Smoking

[Gilwen]

Curium

Cometh The Inquisitor

Howeve, being addicted means that you have put something before God. This is idolatry and a sin.

I actually never thought of it that way. I think that was a very good point.

I disagree. I think it can mean that, but cigarette addiction isn't a lifestyle cultivated by years of habitual use. It stems from a small number of mistakes. A mistake that causes a physical addiction is no more of a sin than one that doesn't. Imagine: a person smokes, once (or so he thinks), and becomes addicted. Is this person MORE of a sinner than a person who commits adultery, once, and stops (adultery not being physcially addictive)? I have yet to see an "anti-smoking addiction" comment made in this thread by someone who has or knows someone who has overcome a powerful nicotine addiction easily. It's usually not easy, and I still say talking about it as though it were is judgmental.

hot_wheels_turbo_racing

I have enough backup to make that claim accurate, but if I said it, you wouldn't buy it.

First or secondhand experience? Because I have never known a smoker who found it simple to quit. So whatever evidence you have, my statement refutes it: Smoking is not always easy to quit. The presence of one smoker who found it difficult to quit proves that.

~Gilwen  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Gilwen

I disagree. I think it can mean that, but cigarette addiction isn't a lifestyle cultivated by years of habitual use. It stems from a small number of mistakes. A mistake that causes a physical addiction is no more of a sin than one that doesn't. Imagine: a person smokes, once (or so he thinks), and becomes addicted. Is this person MORE of a sinner than a person who commits adultery, once, and stops (adultery not being physcially addictive)? I have yet to see an "anti-smoking addiction" comment made in this thread by someone who has or knows someone who has overcome a powerful nicotine addiction easily. It's usually not easy, and I still say talking about it as though it were is judgmental.

On the contrary, it takes a while to be addicted to smoking. Unlike other addictive substances (like, say, cocaine, where one gets addicted after a single usage), tobacco is rather mildly addictive.


Of course, all sin is the same in the eyes of God. However, the logic I put forth still stands. Being addicted to something is putting it before God. I'm not being judgemental, a lot of people put stuff before God. Heck, I'm am someone with an 'addict's personality'. I get addicted to stuff (the phrase 'once an addict, always an addict' holds quite a bit of truth). I know what my struggle is, and it is very hard to stay away from my personal addictions. They have, at one point, been the greatest factor in my life. I would carry around the things needed for my addiction just so, if I ever wanted to, I could fufill the cravings that I had. I know what it's like to be addicted to something.  

[Gilwen]

But the kind of addiction you're talking about is different from physical and psychological dependence. You're talking about habitual sin. You don't suffer psychological or physical withdrawal symptoms if you stop lying or stealing or anything like that. The temptation is still there, but your body doesn't feel compelled to do it, as with actual addiction. You simply desire to do it. Different things entirely.
Continually and willfully sinning is putting something before God. Being addicted is not. If you still think it is, show me a verse. Caffeine is addictive. Do I worship Dr. Pepper when I drink one? Caffeine, like nicotine, is addictive, harmful, and legal. It's only harmful to a lesser degree. Now, do we resort to measuring sin by degrees or do we listen to Jesus: It's what's in the heart that matters.

Matthew 15:11
What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

Addiction isn't smart, and it's not right, but continually doing something that you're physically dependent on is different from refusing to stop a sin pattern simply because God isn't important enough to you. Perhaps getting involved with an addictive substance is the sin, but certainly being addicted is not. It's more of a penalty or consequence, I should think.
Let's take another example: Meth. Higly addictive. Let's pretend it's not mind-altering and it's legal (like smoking) and let's say someone starts doing meth before knowing Christ. He becomes saved, but he's still hooked on one of the most addictive chemicals we know of. Is he an idolater if he still does meth (assuming God does not miraculously cure him of his affliction)? Or is he in the grip of a powerful physical addiction that is the consequence of his past mistakes?

~Gilwen  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Gilwen

But the kind of addiction you're talking about is different from physical and psychological dependence. You're talking about habitual sin. You don't suffer psychological or physical withdrawal symptoms if you stop lying or stealing or anything like that. The temptation is still there, but your body doesn't feel compelled to do it, as with actual addiction. You simply desire to do it. Different things entirely.
Continually and willfully sinning is putting something before God. Being addicted is not. If you still think it is, show me a verse. Caffeine is addictive. Do I worship Dr. Pepper when I drink one? Caffeine, like nicotine, is addictive, harmful, and legal. It's only harmful to a lesser degree. Now, do we resort to measuring sin by degrees or do we listen to Jesus: It's what's in the heart that matters.

Partaking of an addictive substance does not make one addicted.

Quote:

Let's take another example: Meth. Higly addictive. Let's pretend it's not mind-altering and it's legal (like smoking) and let's say someone starts doing meth before knowing Christ. He becomes saved, but he's still hooked on one of the most addictive chemicals we know of. Is he an idolater if he still does meth (assuming God does not miraculously cure him of his affliction)? Or is he in the grip of a powerful physical addiction that is the consequence of his past mistakes?

~Gilwen

I'm not exactly sure on this one, however, I can tell you this. While meth and smoking are both addictive, meth is one heckuva lot worse. You get to deep into it and your addicted for life. You stop you die. Whether or not the continuing of the meth is wrong or not, however, I am not quite sure yet.  

[hot_wheels_turbo_racing]

Gilwen

First or secondhand experience? Because I have never known a smoker who found it simple to quit. So whatever evidence you have, my statement refutes it: Smoking is not always easy to quit.

I never said it was always easy to quit. It's as easy to quit as you make it. Having overcome other addictions (not smoking), I have found for one thing that if you really want to quit something, you have to actually decide you want to quit. If you go against that, then you obviously don't want to quit.

And for us Christians, we always have God to help as well, and with God, everything is possible.  

[Gilwen]

hot_wheels_turbo_racing

I never said it was always easy to quit. It's as easy to quit as you make it.

Animagamer

People say it is really difficult to stop smoking but I disagree.

This is the argument that I'm talking about. You suggested that there was evidence that "quitting smoking was easy". You didn't say that sometimes it was not difficult, or under certain circumstances it was not difficult. You aligned yourself with the quote above, and, in the interest of debating the validity of the statement, I debated the validity of your claim that the statement was true.

Quote:

Having overcome other addictions (not smoking), I have found for one thing that if you really want to quit something, you have to actually decide you want to quit. If you go against that, then you obviously don't want to quit.

A dependence on meth or some hard drug isn't a minor inconvenience that can be ignored if you want to quit badly enough. It's a physical ailment that's extremely difficult to endure, and even more difficult to quit. Same goes for cigarettes, only to a lesser degree.

Quote:

And for us Christians, we always have God to help as well, and with God, everything is possible.

"Possible" does not mean "easy." Ther Bible never claims that reliance on God will assure us an easy time of it, or that we will experience no suffering in letting go the things that we have let rule over us. Telling people otherwise will give them false hope and a false idea of God. He isn't our personal genie and He doesn't promise to make our earthlymproblems disappear.

Imagine if a Christian was trying to quit, to do God's will, and they read your post. If they found quitting really, really difficult, they might read untrue statements like the ones in this thread and think there is something wrong with their faith. It's like Job's friends. They tried of convince him that his troubles were because he was not right with God, when that wasn't the case at all. Be careful of making blanket statements about people's faith and devotion to God without concrete Scriptural support. All of these "quitting is easy" arguments are based on things like "a friend of mine did it," or "I quit something once." Unless you speak from Biblical authority you can't make judgments about the spiritual devotion of other people.

Cometh

I'm not exactly sure on this one, however, I can tell you this. While meth and smoking are both addictive, meth is one heckuva lot worse. You get to deep into it and your addicted for life. You stop you die. Whether or not the continuing of the meth is wrong or not, however, I am not quite sure yet.

Sorry, I don't think sin should be measured in degrees. Being addicted is either right or it's wrong. It's either a rebellious act or a physical problem. We're not talking about whether or not smoking is addictive. There's no argument there. We're talking about whether or not addiction in itself is a willful, rebellious act, and that argument should not depend on the degree of addiction or the substance involved. It's a matter of the heart. What did Jesus say about murder? It's wrong, right? But hatred and antagnonism toward your brother is sin as well. It's the same kind of rebellion, to a lesser degree. Degrees don't matter to God in sin. It's all sin. So, is addiction to a substance a sin or is it a consequence? A sin is an act of will. A consequence is a determined result (presumably) beyond human control. Addiction can't be both.

~Gilwen  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Gilwen

Sorry, I don't think sin should be measured in degrees. Being addicted is either right or it's wrong.

If you want to think about it, we are addicted to food and air. Without it, we go through withdrawel (starvation and that burning sensation you get when you can't breathe) and, eventually die. You do something deep in drugs (like mainlining meth) and you are addicted. Whether or not the continuing with this addiction is actually an addiction or a need is something that I, as of now, am not enitrely sure.

Quote:

It's either a rebellious act or a physical problem.

or, for some, a requierment to live. Withdrawel can, and has, killed people.  

[ioioouiouiouio]

Over the weekend, I had the chance to talk to my youth pastor about this issue. He was not entirely sure as to the biblical decision would be, though he did say that, as long as it was done entirely out of necessity and not for the desire to satiate the addiction, then he was pretty sure that there was nothing wrong with it.  

[immanuelkant]

[ Message temporarily off-line ]  

[Curium]

immanuelkant

Paul says in 1 Cor 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me?but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible for me?but I will not be mastered by anything."

There are no outright biblical passages against smoking. The above passage is a clear statement against addiction however. Addiction to smoking is a sin. The act of smoking itself is not, according to my understanding of the Bible.

The passage talking about the body being a "temple of the Holy Spirit" is more a reference to the fact that God no longer lives in the temple of Solomon where the Jews used to worship, but now lives among his people inside the throne room of their hearts. It is not an admonish for keeping your body clean inside and out the same way you would keep a temple clean. And to be honest... the temple of that day wasn't all that clean. On another note, that passage in context talks about sexual immorality explicitly, such as sleeping with a prostitute. And while parts of it may be applied to other areas, Paul (I believe) did not intend the "temple" passage as one of those parts.

Well, as you said, this verse was being used to say that sexual immorality was wrong. Why then is it being used to say addiction to smoking is a sin?  

[immanuelkant]

Curium

immanuelkant

Paul says in 1 Cor 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me?but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible for me?but I will not be mastered by anything."

There are no outright biblical passages against smoking. The above passage is a clear statement against addiction however. Addiction to smoking is a sin. The act of smoking itself is not, according to my understanding of the Bible.

The passage talking about the body being a "temple of the Holy Spirit" is more a reference to the fact that God no longer lives in the temple of Solomon where the Jews used to worship, but now lives among his people inside the throne room of their hearts. It is not an admonish for keeping your body clean inside and out the same way you would keep a temple clean. And to be honest... the temple of that day wasn't all that clean. On another note, that passage in context talks about sexual immorality explicitly, such as sleeping with a prostitute. And while parts of it may be applied to other areas, Paul (I believe) did not intend the "temple" passage as one of those parts.

Well, as you said, this verse was being used to say that sexual immorality was wrong. Why then is it being used to say addiction to smoking is a sin?

Because the passage clearly states I will not be mastered by "anything", not just sexual temptation.  

[Curium]

immanuelkant

Curium

immanuelkant

Paul says in 1 Cor 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me?but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible for me?but I will not be mastered by anything."

There are no outright biblical passages against smoking. The above passage is a clear statement against addiction however. Addiction to smoking is a sin. The act of smoking itself is not, according to my understanding of the Bible.

The passage talking about the body being a "temple of the Holy Spirit" is more a reference to the fact that God no longer lives in the temple of Solomon where the Jews used to worship, but now lives among his people inside the throne room of their hearts. It is not an admonish for keeping your body clean inside and out the same way you would keep a temple clean. And to be honest... the temple of that day wasn't all that clean. On another note, that passage in context talks about sexual immorality explicitly, such as sleeping with a prostitute. And while parts of it may be applied to other areas, Paul (I believe) did not intend the "temple" passage as one of those parts.

Well, as you said, this verse was being used to say that sexual immorality was wrong. Why then is it being used to say addiction to smoking is a sin?

Because the passage clearly states I will not be mastered by "anything", not just sexual temptation.

Okay, but that doesn't mean it's a sin. I would have used Exodus 20:3-4 "'You shall have no other gods before me.' 'You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.'" This is because having an addiction is putting something before God. And in most cases you are worshiping the item you are addicted to like an idol.  

[immanuelkant]

I would define a sin as anything that goes against scripture. And since the passage definitely speaks against having an addiction of any kind then I would define addiction in any sense as a sin.  

[ioioouiouiouio]

immanuelkant

I would define a sin as anything that goes against scripture. And since the passage definitely speaks against having an addiction of any kind then I would define addiction in any sense as a sin.

But what is said is 'I will not be mastered by anything.' not 'I should not be mastered by anything.  

[immanuelkant]

Cometh The Inquisitor

immanuelkant

I would define a sin as anything that goes against scripture. And since the passage definitely speaks against having an addiction of any kind then I would define addiction in any sense as a sin.

But what is said is 'I will not be mastered by anything.' not 'I should not be mastered by anything.

Which is just a stronger way of saying should... I don't see your point. If the Bible says you will not do something, then you will not do it. And if you do, you're sinning.

Sort of like "Thou SHALT not." That's another way of saying you WILL not, not you SHOULD not.