Drinking Alcohol

It seems you equate moderate drinking with being filled? I am pretty sure it says be not DRUNKwith wine, not never take one drink. THats the point of this thread. No one here is advocating being drunk.

 

Wine is much stronger today than it was in OT and NT times.

Back then, one would have to sit around all day drinking in order to get drunk. Nowadays, people can get drunk with just a couple glasses.

Leave the wine alone. It is in the class of strong drink today.

At the last it biteth like a serpent and stingeth like an adder.

 

Proof Please...

Jamie

 

And this had nothing to do with the Alcoholic content of the drink, it had more to do with the fact that it was drank all the time.

Look at the French, who drink Wine with every meal, and look how much it would take for them to "get drunk" vers what it would take a person that never, or hardly drinks to "get drunk".

Jamie

 

Proof Please...

Jamie </font>[/QUOTE]Jamie:

Go to Amazon.com and look for the book by Peter Masters called Should Christians Drink? The Case For Total Abstinence. Dr. Peter Masters is Minister of London's Metropolitan Tabernacle (this is the church where Charles Haddon Spurgeon preached in the late 1800s). Well worth the money.

 

quote:Originally posted by gb93433:
"Wasn't it the purchase of Pepsico which caused a huge change in the views of Mormons?"


Nope...urban myth:


http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/mormon.asp

 

Consumption of wine as part of the Sabbath meal was the norm for Jews of the Jesus' day. Wine was as much a staple of the Jewish sabbath as the bread. If Jesus had refrained from drinking wine at Sabbath meals, it would have been such so significant to Jews of the day that it would have been notably mentioned in the scriptures. Not one Gospel mentions Jesus refraining, nor do any of the apocryphal gospels.

Mr Masters is completely wrong in the claim that wine is stronger today than it was then.

Fermentation of the juice grapes is a natural process, and begins almost immediately after grapes are picked from the vine. The fermentation process of grape juice in a container will continue until the alcohol content is about 12%. At that point, the natural content of the wine prevents any more fermentation. This was true in Jesus, time, and it's true today (with the exception of artificially fortified beverages). So unless Peter Masters is arguing a change in the laws of the universe since Jesus' time, he's dead wrong on his claim.

 

Is God wrong?

Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise. (Proverbs 20:1)

Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine. Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright. At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder. Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things. 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. They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not sick; they have beaten me, and I felt it not: when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again. (Proverbs 23:29-35)

Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness! (Habakkuk 2:15)

Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it. (Isaiah 5:14)

It is a fact that alcohol is a drug--and it is legal and it is also toxic---how much is too much? If you had a loved one killed by a drunk driver, what would your opinion of alcohol be then? All drunkenness begins with the first drink. If you don't want to run the risk of getting drunk, don't drink. Pretty basic.

 

If God wrong?...

Give strong drink to him who is perishing, And wine to him whose life is bitter. Let him drink and forget his poverty And remember his trouble no more. [Proverbs 31:6-7]

Are you going to tell God he is wrong and not give wine to one whose life is bitter and strong drink to one who is perishing? Or are you a liberal who will try to change the precise wording of scripture based on modern knowledge and progress?

 

If God wrong?...

Give strong drink to him who is perishing, And wine to him whose life is bitter. Let him drink and forget his poverty And remember his trouble no more. [Proverbs 31:6-7]


Are you going to tell God he is wrong and not give wine to one whose life is bitter and strong drink to one who is perishing? Or are you a liberal who will try to change the precise wording of scripture based on modern knowledge and progress? </font>[/QUOTE]Alcott:

You seem to be repeating yourself. I saw the same EXACT post in another forum on drinking. I answered you there--therefore I will not repeat myself again.

Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Proverbs 26:4-5)

 

Proof Please...Jamie </font>[/QUOTE]Since the discovery of the distillation and fortification of alcohol in the 1800's, wine is made much stronger. Scripture tells us one would have to tarry at the wine for long hours before getting drunk. Isaiah 5:11 implies one would pursue drunkenness by drinking the wine for long periods of time

Nowadays people can get drunk in less than an hour.

 

Jesus is the King of kings and the Prince of Peace. Kings are forbidden to drink wine and strong drink. Proverbs 31.

Being the King of kings and Prince of Peace, Jesus would not have gone against scripture and partook of that which it was forbidden for Him to drink.

The statement that Jesus was a Jew and therefore would have drank wine is contrary to scripture.

 

Amen, Dunamis!

I like that verse. Be ye filled with the Holy Spirit. Is one to be filled with a combination of alcoholic beverage and the Holy Spirit? No, I think Paul was saying Be filled with the Holy Spirit. If you are filled with the Holy Spirit, you don't have room for even a sip of alcohol.

 

Salt is a poison, too. So is water if you drink too much at once. There is NOTHING that will not kill you in excess. Oxygen? It will also kill you.

All of life's physical essentials are poisons in extreme.

So referring to wine only in the context of it being used in the extreme is no more valid than railing against salt or water because both of these can kill in the extreme as well!

Jesus not only drank wine, He made it! As Creator of the world, He designed the grapes which produce it naturally, as well!

 

Yes, and also note that the people at the party were not only drinking moderately, they were obviously drinking enough to get somewhat drunk. The proof? When the man throwing the wedding party was asked why he saved the good wine for last when normally after people are intoxicated then you typically serve the bad wine. Obviously, the people were reaching the point of intoxication to make a statement such as this.

 

Proof Please...Jamie </font>[/QUOTE]Since the discovery of the distillation and fortification of alcohol in the 1800's, wine is made much stronger.
Nowadays people can get drunk in less than an hour. </font>[/QUOTE]Wine is NOT distilled. I do not know where you got your information, but you are wrong. There are certain drinks, such as Brandies and even a few wines which are fortified. Sangria is fortified with a little alcohol because it is wine mixed with approximately one-half grape juice, therefore, pure alcohol is added to make up the difference between the actual wine and the grape juice that is added. The end result is wine, with a strong grape-juice taste and the same alcohol content as the regular wine that started it.

Other wines are VERY RARELY fortified with extra alcohol, nor are they distilled, which would completely destroy the wines flavor.

The wine of Biblical days was very much like the wine of today in both alcohol content and flavor.
Minor differences in taste were obvious due to the "wine-skins" used to ferment the mash.

Get your facts straight before you start nailing everybody to the wall with old wive's tales.

 

Here are some notes from a sermon done by Marc Monte, pastor at Faith Baptist Church in Avon, IN.
You can find the audio of this message at:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=8405104120
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=8110510746

It's in two parts--the notes below are for part 1
Will post notes for part 2 in my next post

The Bible and Beverage Alcohol
“Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.” Prov. 20:1

I. Beverage Alcohol and the Old Testament

A. The word “wine” appears over 200 times in the King James Version of the Old Testament, and it is used as an English translation for several different Hebrew terms.

B. God commanded that His priests abstain from the use of beverage alcohol (Lev. 10:8-11), noting that they were to be a holy example to all Israel.

C. Samson’s mother was commanded to abstain from beverage alcohol because Samson was to be dedicated to God in a unique way (Judges 13:3, 4). Apparently beverage alcohol and dedication to God are incompatible.

D. Israel’s rulers were specifically forbidden from using beverage alcohol (Prov. 31:4, 5).

E. Solomon emphasized the importance of avoiding wine that had been fermented: “Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his color in the cup, when it moveth itself aright” (Prov. 23:31).

F. The Old Testament repeatedly warns about the evils of beverage alcohol:

1. “For the drunkard…shall come to poverty” (Prov. 23:21.

2. “Who hath woe? Who hath sorrow? Who hath contentions? Who hath babbling? Who hath wounds without cause? Who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine” (Prov. 23:29, 30).

3. “At the last it [beverage alcohol] biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder” (Prov. 23:32).

4. “Yea also, because he transgresseth by wine, he is a proud man, neither keepeth at home, who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death, and cannot be satisfied, but gathereth unto him all nations, and heapeth unto him all people” (Hab. 2:5).


G. Several Old Testament references, however, speak of wine as a blessing: Gen. 27:28; Judges 9:13; Ps. 104:14, 15. How can wine be spoken of as both a blessing and a curse?

II. The Hebrew Terms for Wine and Their Uses

A. The Hebrew words translated “wine” in the Bible do not always mean fermented or intoxicating wine.

B. The Hebrew word yayin, most often translated “wine” in the Old Testament, means grape juice in any form—fermented or unfermented. The true meaning can only be determined by the context. Yayin is a general term referring to any beverage—sweet or sour, fermented or fresh—derived from grapes.

C. The Hebrew word tirosh, also translated “wine,” in all but one possible case means “new wine,” “unfermented wine.” This word was used repeatedly in the original text in the places where wine has a good textual connotation. Example: Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth and plenty of corn and wine [tirosh—unfermented grape juice](Gen. 27:28). Note the association of fresh corn at harvest with fresh, unfermented grape juice at harvest.

D. Many wines of the ancients were boiled or filtered to prevent fermentation, and these were often considered the best wines.

E. Having carefully examined the context of the uses of yayin in the Old Testament, Dr. Robert P. Teachout has concluded that this word is intended to mean grape juice 71 times and fermented wine 70 times.

F. How can the English reader determine whether the Old Testament is speaking of unfermented, good wine, or fermented, bad wine? Simply examine the context of the verse. Wherever the use of wine is prohibited or discouraged, the reference is to fermented wine. Where its use is encouraged, the reference is to unfermented grape juice.

G. Any argument for the use of beverage alcohol must blur the distinction in Old Testament usage of the word “wine.” In addition, such arguments must “explain away” the Bible’s clear condemnation of intoxicating beverages.

 

Part 2 of Marc Monte's message on "The Bible and Beverage Alcohol" Here is the link to the audio version of that message:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=8110510746

The Bible and Beverage Alcohol, Part II

III. Christ and Wine in the New Testament
A. The Parable of the Wine and the Wineskins (Mt. 9:17; Mk. 2:22; Lk. 5:37-39).
1. The primary message of this parable concerns the change from Mosaic legalism to free grace in Christ. Jesus taught that grace apart from the law could not be poured back into the old wineskin of legalism. New Testament grace is not merely an addition to Old Testament legalism. Grace and legalism do not mix, and attempting to mix them always results in the spilling of grace.
2. Regarding wine, Jesus taught that putting fresh grape juice into an old bottle would hasten the fermentation process due to the yeast deposits left on the previously used container.
3. History has preserved an ancient recipe for keeping wine sweet. Columella, a man contemporaneous with the Apostles, stated that in order to keep wine “always sweet” it must be put in a “new amphora,” or jar.
4. Why do those who have drunk the old wine declare it “better?” Because of the habit forming effect of alcohol. Jesus here acknowledges the addictiveness of alcohol and the fact that alcoholics desire alcohol, not grape juice.
5. The point of the parable is simply this: new wine (grace) is better than old wine (legalism). However, many who had drunk long at the old wine of legalism would prefer it to the new wine of grace. Certainly those who rejected Christ’s message proved His prediction true. Dr. H.A. Ironside writes:

And so these Pharisees would go away saying, “We are satisfied with the old wine,” and legalists and worldlings are like that today. They are apparently content with what they are trying to enjoy down here and do not care what God offers them in Christ Jesus.

6. Jesus taught that the new, unfermented wine is better!
B. Jesus’ Eating and Drinking and the Reaction of the Crowd (Mt. 11:19; Lk. 7:33-35).
1. Jesus here contrasts His ministry with that of John the Baptist. Several important distinctions should be noted:
a. Jesus was called a Nazarene because He came from Nazareth. However, He was not a Nazarite.
b. John the Baptist was a Nazarite, one who had taken a special vow of dedication to God. The vow included several lifestyle restrictions, one of which was abstinence from anything made of grapes—whether alcoholic or not (Num. 6:1-4).
2. Since Jesus was not restricted by the Nazarite vow, He came eating grapes and drinking of the fruit of the vine, all of which was called “wine.”
3. Since the crowd could not criticize John’s ascetic lifestyle, those who rejected his message claimed he was demon possessed.
4. Since Jesus was not an ascetic like John, those who opposed Him criticized his lack of asceticism. (On two other occasions, Jesus’ enemies accused Him of demon possession as well—John 7:20; 8:48).
5. The accusation that Jesus was a “winebibber” was false, just as was the accusation that John was demon possessed. It would be ludicrous for Bible believers to accept the accusations of Jesus’ enemies in order to justify the consumption of beverage alcohol. If their accusations were accurate, Jesus could not be the sinless Son of God!
C. Jesus Making Wine at the Marriage Feast in Cana (John 2:3-10)
1. In considering Jesus’ first miracle, two important principles must govern our thoughts:
a. The wine Jesus made did not conform to modern standards for fermented wine. His wine surpassed the standards of that day and was judged superior to that which had been previously consumed. Because new wine (unfermented) was considered superior to the sour, fermented variety; one could assume that Jesus’ wine was new wine.
b. Whatever the nature of the wine Jesus made, we can be certain that it was consistent with His character. Dr. R.A. Torrey has written:

The wine provided for the marriage festivities at Cana failed. A cloud was about to fall over the joy of what is properly a festive occasion. Jesus came to the rescue. He provided wine, but there is not a hint that the wine He made was intoxicating. It was fresh-made wine. New-made wine is never intoxicating. It is not intoxicating until sometime after the process of fermentation has set in. Fermentation is a process of decay. There is not a hint that our Lord produced alcohol, which is a product of decay and death. He produced a living wine uncontaminated by fermentation.

2. The true nature of the wine Jesus made at Cana is unknown. Consider the words of Dr. William Pettingill, one of the last century’s great Bible scholars:

I do not pretend to know the nature of the wine furnished by our Lord at the wedding of Cana, but I am satisfied that there was little resemblance in it to the thing described in the Scriptures of God as biting like a serpent and stinging like an adder (Prov. 23:29-32). Doubtless rather it was like the heavenly fruit of the vine that He will drink new with His own in His Father’s kingdom (Matt. 26:29). No wonder the governor of the wedding feast at Cana pronounced it the best wine kept until last. Never before had he tasted such wine, and never did he taste it again.

3. Years ago, Presbyterian scholar Albert Barnes wrote:

No man should adduce this instance in favor of drinking wine unless he canprove that the wine made in the “water pots” of Cana was just like the wine which he proposes to drink.

D. The Lord’s Supper (Matthew 26:26-29)
1. Some Christian denominations argue vehemently that Jesus used fermented wine when instituting the Lord’s Supper. In fact, some groups use fermented wine as a matter of conviction, rejecting the use of mere grape juice. Although not a Christian denomination, the Roman Catholic Church also uses fermented wine in the Mass, a custom which has caused widespread alcoholism among priests.
2. In instituting the Lord’s Supper, Jesus used two terms to refer to the liquid representing His blood: “The fruit of the vine” and “the cup.” Can fermented grape juice legitimately be referred to as the “fruit of the vine?” Bible scholar Charles Wesley Ewing states:

Fermented wine is not a product of the vine. Chemically it is entirely different from the sweet and unfermented grape juice. Fermented wine is 14% alcohol, and it has other constituents that are not found in fresh grape juice. Alcohol does not grow on the vine. It is not a vine product. Alcohol is the product of decay, the product of fermentation. It is produced by the process of spoiling.

3. The “cup” used in the Lord’s Supper represents Christ’s blood. Interestingly, Moses long before Christ drew a parallel between fresh grape juice and blood. He referred to fresh grape juice as “the pure blood of the grape” (Deut. 32:14). Fresh grape juice, not fermented, best represents blood.
4. In addition, the Old Testament predicts that Christ’s body and blood, even in death, would not see corruption (Ps. 16:10). Fermentation is a process of corruption, and would not be compatible with the uncorrupt nature of Christ’s blood (I Pet. 1:18).
5. Commenting on Psalm 16:10 and Acts 2:31, Dr. John R. Rice has written:

The cup the disciples drank at the Lord’s Supper is nowhere called wine, but “the fruit of the vine.” We believe it was simply grape juice. Even if the word wine had been used, wine in the Bible means grape juice, whether fermented or unfermented. Fermented wine, with microbes of decay, would not picture the perfect blood of a sinless Christ.


6. Another Bible scholar, William Patton, states:

Leaven, because it was corruption, was forbidden as an offering to God….If leaven was not allowed with the sacrifices, which were the types of the atoning blood of Christ, how much more would it be a violation of the commandment to allow leaven, or that which was fermented, to be the symbol of the blood of atonement? We cannot imagine that our Lord, in disregard of so positive a command, would admit leaven into the element which was to perpetuate the memory of the sacrifice of himself, of which all the other sacrifices were but types.

7. The holy nature of the Lord’s Supper also mitigates against the use of alcoholic wine. Remember that the Old Testament priests were forbidden the use of any fermented wine. The New Testament teaches that Jesus is our High Priest. Certainly He remained consistent with the Old Testament commandment for priestly abstinence.
8. Lastly, Dr. Jack Van Impe has stated:

The final statement of our Lord on the Communion service settles the issue. All Christians who take Communion are to do so in anticipation of the coming kingdom. We have already seen that the wine of the kingdom is unfermented. If we are to look forward to the wine of Eden and Cana during the kingdom, it would be inconsistent to use intoxicating wine when remembering the death of our Savior and King.

E. The Wine offered to Jesus on the cross (Mk. 15:23)
1. The wine offered to Jesus at His crucifixion was doubtless of the intoxicating variety. So severe was the punishment of crucifixion that the victim was offered alcoholic wine as an anesthetic.
2. Notice that in His most trying hour, Jesus refused even the relief from pain that alcohol could provide. Alcohol is NEVER an answer to the problems of life. Jesus refused alcohol, and so should we.
In Conclusion…

1. The Bible never plainly condones the use of alcoholic wine as a beverage.
2. Alcoholic wine is frequently condemned in the Scriptures.
3. Certain classes of people (priests and kings) were expressly forbidden the use of any alcoholic beverages. (Christians are both kings and priests—Rev. 1:6, 5:10.)
4. There is absolutely no sound Bible evidence that Jesus ever consumed alcoholic wine or commanded its use.
5. There is ample evidence to indicate that Jesus Himself did not make, use, or condone the use of alcoholic wine.
6. It is impossible to use the example of Jesus to justify the imbibing of alcoholic beverages.

 

Then give "grape juice" to one perishing or one whose life is bitter? What good would that do them?

 

Sorry about the length of my last post--but there really wasn't a way to break those notes up--