Alcohol

[Guest shiloh357]

Strong's translates the Hebrew word Skekar as "Strong Drink" in every passage and has people buy "strong drink" as part of their tithe.."what ever you heart desires God says"...A TOTAL MISTRANSLATION BY KJV and STRONGS. But they were drinkers so it had to be strong drink...not.

I speak and read Hebrew and Strongs is not wrong. First of all the word used in Deut. 14:26 is uvah-sh'kar and it is used in more than one place to refer to strong drink. The same word is used for one of the kinds of drinks the Levites were not allowed to partake of.

In Psalm 69:12, drunkard is known as "sotei sh'kar. There are numerous ways to show that this is a reference to an intoxicant.

Yes, I agree the word is used as a strong drink. And yes, it is used as a drunk.

Now can you prove it is not used in any other way? Is it a generic word like those for spirit and wind in the NT? I believe it can refer to any of the products from the date palm sap. What is the word from the non alcoholic drink?

Modern Hebrew is not DIRECTLY connected to ancient Hebrew correct? They differ some correct?

We have proved Wine( Yayin Heb) can be used for grape juice or an alcoholic drink so why could the word next to it. Makes perfect sense.

I guess what you are failing to take into account is that Hebrew is a smaller language than English and is in fact, smaller than most other languages. That means that words in Hebrew often play double duty or triple duty, etc. One word in Hebrew might have 10 or usages.

As for modern Hebrew... If King David were alive today, he would be able to walk down the streets of Jerusaelm and be perfectly understood by any modern Jew living today. Even with our modern technology, they simply expand the meaning of current words. For example the ancient Hebrew word for "arrow" is used today to refer to "rocket" or "missile" or "ammunition." The ancient word for "bow" is used for "gun," or "rifle" etc. Modern Hebrew does not differ signifcantly enough from ancient Hebrew to claim that they are not directly connected. Hebrew is Hebrew.

Now to the reference in Deut. 14:26. I realize it is used in other ways, but that is really a pointless issue to bring up. Context determines its usage in Deut. 14:26. Just because you find it used in reference to nonintoxicating drinks as well, does NOT mean you have the right to apply it that way in Deut. 14:26. The text demands it be understood as referring to liquor or strong drink. Whether it is used another way in other verses is irrelevant because the Bible offers no condemnation of consumption of the alchoholic version.

The problem arises when people try to interpret their personal aversion to alchohol into the Bible to make the Bible reflect their own personal views on alcohol consumption. The Bible does not condemn the consumption of alchohol, but only the irresponsible overindulgence of it.

The same is true Yayin. Again, that is only because Hebrew is smaller. Yayin refers both to unfermented and ferment juice but that really doens't help your position. Where it DOES refer to fermented juice there is no condemnation of its consumption in the Bible.

Jesus turned water into wine in Cana and the Greek does not indicate it was anything other than real wine. In fact, the text clearly indicates that they wine that Jesus and the other guests had been drinking prior to the miracle was also real wine. Even Jesus partook of real wine.

Paul, in Romans 14 admonishes us not to drink wine in the presence of weaker bretheren but to does not condemn the consumption of it otherwise, except in excess.

[Smalcald]

Paul, in Romans 14 admonishes us not to drink wine in the presence of weaker bretheren but to does not condemn the consumption of it otherwise, except in excess.

Yes I think that is what I wrestle with. Certainly I totally agree with your analysis of scripture in regard to wine being wine and that scripture does not condemn this substance in and of itself, just its overindulgence and drunkenness. However in this culture we have in the US, it seems that if we live in a culture of excess and overindulgence, it is possible that as Christians in this particular context it may be better to abstain from drink in many if not most circumstances. We are surrounded so to speak with weaker brethren. Where a Christian living in Europe or Israel where alcohol is not seen mainly as a tool to get ripped but a normal part of a meal and diet; that Christian may not be so bound?

[Ovedya]

The problem arises when people try to interpret their personal aversion to alchohol into the Bible to make the Bible reflect their own personal views on alcohol consumption.

This is really what I was getting to with regard to the whole "Timothy not being a pastor" thing. It wasn't intended as a distraction so much as it was to point out that Servant's tendency is to bring his own presumptions to the Scriptures. There are sects within Christendom which teach that all alcohol is a sin. Therefore wine in the Bible must have not been alcoholic, because Jesus would never have sinned at the wedding in Cana. It goes on and on, and on, and on, with no resolution. Fact is, yes, there were a lot of different types of wine. The thick stuff, the really watered down stuff, and perhaps wine that was not fermented much. However, any way you slice it, wine is wine, regardless of the percentage of alcohol. We need to understand this fact of Scripture and move on with our lives, and not be so darned superstitious about things like this. If one person believes wine is a sin then wine is a sin to that person. Otherwise, there's not going to be any convincing of those others who just don't care one way or another.

[Axxman]

This is really what I was getting to with regard to the whole "Timothy not being a pastor" thing. It wasn't intended as a distraction so much as it was to point out that Servant's tendency is to bring his own presumptions to the Scriptures. There are sects within Christendom which teach that all alcohol is a sin. Therefore wine in the Bible must have not been alcoholic, because Jesus would never have sinned at the wedding in Cana. It goes on and on, and on, and on, with no resolution. Fact is, yes, there were a lot of different types of wine. The thick stuff, the really watered down stuff, and perhaps wine that was not fermented much. However, any way you slice it, wine is wine, regardless of the percentage of alcohol. We need to understand this fact of Scripture and move on with our lives, and not be so darned superstitious about things like this. If one person believes wine is a sin then wine is a sin to that person. Otherwise, there's not going to be any convincing of those others who just don't care one way or another.

Geesh...I was going right along in agreement with you. I thought we had a real breakthrough on this topic. But then you do what people always do. You stopped short. I simply DO NOT understand what people's aversion is to saying that some wine in the bible may have been unfermented. Why does all wine have to have some degree of fermentation? Was it really so hard to admit that along side of thick stuff and watered down stuff...there might have actually been just juice....lol. I simply do not get it.

Wine is not wine. Wine isn't even always a beverage. Wine is sometimes food...it is sometimes juice...it is sometimes fermented. This is not just a scriptural fact...it is a historical fact. Once a person understands the facts...it makes more sense. At least to me it did.

[Ovedya]

This is really what I was getting to with regard to the whole "Timothy not being a pastor" thing. It wasn't intended as a distraction so much as it was to point out that Servant's tendency is to bring his own presumptions to the Scriptures. There are sects within Christendom which teach that all alcohol is a sin. Therefore wine in the Bible must have not been alcoholic, because Jesus would never have sinned at the wedding in Cana. It goes on and on, and on, and on, with no resolution. Fact is, yes, there were a lot of different types of wine. The thick stuff, the really watered down stuff, and perhaps wine that was not fermented much. However, any way you slice it, wine is wine, regardless of the percentage of alcohol. We need to understand this fact of Scripture and move on with our lives, and not be so darned superstitious about things like this. If one person believes wine is a sin then wine is a sin to that person. Otherwise, there's not going to be any convincing of those others who just don't care one way or another.

Geesh...I was going right along in agreement with you. I thought we had a real breakthrough on this topic. But then you do what people always do. You stopped short. I simply DO NOT understand what people's aversion is to saying that some wine in the bible may have been unfermented. Why does all wine have to have some degree of fermentation? Was it really so hard to admit that along side of thick stuff and watered down stuff...there might have actually been just juice....lol. I simply do not get it.

Wine is not wine. Wine isn't even always a beverage. Wine is sometimes food...it is sometimes juice...it is sometimes fermented. This is not just a scriptural fact...it is a historical fact. Once a person understands the facts...it makes more sense. At least to me it did.

So I stopped short with "some wine" instead of "all wine," which is what you believe?

Wine is not food, contrary to your argument. Once you boil it down into a "food" you don't call it wine, you call it "grape jam."

Wine in the Bible is fermented. Wine is wine

I just can't understand why you've dug your heels in so deeply on this subject when, in fact, the Bible does not evidence your argument. Are you afraid of wine or something? Or are you just afraid that you might be just a smidge wrong?

[Axxman]

So I stopped short with "some wine" instead of "all wine," which is what you believe?

Wine is not food, contrary to your argument. Once you boil it down into a "food" you don't call it wine, you call it "grape jam."

Wine in the Bible is fermented. Wine is wine

I just can't understand why you've dug your heels in so deeply on this subject when, in fact, the Bible does not evidence your argument. Are you afraid of wine or something? Or are you just afraid that you might be just a smidge wrong?

I'll give you the "some" wine...but I don't bellieve that "all" wine in the bible can be defined as anything. The fact is, and its been pointed out before, that the word "oinos" (wine, in the bible) has multiple meanings...multiple. Your comments that making wine into food changes the word is flawed. If you change the grape into something else (like vinegar) there could be another word to describe the product. However, if you are talking about the grape itself in any form, or part, they use the SAME WORD. A grape is wine. A raisin is wine. Fermented is wine. Juice is wine. Grape skins are wine. Grape seeds are wine. You get the point. The word "wine" in the bible literally means any part of the grape, at any stage of development. You cannot narrow it down to whatever you want just because it works for you.

LoL...I am not afraid of wine. Why would I be. I don't accuse you of being addicted to wine because of your position, so lets be fair. I am also 100% certain that I am not wrong about the word "wine." There is simply too much on my side of that debate, historically and scripturally. However, the usage of the word "wine" in the bible is certainly up for debate...and that is why a proper understanding of the word "wine" is important. As long as people refuse to see the word "wine" properly, they are pitching from second base. (baseball analogy...lol)

[Servant54]

I guess what you are failing to take into account is that Hebrew is a smaller language than English and is in fact, smaller than most other languages. That means that words in Hebrew often play double duty or triple duty, etc. One word in Hebrew might have 10 or usages.

I say...

No, this is not what I am failing to see it is what the moderation side of this debate has failed to see..many uses for one word.. GENERIC WORDS!!

Thank You This is wonderful!

As for modern Hebrew... If King David were alive today, he would be able to walk down the streets of Jerusaelm and be perfectly understood by any modern Jew living today. Even with our modern technology, they simply expand the meaning of current words. For example the ancient Hebrew word for "arrow" is used today to refer to "rocket" or "missile" or "ammunition." The ancient word for "bow" is used for "gun," or "rifle" etc. Modern Hebrew does not differ signifcantly enough from ancient Hebrew to claim that they are not directly connected. Hebrew is Hebrew.

Now to the reference in Deut. 14:26. I realize it is used in other ways, but that is really a pointless issue to bring up. Context determines its usage in Deut. 14:26. Just because you find it used in reference to nonintoxicating drinks as well, does NOT mean you have the right to apply it that way in Deut. 14:26. The text demands it be understood as referring to liquor or strong drink.

I say..

Thank you again for saying it CAN be used in other ways! This is great!

You say context determines the usage..again I do cart wheels thank you... but then you make a very strange statement "THE TEXT DEMANDS IT BE UNDERSTOOD AS REFERRING TO LIQUOR OR STRONG DRINK"

Could you explain why? Your statement does not make sense. Do you know something we do not about Duet 14:26

We are not talking what the bible demands abstinence or moderation at this point...only what this verse is saying, once we determine that we can take the sum of all verse and develop a verdict.

The problem arises when people try to interpret their personal aversion to alchohol into the Bible to make the Bible reflect their own personal views on alcohol consumption. The Bible does not condemn the consumption of alchohol, but only the irresponsible overindulgence of it.

I Say...

This is a two way street..you have just proved that by your last statement

The same is true Yayin. Again, that is only because Hebrew is smaller. Yayin refers both to unfermented and ferment juice but that really doesn't help your position. Where it DOES refer to fermented juice there is no condemnation of its consumption in the Bible.

I say...

Cartwheels again, Thank You for this information in your first statement.

With your logic then we can have more that one wife..the bible does not condemn it where it mentions it..(I am not going to tell my wife just yet though ) Bible does not condemn Noah's drunkeness or Lots..the list goes on

Jesus turned water into wine in Cana and the Greek does not indicate it was anything other than real wine. In fact, the text clearly indicates that they wine that Jesus and the other guests had been drinking prior to the miracle was also real wine. Even Jesus partook of real wine.

I say...

Again your going against your own words..the Greek does not indicate whether it was alcoholic or not.CONTEXT does. You have NO proof Jesus drank alcohol period.

Paul, in Romans 14 admonishes us not to drink wine in the presence of weaker brethren but to does not condemn the consumption of it otherwise, except in excess.I say...

Again you assume this refers to alcoholic wine, it also mentions eating, I believe it is just WHATEVER you eat or drink, it does not say he "does not condemn consuption of it otherwise" period. all assumption on your part.

I thank you for your information, I am actually putting this post in my file and will use your words in future discussions on this subject You have helped us understand greatly Blessings!

[Servant54]

Ovedya says..

However, any way you slice it, wine is wine, regardless of the percentage of alcohol. We need to understand this fact of Scripture and move on with our lives, and not be so darned superstitious about things like this.

shiloh357 says..

The same is true Yayin. Again, that is only because Hebrew is smaller. Yayin refers both to unfermented and ferment juice but that really doesn't help your position.

Meeting time

[Ovedya]

Ovedya says..

However, any way you slice it, wine is wine, regardless of the percentage of alcohol. We need to understand this fact of Scripture and move on with our lives, and not be so darned superstitious about things like this.

shiloh357 says..

The same is true Yayin. Again, that is only because Hebrew is smaller. Yayin refers both to unfermented and ferment juice but that really doesn't help your position.

Meeting time

OUr stements do not conflict. Shiloh357 and I agree, just in different ways. If the Hebrew language uses terms interchangeably just as the English language, then "wine is wine" does not conflict with Shiloh's argument.

[Servant54]

Ovedya says..

However, any way you slice it, wine is wine, regardless of the percentage of alcohol. We need to understand this fact of Scripture and move on with our lives, and not be so darned superstitious about things like this.

shiloh357 says..

The same is true Yayin. Again, that is only because Hebrew is smaller. Yayin refers both to unfermented and ferment juice but that really doesn't help your position.

Meeting time

OUr stements do not conflict. Shiloh357 and I agree, just in different ways. If the Hebrew language uses terms interchangeably just as the English language, then "wine is wine" does not conflict with Shiloh's argument.

So to clarify then you agree with the statement that some wine in the bible could have been totally without alcohol and we would only know by the context they are in or in fact not know at all in some context.

Correct?