Grapes in the Early Spring

[Der Alte]

It does not say that He drank wine. It merely says that He came eating and drinking. Rick can say to Bob that he was eating and drinking yesterday, and yet it would not be a contradiction if Rick only drank water only. Just because somebody is drinking a liquid substance does not mean it is alcohol. Only if one reads alcohol or wine into the word “drinking” is such a thing so in their belief system that they want to be true. For I can drink a glass of milk, it does not mean I am drinking alcohol.

One can make the Bible say almost anything they want it to by quoting selective verses out-of-context, as has been done here.
Let us read the verse in-context.

Matthew 11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.[Luke 7:34]​

If Jesus had been drinking only water or unfermented grape juice why would it be insulting to call Him a winebibber?
Just for fun I looked up the Greek word translated "winebibber" in Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich Greek lexicon, previously inadvertently misidentified as "Hebrew."

οἰνοπότης, ου, ὁ (οἶνος, πότης ‘drinker’; Anacr. 99 Diehl; Callim. [?], Epigr. 36 Pf.; Polyb. 20, 8, 2 of one socially irresponsible; Anth. Pal. 7, 28, 2 here jocosely; UPZ 81 IV, 21 [II B.C.]; Pr 23:20; contrast ὑδροπότης teetotaler: Xen., Cyr. 6, 2, 29) wine-drinker, drunkard (w. φάγος) Mt 11:19; Lk 7:34 (the point being that Jesus is considered a fool, cp. Pr 23:19–21).—DELG s.v. πίνω. M-M.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., pp. 700–701). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.​

 

[miamited]

Again, why would you even ask me that question? You seem to not understand Jewish culture of the time nor the meaning of the scripture. John was a NAZIRITE from birth...He did not eat certain foods and did not drink wine. Yeshua did not have that same restriction. John was from a preistly class, Yeshua was from the house of David. It had NOTHING to do with socializing with people.

Hi YH,

Sorry, I was assuming that you were able to understand the use of the rhetorical. Forgive me. While your explanation is of the deepest and most profound logical sense. It isn't what the Scriptures say. The Scriptures merely say that he came neither eating or drinking. Now, we can surely spend years delving into what that statement may have meant for a Jew in Jesus' day, but what the Scriptures say is that John came neither eating or drinking. Then Jesus says that he did come eating and drinking. He was then considered to be a glutton and a drunkard.

But we know, at least those who know the Lord, that such a thing wasn't possible that Jesus was actually a glutton or drunkard. However, I am perfectly willing to allow you to believe that Jesus did drink fermented drink based on this singular passage of Scripture if that's what your understanding leads you to understand.

BTW, you are absolutely correct that I am not one bit knowledgeable on what Jews believed or thought 2,000 years ago, but I do try to allow that there are some passages of Scripture that we may not understand today because of that.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi DA,

You asked:

If Jesus had been drinking only water or unfermented grape juice why would it be insulting to call Him a winebibber?

Uhhh, because it would have been a lie about the Lord. A blasphemy as the Scriptures would describe it. I would think that anyone would consider it insulting to be blasphemed concerning their activities or nature. Wouldn't you?

Further, I'll ask you, was the Lord a glutton?

God bless,
Ted

 

[Der Alte]

Hi DA,
You asked:
Uhhh, because it would have been a lie about the Lord. A blasphemy as the Scriptures would describe it. I would think that anyone would consider it insulting to be blasphemed concerning their activities or nature. Wouldn't you?
Further, I'll ask you, was the Lord a glutton?
God bless,
Ted

You seem to have misunderstood my post. Of course, Jesus was neither a drunkard nor a glutton but some folks here, because of their anti-alcohol bias, claim that Jesus never drank alcohol content wine.
Jesus was called οἰνοπότης, pr. weenospotays. Why would the opponents of Jesus call Him that if it only meant drink a lot of grape juice?

 

[Mr. M]

But the Israelites would buy strong wine and drink from pagans and sometimes store it in that state, but when it came time to drink it, they would diluted it with several parts of water so that it would not be as intoxicating (unlike modern day alcoholic beverages).

How do you know this? Why couldn't they make their own date liquor?

 

[miamited]

You seem to have misunderstood my post. Of course, Jesus was neither a drunkard nor a glutton but some folks here, because of their anti-alcohol bias, claim that Jesus never drank alcohol content wine.
Jesus was called οἰνοπότης, pr. weenospotays. Why would the opponents of Jesus call Him that if it only meant drink a lot of grape juice?

Hi DA,

And...why would they have called him a glutton if it only meant that he had eaten normal meals?

God bless,
Ted

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Yes it does, it absolutely implies it if you read the rest of that scripture otherwise they would not use the term glutton and drunkard. Grape juice does not make you drunk.

They were lying. Jesus was no more close to being a glutton than he was a drinker.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

How do you know this? Why couldn't they make their own date liquor?

Wine in Biblical times differed from modern wine in its general potency and in the way in which it was consumed.

The term ‘wine’ usually refers to wine in some state of fermentation beginning with fresh, sweet juice available immediately after grape harvest (Isa 16:10; Jer 48:33) that quickly starts the fermentation process in the absence of refrigeration or pressurized bottling. Fermentation is a natural process that takesplace when the grape juice comes into contact with the yeast released from broken grape skins during the treading of grapes.

“New wine” in Hebrew and Greek respectively (tirosh / gleukos) may refer to the juice of the grape that was fresh or in the first year of fermentation. Mixed Wine in the OT was wine flavored with herbs and quite intoxicating (Prov 23:30). Undiluted wine in the NT era was approximately 7%-10% alcohol and usually not taken as a beverage without proper dilution. On account of extra yeast and controlled heating conditions, some standard table wines today by comparison are as much as 14% alcohol.

Fermented wine in the Greek and NT eras was regularly diluted with water1.

The Talmud (200 B.C. — A.D. 200) records the Jewish practice of regularly reducing the effects of wine by a 3/1 or 2/1 ratio of water to wine. In the rabbinic period “Yayin is to be distinguished from Shekar [strong drink]: the former is diluted with water; the latter is undiluted.”2 The Jewish Mishnah said, “They do not say the Benediction over the wine until water has been added to it.”3 The normal mixture for the Jews was three parts water to one part wine.4 In the Passover ritual during NT times the four cups every Jew was to drink during the ceremony had to be mixed three parts water to one part wine.5 This practice is reflected as common during the inter-testament period in 2 Maccabees 15:39: “It is harmful to drink wine alone, or again to drink water alone [bacteria issues], while wine mixed with water is sweet and delicious and enhances one’s enjoyment.”6

This dilution process reduced the alcoholic content of the wine down to approximately 2.25–2.75%. In contrast to the ancient world, the modern world does not dilute the effects of alcohol. Beer is 3.5% to 4.5% and typically served in 12-16 ounce containers; table wines are as much as 14%; fortified wines are 18-24%; hard liquor is 40% (80 proof).

A diluted wine would reduce the risks of drunkenness from that of an undiluted wine. Peter argued that the Christians at Pentecost were not drunk since it was only the third hour (9:00 AM). Normally, one had to linger with the wine or be “beside wine” (1 Timothy 3:3) in order to be intoxicated.

The Greeks practiced dilution and the practice eventually spread throughout the Roman world including Palestine. Pliny’s work entitled “Natural History” mentions an 8 to 1 ratio of water to wine. Other Classical Greek writers mention similar ratios: Hesiod–3 to 1, Alexis–4 to 1, Diocles — 2 to 1. Mnesitheus of Athens said: “The gods have revealed wine to mortals, to be the greatest blessing for those who use it aright, but for those who use it without measure, the reverse. For it gives food to them that take it and strength in mind and body. In medicine it is most beneficial … In daily intercourse, to those who mix and drink it moderately, it gives good cheer; but if you overstep the bounds, it brings violence. Mix it half and half and you get madness; unmixed, bodily collapse” (Stein, “Wine Drinking,” p. 9).

According to Stein, dilution was practiced in the early centuries of the church. Justin Martyr (150 A.D.) described the Lord’s Supper as “Bread is brought, wine and water, and the elder sends up prayers and thanksgiving” (Apology, I, 67, 5). Cyprian (250 A.D.) said, “Thus, therefore, in considering the cup of the Lord, water alone cannot be offered, even as wine alone cannot be offered. For if anyone offers wine only, the blood of Christ is dissociated from us; but if the water be alone, the people are dissociated from Christ. …. Thus the cup of the Lord is not indeed water alone nor wine alone, unless each be mingled with the other”

Source:
Why Believers Today Should Abstain from Alcohol (Part 1)

 

[Mr. M]

Source:
Why Believers Today Should Abstain from Alcohol (Part 1)

A whole lot of interesting information that really makes no case to support this title.
Q. Why should believers today abstain from alcohol?
A. New Testament answer: If their conscience convicts them to do so,
based on the circumstances that The Lord has placed them.
Someone mentioned not putting stumbling blocks before others.
Let's go with what that passage states:
Romans 14:
10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?
For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written:
“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”
12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this,
not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.
14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love.
Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died.
16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil;
17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace
and joy in the Holy Spirit.
18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men.

If there is a concern, do not drink wine on your porch.
If you see a brother doing so, don't judge.
Conclusion: Don't Judge.
Conclusion: Don't create a basis for judging others because you choose to place something
above the weightier matters.
Clearly, saints are divided over this issue. What is worse, accepting that some may have
a glass of wine on occasion with dinner, or divisions in the body?
The liver probably feels stronger about this issue than the sore feet.

Philippians 3:
15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think
otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.
16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule,
let us be of the same mind.

 

[a-lily-of-peace]

Hi DA,

And...why would they have called him a glutton if it only meant that he had eaten normal meals?

God bless,
Ted

This might give a bit more context:

Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not? And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast. No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.
(Matthew 9:14-17, KJV)

Also what the Lord said before and after the part comparing himself with John:

But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented. For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil. The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.
(Matthew 11:16-19, KJV)

If John didn’t eat bread or drink wine, yet the Lord instituted the breaking of bread and sharing of the cup of wine, that doesn’t mean John was excluded from the grace of Christ. He did the work the Lord prepared for him to do.

According to the Didache, the early church fasted on Wednesday and Friday to differentiate themselves from the “hypocrites”:

8.1 Let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on Mondays and Thursdays, but do you fast on Wednesdays and Fridays.

My understanding of the accusation is that the criticism of John (We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced) is a reflection of the unwillingness to see the truth in his preaching of repentance and the criticism of Christ (we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented) is a reflection of the unwillingness to see the truth of who he is.

For my own personal opinion about wine, I believe the early church did mix wine with water, I believe it’s actually better to do so because it’s a lighter drink that provides a bit of refreshment rather than heaviness, but I also believe that the way grapes ferment into wine was designed by God whereas pasteurisation was designed by the industrialist man, and it actually does bother me to hear people strongly believe that the pasteurised grape juice is so much superior that the natural wine has become a sin.

Of course if the church has people who, for their own conscience sake, would like to abstain from all fermented wine yet partake in the cup then pasteurised grape juice is still the fruit of the vine and is sufficient, though I don’t believe it’s superior.

I believe that the alcohol abstinence movement that criminalised alcohol in the US was a genuine response to social ills yet it comes across as legislating fasting as a response to the obesity rate. Fasting and abstaining from wine are both good if you’re called by your conscience to do so but I’m not sure it’s good to criminalise someone for eating a hamburger on Friday.

In all things may the Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on his people and show us the way in which to walk.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Hi DA,

You asked:


Uhhh, because it would have been a lie about the Lord. A blasphemy as the Scriptures would describe it. I would think that anyone would consider it insulting to be blasphemed concerning their activities or nature. Wouldn't you?

Further, I'll ask you, was the Lord a glutton?

God bless,
Ted

yes, but that was the point. If He had not been drinking wine, there would have been no reason to say that...it was in contrast to John. How would drinking grape juice or water imply calling him a drunkard?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

They were lying. Jesus was no more close to being a glutton than he was a drinker.

Of course they were lying. However that does not negate the reason they said it was because he did drink wine. They would have never even implied it had it been just grape juice or water...it would not even make any sense at all...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Hi YH,

Sorry, I was assuming that you were able to understand the use of the rhetorical. Forgive me. While your explanation is of the deepest and most profound logical sense. It isn't what the Scriptures say. The Scriptures merely say that he came neither eating or drinking. Now, we can surely spend years delving into what that statement may have meant for a Jew in Jesus' day, but what the Scriptures say is that John came neither eating or drinking. Then Jesus says that he did come eating and drinking. He was then considered to be a glutton and a drunkard.

But we know, at least those who know the Lord, that such a thing wasn't possible that Jesus was actually a glutton or drunkard. However, I am perfectly willing to allow you to believe that Jesus did drink fermented drink based on this singular passage of Scripture if that's what your understanding leads you to understand.

BTW, you are absolutely correct that I am not one bit knowledgeable on what Jews believed or thought 2,000 years ago, but I do try to allow that there are some passages of Scripture that we may not understand today because of that.

God bless,
Ted

Yes, that IS what it says...in contrast to John. Yeshua DID, John DID NOT. Drinking meant wine. Both drank water so that could not be it. Yeshua drank wine, John did not...you must understand WHY...

 

[a-lily-of-peace]

The portrayal of fermented wine as an alcoholic beverage (because it’s rightly said that a percentage of the drink is alcohol) is as disingenuous to me as portraying pasteurised grape juice as a sugary beverage (because it’s rightly said that a percentage of the drink is sugar) and then saying it’s wrong to drink pasteurised grape juice because encouraging the consumption of sugary beverages leads to tooth decay, diabetes, obesity, poor impulse control, etc.

In fact the alcoholic percentage of wine is among the lowest of alcoholic beverages whereas the sugar percentage of pasteurised juice is among the highest of sugary beverages.

“An 8-ounce serving of Welch's grape juice contains 36 grams of sugar and 140 calories, about one-third more than the same amount of Coca-Cola.”

CSPI Whacks Welch's Over Deceptive Health Claims | Center for Science in the Public Interest

Please note that I’m not saying it’s wrong to drink grape juice but only why that sort of rhetoric clouds the conversation.

If sharing a cup of fermented wine mixed with water will turn away the one who only drinks pasteurised juice then it’s better to have compassion and drink the one they drink.

For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. (Romans 14:17, KJV)

 

[Bible Highlighter]

A whole lot of interesting information that really makes no case to support this title.
Q. Why should believers today abstain from alcohol?
A. New Testament answer: If their conscience convicts them to do so,
based on the circumstances that The Lord has placed them.
Someone mentioned not putting stumbling blocks before others.
Let's go with what that passage states:
Romans 14:
10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?
For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written:
“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”
12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this,
not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.
14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love.
Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died.
16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil;
17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace
and joy in the Holy Spirit.
18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men.

If there is a concern, do not drink wine on your porch.
If you see a brother doing so, don't judge.
Conclusion: Don't Judge.
Conclusion: Don't create a basis for judging others because you choose to place something
above the weightier matters.
Clearly, saints are divided over this issue. What is worse, accepting that some may have
a glass of wine on occasion with dinner, or divisions in the body?
The liver probably feels stronger about this issue than the sore feet.

Philippians 3:
15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think
otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.
16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule,
let us be of the same mind.

This is a spiritual issue and those who already drink and enjoy drinking will defend its use despite what history and Scripture and basic morality says. I used to believe that believers could drink socially if their conscience did not condemn them in the fact that all alcoholic beverages are technically very mild poisons, but I now lean towards the view that we are living in the last days and men are simply out to serve themselves and their own pleasures and vices, and not our Lord. I believe the Christian who is sold out to Christ will not want to drink out of their love for the Lord (even if their conscience did not condemn them). They will not drink so as not to make their brother to stumble.

For again, once a believer opens pandora's box of drinking alcohol, they could drink things like 151, or other strong alcoholic beverages socially. Problem is that these kinds of drinks are purely made to get a person drunk quickly because of their extremely high alcohol content. Can Christians drink beverages with a little bit of rat poison in in it? Surely not, then why can they drink alcoholic beverages that slowly kill them? Do they have a liberty to defile the temple? No. 1 Corinthians 3 says that if we defile the temple God will destroy us.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Of course they were lying. However that does not negate the reason they said it was because he did drink wine. They would have never even implied it had it been just grape juice or water...it would not even make any sense at all...

No offense, but I believe you are reading the Bible with a bias towards drinking alcoholic beverages to get this kind of understanding from the Bible. How so? Well, John the Baptist was said by others to have a devil (Luke 7:33). But that does not by any means John exhibited any standard symptoms of being possessed to lead them to that conclusion. They simply lied completely and or made it up to slander John. This parallel of John the Baptist is used for Jesus eating and drinking. So again, they entirely lied in regards to Jesus. Nothing they said had any truth to it.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

This might give a bit more context:

Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not? And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast. No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.
(Matthew 9:14-17, KJV)

Also what the Lord said before and after the part comparing himself with John:

But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented. For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil. The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.
(Matthew 11:16-19, KJV)

If John didn’t eat bread or drink wine, yet the Lord instituted the breaking of bread and sharing of the cup of wine, that doesn’t mean John was excluded from the grace of Christ. He did the work the Lord prepared for him to do.

According to the Didache, the early church fasted on Wednesday and Friday to differentiate themselves from the “hypocrites”:

8.1 Let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on Mondays and Thursdays, but do you fast on Wednesdays and Fridays.

My understanding of the accusation is that the criticism of John (We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced) is a reflection of the unwillingness to see the truth in his preaching of repentance and the criticism of Christ (we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented) is a reflection of the unwillingness to see the truth of who he is.

For my own personal opinion about wine, I believe the early church did mix wine with water, I believe it’s actually better to do so because it’s a lighter drink that provides a bit of refreshment rather than heaviness, but I also believe that the way grapes ferment into wine was designed by God whereas pasteurisation was designed by the industrialist man, and it actually does bother me to hear people strongly believe that the pasteurised grape juice is so much superior that the natural wine has become a sin.

Of course if the church has people who, for their own conscience sake, would like to abstain from all fermented wine yet partake in the cup then pasteurised grape juice is still the fruit of the vine and is sufficient, though I don’t believe it’s superior.

I believe that the alcohol abstinence movement that criminalised alcohol in the US was a genuine response to social ills yet it comes across as legislating fasting as a response to the obesity rate. Fasting and abstaining from wine are both good if you’re called by your conscience to do so but I’m not sure it’s good to criminalise someone for eating a hamburger on Friday.

In all things may the Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on his people and show us the way in which to walk.

I also believe the Israelite mixed water with wine so as to dilute its potency so as to prevent others from getting drunk so quickly. They stored wine in an undiluted state sometimes in travel leather pouches and used it to sanitize unclean drinking water. It could be used for medical reasons in an undiluted state. But when they drank for social reasons or to celebrate, they drank the wine by diluting it with several parts of water. Today's wines are not like that. They are much higher in alcoholic content because they are not diluted with water.

Jesus created grape juice or unfermented wine with his miracle. He did not create aged fermented alcoholic wine. He created something fresh and new and pure and holy and good. The beverage of the Lord's cup in the Lord's supper is called “the fruit of the vine” in three gospels. This does not sound like juice that has been consumed partially by yeast with it pooping out alcohol. It sounds like fresh fruit of the vine (i.e. grape juice). In fact, if you believe that alcoholic wine is the actual beverage at the Lord's supper, then you need to start promoting that kind of beverage to even children.

Side Note:

There is no mention in Scripture about how children were excluded from partaking in the Lord's supper because it included intoxicating beverages.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

A whole lot of interesting information that really makes no case to support this title.
Q. Why should believers today abstain from alcohol?
A. New Testament answer: If their conscience convicts them to do so,
based on the circumstances that The Lord has placed them.
Someone mentioned not putting stumbling blocks before others.
Let's go with what that passage states:
Romans 14:
10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?
For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written:
“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”
12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this,
not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.
14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love.
Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died.
16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil;
17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace
and joy in the Holy Spirit.
18 For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men.

If there is a concern, do not drink wine on your porch.
If you see a brother doing so, don't judge.
Conclusion: Don't Judge.
Conclusion: Don't create a basis for judging others because you choose to place something
above the weightier matters.
Clearly, saints are divided over this issue. What is worse, accepting that some may have
a glass of wine on occasion with dinner, or divisions in the body?
The liver probably feels stronger about this issue than the sore feet.

Philippians 3:
15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think
otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.
16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule,
let us be of the same mind.

Patrick E. McGovern is a pro-drinking secular authority on ancient and modern wine. He said, “Concentrating grape juice down by heating is still used to make the popular shireh of modern Iran and was known to the ancient peoples of Mesopotamia as well as the Greeks and Romans. It enables fruit to be preserved, and, diluted with water, it produces a refreshing, nonalcoholic beverage.” (Ancient Wine: The Search For The Origins Of Viniculture by Patrick E. McGovern, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 2003).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

An early 1800s recipe book, called “receipts” back then, gives directions that would preserve grapes fresh for 12 months. These grapes could be pressed into a cup at any time of the year (New Family Receipt Book, London; 1820).

So folks who say that we could not preserve grape juice back in earlier years is simply not true.

 

[Mr. M]

This is a spiritual issue and those who already drink and enjoy drinking will defend its use despite what history and Scripture and basic morality says. I used to believe that believers could drink socially if their conscience did not condemn them in the fact that all alcoholic beverages are technically very mild poisons, but I now lean towards the view that we are living in the last days and men are simply out to serve themselves and their own pleasures and vices, and not our Lord. I believe the Christian who is sold out to Christ will not want to drink out of their love for the Lord (even if their conscience did not condemn them). They will not drink so as not to make their brother to stumble.
For again, once a believer opens pandora's box of drinking alcohol, they could drink things like 151, or other strong alcoholic beverages socially. Problem is that these kinds of drinks are purely made to get a person drunk quickly because of their extremely high alcohol content. Can Christians drink beverages with a little bit of rat poison in in it? Surely not, then why can they drink alcoholic beverages that slowly kill them? Do they have a liberty to defile the temple? No. 1 Corinthians 3 says that if we defile the temple God will destroy us.

Therefore, we should consider 1 Corinthians 3, in regards to 'defiling this Temple'.
1 Corinthians 3:3. for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?
Paul is addressing a church here, not an individual, and his concern is divisions within, that destroy
the fellowship in the Holy Spirit. He then speaks of our works being tried:
14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward.
15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
To be clear, the work is the building (edifying) of the body of Christ unto a mature group, where the
Holy Spirit can properly manifest, as discussed later in chapters 12 and 14. So now consider the famous
"defiling the temple" verses.
16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
17 If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.
Once again, Paul is not addressing an individual, but a group. You are the temple.
[G2075]-este=you in plural, of course.
No man is an island is good literature. No man is a temple is Truth. We are the temple, and all of our
divisions are what defiles that temple. When someone asks "are you pretrib?, amil? do you drink alcohol?
What they are asking is: how do you defile the temple? Not that you cannot have your own opinions about such matters, but many are extreme in defending their views, to which Paul advises:
Romans 14:22. Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves.(or disapproves!)
Now we come to the verses in 1 Corinthians 3 that works against both sides of such a carnal disagreement.
18 Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become
a fool that he may become wise.
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”;
20 and again, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.”
21 Therefore let no one boast in men. For all things are yours...
If you review this thread and highlight worldly information, facts and figures, many historical and social suppositions in one color, then highlight scriptural references in another color, the facts and figures will probably win out.
What is spiritual is found in chapter 13. When you do something for the love of Christ, your motive will
always be pure. I very rarely drink any alcohol, but not for any of the reasons mentioned earlier from your document. I simply don't give it much thought. When you sanctify yourself to ministering in the Word and prayers in faith toward The Son of God, worldly pleasures fade. You rarely think about these things, until they come up in a discussion among believers. Love for others may impel you towards abstaining from something, but it may require you to do something in moderation.
1 Corinthians 10:
29 “Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience?
30 But if I partake with thanks, why am I evil spoken of for the food over which I give thanks?
31 Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
32 Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God,
33 just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many,
that they may be saved.

I believe the Christian who is sold out to Christ will not want to drink out of their love for the Lord (even if their conscience did not condemn them). They will not drink so as not to make their brother to stumble.

I cannot argue against this statement, because I agree that any decision motivated by love for Christ
and His church IS, in fact, the direction given by conscience.
Conscience doesn't just condemn, it also approves.

For again, once a believer opens pandora's box of drinking alcohol,

Talk about a 'pandora's box', sounds more like fear. Perfect love casts out fear.