Moderate Drinking?

[AJB4]

Do you think it is a sin to drink in moderation?

[KellyLeigh]

as far as i know the Bible only says getting drunk is a sin. With that being said, a person never knows how alcohol will affect them until AFTER they consume it and the Bible does tell us to flee temptation. so if someone is going to have a sip of wine with dinner or something, they need to be extremely careful they don't drink too much or let alcohol become a temptation for them.

[GodSoLovedTheWorld]

Well I think that a glass or two of wine with a meal is OK. Or maybe a couple of pints socially.
But consider the following...
Suppose 'John' has never had alcohol in his life.
He has a glass of wine and becomes drunk.
Has he commited a sin, even though he did not know that he would get drunk?

[Izdaari]

Well I think that a glass or two of wine with a meal is OK. Or maybe a couple of pints socially.
But consider the following...
Suppose 'John' has never had alcohol in his life.
He has a glass of wine and becomes drunk.
Has he commited a sin, even though he did not know that he would get drunk?
I would have to say no, because I don't think even being drunk occasionally is a sin. It may be even be therapeutic. What's a sin is being a drunkard, an addict, an alcoholic. And if you know you're prone to that, it may be safest and wisest for you to not drink at all.

[DanielRB]

Peace, All :wave:

I think the Bible is clear that only being a drunkard is condemned, not drinking per se. However, if someone feels uneasy about drinking any alcohol, then it would be a sin to do so (Rom 14:23).

I think to judge someone else on this, no matter what your personal conviction, would be to "go beyond what is written." (1 Cor 4:6).

In Christ,

Daniel

[cremi]

I didn't answer the poll because I don't think it's that simple. For some, it is sin and they should not drink any alcohol. For others, drinking alcohol in moderation no more inhibits them than taking a OTC painkiller would. (ie...acetominophin, ibuprofen, aspirin)

Someone who has struggled with alcoholism shoud not drink. Period. Moderately or not. The same could also be said for those who really do believe it is sin. For them it is.

To make a blanket statement though, one way or the other, is not one that can be made. Drunkeness is prohibited, but drinking one glass does not mean one is inhibited or drunk.

[Amisk]

I stand fully against alcohol in any form. I attended the Nazarene Church for most of my teen years. I held a student minister's license for part of that time as well. At the time the Nazarene Church stood very strong against the use of alcohol. I attended Canadian Nazarene College in Red Deer, Alberta and again in Winnipeg, Manitoba and if a student had been caught drinking, he or she would have been expelled, no question asked.

I also grew up in a Christian home where my mother made it very strongly known to my father's brothers who drank that they were welcome to the house anytime, if they came sober and left the booze at home. That is the policy of my home today.

The reason that I take such a strong stand on alcohol is that I have never met an alcoholic yet who ever started out to become a drunk. Every one of them took the attitude which I see in most of the statements on this site, that playing around the edge of the mud hole is okay as long as you don't fall in.

There is only one way to assure yourself that you will never become a drunk and that is to leave the booze at the dealers.

Most men and women that I have talked with that became slaves of the bottle started out as social drinkers and many of them managed very well until some incident happened in their life, maybe a lost of a job, break up of their family, death of family member, stress of the workplace, whatever, and the bottle moved into solve the problem. No, it was not intentionally but nevertheless they ended up there.

I had Uncles and Aunts who drank themselves into broke homes, one lost their family to child welfare. To this day they don't know where some of their children are.

Some of their kids got together recently and to hear them cry over their childhood tales would tear your heart out. It all came about because some one talked their parents into social drinking.

Most kids get started drinking and smoking out of their parent's bar and cigarette packages. Don't forget the old saying, "What parents do in moderation their children will do in excess."

No church ought to use fermented wine at communion, just because a drunk has accept Christ as his Saviour and he has overcome the bottle via his salvation, doesn't mean that one drink of alcohol will not send him into a tail spin and back to skid row. Sad the day that the church becomes the devil's aid, but it is happening out there in many a domination.

As for the comment that Jesus created alcoholic wine at the wedding in Cana, you will have a hard time proving it either way. I think the best answer to that is one I heard Jimmy Swaggart give sometime ago. "if you think Jesus made alcoholic wine then go to your kitchen tap and pray over it and if the water comes out wine then drink it, otherwise don't."

I firmly believe that the smart man or woman is the one who doesn't play with sin or anything that could lead to it. I have never met a man or woman yet who has told me that they wished they had started using alcoholic drinks at a earlier age, but I have known many out there in the work place who would cry buckets of tears over that first glass if they knew then what they know now.

[AJB4]

I stand fully against alcohol in any form. I attended the Nazarene Church for most of my teen years. I held a student minister's license for part of that time as well. At the time the Nazarene Church stood very strong against the use of alcohol. I attended Canadian Nazarene College in Red Deer, Alberta and again in Winnipeg, Manitoba and if a student had been caught drinking, he or she would have been expelled, no question asked.

I also grew up in a Christian home where my mother made it very strongly known to my father's brothers who drank that they were welcome to the house anytime, if they came sober and left the booze at home. That is the policy of my home today.

The reason that I take such a strong stand on alcohol is that I have never met an alcoholic yet who ever started out to become a drunk. Every one of them took the attitude which I see in most of the statements on this site, that playing around the edge of the mud hole is okay as long as you don't fall in.

There is only one way to assure yourself that you will never become a drunk and that is to leave the booze at the dealers.

Most men and women that I have talked with that became slaves of the bottle started out as social drinkers and many of them managed very well until some incident happened in their life, maybe a lost of a job, break up of their family, death of family member, stress of the workplace, whatever, and the bottle moved into solve the problem. No, it was not intentionally but nevertheless they ended up there.

I had Uncles and Aunts who drank themselves into broke homes, one lost their family to child welfare. To this day they don't know where some of their children are.

Some of their kids got together recently and to hear them cry over their childhood tales would tear your heart out. It all came about because some one talked their parents into social drinking.

Most kids get started drinking and smoking out of their parent's bar and cigarette packages. Don't forget the old saying, "What parents do in moderation their children will do in excess."

No church ought to use fermented wine at communion, just because a drunk has accept Christ as his Saviour and he has overcome the bottle via his salvation, doesn't mean that one drink of alcohol will not send him into a tail spin and back to skid row. Sad the day that the church becomes the devil's aid, but it is happening out there in many a domination.

As for the comment that Jesus created alcoholic wine at the wedding in Cana, you will have a hard time proving it either way. I think the best answer to that is one I heard Jimmy Swaggart give sometime ago. "if you think Jesus made alcoholic wine then go to your kitchen tap and pray over it and if the water comes out wine then drink it, otherwise don't."

I firmly believe that the smart man or woman is the one who doesn't play with sin or anything that could lead to it. I have never met a man or woman yet who has told me that they wished they had started using alcoholic drinks at a earlier age, but I have known many out there in the work place who would cry buckets of tears over that first glass if they knew then what they know now.
That's basically a personal conviction, rather than a Biblical explanation over whether it is a sin or not. Sure, you can personally dislike alcohol, but that doesn't make it a sin.

[Amisk]

That's basically a personal conviction, rather than a Biblical explanation over whether it is a sin or not. Sure, you can personally dislike alcohol, but that doesn't make it a sin.

I suppose you are correct that it is a personal dislike for alcohol, however I also notice that in many of the pollsters seeking votes for things such as the use of alcohol, street drugs, and so called free sex etc. I left wondering if they are really not just looking for conformation or backing for what they personally want to do. Many of them leave one wondering if their church or minister hasn't come down hard on want they would really like to be involved and they in turn would like other Christians to say, "oh my, there is nothing wrong with that..."

You will not find more of a biblical stand on the use of alcohol than has been mentioned by others before me. Having said that I don't need a book, chapter, or verse to tell me something is wrong when I see it destroying homes, marriages, and families. Nor, when I talk to the guys and gals who show up at the a soup Kitchen 3 days a week for a pan cake and cup of hot coffee because they fell into the trap that one can use alcohol in moderation and it will never get the better of them some place down the line.

The truth of the matter is that alcohol is no different than any other street drug. A man is very foolish to be playing with any substance when its history shows the results that alcohol has over its life-time, after all it has a record of destroying health, dragging people into court on a variety of crimes and causing them to loose their careers etc. Alcohol is known to have done all of the above and if our governments truly cared about the families in their jurisdiction they would remove booze from the market place.

You likely will not agree with me today and I hope you never become one of the Stat. that show up at one of the other missions for the homeless in our cities looking for a hand out before you know that I was right.

[Izdaari]

Alcohol is known to have done all of the above and if our governments truly cared about the families in their jurisdiction they would remove booze from the market place.
That's been tried. It was called Prohibition, and was in effect in the US from 1920-1933. It was a miserable failure. The major effect of it was to boost organized crime and to increase disrespect for the law among the general public. Public recognition of that was why it was repealed. Those are also the major effects of similar policies regarding other drugs today.

[ParsonJefferson]

That's been tried. It was called Prohibition, and was in effect in the US from 1920-1933. It was a miserable failure. The major effect of it was to boost organized crime and to increase disrespect for the law among the general public. Public recognition of that was why it was repealed. Those are also the major effects of similar policies regarding other drugs today.

The strange thing is, Prohibition wasn't as much of a failure as people popularly want to say it was.

Personally, I'm a non-drinker. I fully expect my kids to be as well. We make no bones about that whatever. But it's not because taking "a" drink is a sin that is going to condemn somebody to hell. It's because drinking leads to SO many problems. I have no idea how many families I've known and worked with - as a pastor - whose lives have been torn to pieces by alcohol. It's horrible.

[cremi]

I wonder too about the prohibition of alcohol in families. I know of two individual families where the brother did not forbid alcohol and did partake. His children all partake moderately or occasionally. The sister of this same brother did not partake and did forbid it. Her husband was also the same way. All of their children partake modertately or occasionally.

Maybe the reason to not partake was lost somewhere? I've just found it to be curious.

[Amisk]

That's been tried. It was called Prohibition, and was in effect in the US from 1920-1933. It was a miserable failure. The major effect of it was to boost organized crime and to increase disrespect for the law among the general public. Public recognition of that was why it was repealed. Those are also the major effects of similar policies regarding other drugs today.

[Quote Parson] The strange thing is, Prohibition wasn't as much of a failure as people popularly want to say it was.

Personally, I'm a non-drinker. I fully expect my kids to be as well. We make no bones about that whatever. But it's not because taking "a" drink is a sin that is going to condemn somebody to hell. It's because drinking leads to SO many problems. I have no idea how many families I've known and worked with - as a pastor - whose lives have been torn to pieces by alcohol. It's horrible. [Quote]

The Parson is correct. The facts are that prohibition here in Canada failed for the same reason that it failed in the U.S. It failed because the politicians and church folks were convinced by those wishing to have booze that the only away to control it was to legalize it. The politicians also saw it as a tax grab. Politicians didn't care about the health, or family problems nor the crime resulting from the use of the devil’s brew. Even today, politicians fail to look at the cost of policing and housing those who are arrested for crimes committed while under the influence. Some time back I saw a stat. that alcohol is involved in 80% the crimes that has put Canadian prisoners behind bars.

Church ministers where convinced as well that taking a lighter stand on drinking would gain them an increase in membership, as if church membership had much to do with the salvation of their parishioners. These ministers didn’t worry about the fact that alcohol has likely send more souls to hell than any other substance on the face of the earth.

One of the hall markings of every great revival of Christianity through the centuries has been a return to sober living. Usually it has meant the closing of bars as a result of new converts to the faith leaving a life of drunkenness. It has usually bought happier marriages, better employees and bread winners who had money enough to support their families. It has caused ministers to speak out strongly against the use of any substance that causes men and women to living lives that leads them into sin. The Bible clear teaches that no sin will enter Heaven. It teaches as well that without holiness no man shall see the Lord. We are also told to shun the very appearance of evil.

Yes, you can argue that the use of alcohol in moderation is okayed by the scriptures while others argue the opposite view, but the truth is that no man knows when alcohol will become the main stay of handling life's troubles. I guess I would also ask why you would wish to play around the edge of a mud puddle if there is a chance that it could cost you your own soul or the souls of your children, and perhaps send your neighbours to Hell for eternity?

[AJB4]

Jesus himself drank wine.

Luke 7:33-34 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%207:33-34&version=9)
For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil. The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!


If Jesus did not drink real, alcoholic wine, but grape juice, then answer me this:

Why would they accuse Jesus of being a 'winebibber' for drinking fruit juice?

Also, if that Old Testament-era Proverb was condemning alcohol consumption AT ALL, rather than it's misuse, why was the rest of the Old Testament so positive towards the consumption of alcohol (Deuteronomy 14:26 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2014:26&version=31), Exodus 29:40 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2029:40;&version=9;), to name just a few verses)?

Also, at the Wedding at Cana:

John 2:10 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%202:10%20;&version=9;)
And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk*, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

* FYI, the Greek word used here is:

μεθύω (Methuō) - pronounced 'meth-oo'-o, which means:

to drink to intoxication, that is, get drunk: - drink well, make (be) drunk (-en)

You can check this (http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/g3184.htm) if you don't believe me.

Tell me, what the heck is Jesus doing turning water into undeniably alcoholic wine, if he disapproved of it?

[Izdaari]

Yes, you can argue that the use of alcohol in moderation is okayed by the scriptures while others argue the opposite view, but the truth is that no man knows when alcohol will become the main stay of handling life's troubles. I guess I would also ask why you would wish to play around the edge of a mud puddle if there is a chance that it could cost you your own soul or the souls of your children, and perhaps send your neighbours to Hell for eternity?
There is another issue here besides whether you think drinking is permissible for a Christian, and that's a question of political philosophy. Do I believe in making things illegal for society in general just because I think they're bad? No, not at all. I don't think that's the proper role of government. I don't believe Caesar should be the enforcer of Godliness or public morality, but only of the minimum standards necessary for public safety and order.

[DanielRB]

Peace, Izadaari :wave:

There is another issue here besides whether you think drinking is permissible for a Christian, and that's a question of political philosophy. Do I believe in making things illegal for society in general just because I think they're bad? No, not at all. I don't think that's the proper role of government. I don't believe Caesar should be the enforcer of Godliness or public morality, but only of the minimum standards necessary for public safety and order.

I would agree, but sometimes the line between public mortality and public safety are fuzzy. For example, it might be an issue of moality that someone uses meth and produces it in the their own home; however, meth houses use very dangerous, explosive chemicals and therefore public safety is at risk.

In Christ,

Daniel

[Izdaari]

Peace, Izadaari :wave:



I would agree, but sometimes the line between public mortality and public safety are fuzzy. For example, it might be an issue of moality that someone uses meth and produces it in the their own home; however, meth houses use very dangerous, explosive chemicals and therefore public safety is at risk.

In Christ,

DanielVery true. Meth labs are extremely dangerous and present major public safety issues. However... I don't see that drug laws are necessarily needed to deal with that. What we're talking about there are hazmat safety and environmental violations, and there were already laws about such things. Perhaps those laws need to be strengthened though.

[Amisk]

Jesus himself drank wine.

Luke 7:33-34 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%207:33-34&version=9)
For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a devil. The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!


If Jesus did not drink real, alcoholic wine, but grape juice, then answer me this:

Why would they accuse Jesus of being a 'winebibber' for drinking fruit juice?

Also, if that Old Testament-era Proverb was condemning alcohol consumption AT ALL, rather than it's misuse, why was the rest of the Old Testament so positive towards the consumption of alcohol (Deuteronomy 14:26 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2014:26&version=31), Exodus 29:40 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2029:40;&version=9;), to name just a few verses)?

Also, at the Wedding at Cana:

John 2:10 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%202:10%20;&version=9;)
And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk*, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

* FYI, the Greek word used here is:

μεθύω (Methuō) - pronounced 'meth-oo'-o, which means:

to drink to intoxication, that is, get drunk: - drink well, make (be) drunk (-en)

You can check this (http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/g3184.htm) if you don't believe me.

Tell me, what the heck is Jesus doing turning water into undeniably alcoholic wine, if he disapproved of it?

So, you want to drink alcoholic beverages? You tell us that you think it is okay, you are prepared to argue your case, even though you can't really prove your point of view from scripture any more than I can mine. There is no proof in defence of social drinking as far as scripture is concerned. The Scripture so often quoted as being in favour of drinking really fails to give us genuine proof either for or against. On the other hand the Bible gives us enough verses on drunkenness to warn us to be ware of booze.

Where is your proof that Jesus turned the water into fermented wine? The term of wine was used for both fermented and un-fermented grape juice at the time.

When we look at the history of alcohol, common sense would tell us that if we yield to the pressures of our friends and begin drinking socially, we like many before us, could well be the next victim of the brewery industry.

I remind you again that the man staggering down the street with a week's growth of whiskers didn't start out with the idea of letting his first glass of beer drag him into the misery that he now lives in.

The lady that gets drunk today and finds herself in a bed with a man, tomorrow morning, that she doesn't even know, did not plan with her first glass of booze to end up the free bed partner of any guy who could get her stoned out of her mind enough to rob her of all common sense.

This my friend is the history of booze from the days of Noah until this very hour. That my friend is something that any man or woman who yields to the temptation of alcohol has a good chance of becoming. Alcohol has always been just as dangerous as any other street drug out there today.

I know the human race is guilty of living with the idea that it can happen to the other guy but it will never happen to me. That is known as "the famous last words" which we are too often prone to use in excusing ourselves when we want to do the questionable things our friends are doing. We are also shocked when we become the guy at the end of the noose.

You likely will not agree with me, but maybe some day down the road you will see that this old guy was not so far from right.

[AJB4]

There is no proof in defence of social drinking as far as scripture is concerned.

Need I remind you again about Deuteronomy 14:26 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2014:26&version=31), where Moses was telling them to tithe, and he said, "And if the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it; or if the place be too far from thee, which the LORD thy God shall choose to set his name there, when the LORD thy God hath blessed thee: Then shalt thou turn it into money, and bind up the money in thine hand, and shalt go unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose:
And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice."

That seems pretty positive to me, don't you? Considering that Moses wrote the old law, I think we can take this statement to mean that the Old Testament is indeed positive to fermented drink.

Also, at the wedding at Cana, not only does the governor of the party mention specifically drink, but he also speaks of 'better' and 'worse' wine. There's

[spiritfilledjm]

Ok, bottom line, the bible only says do not get drunk. It says nothing about don't drink.

[WesWoodell]

* FYI, the Greek word used here is:

μεθύω (Methuō) - pronounced 'meth-oo'-o, which means:

to drink to intoxication, that is, get drunk: - drink well, make (be) drunk (-en)

You can check this (http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/g3184.htm) if you don't believe me.

Tell me, what the heck is Jesus doing turning water into undeniably alcoholic wine, if he disapproved of it?


Its possible that it could also be translated "drink freely"
according to the standard Greek New Testament.

[DanielRB]

Peace All, :wave:

It seems to me that if we apply the principle to speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent, we should allow individual conscience to dictate one's feelings on the matter. There are excellent reasons to avoid drinking socially, but fundamentally, they are not Biblical reasons (other than the prohibition against drunkeness which I think we all agree is directly addressed in the Bible).

I would also say that there are few good reasons to drink outside of the Bible (there's the heart health and red wine argument, but the same effect can be had with grape juice). On the balance, I think using reason, avoiding drink is best; but from the pages of the Bible, there is not a "thus saith the Lord" against it, so I don't think it is proper to elevate abstinence from alcohol to the level of a Church position.

I, too, have seen lives ruined by alcohol; it is very distructive. But I can't tell someone that the Bible is against drinking in moderation, because it simply is not.

In Christ,

Daniel

[spiritfilledjm]

Peace All, :wave:

It seems to me that if we apply the principle to speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent, we should allow individual conscience to dictate one's feelings on the matter. There are excellent reasons to avoid drinking socially, but fundamentally, they are not Biblical reasons (other than the prohibition against drunkeness which I think we all agree is directly addressed in the Bible).

I would also say that there are few good reasons to drink outside of the Bible (there's the heart health and red wine argument, but the same effect can be had with grape juice). On the balance, I think using reason, avoiding drink is best; but from the pages of the Bible, there is not a "thus saith the Lord" against it, so I don't think it is proper to elevate abstinence from alcohol to the level of a Church position.

I, too, have seen lives ruined by alcohol; it is very distructive. But I can't tell someone that the Bible is against drinking in moderation, because it simply is not.

In Christ,

Daniel
AMEN!!!! I agree one hundred percent. Let everyone decide whether or not to have a beer every now and then. I know once I turn 21 that I will have a beer in my fridge every once in a while. I remember when I was a youth I was at my youth leaders and I went to get a drink from their fridge and I found beer inside of it. I came out of the room looking very confused and so they asked me if I was ok and I was like, "Umm...why is there beer in your fridge?" They then pointed out that scripture only says don't get drunk but it doesn't say don't drink. So I am making my decision to drink a beer (in 3 months) every once in a while but not to get drunk.

[Splayd]

I also agree with Daniel on this matter and I'm someone who has struggled with alcohol.

As I see it - Having a blanket approach of "Drinking alcohol is always sinful" is to essentially build a fence around the law like the Jews did. That is: we make a new law to prevent us from breaking the real law of not getting drunk. Now fence-building can be tricky. On the one hand Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for their emphasis on fence laws... BUT at the same time He was also doing the same thing during the sermon on the mount (eg: Don't commit adultery = don't even look at someone with lust).

So - what's the difference?
I'd suggest it's a matter of the heart more than anything. If I determine that I can consistently drink until my blood alcohol reading reaches 0.06 (or whatever) OR if I determine that noone should ever ever drink a single drop... my focus is on the law itself. Rather we should be focused on Christ and serving Him and others. When we're truly doing that, it should be evident what's acceptable and what isn't... BUT if we're blind to that - the law is there to remind us: Don't get drunk.

Peace

[Amisk]

ALCOHOL
Father Charles Chiniquy, a Roman Catholic priest at The Quebec Marine Hospital in 1834 tells of this first hand lesson on the effects of alcohol on the human body. Sailors at the hospital were dying from small pox and cholera. He had been called to the hospital at the request of many of the dying men. Let me quote his story as he told it.
" The first man I met was Dr. Douglas who confirmed the number of sick and added that the prevailing diseases were of the most dangerous kind.
"Dr. Douglas, who was one of the founders and governors of the hospital was one of the ablest surgeons of Quebec. Though a staunch Protestant honoured me with his confidence and friendship from the first day we met. I may say that I have never known a nobler heart, a larger mind and a truer philanthropist.
"After thanking him for the useful sad news (the conditions of the sailors), I requested Mr. Glackmayer (the hospital superintendent) to give me a glass of brandy, which I immediately swallowed.
"What are doing?" said Dr. Douglas.
"You see," I answered; I have drunk a glass of excellent brandy."
"But please tell me why."
"Because it is a good preservative against the pestilential atmosphere I will breathe all day," I replied. "I will have to hear the confessions of all those people dying from smallpox or cholera and breathe the putrid air which is around their pillows. Does not common sense warn me to take some precautions against the contagion?"
"Is it possible," rejoined he, "that a man for whom I have such sincere esteem is so ignorant of the deadly working of alcohol in the human frame? What you have just drank is nothing but poison; and far from protecting yourself against the danger, you are now much more exposed to it than before you drank that beverage."
"You poor Protestants," I answered in a joking way, "are a band of fanatics, with your extreme doctrines of temperance. You will never convert me to your views on that subject. Is it for the use of the dogs that God has created wine and brandy? No; it is for the use of men who drink them with moderation and intelligence."
"My dear Mr. Chiniquy, you are joking; but I am in earnest when I tell you that you have poisoned yourself with that glass of brandy," replied Dr. Douglas.
"If good wine and brandy were poisons," I answered, "you would be long ago the only physician in Quebec, for you are the only one of the medical body whom I know to be an ALCOHOL abstainer. But, though I am much pleased with your conversation, excuse me if I leave you to visit my dear sick sailors, whose cries for spiritual help ring in my ears"
"One word more," said Dr. Douglas. "Tomorrow morning we will make the autopsy of a sailor who has just died suddenly here. Have you any objection to come and see in the body of that man, what your glass of brandy has done in your own body."
"No, sir; I have no objection," I replied. "I have been anxious for a long time to make a special study of anatomy. It will be my first lesson; I cannot get it from a better teacher." .....
The next morning I was, at the appointed hour, by the corpse of the dead man when Dr. Douglas kindly gave me a powerful microscope.
"I have not the least doubt," said he, "that this man has been instantly killed by a glass of rum. The rum has caused the rupture the aorta."
While talking thus the knife was doing its work so quickly that the horrible spectacle of the broken artery was before our eyes almost as the last word fell from his lips.
"Look here," said the doctor. "All along the artery you will see thousands, perhaps millions, of reddish spots, which are as many holes perforated through it by alcohol. Just as the musk rats of the Mississippi River dig little holes through the dams and cause the waters to break through and carry desolation and death along its shores, so alcohol every day causes the sudden death of thousands of victims by perforating the veins of the lungs and the whole body. Look at the lungs and count, if you can, the thousands and thousands of reddish, dark and yellow spots, and little ulcers. Everyone one of them is the work of alcohol causing corruption and death all over these marvellous organs. Alcohol is one of the most dangerous poisons. It has killed more men than all the other poisons together.
"Alcohol cannot go to any part of the human frame without bringing disorder and death to it. For it cannot in any possible way unite with any part of the body. The water we drink and the wholesome food we eat is sent to the lungs, to the brain, and the muscles, the bones -- where it goes it receives, so to speak, letters of citizenship; it is allowed to remain there in peace and work for the public good. But not so with alcohol. The very moment it enters the stomach it brings disorder, ruin and death, according to the quantity taken.
"Look here with your microscope and you will see every place where King Alcohol has put his foot has been turned into a battlefield, spread with ruin and death. But a most extraordinary work of nature, or rather by the order of God, every vein and artery through which alcohol has pass suddenly contracts, as if to prevent its passage or choke it as a dead foe. Every vein and artery has evidently heard the voice of God: 'Wine is a mocker; it bites like a serpent and stings as an adder!' Every nerve and muscle which alcohol touched, trembled and shook as if in the presence of an implacable and unconquerable enemy. Yes, at the presence of alcohol every nerve and muscle loses its strength, just as the bravest man, in the presence of a horrible monster or demon, suddenly loses his natural strength, and shakes from head to foot."....
"During the four years I was chaplain of the Marine Hospital, more than one hundred corpses were opened before me. It is my conviction that the first thing a temperance orator ought to do is to study anatomy; get the bodies of drunkards, as well as those of so called temperate drinkers, opened before him, study there the working of alcohol in the different organs of man. These bodies were books written by the hand of God Himself, and they spoke to me as no man could speak."
"FIFTY YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME" By Charles Chiniquy ---

[cmr]

In my humble opinion, it's not a question of is drinking in moderation a sin, but what are your intentions in drinking? This can be applied to anything you do.
Where your motives lie behind the act is what God is concerned with.
Being drunk is an obvious sin, as is over eating, anger, laziness and the list goes on.
As followers of Christ we need to not only take into account whether we've been convicted by the Holy Spirit of a specific act, but also how that act may cause another to stumble in their lives.
After all, it's not about us anymore if we claim Christ as our Savior.
We are to be filled with the Holy Spirit and not "spirits"

[Splayd]

Great first post cmr :)
Welcome! :wave:

[DanielRB]

Peace, Amisk :wave:

I don't believe anyone can seriously argue that drinking alcohol is good for you. I think that it is sound medical advice to avoid it altogether. However, I think that if someone tries to argue that the Bible is aginst it would have a hard time. (However, medical opinions come and go...but the Word of God abides forever.)

My position is simply that only what can be taken from the Bible can be legitimately said as a "thus saith the Lord." But there are a lot of things that the Bible doesn't address. I think moderate drinking is one of them. Reason has dictated to me to avoid alcohol, not the Bible. Reason also has dictated to me to exercise regularly.

Now, the general Biblical principle that we should take care of our bodies and not destroy the image of God by the slow-motion suicide of alcohol, tobacco and sedintary living--that can be a good argument.

In Christ,

Daniel

[AJB4]

One verse that always seems to be overlooked in the mix of verses about alcohol is:

1 Corinthians 11:21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Cor%2011:20-21;&version=50;) - Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk.

The word again is methuo, which means to drink to intoxication, that is, get drunk: - drink well, make (be) drunk (-en), drink freely, get tipsy etc.

The point is though, it seems that the wine they used for the Lord's Supper at this time was real wine, not grape juice, because you can't get drunk on grape juice, and nowhere in the text do you see Paul condemning alcohol, rather, that they were misusing the Lord's Supper wine and getting drunk on it.

[Amisk]

Peace, Amisk :wave:

I don't believe anyone can seriously argue that drinking alcohol is good for you. I think that it is sound medical advice to avoid it altogether. However, I think that if someone tries to argue that the Bible is aginst it would have a hard time. (However, medical opinions come and go...but the Word of God abides forever.)

My position is simply that only what can be taken from the Bible can be legitimately said as a "thus saith the Lord." But there are a lot of things that the Bible doesn't address. I think moderate drinking is one of them. Reason has dictated to me to avoid alcohol, not the Bible. Reason also has dictated to me to exercise regularly.

Now, the general Biblical principle that we should take care of our bodies and not destroy the image of God by the slow-motion suicide of alcohol, tobacco and sedintary living--that can be a good argument.

In Christ,

Daniel

I agree with your statements here.:thumbsup:

[Loveaboveall]

So.... its okay to kill brain cells as long as you don't kill that many? It has been scientifically proven that even one glass of wine kills many brain cells. What about the person who takes only ONE drink and becomes an alcoholic? It happens. Why do people drink anyways? Most people say because it relaxes them and takes away the stress of life. Isn't that whay God is supposed to do for us through meditating on His word and prayer? Isn't our bodies God's temple where He dwells? Do we have the right to pollute it with intoxicating drink and poisons that destroy and kill cells and cause damage to the liver that leads to death? By the way doesn't the bible say "Thou shalt not kill"? Is that only a command to not kill if it is instantaneous or can it mean to not kill yourself prematurely by doing things to your body that are harmful.

The argument that Jesus drank "strong drink" is completely ridiculous. Jesus who lived a perfect life who was in all ways tempted as we were would NOT drink something that would lower His inhibitions which would give the devil a much greater chance in succeding in his tempting Jesus. We are to guard ourselves against all the wiles of the devil, How can you do that when your inhibition has been lowered?

[WesWoodell]

One verse that always seems to be overlooked in the mix of verses about alcohol is:

1 Corinthians 11:21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Cor%2011:20-21;&version=50;) - Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk.

The word again is methuo, which means to drink to intoxication, that is, get drunk: - drink well, make (be) drunk (-en), drink freely, get tipsy etc.

The point is though, it seems that the wine they used for the Lord's Supper at this time was real wine, not grape juice, because you can't get drunk on grape juice, and nowhere in the text do you see Paul condemning alcohol, rather, that they were misusing the Lord's Supper wine and getting drunk on it.


You may have missed my other post, but that word is not always translated that way.

Be very careful about putting your full weight down on what some random website says about a Greek word. The person who posted that definition may have a limited knowledge of the language, they may not have done their research on that word, or they may have an agenda their pushing.

That word does not always have to mean "getting drunk" regardless of what that website says.

[AJB4]

You may have missed my other post, but that word is not always translated that way.

Be very careful about putting your full weight down on what some random website says about a Greek word. The person who posted that definition may have a limited knowledge of the language, they may not have done their research on that word, or they may have an agenda their pushing.

That word does not always have to mean "getting drunk" regardless of what that website says.
The same definition is on E-sword too, but, point taken.

[Amisk]

You may have missed my other post, but that word is not always translated that way.

Be very careful about putting your full weight down on what some random website says about a Greek word. The person who posted that definition may have a limited knowledge of the language, they may not have done their research on that word, or they may have an agenda their pushing.

That word does not always have to mean "getting drunk" regardless of what that website says.


You are correct Wes. One needs to be very careful what one propagates on a public web site. I would suggest that when one starts advocating using alcohol in any form one must remember that these web sites are open to men and women, boys and girls of all ages or mental ability.

Many adults may be rational enough to have thought through the pros and cons of using alcohol. On the other hand some adults can be easily lead into that which is harmful for them.

In the 1940's only a handful of women smoked cigarettes. The rest thought it was un-lady-like to do so, or as Christians they were against it because they believed that it was destroying the temple of the Lord.

When it began to be fashionable for women to smoke, many of the women who bought into they idea were adults, I suggest even into their forties and fifties.

The same has been the case with the social use of alcohol and street drugs.

Then there are many young children and teens who read these forums as well. After reading the sites that argue for the use of alcohol they come to believe it is acceptable for Christians to use booze. They come to think that it is only an non-harmful social practice.

When it advances to the point that they have become addicted to and they loose out spiritually and health-wise, and job-wise they can well point the finger back to this forum and others like it that led them to think that it was sociably and Christian-wise okay to drink.

I personally don't want to lead anyone into a life style that could destroy their walk with Christ, rude their family life, cause them to end up killing some one due to drunk drinking, or fights they might get into, or leads them into away of life that decimates their health, or any problem to make a living for themselves or their family. To advocate that there is no harm with the use of alcohol would give them the opportunity to blame me for their sin and handi-cap.

So, yes, we need to be care what we suggest is right and Christian on this or any other forum whether we are speaking of alcohol or another subject.

[annie1speed]

Greek words or no. English is plain enough for me. Loveaboveall has hit on the heart of the matter here. Do we want to do things we know will lower our inhibitions and make it easier for us to slip in our Christian walk? Alcohol, or drug in general for medicinal uses is one thing, but using either for pleasure is at best poor judgement and at worst opening the door for disaster. My opinion is that those who drink socially will EVENTUALLY get drunk. That and 50 cents ... well maybe $3.98 if you want a Moooolatte from Dairy Queen will you know the rest.

[JDIBe]

The best analogy I can give is this:
"It is not sinful to play with a box of matches in bed....but it is extremely unwise."

Unfortunately, sometimes when people hear, "It's not a sin." it gets translated, "It's a good thing". That is not always necessarily the case. :)

[Amisk]

The best analogy I can give is this:
"It is not sinful to play with a box of matches in bed....but it is extremely unwise."

Unfortunately, sometimes when people hear, "It's not a sin." it gets translated, "It's a good thing". That is not always necessarily the case. :)

You have hit the nail on the head with wise wording.

[cremi]

Oh My! We've gone from asking a question about drinking alcohol moderately to killing people while driving drunk????

Sounds like a great deal of fear to me and is what I call the "Domino Theory". IOW, don't do this one thing or else the dominos will start to fall and you'll end up way down there. It is the same type of reasoning I've heard to not have musical instruments--but none of that is based on faith--it is based in fear. The big "what if" question.

Now, as far as arguements go for being chaste with alcohol goes--those make sense. We are to be filled with the Holy Spirit, not with wine.

Ephesians 5:18
18 Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

Yet, Jesus did turn the water into wine--not grape juice. As a matter of fact, it was so good that the master of the banquet asked the bridegroom why he had saved the best wine for last..(John 2:1-11) I've heard the arguements that the wine back then was not as alcoholic as it is today, but does that really make any difference? It still had some level of alcohol in it. Apparently there was a bit of fermentation going on even back then, because the Jews knew to not put "new wine" into "old wineskins", or else the wineskins would burst. (Matt. 9:17, Mark 2:22, Luke 5:37-39) If Jesus really had an issue with people drinking in moderation, why would he have turned the water into wine?

I'm sort of amazed at some of the analogies I've seen presented here, along with some misinterpretation of facts--like alcohol kills bran cells. If anyone is interested, here (http://www.wonderquest.com/BrainCells.htm) is an article talking about exactly what alcohol does to the brain. I think we all know alcohol can be damaging if abused. So can OTC medication, illegal drugs, gambling, guns, overeating, sexual immorality and....the list is quite long. I'm sure some of these activities some of us would never participate in, but I bet some of us have partaken in at least one of these activities...true?

I'm not arguing that we should drink. If I've learned anyting in my Christian walk, it is truly that just because something is permissible, does not mean I should partake. I see a good example in John the Baptist, who never touched wine, as one to follow. Yet though that may be my opinion regarding alcohol for myself, I find it necessary to be more conservative with myself and liberal with others.

[AJB4]

Oh My! We've gone from asking a question about drinking alcohol moderately to killing people while driving drunk????

Sounds like a great deal of fear to me and is what I call the "Domino Theory". IOW, don't do this one thing or else the dominos will start to fall and you'll end up way down there. It is the same type of reasoning I've heard to not have musical instruments--but none of that is based on faith--it is based in fear. The big "what if" question.

Now, as far as arguements go for being chaste with alcohol goes--those make sense. We are to be filled with the Holy Spirit, not with wine.

Ephesians 5:18
18 Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

Yet, Jesus did turn the water into wine--not grape juice. As a matter of fact, it was so good that the master of the banquet asked the bridegroom why he had saved the best wine for last..(John 2:1-11) I've heard the arguements that the wine back then was not as alcoholic as it is today, but does that really make any difference? It still had some level of alcohol in it. Apparently there was a bit of fermentation going on even back then, because the Jews knew to not put "new wine" into "old wineskins", or else the wineskins would burst. (Matt. 9:17, Mark 2:22, Luke 5:37-39) If Jesus really had an issue with people drinking in moderation, why would he have turned the water into wine?

I'm sort of amazed at some of the analogies I've seen presented here, along with some misinterpretation of facts--like alcohol kills bran cells. If anyone is interested, here (http://www.wonderquest.com/BrainCells.htm) is an article talking about exactly what alcohol does to the brain. I think we all know alcohol can be damaging if abused. So can OTC medication, illegal drugs, gambling, guns, overeating, sexual immorality and....the list is quite long. I'm sure some of these activities some of us would never participate in, but I bet some of us have partaken in at least one of these activities...true?

I'm not arguing that we should drink. If I've learned anyting in my Christian walk, it is truly that just because something is permissible, does not mean I should partake. I see a good example in John the Baptist, who never touched wine, as one to follow. Yet though that may be my opinion regarding alcohol for myself, I find it necessary to be more conservative with myself and liberal with others.
:amen:

[JDIBe]

[F New Roman]Oh My! We've gone from asking a question about drinking alcohol moderately to killing people while driving drunk????[/FONT]

[F New Roman]Sounds like a great deal of fear to me and is what I call the "Domino Theory". IOW, don't do this one thing or else the dominos will start to fall and you'll end up way down there. It is the same type of reasoning I've heard to not have musical instruments--but none of that is based on faith--it is based in fear. The big "what if" question.[/FONT]

[F New Roman]Now, as far as arguements go for being chaste with alcohol goes--those make sense. We are to be filled with the Holy Spirit, not with wine. [/FONT]

[F New Roman]Ephesians 5:18[/FONT]
[F New Roman]18 Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.[/FONT]

[F New Roman]Yet, Jesus did turn the water into wine--not grape juice. As a matter of fact, it was so good that the master of the banquet asked the bridegroom why he had saved the best wine for last..(John 2:1-11) I've heard the arguements that the wine back then was not as alcoholic as it is today, but does that really make any difference? It still had some level of alcohol in it. Apparently there was a bit of fermentation going on even back then, because the Jews knew to not put "new wine" into "old wineskins", or else the wineskins would burst. (Matt. 9:17, Mark 2:22, Luke 5:37-39) If Jesus really had an issue with people drinking in moderation, why would he have turned the water into wine?[/FONT]

[F New Roman]I'm sort of amazed at some of the analogies I've seen presented here, along with some misinterpretation of facts--like alcohol kills bran cells. If anyone is interested, here (http://www.wonderquest.com/BrainCells.htm) is an article talking about exactly what alcohol does to the brain. I think we all know alcohol can be damaging if abused. So can OTC medication, illegal drugs, gambling, guns, overeating, sexual immorality and....the list is quite long. I'm sure some of these activities some of us would never participate in, but I bet some of us have partaken in at least one of these activities...true?[/FONT]

[F New Roman]I'm not arguing that we should drink. If I've learned anyting in my Christian walk, it is truly that just because something is permissible, does not mean I should partake. I see a good example in John the Baptist, who never touched wine, as one to follow. Yet though that may be my opinion regarding alcohol for myself, I find it necessary to be more conservative with myself and liberal with others.[/FONT]
Cremi,

First let me say that I am in basic agreement with what you said. I believe Jesus did drink wine. In fact everyone back then probably did. The water was probably so bad it was probably safer to drink the wine! Fortunately, most of us live in countries where that is no longer a concern. Drinking is in some part, a cultural thing. It is frowned upon by Christians and non-Christians alike in some cultures, perfectly acceptable in others. That being said, (and you knew it was coming...:) )


1. I have never met a person who described themselves as a "moderate drinker" who meant it as they never got drunk. Only that they didn't get drunk "very often".

2. They call it the "domino theory" for a reason. It does happen. And it does with alcohol as well.

3. It doesn't have to be a progression. I can tell you stories of family members who haven't spoken for 20 years all because someone said something they shouldn't have when drinking. Alcohol can do a lot of damage in an instant and not just physically.

4. As for your argument that statements were "based on fear and not faith", I would say, "faith in what?" Faith in God, or faith in yourself to handle things that can be harmful to you? The former is admirable. The latter is unwise. Samson thought he could handle his Delilah. Sometimes a little fear is a good thing because pride goeth before a fall. If someone says, "Don't drink.", I don't think they are showing a lack of faith. I think they are trying to be helpful out of concern for another individual.

Biblically speaking, I think this applies to the discussion...

Proverbs 23:29-35
29 Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? Who hath complaining? who hath wounds without cause? Who hath redness of eyes?
30 They that tarry long at the wine; They that go to seek out mixed wine.
31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, When it sparkleth in the cup, When it goeth down smoothly:
32 At the last it biteth like a serpent, And stingeth like an adder.
33 Thine eyes shall behold strange things, And thy heart shall utter perverse things.
34 Yea, thou shalt be as he that lieth down in the midst of the sea, Or as he that lieth upon the top of a mast.
35 They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not hurt; They have beaten me, and I felt it not: When shall I awake? I will seek it yet again.

Folks, drink as much as you want, particularly if...

1. you enjoy being sad. (Prov. 23:29)
2. enjoy having problems to deal with. (vs. 29)
3. you like to have things to complain about. (vs. 29)
4. you enjoy needless bruises. (vs. 29)
5. you want bloodshot eyes. (vs. 29)
6. you don't think reality is very important. (vs. 33)
7. you think being disoriented impresses your friends and coworkers. (vs. 34)
8. you think feeling invincible is a good thing ESPECIALLY when you are not. (vs. 35)

Proverbs 23:32 says that alcohol, in the end, "bites like a snake, and poisons like a viper". Why is alcohol so dangerous? Because even with all of the problems listed above, what does the person think is the solution to all these problems?








Another drink. (vs. 35)

[DanielRB]

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][COLOR=purple]I'm sort of amazed at some of the analogies I've seen presented here, along with some misinterpretation of facts--like alcohol kills bran cells. If anyone is interested, here (http://www.wonderquest.com/BrainCells.htm) is an article talking about exactly what alcohol does to the brain. I think we all know alcohol can be damaging if abused. So can OTC medication, illegal drugs, gambling, guns, overeating, sexual immorality and....the list is quite long. I'm sure some of these activities some of us would never participate in, but I bet some of us have partaken in at least one of these activities...true?

I'm not arguing that we should drink. If I've learned anyting in my Christian walk, it is truly that just because something is permissible, does not mean I should partake. I see a good example in John the Baptist, who never touched wine, as one to follow. Yet though that may be my opinion regarding alcohol for myself, I find it necessary to be more conservative with myself and liberal with others.

Thanks for the link. Although I abstain (and think it's a medically sound decision), I cringe when I see people misrepresent the facts, like "alcohol kills brain cells."

I like your conclusion: "...to be more conservative with myself and liberal with others." I think that sums it up nicely. :)

In Christ,

Daniel

[Loveaboveall]

Harper C (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus&term=%22Harper+C%22%5BAuthor%5D).Department of Pathology, Blackburn Building, D06, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. cliveh@med.usyd.edu.au
Patterns of drinking are changing throughout the world and in many countries this will be detrimental to the health and welfare of the local population. Even uncomplicated alcoholics who have no specific neurological or hepatic problems show signs of regional brain damage and cognitive dysfunction. Many of these changes are exaggerated and other brain regions damaged in patients who have additional vitamin B1 (thiamine) deficiency (Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome). Quantitative neuropathology techniques and improvements in neuroimaging have contributed significantly to the documentation of these changes but mechanisms underlying the damage are not understood. A human brain bank targeting alcohol cases has been established in Sydney, Australia and provides fresh and frozen tissue for alcohol researchers. The tissues can be used to test hypotheses developed from structural neuropathological studies or from animal models and in vitro studies. Identification of reversible pathological changes and preventative medical approaches in alcoholism should enhance rehabilitation and treatment efforts, thereby mitigating debilitating morbidities and reducing mortality associated with this universal public health problem.
PMID: 17439928 [PubMed - in process

Blanco AM (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus&term=%22Blanco+AM%22%5BAuthor%5D),
Guerri C (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus&term=%22Guerri+C%22%5BAuthor%5D).Centro de Investigacion Principe Felipe, Cell Pathology Laboratory, Avda. Autopista del Saler 16, 46013-Valencia, Spain.
The brain is one of the major target organs of ethanol actions, and its chronic and acute intoxication results in significant alterations in brain structure and function, and in some cases to neurodegeneration. Glial cells and Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are vital players in CNS immune response; dysregulation of this response plays an important role in brain damage and neurodegeneration. Ethanol has immunomodulatory effects and induces specific alterations in the TLRs response in many tissues. These actions depend on the cell type, ethanol dose and treatment duration, as well as the concomitant presence of pathogens and their characteristics. Recent findings indicate that low concentrations of ethanol (10 mM) promote inflammatory processes in brain and in glial cells by up-regulating cytokines and inflammatory mediators (iNOS, NO, COX-2), and by activating signaling pathways (IKK, MAPKs) and transcriptional factors (NF-kappaB, AP-1) implicated in inflammatory injury. TLR4/IL-1RI receptors may be involved in ethanol-mediated inflammatory signaling, since blocking these receptors abolishes the production of ethanol-induced inflammatory mediators and cell death. We propose that at low physiologically relevant concentrations, ethanol facilitates TLR4/IL-1RI recruitment into lipid rafts microdomains, leading to the activation and signaling of these receptors. In summary, current results suggest that TLR4/ IL-1RI are important targets of ethanol-induced inflammatory brain damage.



You can find in research just about whatever you want to find. I think the more important point is that even very small quantities of alchol alter your brain and lead to decreased inhibition. Can you see Jesus drinking alcohol? If Jesus came to save those who were lost why would he create something that would lead to more sin? Why is it so hard to believe that Jesus created the best grape juice the people had ever tasted?

"And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: [but] thou hast kept the good wine until now."

This vs could just as easily be interpreted to say that the men had already drunk their fill and desired no more. I just can't accept that Jesus would create something that would be the demise of someone else.

You may believe that alcohol is not bad for you and you can find links on the web to back up whatever you want to believe. But I Jesus would not even drink fermented drink when to help lessen the pain. Why not? It would not have made him "drunk" from drinking from a sponge would it?

matt 27:34 "They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted [thereof], he would not drink."

Note that mark calls it wine

Mark 15:23 "And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received [it] not."

[cremi]

Harper C (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus&term=%22Harper+C%22%5BAuthor%5D).Department of Pathology, Blackburn Building, D06, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. cliveh@med.usyd.edu.au
Patterns of drinking are changing throughout the world and in many countries this will be detrimental to the health and welfare of the local population. Even uncomplicated alcoholics who have no specific neurological or hepatic problems show signs of regional brain damage and cognitive dysfunction. Many of these changes are exaggerated and other brain regions damaged in patients who have additional vitamin B1 (thiamine) deficiency (Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome). Quantitative neuropathology techniques and improvements in neuroimaging have contributed significantly to the documentation of these changes but mechanisms underlying the damage are not understood. A human brain bank targeting alcohol cases has been established in Sydney, Australia and provides fresh and frozen tissue for alcohol researchers. The tissues can be used to test hypotheses developed from structural neuropathological studies or from animal models and in vitro studies. Identification of reversible pathological changes and preventative medical approaches in alcoholism should enhance rehabilitation and treatment efforts, thereby mitigating debilitating morbidities and reducing mortality associated with this universal public health problem.
PMID: 17439928 [PubMed - in process

Blanco AM (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus&term=%22Blanco+AM%22%5BAuthor%5D),
Guerri C (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&itool=pubmed_AbstractPlus&term=%22Guerri+C%22%5BAuthor%5D).Centro de Investigacion Principe Felipe, Cell Pathology Laboratory, Avda. Autopista del Saler 16, 46013-Valencia, Spain.
The brain is one of the major target organs of ethanol actions, and its chronic and acute intoxication results in significant alterations in brain structure and function, and in some cases to neurodegeneration. Glial cells and Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are vital players in CNS immune response; dysregulation of this response plays an important role in brain damage and neurodegeneration. Ethanol has immunomodulatory effects and induces specific alterations in the TLRs response in many tissues. These actions depend on the cell type, ethanol dose and treatment duration, as well as the concomitant presence of pathogens and their characteristics. Recent findings indicate that low concentrations of ethanol (10 mM) promote inflammatory processes in brain and in glial cells by up-regulating cytokines and inflammatory mediators (iNOS, NO, COX-2), and by activating signaling pathways (IKK, MAPKs) and transcriptional factors (NF-kappaB, AP-1) implicated in inflammatory injury. TLR4/IL-1RI receptors may be involved in ethanol-mediated inflammatory signaling, since blocking these receptors abolishes the production of ethanol-induced inflammatory mediators and cell death. We propose that at low physiologically relevant concentrations, ethanol facilitates TLR4/IL-1RI recruitment into lipid rafts microdomains, leading to the activation and signaling of these receptors. In summary, current results suggest that TLR4/ IL-1RI are important targets of ethanol-induced inflammatory brain damage.



You can find in research just about whatever you want to find. I think the more important point is that even very small quantities of alchol alter your brain and lead to decreased inhibition. Can you see Jesus drinking alcohol? If Jesus came to save those who were lost why would he create something that would lead to more sin? Why is it so hard to believe that Jesus created the best grape juice the people had ever tasted?

"And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: [but] thou hast kept the good wine until now."

This vs could just as easily be interpreted to say that the men had already drunk their fill and desired no more. I just can't accept that Jesus would create something that would be the demise of someone else.

You may believe that alcohol is not bad for you and you can find links on the web to back up whatever you want to believe. But I Jesus would not even drink fermented drink when to help lessen the pain. Why not? It would not have made him "drunk" from drinking from a sponge would it?

matt 27:34 "They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted [thereof], he would not drink."

Note that mark calls it wine

Mark 15:23 "And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received [it] not."I disagree with you here and I think scripture is pretty clear that Jesus did not turn the water into grape juice. However, I given my thoughts on said topic and don't feel the need to rehash or defend what I've already posted.

For you, drinking alcohol is sin, so you shouldn't do it.

[AJB4]

Why is it so hard to believe that Jesus created the best grape juice the people had ever tasted?

The answer to your first question is, the people at the wedding were Jews. Jews drink, and always have. Sure, the grape juice would have tasted good, but Jews drink real wine. If the wine at the wedding wasn't in fact wine, the Jews would have been like "Where's the wine?" Alcohol has been a part of the Jewish culture forever, and Jesus was a Jew (by culture if not by religion). It just doesn't make sense (to me personally) that he would come along and suddenly decide that it was wrong - espcecially since back in Jesus' time, since they didn't have all of this 'research', people certainly didn't have the mentality that alcohol was wrong.

[AJB4]

*Deleted*

[annie1speed]

Hmmmmm. I still don't know how to insert quotes so my tpynig will have to do. ;)

AJB4: " The Jews drink and always have."

:sigh: :sigh:

Where to begin.

Can you give references for your generalization? Define drink. Do all Jews drink today? Does your statement imply that Gentiles did not drink? That Gentiles did not drink alcoholic beverages. Even if your statement is accurate, how does this imply that it is alright (not sinful) for us to drink today?

1) Back in Jesus' day, the lack of modern refrigeration and storage would have made it more likely that the wine was fermented and therefore alcoholic.

2) Consider the time of the grape harvest and the fact that they didn't enjoy the year-round availability at the local grocery store of fresh fruit from all over the world, and that makes another argument for fermented drink.

3) We could talk about Greek words and fermented vs unfermented also.

4) At the wedding in Cana, well - it was a wedding, a celebration, and there was the reference to holding on to the poorer wine until folks had already been drinking and wouldn't notice the difference.

5) I wonder what % alcohol the wine was back then. Today wineries use sophisticated methods for encouraging more complete fermentation of the sugars present. I understand some folks make their own potent brew but they also use some of these. Yeast or some other catalyst is added to help the fermentation process proceed. The juice is held at optimum temperature, etc. The argument could be made that yes the wine was old wine or fermented wine, but I believe the 'wine' of Jesus' time was not as potent as the wine of today.

All of these are compelling facts that indicate that the wine of Jesus' day was alcoholic except for times very near the grape harvest.

The question remains: is it sinful. I believe Jesus did not sin. Therefore Jesus did not sin by drinking wine in the Bible. So, if Jesus did not sin by drinking that implies one of two things:

1) It is not sinful to drink alcoholic beverages (just don't overindulge)
or
2) It is sinful to drink alcoholic beverages, therefore the wine that Jesus drank was non-alcoholic.

I can't think of any others. You may be able to....

If scientific research shows that the wine of today has debilitating effects even at low levels, we should not drink it.

The wine of Jesus' day was most often taken with meals which would have diluted its effects on the body. Couple that with the lower alcohol content, and you get extremely low effect or no effect on a person. And no sinful activity.

For those who drink alcoholic for the effect ( the lowered inhibitions, the relaxing properties, the buzz) whether in Jesus' time or today, it is a sinful activity.

The Bible does not paint the picture of our Lord and Savior sitting on the boat knocking back a few with His twelve fishing buddies, does it? Today, alcoholic drink is used just this way - and that is sinful.

I could get into some chemistry (I is a chemist2 :) ) and some calculations, but I don't think that is really necessary.

Is it a sin? Today, considering the alcohol content, the way it is used, and known physiological effects on our bodies. I believe the answer is yes.

One more thing and the main reason I started this post: generalizations about Jews or any other group are completely inappropriate and juvenile.

[cremi]

The wine of Jesus' day was most often taken with meals which would have diluted its effects on the body. Couple that with the lower alcohol content, and you get extremely low effect or no effect on a person. And no sinful activity.

For those who drink alcoholic for the effect ( the lowered inhibitions, the relaxing properties, the buzz) whether in Jesus' time or today, it is a sinful activity.

The Bible does not paint the picture of our Lord and Savior sitting on the boat knocking back a few with His twelve fishing buddies, does it? Today, alcoholic drink is used just this way - and that is sinful.

I could get into some chemistry (I is a chemist2 :) ) and some calculations, but I don't think that is really necessary.

Is it a sin? Today, considering the alcohol content, the way it is used, and known physiological effects on our bodies. I believe the answer is yes.

One more thing and the main reason I started this post: generalizations about Jews or any other group are completely inappropriate and juvenile.Haven't you made generalizations yourself here though? You seem to indicate that those who do drink any kind of alcoholic beverage, do so for
1) the buzz - or-
2) to relax and kick back
-and-
3) that the way alcohol is used today is so different than how the Jew used alcohol.

What about those that simply just enjoy having a glass of wine with a meal, with no other motive, other than enjoyment? No drunk driving, no relaxation intended, no hanging out with anyone, except maybe the family at home? What about alcohol(wine) being used in cooking, simply for flavor, but not for any other purpose?

See...generalizations can run both ways.

I think AJB4 was not trying to make the generalizations as you have interpreted them, but merely to state that the Jews did drink wine. It was part of their way of life.

That isn't a blanket statement however, to say that we now have free reign--not at all. It only addresses the idea that wine was not foreign to Jesus and that he did not specifically condemn the drinking of wine. We could argue all day long about whether he did or didn't and probably both arguements could be presented, but in some ways, it is a moot point.

The more important idea is whether he condemned the drinking of wine, which he clearly did not do, as he made wine for the wedding. If you want to use a someone in the bible to argue against drinking, then use John the Baptist. He did not partake of wine and the bible is clear on that. It is not so clear about Jesus though.

Even at the cross when he was offered wine, he did taste it--
John 19 :28-30
28Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty." 29A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. 30When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Matthew 27:34
34There they offered Jesus wine to drink, mixed with gall; but after tasting it, he refused to drink it.

But see, I still don't think this really pertains to the arguement at hand. If you think Jesus did not partake ever, than in these two verse, we see that he actually did taste it. Is he now defiled? Did he sin by having a taste? Some versions say wine vinegar, some say wine mixed with myrhh and some say wine mixed with gall. None of those sound real appealing to me to be drinking and is not 'proof' one way or the other as to whether Jesus did indeed drink wine or not.

Anyway...this arguement won't be settled here. It's been long discussed by scholars, theologians and scientists on both sides of the issue. I could pull up more verses about the instructions--not against drinking--but against drinking too much, but I'm sure they would not be read for what the intention was. I'll state again that I believe our job is to be conservative with ourselves and more liberal with others. We do need to judge between right and wrong, but when there is no clear condemnation in scripture, we need to be careful about labeling certain things as sin. They may indeed be sin for us individually, but not necessarily for everyone else.

[JDIBe]

Haven't you made generalizations yourself here though? You seem to indicate that those who do drink any kind of alcoholic beverage, do so for
1) the buzz - or-
2) to relax and kick back
-and-
3) that the way alcohol is used today is so different than how the Jew used alcohol.

What about those that simply just enjoy having a glass of wine with a meal, with no other motive, other than enjoyment? No drunk driving, no relaxation intended, no hanging out with anyone, except maybe the family at home? What about alcohol(wine) being used in cooking, simply for flavor, but not for any other purpose?

See...generalizations can run both ways.



Convenence Store Beer Sales Data (2005)
(http://www.npnweb.com/uploads/researchdata/2006/ConvenienceStoreData/0610_ccss.asp)

Alcoholic Beer Sales (% of total): 99.88%
Non-alcoholic Beer Sales (% of total): 0.12%


Come on, Cremi...:)

People drink alcohol for the buzz and relaxation. Ask the young man who said he was going to drink "a few beers every once in a while" because his youth minister did. Is he going to do it simply for the taste? If people drank beer simply for the taste and not the alcohol, (and they do not, because as any good German can tell you, American beer is just beer-flavored water...) why is 99.88% of beer sold alcoholic? I understand and agree, that the ethanol molecule in and of itself is not inherently evil, but Annie's generalization certainly is valid in this case.

If we are going to discuss the issue honestly, we really have to admit that people drink for the alcohol. The taste may be a side benefit, but the alcohol is the key. Otherwise, there would be a huge market segement for non-alcoholic wines and beers and there is not.

As for cooking, cooking evaporates the alcohol leaving the flavors behind, so I don't think anyone would have a problem with that.

[cremi]

Convenence Store Beer Sales Data (2005)
(http://www.npnweb.com/uploads/researchdata/2006/ConvenienceStoreData/0610_ccss.asp)

Alcoholic Beer Sales (% of total): 99.88%
Non-alcoholic Beer Sales (% of total): 0.12%


Come on, Cremi...:)

People drink alcohol for the buzz and relaxation. Ask the young man who said he was going to drink "a few beers every once in a while" because his youth minister did. Is he going to do it simply for the taste? If people drank beer simply for the taste and not the alcohol, (and they do not, because as any good German can tell you, American beer is just beer-flavored water...) why is 99.88% of beer sold alcoholic? I understand and agree, that the ethanol molecule in and of itself is not inherently evil, but Annie's generalization certainly is valid in this case.

If we are going to discuss the issue honestly, we really have to admit that people drink for the alcohol. The taste may be a side benefit, but the alcohol is the key. Otherwise, there would be a huge market segement for non-alcoholic wines and beers and there is not.

As for cooking, cooking evaporates the alcohol leaving the flavors behind, so I don't think anyone would have a problem with that.Maybe you are right about the beer---I wouldn't know.:) Is it possible that non-alcoholic beer tastes different than alcoholic beer? I do know (from personal past experience) that non-alcoholic wine tastes very different than regular wine. Either way, YOU are making judgements and assuming things about what people's motives are for drinking. Do you really have the ability to do that?

When it comes to wine, I know some people who do drink a glass of wine for the enjoyment of having it with a meal. The intention is not about getting a buzz or relaxing--but they like the taste of wine.

How is that different than cooking with wine?

[AJB4]

I think it also depends what country you live in as well. A lot of countries (particularly Middle Eastern ones and maybe Russia) Christians (though I don't really know for sure) have always drunken alcohol and have not condemned each other over there for the practice, because it's part of the culture...that plays an important part as well.

[Loveaboveall]

To throw in my last 2 cents worth:)

I understand that I am in the minority here and that is fine. I want to you guys to think about one last point. You are asking if drinking socially is a sin. What we really must ask ourselves is this... What is sin? Secondly then, does drinking socially fall into this category.

My definition of sin is this... getting down to the nitty gritty... Sin is selfishness, putting yourself above God or others. Thinking of your wants and needs before God or others. Most people would agree they like to drink for the way it makes them feel and then some like cremi for the way it tastes. If something has even a small chance of causing damage to your body, the temple of God, than how can you justify putting your wants above glorifying God? In reality that goes for anything in our fast food society-- cigarettes, caffeine, recreational drugs, lots of sugar, processed foods that we know now cause all kinds of problems including heart disease and cancer-- All these things we do because we like them and we want to continue partaking of them even though we know they are deleterious to our health and can break down the temple of God. The drugs and alcohol, in my opinon, are on another level because they have an effect on our brain that in effect limits the ability of the Holy Spirit to speak to us. When we know this to be true and we still do it, to me, this falls under the title of selfishness which is the essence of sin.

Just my 2 cents

[Amisk]

I think it also depends what country you live in as well. A lot of countries (particularly Middle Eastern ones and maybe Russia) Christians (though I don't really know for sure) have always drunken alcohol and have not condemned each other over there for the practice, because it's part of the culture...that plays an important part as well.

Middle East Countries drink alcohol? I question that. Most Middle East Countries are Muslim and my understanding is that Muslim's don't drink nor permit its manufacture within their borders.

I understand that in most of them the U.S. and other Western Countries have to demand that they be allow to bring alcohol in for their military people and their Embassy employees.

So to imply that Middle Eastern countries have always drank alcohol is wrong, after all Islam has been around since before Christianity (although not before if you add Judaism to the history of Christianity).

I might suggest that if you want to know if Christ made water into alcoholic wine, you'll have a chance to ask Him personally on judgement day. I hope your not red faced when you hear His answer. If you are, you will also come under judgement for those you have influenced to drink and they ended up victims of the tragic history of alcohol. If one stands against its use they will have no regrets if they are wrong.

[cremi]

Sin is selfishness, putting yourself above God or others. Thinking of your wants and needs before God or others. Most people would agree they like to drink for the way it makes them feel and then some like cremi for the way it tastes.Actually, I don't think I said whether or not I did/did not enjoy wine personally ( except in past tense:) )...just that I knew people who did.

Your definition is good. I would say sin is anything that misses the mark...which actually broadens the definition to include a great number of things that all of us need to watch out for.

[annie1speed]

Where did I make a generalization? Read my post again. I said 'FOR those who drink ... for the buzz etc. I don't consider that a generalization at all. It was a qualified statement. I did not say anyone who drinks alcoholic beverages does drink it for the buzz. Cremi, I'm thinkin you are a little sensitive about your wine.;) One more thing and I'll go back to my corner, have the Jews 'ALWAYS' drank? I'll ask it another way: has there been a time when we KNOW Jews did NOT drink? (Jeopardy music plays in the background) Maybe this question is better put on the Bible Trivia thread. I'll check back later to see you need a hint.

Annie

[AJB4]

I will also go back to my corner after this post - I don't believe this thread is going anywhere. I'll just say this though:

When it comes down to it, the fact is, there is nowhere in scripture that condemns the use (though not misuse) of alcohol.

The closest one can get to a scriptural argument against alcohol is Proverbs 23:29-35 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2023:29-35%20;&version=9;), but before one can use that as a legitimate argument against alcohol, I think that one has to consider a few points.

1) If that Old Testament-era Proverb is a legitimate argument against the use of alcohol altogether, why is alcohol presented in such a different light in the rest of the Old Testament? One doesn't have to read far in the OT to see that the use of alcohol was considered perfectly fine in the OT (Moses, author of the Old Law, even encouraged people in Deuteronomy to buy strong, alcoholic drink). There is absolutely zero evidence in the OT that God forbade or even discouraged the use of alcohol. The use of alcohol, as well as grape juice on some occasions, are both mentioned in the OT in a positive light and are not condemned or forbidden.

2) One must consider the level of drunkenness being described in the Proverb. Can an anti-alcohol Christian honestly say that one who enjoys the odd glass of wine or the odd beer with a meal (or whatever), have things such as bloodshot eyes, hallucinations of strange women, and not feel it when people beat or strike you? For symptoms like that, one has to be absolutely toasted.

Also, consider a few snippets from the passage: "They that tarry long at the wine", "When shall I wake? I will seek it yet again". Those are quite clearly alluding to addiction to the misuse of alcohol.

3) One must also consider the very nature of a proverb. A proverb is not intended to be canon law or dogma. They are merely wise sayings - advice, if you will. Kind of like the fables of Aesop.

Coupled with many things that are true about drinking back then (especially the fact that immediately after harvest time, due to the extreme heat, grapes would ferment), I believe that it paints a clear enough picture for me personally that those who wish to responsibly use alcohol are at liberty.

I'm not saying that abstaining from alcohol is not a good moral choice, but attempting to use the Bible to condemn it doesn't really get one very far.

It's a matter of conscience. If you believe it's a sin, then for you it is, but for those who can confidently say that they can drink alcohol safely and responsibly (and there are many people on these forums that do, or so they say), I believe that they are at liberty to do so.

[annie1speed]

Now that is a good post.- Annie

[cremi]

Cremi, I'm thinkin you are a little sensitive about your wine.;)

AnnieI am sensitive about that comment. It is unappreciated. I have not said I that I do or do not partake. Why would anyone assume I drink wine, simply because I have not taken the position that drinking is sinful?

[Amisk]

I am sensitive about that comment. It is unappreciated. I have not said I that I do or do not partake. Why would anyone assume I drink wine, simply because I have not taken the position that drinking is sinful?

People usually only defend or seek to convince others that the use of alcohol, tobacco, street drugs and other such things are okay when they themselves want to justify their own use of them.

[DanielRB]

Well said, AJB4. I think I'll retire from this thread as well, on that note.

In Christ,

Daniel

[ludovica]

The only place I have alcohol nowadays at church in partaking of communion wine

[DanielRB]

Peace, Amisk :wave:

Middle East Countries drink alcohol? I question that. Most Middle East Countries are Muslim and my understanding is that Muslim's don't drink nor permit its manufacture within their borders.

I understand that in most of them the U.S. and other Western Countries have to demand that they be allow to bring alcohol in for their military people and their Embassy employees.

So to imply that Middle Eastern countries have always drank alcohol is wrong, after all Islam has been around since before Christianity (although not before if you add Judaism to the history of Christianity).

Ok, I said I would retire, but I had to respond to this. Islam is younger than Christianity by about 600 years. Just a point of fact I want to clarify.

In Christ,

Daniel

[ludovica]

I think drinking is overrated personally

[JDIBe]

People usually only defend or seek to convince others that the use of alcohol, tobacco, street drugs and other such things are okay when they themselves want to justify their own use of them.
Guys, we need to ease up on Cremi a bit. (Even though I think some of us were just teasing.)

I do think it is fair to generalize for a GROUP of people in this case, but it is not fair to extend a generalization to each individual (after all, there might be some people who actually do buy Playboy for the articles...:) )

If Cremi says she knew people that just liked the taste, then I think she deserves the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. The fact that she says she has tasted wine before does not imply that she drinks now or has used it sinfully in the past.

But I do think that one would be hard-pressed to make the case that a significant portion of people in this country, with our culture, drink just for the taste. The empirical data does not bear that out, and I think this is the main objection by the non-alcohol people here.

I think we can all agree there are ways that alcohol can be used sinfully. We also agree it can be used in a way that is not sinful. The disagreement seems to be in between.

[cremi]

Guys, we need to ease up on Cremi a bit. (Even though I think some of us were just teasing.)

I do think it is fair to generalize for a GROUP of people in this case, but it is not fair to extend a generalization to each individual (after all, there might be some people who actually do buy Playboy for the articles...:) )

If Cremi says she knew people that just liked the taste, then I think she deserves the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. The fact that she says she has tasted wine before does not imply that she drinks now or has used it sinfully in the past.

But I do think that one would be hard-pressed to make the case that a significant portion of people in this country, with our culture, drink just for the taste. The empirical data does not bear that out, and I think this is the main objection by the non-alcohol people here.

I think we can all agree there are ways that alcohol can be used sinfully. We also agree it can be used in a way that is not sinful. The disagreement seems to be in between.
Thank you for that.:) With that, I'll say no more on this thread.

[Amisk]

The only place I have alcohol nowadays at church in partaking of communion wine


Why would a church use alcohol in their communion wine? After all one taste of alcoholic communion wine may well be the means of Turning a alcoholic convert back into a drunk.

The Apostle Paul speaks to this issue when he warned the Corinthians to avoid eating meat offered to idols.
We read: I Corinthians 8:5 -"For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.

But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.

But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak.

For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;

And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?

But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.

Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend."

While the substance that lead to the sin may not be the same the end result is the same.

Is the church which is determined to use alcoholic wine trying to put some redemptive power in the wine itself? If so that preaching a different gospel than what Christ and the apostles preached.

[Amisk]

Peace, Amisk :wave:



Ok, I said I would retire, but I had to respond to this. Islam is younger than Christianity by about 600 years. Just a point of fact I want to clarify.

In Christ,

Daniel

OKay Daniel, I stand correction. According to the Islamic History (Chronology) Islam came into being in the 6th Century (500-599) C.E. If that is true then I was wrong.:blush:

[ludovica]

Why would a church use alcohol in their communion wine? After all one taste of alcoholic communion wine may well be the means of Turning a alcoholic convert back into a drunk.

The Apostle Paul speaks to this issue when he warned the Corinthians to avoid eating meat offered to idols.
We read: I Corinthians 8:5 -"For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.

But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.

But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak.

For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;

And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?

But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.

Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend."

While the substance that lead to the sin may not be the same the end result is the same.

Is the church which is determined to use alcoholic wine trying to put some redemptive power in the wine itself? If so that preaching a different gospel than what Christ and the apostles preached. How extraordinary.... The alcohol in the wine is important. Jesus chose wine, not water.. he turned water into wine even.
I know that in my diocese any Church that opted for non alcoholoic wine would be in trouble with the Bishop...as wine is absolutely central to the service.
Its quite strong wine too, more like Port or Sherry. I have discussed this with the vicar and he says that it is important and thats good enough for me. I believe that people who are unable to take wine just mimic the action of drinking as a symbol

[Loveaboveall]

Ludovica,

I would recommend the book by charles chinniquy "Fifty Years in the Church of Rome" in which he speaks in depth of the alcohol problem and its misuse and his work in trying to turn people away from the use of alcohol.

[Splayd]

My understanding is that Alcoholics Anonymous don't even have a problem with their members having communion with alcoholic wine. In fact it's often even encouraged, despite the alcohol.

Regardless, many churches now use non-alcoholic wine and/or grape juice. I don't see any of them really being a problem for communion though.

[ludovica]

My understanding is that Alcoholics Anonymous don't even have a problem with their members having communion with alcoholic wine. In fact it's often even encouraged, despite the alcohol.

Regardless, many churches now use non-alcoholic wine and/or grape juice. I don't see any of them really being a problem for communion though. I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to take Communion with any degree of seriousness if I was expected to pretend that grape juice was wine. I think it is contrary to scripture

[Splayd]

Ummm... You don't need to pretend. They're the same thing. They drank the fruit of the vine. Of course it would ferment over time, but it was grape juice nonetheless.

The distinction really isn't made in any case, though it's commonly understood that NT Christians probably did use fermented grape juice. Inversely, when Jews took the Nazarite vow they abstained from any and all grapes whether fermented or not. In their time and culture it all amounted to the same thing either way.

Peace

[ludovica]

Ummm... You don't need to pretend. They're the same thing. They drank the fruit of the vine. Of course it would ferment over time, but it was grape juice nonetheless.

The distinction really isn't made in any case, though it's commonly understood that NT Christians probably did use fermented grape juice. Inversely, when Jews took the Nazarite vow they abstained from any and all grapes whether fermented or not. In their time and culture it all amounted to the same thing either way.

Peace I disagree. .. Old wine, new wineskins etc make it quite clear IMO that there is a differentiation between fermented and unfermented. Wine might start out as grape juice, but they are definitely not the same thing

[Izdaari]

But I do think that one would be hard-pressed to make the case that a significant portion of people in this country, with our culture, drink just for the taste. The empirical data does not bear that out, and I think this is the main objection by the non-alcohol people here.I'm not so sure about that. Craft brewed beers (microbrews) have achieved a very high level of popularity, and aside from social status, the only reason to buy them over the mass-market stuff is because they taste better. That's why I buy them. If it were a matter of what works best for getting drunk, well, there are cheap ice or high gravity beers for that -- more alcohol for less money -- but they don't taste very good. There is a pretty large community of beer connoisseurs, and that's all about the taste.

Ditto for wine, though I'm not into wine that much. That is, I like wine, but I'm not very familiar with the wine connoisseur community. My wine shopping is largely a matter of bargain hunting, as I can't afford expensive wines anyway. But I've had very good luck with finding pleasant, drinkable, inexpensive wines.

[Izdaari]

How extraordinary.... The alcohol in the wine is important. Jesus chose wine, not water.. he turned water into wine even.
I know that in my diocese any Church that opted for non alcoholoic wine would be in trouble with the Bishop...as wine is absolutely central to the service.
Its quite strong wine too, more like Port or Sherry. I have discussed this with the vicar and he says that it is important and thats good enough for me. I believe that people who are unable to take wine just mimic the action of drinking as a symbolIt's important to me, though I can't explain why. Even though I grew up with churches that used grape juice for communion, it just doesn't feel right to me.

[JDIBe]

I'm not so sure about that. Craft brewed beers (microbrews) have achieved a very high level of popularity, and aside from social status, the only reason to buy them over the mass-market stuff is because they taste better. That's why I buy them. If it were a matter of what works best for getting drunk, well, there are cheap ice or high gravity beers for that - more alcohol for less money -- but they don't taste very good. There is a pretty large community of beer connoisseurs, and that's all about the taste.

Ditto for wine, though I'm not into wine that much. That is, I like wine, but I'm not very familiar with the wine connoisseur community. My wine shopping is largely a matter of bargain hunting, as I can't afford expensive wines anyway. But I've had very good luck with finding pleasant, drinkable, inexpensive wines.



If by "high popularity" you mean 3% of beer sold, well.....ok, and I think if you took the alcohol out, the numbers would probably trend toward what we see with the non-alcoholic beer sales.

There could be exceptions to the rule, (that's why it's called a generalization) but I feel the large majority of people like alcohol for the way it makes them feel. Taste is secondary.

[Izdaari]

If by "high popularity" you mean 3% of beer sold, well.....ok, and I think if you took the alcohol out, the numbers would probably trend toward what we see with the non-alcoholic beer sales.

There could be exceptions to the rule, (that's why it's called a generalization) but I feel the large majority of people like alcohol for the way it makes them feel. Taste is secondary.I would bet those figures are pretty old, and the trend has been upward. Microbrews and imports take up vastly more than 3% of the shelf space in the beer section of supermarkets. I'd estimate something like 20-25% in the Seattle area. That'd never happen if they weren't selling well.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would sometimes buy non-alcoholic beers if any of them tasted good. I haven't yet found one that does.

[JDIBe]

I would bet those figures are pretty old, and the trend has been upward. Microbrews and imports take up vastly more than 3% of the shelf space in the beer section of supermarkets. I'd estimate something like 20-25% in the Seattle area. That'd never happen if they weren't selling well.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would sometimes buy non-alcoholic beers if any of them tasted good. I haven't yet found one that does.
"About 50 percent of the beer consumed in the country is produced by Anheuser Busch. Miller is second and Coors ranks third. Pabst often is listed as fourth, although Miller holds the rights to the brands of that former brewery.

About 11 percent of the American market is made up of imported beers. So-called "craft" or micro-brewery products make up about 3 percent."

Source: Wisbusiness.com
WisBiz In-Depth: City Brewing of La Crosse
7/27/2004

http://www.wisbusiness.com/index.iml?Article=20750



Sometimes???? :) :) ;)

[Izdaari]

"About 50 percent of the beer consumed in the country is produced by Anheuser Busch. Miller is second and Coors ranks third. Pabst often is listed as fourth, although Miller holds the rights to the brands of that former brewery.

About 11 percent of the American market is made up of imported beers. So-called "craft" or micro-brewery products make up about 3 percent."

Source: Wisbusiness.com
WisBiz In-Depth: City Brewing of La Crosse
7/27/2004

http://www.wisbusiness.com/index.iml?Article=20750

Ok, 11% + 3% = 14%. That's more reasonable. People buy imports for the same reason they buy micros: they're looking for better taste. Same reason they buy super premium beers by the big brewers like Anheuser-Busch. I'd add that in too if I had a number for it.

Sometimes???? :) :) ;)Yeah, sometimes. I never claimed to be one of those who like beer only for the taste. :)

[JDIBe]

[F Sans MS]Ok, 11% + 3% = 14%. That's more reasonable. People buy imports for the same reason they buy micros: they're looking for better taste.[/FONT] [F Sans MS]Same reason they buy super premium beers by the big brewers like Anheuser-Busch. I'd add that in too if I had a number for it.[/FONT]

[F Sans MS]Yeah, sometimes. I never claimed to be one of those who like beer only for the taste. :)[/FONT]

....And I would humbly suggest the large majority of those 14% above probably feel the same way....:)

[Izdaari]

....And I would humbly suggest the large majority of those 14% above probably feel the same way....:)
I'm sure that's true. I don't see it as a problem.

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- Benjamin Franklin

^_^

[FreeinChrist]

I need to post a reminder of this rule:

1.4 Congregational Areas

You may post in any of the Congregational Forums if you agree with the contents of the Nicene Creed and the Trinitarian nature of God, but you may not argue or debate with members of particular denominations and groups in their congregational areas unless you are a member of that particular denomination or group.


If you are not a part of the Restoration Movement, you are not allowed to debate here. Fellowship posts are welcome.

[neonsurfboard]

Hey i read on here a few people saying that you decide if alcohol is a sin for you personally or not. Im just learning but it doesnt really some to line up with other things ive read from the bible. Can we choose whats a sin to us? That seems to defeat the purpose if were allowed to pick and choose what WE want to live by, but please correct me if im wrong or just misinterprating. Thanks

[annie1speed]

Welcome Neonsurfboard,

Your point is a good one. What does the Bible have to say about it should be the first question when we talk about what is right and wrong. Thanks for reminding us.

Annie

[Splayd]

Hey neonsurfboard,

I appreciate your point but scripture really doesn't address this topic. It addresses getting drunk and I suspect we pretty much all agree that getting drunk is a sin, but it doesn't ever say anything against drinking generally.

Interestingly, we do find in scripture plenty of times that they did in fact drink wine. During the Passover alone (which was commanded of the Jews) there are 4 cups of wine throughout the evening. We also know that Paul commended the use of a little wine for one's health.

Realistically, I have to conclude from scripture that drinking is not a sin but getting drunk is. That's it... BUT I also recognise that for some people (esp. alcoholics) the use of a little alcohol would in fact be sinful because it's understood that it will lead to drunkeness. Surely then it must be recognised that even IF it's not a sin generally it can still be a sin individually.

The same is true of most things really.

[cremi]

Hey i read on here a few people saying that you decide if alcohol is a sin for you personally or not. Im just learning but it doesnt really some to line up with other things ive read from the bible. Can we choose whats a sin to us? That seems to defeat the purpose if were allowed to pick and choose what WE want to live by, but please correct me if im wrong or just misinterprating. ThanksYou might have gotten some of that from my posts, but that isn't quite what I meant. Splayd pretty much summed up what I was trying to say earlier.

Also, I think if you read Romans 14, the principle in this passage applies to not only this topic, but many other issues that people disagree on.

Romans 14 (NASB)




1 Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgement on his opinions.
2One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only.
3The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him.
4Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
5One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.
6He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.
7For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself;
8for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord's.
9For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
10But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.
11For it is written,
"AS I LIVE, SAYS THE LORD,