Featured Alcohol

If alcohol is such a fine beverage, why isn't it put on the pulpit for the preacher?

I don't try to prove alcohol wrong biblically. I rest fully on my experience of rescuing wives being beat by a drunken fool, and counselling at a home for rescued wives. Often they have denied to see their husband charged in a court of law, return home only to face a funeral in about three weeks.

Maybe you can justify alcohol with that history, I can't.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I really do not care to "debate" the issue with the BB; merely to let others who visit know that there is really no Biblical excuse to consume any intoxicant other than the medical issue stated below. Folks on the BB have spent many hours, days, on this kind of thread. I only post now, to let the young reader or others who generally do not post know that there is Biblical reason and principle for not consuming intoxicants. There will be those who object, but that is the nature of the BB.


Here are some of the basic issues that believer consumers must put aside to excuse consumption of intoxicants.

1) The believer is to be an example of Christ. Having served the public in the business field for decades, I never met an unregenerate that doesn't scoff at believers who consume an intoxicant. They belittle them as pure fakes. The lack of testimony is astounding on this issue.

2) Christ would never violate His own self (The Word).

3) The whole purpose of the intoxicant is to poison. It matters not in the slightest "how much" or that one doesn't become "drunk," for those are man made standard attempts at righteousness and not Godliness. The human body is not aided by toxins, they are poisons. Anyone who has been present during the detoxification process of the drunk, can attest to the horrible rebuke the body goes through.

4) Christ never willingly took in any amount of toxin and remained the pure Lamb of God without blemish. Because the purpose of the toxin is to poison, on some micro cellular level, even a sip of a toxin would have perverted Christ. This is actually born out in number 5 on this list.

5) On the Cross Christ was given drink twice. The first was water, which He consumed. The second mixed water with an intoxicant, which He spit out. Even in death, He allowed no intoxicants to enter Him.

6) There are three places intoxicants are permitted in Scriptures.

The first is if one journeys from a far off land to come to Temple. There is no Temple and no one journeys under the same conditions as found in the Deut. permission. So that "permission" is void as not applicable.

The second is the injunction to give strong drink to those who have no hope. The believer is NEVER without hope in Christ. So that "permission" is void and not applicable.

The third is medicinal use. Paul's instruction to Tim to "take a little" with the assumption that Dr. Luke (traveling with Paul) made the remote diagnosis and recommended treatment. It would stand that ONLY under medical authority and oversight would consumption of any intoxicant be permitted to the believer. Tim was an obvious abstainer or Paul would never have needed to include the formula for the stomach treatment. Tim wasn't to have a glass, or a bottle, or a can consumption. A little would be like a tablespoon sized amount, a sip, is a little to even a child's thinking. But some believers would desire the little to be a grand amount - a beverage size. ​

7) "New Wine" is non-intoxicant like grape juice. It has had no time to ferment and acquire the bitterness of the natural yeast. Note: all sweet tasting wines must have yeast added, sweeteners and multiple straining to remove particles and bitterness in the processing making the new wine old for this is not something done overnight.

8) The believer is to be as Christlike as possible.

9) All intoxicants have one goal when consumed by a person. To pervert judgment and rational sensibilities. For the believer to purposely consume something that has as the core perversion and irrationality is NOT being filled with the Holy Spirit.

10) Government statutes establishing when a person is drunk is certainly never God's standard. God's standard is Holiness.


Someone of the BB will certainly post about the scheming agenda seeking pharisees who accused Christ of spending time eating and drinking with sinners. However, there is no proof that the accusations were fact, and, in fact, it is evident that the religious rulers were trying all manner of deceitfulness to liable the Savior. So those who would use that as an excuse have no real foundation in those passages.

There are many diversions attempted to excuse consuming an intoxicant by those who desire an excuse. Shifting the focus upon coffee, sodas, sugary snacks, weight, and a host of other non-issues, are just some of the vain attempts to mock and ridicule those who would hold that the Bible does lay out principles that are directly against consuming an intoxicant. Especially in this day, when water purification is pretty much a non-issue in the "civilized world, some on the BB will use that as an excuse, too, as if they dwell in the desert and have to drink goats milk and eat camel eyes.

Some will point to the historical use by believers or cultures of the past or other countries. However, that is a non-starter for the believer does not live in the past. I do not know of another country in which the paying public cannot find alternative beverage choices other than an intoxicant. The consumption is NOT a doctrine in which great theological historical thinking and views have established president, so looking for examples in the past for excuse to use in today's application is frightfully frail and perilously poor attempts seeking to assuage the mind and heart.




Wine is a mocker

Strong drink is raging

Fools are deceived by them.

 

Alcohol

Yep, it's summertime. Reruns.

 

As do I. The occasion is usually after a hard day's work in the machine shop.

 

In the past I drove an automobile, but after seeing all the death and carnage produced by these vehicles, I now abstain. Makes about as much sense as what you are saying about alcohol.

 

A great wine connoisseur invited the composer Johannes Brahms to dinner. 'This is the Brahms of my cellar,' he said to his guests, producing a dust-covered bottle and pouring some into the master's glass. Brahms looked first at the color of the wine, then sniffed its bouquet, finally took a sip, and put the glass down without saying a word. 'Don't you like it?' asked the host. 'Hmm,' Brahms muttered. 'Better bring your Beethoven!'.

Arthur Rubinstein, Polish pianist, (1886-1982) in My Young Years

 

In the words of Homer Simpson:

"I've found that the answers to life's problems are not at the bottom of a bottle...They're on TV!"

 

Think that the KLord provides/allows us to partake of Alcoholic beverages, just as long as we do NOT drink to excess, are NOT tempted by that to become alcoholic/problem drinker, and are NOT convicted by him to not take them!

For IF one is fully persuaded that it would be a sin to do such, stay around, but if persuaded to be able to do it, partake under guidelines!

I don't drink at all, but IF you wanted to have a glass of wine at dinner, be my guest!

IF I was attending a function, knowing that NONE of the bethren accepted me ordering a ber, would do as paul asks, and keep myself from doing as not to offend them...

See this as modern version of "to eat meat sacrified to idols or not?"

 

If salad is such a fine food, why isn't it put on the pulpit for the preacher?

You show the effects of drunkenness...not drinking. It is ignorance to equate the one with the other.

 

Read what I say!!!! I didn't stop anyone from drinking booze. It is their choice. I simply said why I oppose it. It was quite common, in England, to have a glass of brandy before supper.....even Christians.

I never mentioned having food in the pulpit, but many preachers have a glass of water there; a drink!

Cheers,

Jim

 

1st post btw...

- How many of you "proponents" grew up in the environment created by an alcohol user/abuser?

- How many of you "proponents" are ex-alcoholics (clearly the "ex" is hyperbole) that shake violently when the mere odor of the intoxicant hits your senses?

- How many of you "proponents" watched your mother and sisters beaten by a violent drinker? How sure are you that you'll not fall prey to the worst aspects of the disease? Violence being just one example.

- How sure are you "proponents" that the next drink you take won't be the gateway to a life of misery? Argue all you want about this one, many alcoholics are self-made not born.

- How many of you "proponents" are prescient enough to know (and I mean truly know) that those you choose to exercise your "freedoms" in front of will not stumble? How much havoc are you willing to risk wreaking in another's life?

- How many of you "proponents" are sure that your kids can watch you drink and NOT follow your example until the "right" time? What is the right time? Will you be proud of them for making the wise decision to drink only when it's "okay"?

It's easy to go on like this but why bother, eh? You have your freedoms and rights...so how dare I? And it's certainly easier to not bother with what edifies and profits others, so drink up! We certainly wouldn't want to be required to throw "I" or "Me" onto any alter. And after all and finally, there's nothing better for the body than a poison, right? It's only a little bit after all and we all know that we have absolute control over everything, right?

And finally-finally :thumbsup:

Just do the world a favor; for every drink you take and for all the energy you put into defending something absolutely unnecessary, please at the very least, put an equal amount of energy and resources into helping those that the object of your freedom destroys.

Oh and, nice to meet you!

 

Nice to meet you too.

Oh, and take your soapbox with you. Feel free to come back (I see this is your first post) and bring your Bible with you.

 

Nice to meet you too! :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

 

First, nice to meet you and welcome to the BB :thumbs:

Second, ALL of your examples deal with DRUNKENNESS and ABUSE. Nobody here is a proponent of DRUNKENNESS or ABUSE. Please do NOT equate drinking with drunkenness as they are NOT one in the same thing!

...and I am teaching my kids what the Bible says about drinking, not what baptists say about it. They know the "right time" is when they are legal, just like the "right time" to drive, vote, etc.

I also place my energy in defending biblical truth, which is anything but unnecessary.

 

I did read what you said, you said

...and my reply was based on that. Your pulpit example was plain silly, as was my response.

 

Nope. The box fits me just right.

Crawl out from under yours and answer my questions.

I was waiting for the Bible shot but figured I covered that with key words like edify and profit. In fact, I thought they were almost too on the nose. How'd you miss that?

1 Corinthians 6:12
&
1 Corinthians 10:23

...for starters. Play all you want with nuance and context, I've heard and read most of it before. Life experiences work just fine too, the Bible was actually made for the humans that live through them believe it or not.

I will come back, the rudeness doesn't bother me a bit. Ive read my share of it here before I ever considered posting. I have a thick skin so fire your worst arrows. As someone mentioned before, no one will likely change positions but until you can answer my reasonable questions...

 

Thanks. Can you answer the rest of my questions?

I will absolutely relate even the slightest casual drinking to drunkenness and abuse. They are inextricably tied together, only a fool denies that the use of alcohol does not lead to both. Not always no doubt but without a doubt in every case alcohol is the root; you cannot have drunkenness without drinking.

About the kids drinking at a legal age; does that also apply to abortion? It's legal. You need to clarify that one a bit. Legality certainly doesn't equate to the rights and wrongs of Christian morals and ethics.

I'm with Jim (though he may not be with me), so as I said before, drunk up. It's clearly an act that is done in a vacuum and without consequence for you that are strong and mighty (that's to no one in particular).

 

I thought they were rhetorical in nature, but at any rate I believe my reply did generally answer your questions.

Let us apply this same logic to gluttony and sexual sin.

non sequitur, nothing to clarify. Drinking is not against God's law nor ours at 21. They will be taught that truth.

drunk up?! Already on the record saying drunkeness is a sin. It has nothing to do with being strong and mighty but in regards to the priesthood of the believer and following Gods Word over mans traditions. If you want to do the latter, all the power to you!

 

deleted. Not worth replying.