Alcohol

[Believer1997]

But we are not all the same....and someone who has a problem with alcohol should not invite the temptation...and I should be careful not be a stumbling stone to that person by enjoying my liberty in their presence because that wouldn't be "love" towards my brother/sister.

yod, you do realize, don't you, that the above comment is going to cause someone to try and make the point that you are unknowingly being a stumbling block to others if you are seen sipping a glass of wine at a restaurant?

of course, that also means that you're most likely being a stumbling block to someone who might see you eating a pork chop.

OR having ice cream....

[Guest LadyC]

But we are not all the same....and someone who has a problem with alcohol should not invite the temptation...and I should be careful not be a stumbling stone to that person by enjoying my liberty in their presence because that wouldn't be "love" towards my brother/sister.

yod, you do realize, don't you, that the above comment is going to cause someone to try and make the point that you are unknowingly being a stumbling block to others if you are seen sipping a glass of wine at a restaurant?

of course, that also means that you're most likely being a stumbling block to someone who might see you eating a pork chop.

OR having ice cream....

or a double cheeseburger with fries and a soda....

[other one]

BTW the wine in Proverbs 23:31 to a person who is familiar with making wine knows that cup is infected with a very toxic bacteria that usually results in death if injested. Go to the origional language to fully understand what it's talking about. The going down smooth part is not what it's really talking about in later translations. It's the moving itself alright and sparkling that should make you pour it out and whatever it came in and whatever you poured it into. You will find that terminlogy in the KJV.

So what you are saying is this is not a warning about drinking or drunkeness but this is a warning about drink poison.

I have heard this before and since we all know is that grape juice is not poison and finished wine is not poison I would have a hard time believing something in between is

Do we know of anyone who has died from this...I thought not.

Later translations? What does that mean? They say pretty much the sane thing.

Maybe a little proof to back up your "fact"..I have a hard time with these statements. I believe this is totally untrue.

Actually yes we do..... well at least those who have played around with making wine do. One of the major california wineries sold some wine that contained this bacteria and as I remember two or three people died from it and it made several others sick before they could recall it. Happened about 35 or so years ago. I find it intereting that you didn't bother to look up the scripture, for they do not say the same thing.

I don't know if I can find anything that would satisfy you on the bad wine, but if I can find something still available I'll post it.

[stacey c]

But we are not all the same....and someone who has a problem with alcohol should not invite the temptation...and I should be careful not be a stumbling stone to that person by enjoying my liberty in their presence because that wouldn't be "love" towards my brother/sister.

yod, you do realize, don't you, that the above comment is going to cause someone to try and make the point that you are unknowingly being a stumbling block to others if you are seen sipping a glass of wine at a restaurant?

of course, that also means that you're most likely being a stumbling block to someone who might see you eating a pork chop.

I agree Lady C

But I have a question and hope it's not too much off topic.

Really how much responsability falls on the one who is the supposed stumbling block? Should that one really have no such frredom in Christ or his/her life for fear of causing somelse to lose their walk or be cast into the role of judging.

Ican take a certain amount of responsability, but for others to lay blame for their fallings because so and so did it, IMO is not what that means.

[other one]

Good night Agnes... has this thread run it's course or what???

This thread will never run it's course....

[Guest yod]

I think this, and baptism, and Martin Luther are the topics that go flaming out the longest...

[anitarose]

Good night Agnes... has this thread run it's course or what???

No, these threads never run their course when legalism is involved.

Legalism is the gift that keeps on giving.

Hmmm...and all this time I thought it was an STD that was the gift that kept on giving.....

a.

[Axxman]

Using the religious slur "legalism" doesn't prove anyone's point. Its a cheap shot...its unbiblical...its unneccesary.

While I certainly can't agree with everything Servant is saying...it seems that most (not all) of you are desperate to attack him on ANY point he makes...besides the biblical and historical use of the word "wine." The reason this thread is so long isn't because of the topic of alcohol. Its because the majority of you are latching onto off topic comments about his uncle, judgementalism, eternal security, or street ministry. This thread would be under 20 pages if it stayed on topic....so son't blame us if the thread is too long.

[Servant54]

It does not say that Elders are to abstain. That is a notion that you are placing upon the text that is not there. You are interpolating it. You are stating something as fact that is not fact.

Titus 1:6-9 6 An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 7 Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless-- not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8 Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 9 He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

It says not given to drunkeness, not that he is to abstain. You are adding something to the scripture that is not there.

We have already gone over this but I need to memorize it anyway.....the Greek reads "not given to" in Timothy 3:3 and the Greek in Titus 1:7 reads " not one beside wine"

Your translation is not a transliteration but a poor paraphrase of what is really said. We need to check the Greek if we are going to form doctrine from a passage.

Again every Christian is called to be "Not given to drunkenness" so even baby Christians could be elders if that was the only rule in becoming one..it makes no sense.

No one has answered why Timothy was abstaining when Paul said take a little wine for stomach sake..care to take a stab at it?

Thank you for answering kindly to me.

Edited May 22, 2009 by Servant54

[Servant54]

But when you go a step farther than what the scriptures actually say and try to suggest that abstaining is the only righteous and biblical position; and then make the presumption that Yeshua must have also abstained because this is the only high-ground moral position which appeals to your human sense of reason...then I will have to step in and point out that this is the very literal definition of "legalism"

You have been intellectually honest on most points up to here so I want to ask you a direct question about your personal philosophical view.

Do you honestly believe that all people get drunk on one glass of wine...especially when its sipped over a long period of time? What if they drink a cup an hour for 4 hours as the Passover was done (it normally took a much longer period of time)

Elders are to abstain (they deal with spiritual matters, higher office)

Again I ask....where does it say that in the Bible? I totally understand that is the "tradition" of your denomination...and why. But lets go to the real authority, the one you call "the perfect" instead, shall we?

I would get bored if everyone agreed with me but I'm going to keep trying until MG comes out of the liberal closet! Thanks for the opportunity to type this response to an anonymous name on a computer screen.

I am still having a hard time that no one understands the typology of the passover. Jesus did not see corruption, he died and was bodily resurrected before his body rotted, he knew no sin.

These two facts show that "pure juice", "fruit of the vine" were the elements of the passover as well as Christian communion. Alcoholic wine is made when the natural fruit DECAYS from sugar to alcohol, like birds getting drunk on rotten fruit. Also the leavening action is a type of sin..a little leaven leavens the whole lump, that is why we use non fermented(leavened) bread for communion. Chrsit had no sin..no leaven.

Now Jews of today do things different..but that does not make it right..they are backslid and we are not to get doctrine from today's backslid Jews. They as a group have rejected Christ (unless you are talking about Christian Jews.)

So someone who insists on saying the passover or the communion has alcoholic wine just does not understand what they symbolize at all.

My Savior has no sin and my communion wine has no alcohol.

Again Jesus is the KING of KING'S and kings are not to drink alcohol Pro31 because they could pervert the law..who greater than Jesus in giving out the law..He was the ultimate law giver and it was a spiritual law to decided who went to heaven and hell not just who died and who did not as regular kings. This is very simple logic..no one should miss this.

We are also kings revelation says..is it not as important that we not drink that we might pervert the law? Are non abstainers saying it is ok to get buzzed( not drunk mind you) before going street witness....having alcohol on your breath..you know just having a quick one before being in a crowd so you can overcome fears of being before people.

Is there something wrong with this picture?

I witness ever where I go..and that is why I do not drink..I do not want to be "buzzed" or have booze breath answering salvation questions at some party, park or restaurant of some young person.

Edited May 22, 2009 by Servant54