Christians and drinking

[Still Alive]

1 hour ago, DWH2003 said:

Are you saying ALL sex is lawful (sodomy, fornication, adultery, etc), in moderation?

No. That's why I said "with my wife". I was trying to make it crystal clear and remove all doubt.

[Still Alive]

1 hour ago, DWH2003 said:

@The_Patriot2018 and others on John 2

In John 2 Jesus turned water into "wine" (Gk oinos, Strong 3631).  Was this alcohol or grape juice.  The same word (oinos, Strong 3631) is used in Matthew 9:17, "Neither do men put new wine into old wine-skins: else the skins burst..." See the definition of the word in Vine's Expository Dictionary:  "(Strong's #3631 — Noun Masculine — oinos — oy'-nos ) is the general word for 'wine.'"  (https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/ved/w/wine.html)

And the bursting of the wine skins indicates fermentation. So, grape juice is called "wine" prior to fermentation.  Thus, the word absolutely allows that Jesus created grape juice.

 

Now consider the context of John 2. People had already consumed what was there. Jesus provided ~180 gallons more to consume. IF this passage is Jesus turning water to alcohol, then Jesus is approving of and even supplying a large quantity to be consumed... not just a little moderate drinking!

BUT, the immediate context shows the ruler of the feast said this "wine" was the best.  Step away from modern thoughts when you read this.  Modern thought is: more alcohol = best.  While in Bible times, more alcohol also meant more vinegar (since distillation was not known in Bible times/lands at this point).  The higher the alcohol content, the worst it tasted!  Yet, fresh grape juice would be sweet and tasty.  So, better tasting was fresh juice.

Also, considering the remote context (the word of Christ through the Spirit to the apostles), Eph 5:18 literally says do not begin the process of drinking wine wherein is riot, 1 Pet 4:7 saying to be sober (literally free from the influence of intoxicants), and others... what would Jesus have created then?  Would Jesus contradict His own instructions to others? Was Jesus a hypocrite? Certainly not.

 

Regarding 1 Timothy 5:23

Be no longer a drinker of water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.

The text shows Timothy was an abstainer.  Paul had to give him instructions for genuine medical purposes before Timothy would drink any alcohol.  And note the quantity, "a little". Not until you "feel good" or "socially" or "to relax".  It was due to genuine illness.

When traveling and preaching you find water to be a challenge.  Stomach issues will frequently arise.  How much alcohol does it take to address this & purify the water?  Not much.  The old folks crossing with wagons into the west used to bring alcohol with them for this very purpose - purify the water. They would add a ladle of alcohol to a full barrel of water. You would never get drunk from this, but the water would be purified.

TLDR:

There is no reason to think that Timothy was allowed or encouraged to practice what is elsewhere, plainly forbidden.

There is no reason to think that Jesus provided intoxicants in large quantities.

And, the Bible does say drinking in moderation is a sin. Eph 5:18, 1 Pet. 4:17, and more plain verses exist if you need them.

 

-----------------

Regarding spirit vs letter of the law:

The Bible directs us to approach it in a certain way.  We must not assume permission, we must look for permission being granted by God first.  1 Corinthians 4:6 "...that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written..." and Hebrews 7:14 (as just 2 examples) show that when God does not authorize, there is no permission.

Thus, applying "spirit" and "letter" of the law (Romans 2) in a way that allows people to do something there is no authority for, would not be correct.

Even the context of Romans 2 bears this out.

Romans 2:25 the context is contrasting Jews (those with the Old Law who disobeyed it) & Gentiles (those who did not have the Old Law yet obeyed it).  Again, the Jews had "the letter" of the law yet transgressed (2:27)!  The letter was not indicating from the heart obedience, it was indicating those who had been given instruction yet disobeyed!

In contrast, Romans 2:28 "For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh: 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

Inward, from the heart obedience to God is not condemned here. It is held up as the role model, as God approved.  The letter is outward only, not from the heart.  So, the contrast is not between obeying God strictly being wrong and obeying God loosely being alright. Rather, spirit vs letter means that outward forms only is disobedience and obeying from the heart (in faith!) is right!

I'm both in agreement and disagree with the content of your "bible study in a post".

I agree that we need to remove 21st century sensibilities from this issue and focus on the culture contemporaneous with the events  in the bible. This is where we agree.

Where we disagree is that I'm a big fan of the phrase "times change, people don't". So, I know what most people in a culture that did not forbid intoxicating drink would consider "good" wine. I also understand that wine goes rapidly from grape juice to alcoholic. And then - eventually - to vinegar. You'd want to grab it before it got to that point to get the "best" that "made mans heart glad" as it says in Psalms.

I'm trying not to "over-spiritualize" what is being communicated in the bible and apply a "rubber meets the road" perspective regarding the heart of man and God saying that what he created is good.

 

And creating a reality where the grapes have sugar and they are coated with yeast is pure genius!

Edited July 20, 2018 by Still Alive

[Still Alive]

1 minute ago, Cletus said:

God Is a genius.  I am glad you said this.  For anyone who thinks its not true Here is a link, just go to the second section titled "yeast"

http://www.morethanorganic.com/fermentation

It gives a very basic intro to "wild yeasts"   with a little more research one can even find out scientific names of such wild yeasts.  I looked it up before when i was big into making wine but ended up just ordering some packets from an online store. 

I live in KY and drive by six distilleries on my way to work every day. When friends come to town we will hit a tour or two. They all make a big deal out of their yeast. One of the beams actually took a sample home with him from work every day. It was critical to the flavor.

[Mike Mclees]

 

Its probably aready been said  

Its best one does not drink at all if it is a cause for a weak bro to stumble. The Alcoholic wants to be able to be a social drinker but one drink and he is on his way. We must set the better example. I know I can have a drink and stop but to many can't stop. 

I have lived around this all my life and so have many here also. 

Romans 15:1      We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak and not to please ourselves

Think to day there is other was to settle one's stomach 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2018 by Mike Mclees

[Still Alive]

1 minute ago, Cletus said:

When my family came to this country on a boat a lot of my ancestors lived in KY.  and virginia.  during prohibition a lot of my family decided to go to texas.. and so here i am now.  i still have relatives back there.  even still a few recipes  were handed down... yeast does effect the taste.  if you try to just use regular brewers yeast for bread it has a bitter taste.  for making wine and beer it effects taste and content.  most strains die at around 15% but they have some newer strains of yeast that will make well over 20%  so for those who do drink and you come across some homebrew,  slow sip it. 

There is a great non-fiction book called "The Cornbread Mafia". We moved to Kentucky from Seattle seven years ago to the edge of the very area it discusses. The old timers here have some amazing stories. I even played in a band who's members were part of the "official" band of the Cornbread Mafia. I'm in Taylor county, the Mafia did its thing in Marion and Washington counties. I'm right on the edge of Marion county.

My county was dry until last year. It's primarily Baptist while the other two at primarily Catholic, inundated with "bathtub Marys". The history is interesting, especially when rolled into the relationship this area has with the infamous bootleg customers in Chicago.

BTW, Bourbon is absolutely exploding worldwide. Makers Mark, one of the distilleries I drive by on my commute, was purchased by a Japanese company a few years ago. The first thing they did was change the tours from free to $7 and quickly ramped up the price. They've also done major renovation.

Heaven Hill is expanding like crazy as well. I actually applied for an IT job there last year. It was all going really well until I signed an agreement for a background check and one of the data points I had to fill out was my birthdate and year. They found out I was 64 and were not interested. Bit I also saw it as an answer to prayer...:)

 

[Fidei Defensor]

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

”For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, 'He has a demon.The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' But wisdom is proved right by her deeds." (Matthew 11:18-19)

“I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom." (Matthew 26:29)

“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.9 Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world.” (1 Peter 5:8-9)

Scripture records do not get drunk and Jesus Our Lord and God made flesh did drink wine and even tells us to do so at Communion: 

“In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is poured out for you.” (Luke 22:20). 

On the other hand Peter and Paul tell us to be sober minded and if you have alcoholic tendencies in your family it is best to abstain. 

In the end you must follow your conscious in Christ and by The Holy Spirit discern what you can or cannot do regarding this which includes deciding how the Scripture convinces you to proceed. 

[DWH2003]

On 7/20/2018 at 7:25 AM, Still Alive said:

No. That's why I said "with my wife". I was trying to make it crystal clear and remove all doubt.

 

I asked of a purpose.  In specifying your wife, you made the very point I am trying to highlight.  You agree that the context LIMITS what is considered "all things are lawful" to lawful things.

I would challenge you, then, to prove that drinking alcohol is included in "all things are lawful" when so many plain passages tell us it is not.

 

 

@Mike Mclees @Fidei Defensor

 

On a subject proven to be a matter of authorized liberty (Romans 14), I will readily agree that we can leave it up to personal conscience, being careful not to cause another to stumble.

But, the issue with "wine" in the Bible is that you have passages approving "wine" and passages out right condemning it as evil, mind altering, hindering spirituality, foolish, etc. 

Either there is a contradiction (which I do not think any of us believe) or "wine" in the Bible is a general term addressing at times grape juice and at times alcohol.  The later is very clearly the case - The "wine" in the cluster (Isaiah 65:8) and new "wine" in wine skins (Matt. 9:17).  So, we must use context to figure out what passage refers to which "wine".

Two example:

The NT out right says to "be free from the influence of intoxicants" ("sober", Strong's #3525 nepho) in 1 Pet. 4:7.  Either this references grape juice or it references alcohol.  Which one hinders prayer?  Which one has an influence detrimental to spirituality? 

 

The Lord's Supper.  Luke 22:20 mentions the "cup".  Luke 22:18 calls it the "fruit of the vine".  The vine produces grape juice. I do not recall any passage which even uses the Greek word "oinos" (wine) referencing the Lord's Supper. 

Edited July 23, 2018 by DWH2003

[DWH2003]

On 7/20/2018 at 7:33 AM, Still Alive said:

I'm both in agreement and disagree with the content of your "bible study in a post".

I agree that we need to remove 21st century sensibilities from this issue and focus on the culture contemporaneous with the events  in the bible. This is where we agree.

Where we disagree is that I'm a big fan of the phrase "times change, people don't". So, I know what most people in a culture that did not forbid intoxicating drink would consider "good" wine. I also understand that wine goes rapidly from grape juice to alcoholic. And then - eventually - to vinegar. You'd want to grab it before it got to that point to get the "best" that "made mans heart glad" as it says in Psalms.

I'm trying not to "over-spiritualize" what is being communicated in the bible and apply a "rubber meets the road" perspective regarding the heart of man and God saying that what he created is good.

 

And creating a reality where the grapes have sugar and they are coated with yeast is pure genius!

 

 

Studying the Bible is a marvelous thing.  It is the mind of God revealed.  : )

 

I agree, that reading any message as it was intended by the author is vital to a proper understanding.

 

While I also agree that times change, people don't - I am concerned that you still place a modern assessment of preference into the Bible regarding alcohol when you say, "So, I know what most people in a culture that did not forbid intoxicating drink would consider 'good' wine."  Modern culture undoubtedly sees good wine as potent, alcoholic.  In Bible times this was not so, simply because in Bible lands no process was known for how to separate the alcohol and vinegar which both developed.  The stronger the alcohol (6% max naturally before it kills the yeast) the stronger the vinegar.  Not very tasty.  Just leave a glass of grape juice out for a day or 2, and you will quickly see for yourself.  (See the addendum below for actually historical references on what people actually considered good in those times.)

They did know how to preserve fresh juice, they boiled it down to a syrup, which could be restored by adding water for use.  Sweet, fresh juice was the best in this context. Not vinegar tasting alcohol.

 

Grape juice makes the heart glad, without any intoxication.  Your reference to Psalms does not demand alcohol.  A fresh tomato makes the heart glad too, much more than a bad tasting one.

 

 

Addendum regarding "good" wine in Bible times:

In the Roman world (NT times) the best wines were those whose alcoholic potency had been removed by boiling or filtration.  Pliny (ad 23-79) says that "wines are most beneficial when all their potency has been removed by the strainer"  Pliny, Natural History 23, 24 trans. W. H. S. Jones, The Loeb Clasical Library (Cambridge, Massacusetts, 1961).

Similarly, Plutarch (AD 46-120) points out that wine is "much more pleasant to drink" when it "neither inflames the brain nor infests the mind or passions" because its strength has been removed through frequent filtering.  (Plutarch, Symposiac 8, 7. )

 

Referring to some of the same ancient authors, Barnes says: "Pliny, Plutarch and Horace describe wine as good, or mention that as the best wine which was harmless or innocent—poculis vini innocentis. The most useful wine—utilissimum vinum—was that which had little strength; and the most wholesome wine—saluberrimum vinum—was that which had not been adulterated by ‘the addition of anything to the must or juice.’ Pliny expressly says that a ‘good wine’ was one that was destitute of spirit. Lib iv. c.13. It should not be assumed, therefore, that the ‘good wine’ was stronger than the other. It is rather to be presumed that it was milder. That would be the best wine certainly. The wine referred to here was doubtless such as was commonly drunk in Palestine. That was the pure juice of the grape. It was not brandied wine; nor drugged wine; nor wine compounded of various substances such as we drink in this land. The common wine drunk in Palestine was that which was the simple juice of the grape." (Albert Barnes (n. 11), p. 197.)

The wine Christ made was of high quality, not because of its alcohol content, but because, as Henry Morris explains, it was "new wine, freshly created! It was not old, decayed wine, as it would have to be if it were intoxicating. There was no time for the fermentation process to break down the structure of its energy-giving sugars into disintegrative alcohols. It thus was a fitting representation of His glory and was appropriate to serve as the very first of His great miracles (John 2:11)." (Henry M. Morris, The Bible Has the Answer (Nutley, New Jersey, 1971), p. 163.)

 Albert Barnes warns on John 2:10 not to "be deceived by the phrase ‘good wine.’" The reason, he explains, is that "We use the phrase to denote that it is good in proportion to its strength, and its power to intoxicate. But no such sense is to be attached to the word here." (Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament, Luke-John (London, 1875), vol. 2, p. 197.

Edited July 23, 2018 by DWH2003

[brujaq]

I used to drink and I knew how it was going to end up because I was looking for an excuse to get stoopid .. There's nothing wrong imo to drink a little but not get drunk, some folks can handle it some can't .. My wife and I go to the beach and drink a couple of those limearitas sometimes and if I witness and someone offers me a beer I may or may not take it depending on if they might be tempting me or really offering in friendship, even if I do accept one I sip on it out of courtesy and never have finished one ..

[Still Alive]

On ‎7‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:19 AM, DWH2003 said:

 

I asked of a purpose.  In specifying your wife, you made the very point I am trying to highlight.  You agree that the context LIMITS what is considered "all things are lawful" to lawful things.

I would challenge you, then, to prove that drinking alcohol is included in "all things are lawful" when so many plain passages tell us it is not.

But I've not seen a single scripture that tells us it is not. And plenty have been offered to show that it is fine and to be enjoyed, but not to get drunk. Enjoy candy bars and donuts, but don't become a glutton. etc.

I think this one is relevant:

Colossians 2:20-22

If you have died with Christ to the spiritual forces of the world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its regulations: "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch? - These will all perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings