to see the blog about alcohol and how it differs from tobacco. The NIDA (National Institute on Drug Abuse) classifies "illicit drug, alcohol, and tobacco use" in the same category of studies/statistics. According to the NCHS (National Center for Health Statistics) in 2010 there were 85,000 deaths related to alcohol. In that same year, there were 435,000 deaths related to tobacco. You know where tobacco stands on the list of causes of death? Number one...leading cause of death in the US in 2010. Alcohol is number 3. In 2007 the British (not our US government) medical journal, The Lancet, did a study "Drug Rankings by Harm" (Drug Rankings). Under "Dependence" tobacco received a rating of "2.21". Out of the 20 "drugs" tested, tobacco was #3 on the list. #2 was Cocaine. #1 was Heroin. Tobacco ranks 12th out of 20 for "Social Harm". Tobacco ranks 15th out of 20 for "Physical Harm"...which is higher than LSD, Cannabis, Ecstasy...and was just barely beat by "solvents". http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/1825
Politics aside...tobacco is VERY addictive, is classified as a drug (right there with alcohol), and kills. Why would any Christian touch it with a ten foot pole?
If I may, I'd just like to say that no medical studies have proven any link between caffeine and the alleged health conditions/risks. The results are all variable by individual, and they are all contradictory. For example, certain reactions, for lack of a better word, that were allegedly caused by caffeine intake were not caused by coffee or tea, but were, actually, the case with soft drinks. So that proves that it probably isn't the caffeine to begin with. Furthermore, studies have actually shown that there have been some benefits of caffeinated coffee and tea that were not provided by decaffeinated coffee or tea in the same study.
ReplyDeleteAt any rate, even if the allegations were proven, caffeine would most definitely fall in under the food category, in dad's explanation, rather than be placed alongside tobacco, as the affects of caffeine, were they proven, can be ceased and reversed.