[SmileAndFollow]

I used to be a binge drinker/drunk/borderline alcoholic. I can now sit and drink one beer and not crave another. I have my reasons for getting myself under control and Im glad I did. I do not think people who might have a problem with it should drink or be around people who do. I only drink in the presence of people who understand me and my stance on drinking. I dont go to parties and drink with people who would get the wrong impression or talk about it with people that might take it wrong or it might make them want to. There are definetly limits that need to be placed but to ever say that one cannot have a drink is wrong and goes against the Bible. To encourage people to control their drinking ro abstain if they cannot is completely biblical.

[nightowl10175]

So are you actually arguing that drinking is a sin? (remember, we have established that not only did Jesus drink, but he also went on keg runs for weddings). Or are you saying that we should be careful whom we drink around? I think you confuse drinking with being drunk. Being drunk necessitates drinking, but drinking DOES NOT necessitate being drunk. Not when done properly in moderation.

As for the drunkard, he's going to think "whoa, a Christian who isn't about to condemn me to Hell for drinking". Or he's going to be thinking, "Oh man... where's the nearest toilet...". But he isn't going to be thinking that a Christian is bad because he drinks. Now, if you murder someone and then turn around to someone else in the room and witness to them, that's where the question of hypocrisy comes up.

So remember, the only way to say that it is wrong to drink, is to call Jesus a sinner

I am not saying Drinking is a sin, and I think we are in agreement that being drunk is a sin.

What I am saying is I think for chrisitans who do drink, there is a certain awareness you need to have, because people are watching, and if that alcoholic wants a changed life, but looks at all the chrisitans sitting at the bar with him, it won't be much of a testimony, or much of a convincing route to him.

And Personally to me because of that one scripture in Romans, if someone stops believeing or decides against Christ because of my actions, then I think for me it is a sin.

[goldenchild]

Originally Posted by Ryan Akers

I do believe that drinking biblical wine is not a sin.

How's biblical wine different from today's wine? Is it more holy? Therefore is it okay to drink biblical wine and not current wine?


I'm just playing with ya I don't think you meant specifically biblical wine. Or did you?

[smhatahy]

Originally Posted by gavin

Aside from these two points, there is nothing wrong with wine. I would appreciate responses to this.

You forgot underage drinking gavin.

1) Don't get drunk
2) Don't drink underage
3) And watch who you drink with

[Lightknight]

Originally Posted by Ryan Akers

1.) I liked the example of witnessing to someone who is a drunk. How can you correct their ways when they might have the wrong view of yours.

I've led more people to Christ in a pool hall than anywhere else (except maybe the Franklin Graham crusade in Florida). Keep in mind, I don't drink alcohol. But they had no idea what I was drinking when I was witnessing to them. They didn't really care to ask, either. They (the adults) bring their families to church too now.

2.) I have yet to be convinced by anyone that the wine of the New Testament as well as the Old Testament is as alcoholic as it is today. From what I understand, the wine of that day was very diluted with water. The alcohol was used to kill the bacteria of the water so the wine was more of water than anything.

Has the fermentation process somehow decreased? I think you really need to read up on fermentation processes. Wine is wine. I'm sure the "proof" differed just as much back then as it does now (maybe not quite as much). The fact is that wine was still associated with drunkeness back then just as much as it is now. This is why people called Christ a drunkard just because he drank. There is no evidence to suggest what you believe. Heck, I seem to remember the salvaging of jars off the coast of Greece or Egypt (mediterranean sea, right?)several years back that made the archaelogical find of the year. The jars contained things like preserved grape and wine residue. I'll start looking for it for this discussion, but I'd appreciate it if someone else remembers this and knows a link to show it. Or at least concur. The find has been made many more times in the tombs of rulers.

I've done a little research before posting and have found quite a few things. I don't know if they refer specifically to what I have presented, but there are several more accounts of what I speak. We even use the same type of grapes they used in 99% of our wines today. But there exists such irrefutable evidence as to call whomever would claim "the wine used back then wasn't as potent as today's wine" to be speaking such in ignorance, not with facts.

Archaeological Chemistry

Now, what you are confusing with the statement you made about water is this,

"Men of the Ancient world began to make alcoholic beverages not because they wanted to become intoxicated, but for more practical reasons. One reason was that there were very few ways in which food could be preserved. The people of those times found that grape juice soon spoiled, but that the fermented juice, or wine, would keep. The alcohol produced by the fermentation stopped the growth of the bacteria which spoiled the juice. They also noticed that persons who drank fermented liquors did not become sick as often as those who drank water or unfermented beverages. This was not because alcoholic drinks themselves were healthful. But many of the springs and wells of Europe and Asia were impure, and the drinking of the water sometimes caused sickness and death. This may have been why Saint Paul said, "Use a little wine for they stomach's sake". Some early peoples, such as the Indians, never learned to make alcoholic beverages."

I really don't see how the question of whether or not it was as potent as today really comes into question. Fermentation is fermentation.

3.) Drunkenness is a sin, thus why should we even be toeing the line by drinking. Satan knows drunkenness is a sin, so he knows weaknesses. I don't care who thinks they are strong-willed enough to withstand the wiles of the Devil...they're not.

Was Jesus "toeing the line"? Was Paul commanding us to sin when he told us to drink a little wine when we're feeling sickly? To call this "toeing the line" is to say that we should act better than Christ in this aspect and be more religious than Paul. Be careful to avoid such comments as these are the roads that our more religious/pharisetical brothers and sisters in Christ have taken. Assuming that they know better what is sinful and making their own doctrines surrounding it. Not that I'm saying you are portraying it at all, just that you should be more aware of this when people tell you such things. Drunkeness is a sin, but drinking a beer isn't going to get you drunk. This is why the Bible only condemns drinking TO EXCESS.

[Lightknight]

Originally Posted by goldenchild

How's biblical wine different from today's wine? Is it more holy? Therefore is it okay to drink biblical wine and not current wine?


I'm just playing with ya I don't think you meant specifically biblical wine. Or did you?

He did, from his statement he seems to think that wine was somehow, "less fermented" back then.

[Lightknight]

Originally Posted by nightowl10175

I am not saying Drinking is a sin, and I think we are in agreement that being drunk is a sin.

What I am saying is I think for chrisitans who do drink, there is a certain awareness you need to have, because people are watching, and if that alcoholic wants a changed life, but looks at all the chrisitans sitting at the bar with him, it won't be much of a testimony, or much of a convincing route to him.

And Personally to me because of that one scripture in Romans, if someone stops believeing or decides against Christ because of my actions, then I think for me it is a sin.

I think there'd be more non-christians who would be turned away by your "holier-than-thou" attitude by believing and acting like drinking at all is a sin. Would it not be better to be able to witness to someone at a bar or pool hall by sitting down by them, ordering two drinks (one for yourself and one for them) and tell them about Jesus and his love for us? Then stop at that, don't drink another. Show self control, which is to be expected.

[Lightknight]

Originally Posted by Akshay

You forgot underage drinking gavin.

1) Don't get drunk
2) Don't drink underage
3) And watch who you drink with

What about if you have a stomach pain? Paul tells us to drink some wine for it. I don't remember a specific age. I suppose it just goes down to who you're going to obey first. God's word or man's. The US is one of the few countries that has an age limit on alcohol. And we're the ones with the biggest problems pertaining to it. I don't drink, but I'm not in total agreement with the US's standpoint on this issue. The age limit was only to appease the prohibitionists in some way to prevent major strikes that origionally brought on the 18th ammendment (the prohibition ammendment for those who don't care for google or constitution class).

And as for churches that use actual wine as the communion, do the kids not also have the wine? Of course they do. Would you condemn churches for this? Why should we make something that Jesus did illegal for anyone at any age? It's silly and it makes something Christ did seem borderline sinful. So no, I am not adding that to my list. It remains at what the Bible says about drinking.

[Daniel21TX]

I agree with Lightknight. How can you put a age limit on something. At is the change that takes place from 20 to 21 that all of a sudden doesn't make it a sin, if you think it is sin to drink under age. I agree also with those who do not drink at all as well though. I think it is better for me personally not to tempt myself, and take that first drink. If I do drink, it will be wine, and it will be communion. I think communion should be done with wine if it is available. This doesn't mean however, I will grab the biggest glass I can find and fill it to the rim and say it I am drinking it because of communion. Drinking is not a sin, unless you drink to get drunk.

[smhatahy]

What about if you have a stomach pain? Paul tells us to drink some wine for it. I don't remember a specific age. I suppose it just goes down to who you're going to obey first. God's word or man's. The US is one of the few countries that has an age limit on alcohol. And we're the ones with the biggest problems pertaining to it. I don't drink, but I'm not in total agreement with the US's standpoint on this issue. The age limit was only to appease the prohibitionists in some way to prevent major strikes that origionally brought on the 18th ammendment (the prohibition ammendment for those who don't care for google or constitution class).

And as for churches that use actual wine as the communion, do the kids not also have the wine? Of course they do. Would you condemn churches for this? Why should we make something that Jesus did illegal for anyone at any age? It's silly and it makes something Christ did seem borderline sinful. So no, I am not adding that to my list. It remains at what the Bible says about drinking.

so you can break any law you don't agree with?

[nightowl10175]

I think there'd be more non-christians who would be turned away by your "holier-than-thou" attitude by believing and acting like drinking at all is a sin. Would it not be better to be able to witness to someone at a bar or pool hall by sitting down by them, ordering two drinks (one for yourself and one for them) and tell them about Jesus and his love for us? Then stop at that, don't drink another. Show self control, which is to be expected.
Today 11:19 AM

I'm not trying to have a holier-than-thou attitude, and if it came across that way, I apologize. Like I stated before, I don't try and act that as a blanket statement drinking is a sin. But If I go against my personal God given convictions, then I am sinning, that dosen't mean every other person in the world that drinks, sins, but for me it is. God speaks to each of his people in an individual voice, when I read his word in 1 Corinthians when it talks about our bodies as temples, and in Romans when it talks about our actions, to me God is saying "don't get involved in that" If you don't have that conviction, then drinking isn't a sin for you. (I hope that made sense)

[+Donny]

Originally Posted by Lightknight

What about if you have a stomach pain? Paul tells us to drink some wine for it. I don't remember a specific age. I suppose it just goes down to who you're going to obey first. God's word or man's. The US is one of the few countries that has an age limit on alcohol. And we're the ones with the biggest problems pertaining to it. I don't drink, but I'm not in total agreement with the US's standpoint on this issue. The age limit was only to appease the prohibitionists in some way to prevent major strikes that origionally brought on the 18th ammendment (the prohibition ammendment for those who don't care for google or constitution class).

And as for churches that use actual wine as the communion, do the kids not also have the wine? Of course they do. Would you condemn churches for this? Why should we make something that Jesus did illegal for anyone at any age? It's silly and it makes something Christ did seem borderline sinful. So no, I am not adding that to my list. It remains at what the Bible says about drinking.

Gavin, that is Paul's command to Timothy, not God's command to all of us.

[joshaber]

Originally Posted by Lightknight

What about if you have a stomach pain? Paul tells us to drink some wine for it. I don't remember a specific age. I suppose it just goes down to who you're going to obey first. God's word or man's.

Do you drink wine when you have a stomach pain? I'd hardly call Paul's medicinal advice to Timothy a Biblical command which we can disobey government to obey.

[Godreignsoveral]

Originally Posted by Lightknight

What about if you have a stomach pain? Paul tells us to drink some wine for it. I don't remember a specific age. I suppose it just goes down to who you're going to obey first. God's word or man's. The US is one of the few countries that has an age limit on alcohol. And we're the ones with the biggest problems pertaining to it. I don't drink, but I'm not in total agreement with the US's standpoint on this issue. The age limit was only to appease the prohibitionists in some way to prevent major strikes that origionally brought on the 18th ammendment (the prohibition ammendment for those who don't care for google or constitution class).

And as for churches that use actual wine as the communion, do the kids not also have the wine? Of course they do. Would you condemn churches for this? Why should we make something that Jesus did illegal for anyone at any age? It's silly and it makes something Christ did seem borderline sinful. So no, I am not adding that to my list. It remains at what the Bible says about drinking.

So Gavin, you're telling us that every time you have a stomach pain you actually follow through with drinking wine? Or do you, as I do, see that verse as advice to not be so legalistic about not drinking because it was healthy to have a drink. If you see it as only advice and not a dogmatic rule for every sick tummy, then how is it wrong to obey the civil law of the land... ie underage drinking prohibited... whether you agree with it or not? Did Paul promote slavery? No. But it was the custom of that land. He said if you could be free, be free... but it wasn't revolution material. I think you ought to be very careful about just disregarding our local legal system just because you think it hints at something bad. Even if it outlawed drinking altogether, unless it's specifically saying Jesus was a sinner for not obeying current drinking laws, we ought to be following the law. Are there exceptions? I don't know. As was discussed in the other thread, you'll probably not find a single law enforcement officer who's going to bust in on communion and arrest little kiddies and their parents too. *shrugs* I don't know if that makes it okay or if that makes the law officers wrong too. Either way, just to disregard the law because you're not diggin' it and Jesus didn't do it seems a bit silly when Jesus did follow the law of the land.

Mark

EDIT: Oh, yeah, exactly what +Donny and Joshaber said. I didn't see them ask this before I'd finished my slow typing... :-)

[Ryan Akers]

Yet another point which I have not heard refuted well at all...

We have advanced much more since the time of the Bible. Back in Biblical days wine was basically the only drink they could preserve well.

Now I'm not making excuses or anything, but I think a lot of people use the argument that Christ drank wine and take it too far.

Originally Posted by LightKnight

I've led more people to Christ in a pool hall than anywhere else (except maybe the Franklin Graham crusade in Florida). Keep in mind, I don't drink alcohol. But they had no idea what I was drinking when I was witnessing to them. They didn't really care to ask, either. They (the adults) bring their families to church too now.

That's great. But I don't see how that disproves my point. You don't drink alcohol and you weren't trying to correct their drunkenness....?

Originally Posted by LightKnight

Has the fermentation process somehow decreased? I think you really need to read up on fermentation processes. Wine is wine. I'm sure the "proof" differed just as much back then as it does now (maybe not quite as much).

No the fermentation process has not changed. Like I said, wine was used to kill the bacteria in water, thus it was consumed in small amounts with water. The wine in the Bible was watered down, thus it is NOT the same as what we have today.

Was Jesus "toeing the line"?

Christ was sinless and unable to sin...He is/was God. Thus, no, he was not toeing the line.

Was Paul commanding us to sin when he told us to drink a little wine when we're feeling sickly? To call this "toeing the line" is to say that we should act better than Christ in this aspect and be more religious than Paul.

Nowhere in what I have said have I said it was a sin to drink. Please do not misquote me.

Be careful to avoid such comments as these are the roads that our more religious/pharisetical brothers and sisters in Christ have taken. Assuming that they know better what is sinful and making their own doctrines surrounding it. Not that I'm saying you are portraying it at all, just that you should be more aware of this when people tell you such things.

Once again, I have not condemned anyone who drinks. In fact, when I first posted I said that I have no problem with people who drink. Once again, please do not misquote me.

Those who drink and support drinking automatically lump me into a group who says they are a bunch of sinners, which is great because they can assume whatever they want. I have clearly stated my beliefs and not attacked anyone or anything they believe.

Drunkeness is a sin, but drinking a beer isn't going to get you drunk. This is why the Bible only condemns drinking TO EXCESS.

No, drinking a beer will not get you DRUNK. Although, drinking a beer will have alcohol in your blood and you will be "buzzing" or whatever the new-fangled term is. Once you have the alcohol in your blood, it begins to impair you from your normal state. Though you may not be considered drunk, you are impaired a little.

My question without like trying to open a new can of worms and whatnot and cause a huge problem. What is "in excess"? Where do we draw the line?

Originally Posted by ChrisHarbison

This can go for anything. By this logic, a married man with a healthy sex life would be disqualified from correcting the ways of a man addicted to pornography. After all, how can the married man correct the abuser if he has a wrong view of the married man's sex life?

I see the point you are trying to make, yet I can't fully see it. Someone can see you drinking alcohol. 1.) I would hope that no one would see you and your wife's sex life. 2.) What view could a man have of another man's sex life with his wife? Sure he could see him as an adulteress, but it's highly unlikely that would happen. A man could just as easily help correct someone's addiction to pornography if he were married than if he were unmarried. I don't see the point of how it's the same...sorry.

Is this really relevant? I mean, honestly, does it really matter if our wine happens to be (and I'm not in any way convinced it is) stronger than theirs? It's still alcohol.

Ah, correct. That's a hard one to refute. Alcohol is alcohol. I've already addressed my views on that.

Sexual promiscuity is a sin, so why would we even be toeing the line by having sex with our spouses? Satan can take any good gift from God and tempt us to abuse it, that doesn't mean we should avoid it all together.

How many people sin by having sex with their spouse? If Satan is tempting me to have sex with my spouse...wouldn't that be like the house divided thing since God created sex as a gift to man? Now, if it were having sex with someone else's spouse, that would be another case. Once again, I don't see the point you're trying to make with that example, although I do see the point as a whole.

Once again, there is a fine line. Sure, Satan could tempt me to use my car to run over people for fun, and that doesn't mean I shouldn't drive. Drunkenness is something we are warned of in the Bible. If it isn't such a big temptation to man, why would God warn us of it.

And one last thing I struggle with is the fact that wine is called a mocker in the Bible. That's just a hard one to swallow as a whole to see it being drank in the New Testament. Yet another reason I am not convinced the wine of today and the wine of then are completely the same.