(Real) Wine for the communion ?

I probably did not make myself really clear. However, your post here is right on the money. I do not drink anyhow, but if I did, others would always come before liberty.

Several weeks back we discussed what our reaction should be to other believers who drink, and as I recall, I had a much more hands off approach than you.

 

You have got to be kidding. Because the people of Europe, as a whole, do not treat the use of alcohol as we do. They are much more mature and responsible, sometimes using it as a beverage for bad water. Since we treat alcohol like self-indulgent pigs, and they do not, there is a big difference. If you will travel there, spend some time and obeserve, you will see glaring differences.

 

A little bit of an aside:

Many/most US citizens believe America has a good water supply.

Do a google on America's water supply and pollution.

http://www.naturalnews.com/022809.html

Of course we can buy water instead of beer, wine, etc.

But also remember the essence of wine is made of rain water.

Anyway, I have a triple filtered deep well here in rural WA in the Cascadian aquafer (home of Mount Saint Helens and Mount Ranier).

It has never tested bad even without the filters but I just like to have the filtering system to moderate the volcanic mineral hardness of the water.

Oh well, no beer for me.

HankD

 

Well that is nice to hear but you are in the minority on that opinion. In any casae though it is nice to hear

 

Do you not find it interesting that in America it is preached as a taboo with such regularity in areas of the country where cultural Christianity exists. Yet in other areas where wine grapes are grown and made into wine you find almost zero problems among those who have it so readily available. We had wine around all the time because my parents were given several bottles from the winery who processed our grapes. We seldom even took a sip even though it was out in the open. There was a time when a friend of mine came over and my parents were gone and his eyes opened up in amazement. He asked if he could have some wine and I told him that it belonged to my parents. Every time we took a sip we were reminded of how awful it tasted.

When our daughter was growing up she would ask about how it tasted. So my wife gave her some and she has never forgotten how it tasted and expressed an immediate distaste for it. She has never inquired again since. she sees students get drunk and think of how stupid they are.

I am waiting for the day when overweight preachers decide to start preaching against eating too much and giving the money they save to missions and others who need help. When I was in Europe food cost about 80% more, and the people spent the same amount of food as we do in America.

 

My experience of several years in various countries in Europe supports your position. For example, in several countries, there were quite long lunches where people could take up to two hours. They would usually sit outside a small cafe or such. During that two hour period, the patrons would SIP wine, and go back to work after a good meal and conversation. During the same period of time, one could observe Americans coming to the same setting, and drink so much, they could hardly walk away in half the time. It was quite a contrast. That is only one example.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of Europeans that drink like us and plenty of Americans that drink like Europeans. I am looking at it as a population as a whole. The mindset is totally different.

 

Yes, and that is my point exactly.

 

Maybe that is because most of the Americans you saw were on vacation and the Europeans knew they had to go back to work? However, I would guess that Americans tend to do most things in a more hard charging style than in other places. They eat faster, work harder and probably drink harder than people in other countries. I don't think Americans are particularly abusive toward alcohol, at least not those in my circle of friends. I am in a setting probably once a week where the primary activity is drinking and I almost never see anyone who would be cited for DUI if he were stopped on the way home.

 

You have completely ignored the text in terms of the Greek text itself and tense of the verb. The second word in the Greek text is an imperative. How else would you explain an imperative?

There is a good reason why seminaries recommend that their students take Greek and Hebrew.

One of your own SBC scholars A.T. Robertson wrote, "Be no longer a drinker of water (mêketi hudropotei). Present active imperative (prohibition) of hudropoteô, old verb (from hudropotês, water drinker, hudôr, pinô), here only in N.T. Not complete asceticism, but only the need of some wine urged in Timothy's peculiar physical condition (a sort of medical prescription for this case).

But use a little wine (alla ainôi oligôi chrô). Present middle imperative of chraomai with instrumental case. The emphasis is on oligôi (a little).
For thy stomach's sake (dia ton stomachon). Old word from stoma (mouth). In Homer throat, opening of the stomach (Aristotle), stomach in Plutarch. Here only in N.T. Our word "stomach."
Thine often infirmities (tas puknas sou astheneias). Puknos is old word, dense, frequent. In N.T. only here,
#Lu 5:33; Ac 24:26 Astheneias = weaknesses, lack of strength #Ro 8:26
Timothy was clearly a semi-invalid."

Why continue to dialog with someone who is proud of their ignorance of the text itself when he should be taught first?

 

If you have taken Greek you wouldn't even be asking

However, whether I or anyone else knows Greek or not is irrelevant to the discussion since your own source whom you cite on the Greek - agrees with me.
But just so you know, you are not the only one who can read both Greek and Hebrew.

The text does not state that Timothy drank prior to Pauls request, and the 'fact' that Paul states he should no longer drink water proves it from the Greek. Now what is interesting is that A.T. Roberson AGREES with 'me' and also that Paul was not 'commanding' Timothy anything but was in 'fact' (there it is again) urging him or encouraging him to do so for his benifit. Paul had no more authority to command Timothy to drink wine than he did to command him to breathe water.

As you can clearly see the above is completely in line with what I said and it seems you need to go back and read it yourself as it proves my point :thumbs:
Now, this is not to say that Timothy didn't take some to help medicinally but for the reason I used it it proved that even back in the days of the apostles to drink alcohal or not was an issue even then and that abstenance was in fact a biblical perspective. I do believe some people can take it to far or to extremes such as Timothy did to deny himself the medicinal benifits of it as well as some possible other aspects but that does not negate my point.

Well based on the above and the fact A.T. Robertson agrees with me it seems I stand in good company with others who are ignorant.
Let me suggest that you mature a little more spiritually as it will help with your attitude and conversations with others.

As I said, and it is now more than ever abundantly clear, discussion with you is both pointless and unfriutful so enjoy the thread. I have said my peace and have proven my point. The Lord bless you in your day.

 

Edify us by proving it.

 

Where do you get this point from? The fact is that Paul did command him to no longer drink water but a little wine for his stomach problems. If Paul did not have any authority then he had no authority to write scripture.

Abstinence was never a biblical issue. Drunkenness was. If drinking wine was an issue then Proverbs would only deal with that issue and not being drunk.