Drinking a beer does not go against Bible

[AlexDTX]

But in these things: They all have their rightful place in allowance.
People can only have sex within the bounds of marriage.
Alcoholic drinks of today have their rightful place, too. One use is that they can be used for medical reasons as Paul told Timothy to put a little wine into his water for the infirmities of his stomach. For wine back in Biblical times used by the Israelites who were faithful to God was diluted with water. Revelation says, "he same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation" (Revelation 14:10). The picture here is that the wine is without the mixture of water to dilute and hence the full strength of the wine that ferments is the wrath of God being poured out upon the wicked who take the mark of the beast.

In other words, the wine of today was not like the wine the Israelites (Who were faithful to God) had drunk.



While this may be true in the case for meats sacrificed to idols, we cannot ignore the warning in Scripture that says,

"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; " (Ephesians 5:18).

One can only get drunk (of their own free will) if they start to drink.
So while a believer does have a liberty in Christ, we are not to let our good be evil spoken of.
And it is still true that wine is a serpent that can bite you, too.
So the believing Christian who drinks socially, has to be crazy wildly careful not to be addicted and or to make other Christian brothers to stumble if they struggle with alcoholism. Meaning, if they truly love their brother, they would drink in private and not put at risk their brother in seeing them in public partaking of a drug that they struggle with.

Anyways, the safer play is always to pick up your cross, deny yourself, and follow Jesus.
But that is your call (of course).
But every man will have to give an answer to God for what he has done here upon this Earth.


...

jason, I don't disagree that alcohol is a dangerous thing to drink. I do disagree with your assumption about the wine the Jews drank or the passage regarding drinking wine for Timothy's intestinal troubles. I think the issue in Timothy was the water itself was unhealthy to drink hence the suggestion to drink a little wine instead.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

dont have those numbers on my phone.

This is the post # I am talking about.

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...o-against-bible.7966249/page-18#post-70182735

Just click on the link above here and let the magic of the internet take you there.

Stones?

Yes, you were criticizing the man for the use of a name without trying to check as to what he said it means.
You just threw stones at him with your words.

How can you call a pig holy?
Its a filthy animal that the jews were not allowed to touch.
No animal is holy, if some of them actually were holy I am sure the pig wouldnt be one of them

Have you ever read about how Peter was told by God to eat unclean animals in a vision?


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

jason, I don't disagree that alcohol is a dangerous thing to drink. I do disagree with your assumption about the wine the Jews drank or the passage regarding drinking wine for Timothy's intestinal troubles. I think the issue in Timothy was the water itself was unhealthy to drink hence the suggestion to drink a little wine instead.

Why exactly do you disagree? Which verses show you that?


...

 

[Archivist]

Please show me where in John 2 you think he was an alcohol or wine expert?

That is what a steward is.

Please show me where you think it says alcohol was the actual beverage being used.

I've already done that several times, starting with the Hebrew word for wine.

What words of the steward do you think I am not explaining? Please provide his exact words.
Thank you.

I've already done that sevearl times. I'm not going to do it again.

Can you honestly say that this was a part of your conversation with God one day?

"Lord, I don't want to be right here. I want you to show me the truth in your Word even if I don't like it." "Lord, maybe there is an unfermented wine (grape juice) and I am just not wanting to see it because I like to drink socially."
​

If you prayed a prayer like that and truly meant it, and you were honestly willing to see what God says in His Word about wine, I believe you will be able to see what I am trying to show you. But if you have made up your mind and you are right, then by all means you will see whatever you want to see.

Why would I pray a prayer like that when God has given us a wonderful alcoholic beverage, wine, to be enjoyed in moderation?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Why would I pray a prayer like that when God has given us a wonderful alcoholic beverage, wine, to be enjoyed in moderation?

Well, someone would obviously pray a prayer like that because they do not want to be deceived about what God's Word is really saying.

As for the word "steward": It is dangerous to base an entire theology off of one word. We need a clear example elsewhere in Scripture showing us how a steward is a wine expert. Taking a word and defining it how you want to define it is not proper exegesis. Context (i.e. the surrounding words) and cross references helps us to determine the meaning of words in the Bible. In other words comparing Scripture with Scripture like a good Berean.

As for the words of the steward of him saying men serve the best wine first and the worst last as an indication that it is alcoholic: Well, you run into several problems with this interpretation. Again, if the men were "well drunk" on intoxicating wine (even if it was a little bit intoxicating), and Jesus served them more intoxicating wine, then Jesus would be contributing to their intoxication or in being less sober. For you are proposing that the best wine was served first because men who drank the worse wine last would be too intoxicated to notice. Or is that not what you are saying? Remember, Scripture tells us to be sober in many places. If Jesus contributed to people being not sober (on any level), he would have sinned. The Bible says, "Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken" (Habakkuk 2:15).

Anyways, the reason why the steward serves the best wine first and the worst last (with it being non-intoxicating) is because people are hungry and thirsty and their tongues are not filled with other foods or drinks. So they will be able to notice tastes and flavors more accurately. But after they eat and drink for a while, the food and drink lingers in their mouths. So they will be less likely to notice a poorer quality unfermented wine later in the feast. In other words, it has nothing to do with the guests being too intoxicated to notice (if that is what you are suggesting).



...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I suppose the problem I have is that if I encourage believers to take the drinking of alcohol lightly, and they fall into alcoholism, I am in part to blame because I told them it was not all that bad. But if I encourage others to treat wine (or alcohol) like a serpent (like the Scriptures say), then I am not only in line with God's Word but I am also protecting myself from being blamed by God at the Judgment because I warned people that alcohol can cause problems for them (Whereby such a warning can protect them - if they heed it). In other words, I am not burying my head in the sand by refusing to tell people about the seriousness of the problems of alcoholism and the deaths that are caused by drunk driving.

Sure, we have a liberty in Christ, but let not your good be evil spoken of (i.e. do not abuse your liberty in Christ).



...

 

[ToBeLoved]

I suppose the problem I have is that if I encourage believers to take the drinking of alcohol lightly, and they fall into alcoholism, I am in part to blame because I told them it was not all that bad. But if I encourage others to treat wine (or alcohol) like a serpent (like the Scriptures say), then I am not only in line with God's Word but I am also protecting myself from being blamed by God at the Judgment because I warned people that alcohol can cause problems for them (Whereby such a warning can protect them - if they heed it). In other words, I am not burying my head in the sand by refusing to tell people about the seriousness of the problems of alcoholism and the deaths that are caused by drunk driving.

Sure, we have a liberty in Christ, but let not your good be evil spoken of (i.e. do not abuse your liberty in Christ).
...

Or you could simply say nothing. Only what God has said in His Word.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Or you could simply say nothing. Only what God has said in His Word.

But such thinking really wouldn't be Biblical, though. For it is written,

"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." (2 Timothy 4:2).


...

 

[ToBeLoved]

But such thinking really wouldn't be Biblical, though. For it is written,

"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." (2 Timothy 4:2).


...

It wouldn't be Biblical to say what God's Word says? Since when? I think your verse disagree's with you.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It wouldn't be Biblical to say what God's Word says? Since when? I think your verse disagree's with you.

Ah, I see. You think I cannot use my own words along with the Word of God as a part of my rebuke. You are saying that I am only allowed to rebuke with just quoting Scripture alone (with no words of my own). However, many times Paul rebuked others using hIs own words and Scripture. So I do not see why believers of the future cannot do so, as well.


..

 

[Archivist]

Well, someone would obviously pray a prayer like that because they do not want to be deceived about what God's Word is really saying.

As for the word "steward": It is dangerous to base an entire theology off of one word. We need a clear example elsewhere in Scripture showing us how a steward is a wine expert. Taking a word and defining it how you want to define it is not proper exegesis. Context (i.e. the surrounding words) and cross references helps us to determine the meaning of words in the Bible. In other words comparing Scripture with Scripture like a good Berean.

As for the words of the steward of him saying men serve the best wine first and the worst last as an indication that it is alcoholic: Well, you run into several problems with this interpretation. Again, if the men were "well drunk" on intoxicating wine (even if it was a little bit intoxicating), and Jesus served them more intoxicating wine, then Jesus would be contributing to their intoxication or in being less sober. For you are proposing that the best wine was served first because men who drank the worse wine last would be too intoxicated to notice. Or is that not what you are saying? Remember, Scripture tells us to be sober in many places. If Jesus contributed to people being not sober (on any level), he would have sinned. The Bible says, "Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken" (Habakkuk 2:15).

Anyways, the reason why the steward serves the best wine first and the worst last (with it being non-intoxicating) is because people are hungry and thirsty and their tongues are not filled with other foods or drinks. So they will be able to notice tastes and flavors more accurately. But after they eat and drink for a while, the food and drink lingers in their mouths. So they will be less likely to notice a poorer quality unfermented wine later in the feast. In other words, it has nothing to do with the guests being too intoxicated to notice (if that is what you are suggesting).

Now you are back on saying that the men at the wedding were drunk. They were not. "Well drunk" is a term in old Englush; it does not mean they were drunk. That was already explained to you but you ignored it, just as you ignored Bible verses, just as you ignored the very meaning of the Hebrew word for wine.

I'm done here. And, yes, I will be enjoying a glass of Rhine wine with my dinner.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Now you are back on saying that the men at the wedding were drunk.

They were not. "Well drunk" is a term in old Englush; it does not mean they were drunk. That was already explained to you but you ignored it, just as you ignored Bible verses, just as you ignored the very meaning of the Hebrew word for wine.

Personally, I believe the word "well drunk" means to satiate, too. For I believe the substance was non-intoxicating and non-alcholic. Yet, you are saying the beverage was non-intoxicating (and yet it was alcoholic) and somehow they did not get drunk off of it? This would mean that the beverage was not fermented like normal wines and that it was unfermented wine. A fermented wine would mean it would intoxicate you.

I'm done here. And, yes, I will be enjoying a glass of Rhine wine with my dinner.

Enjoy your liberty in Christ, my friend.
Just be careful not to treat such a substance too lightly.
For it is also dangerous in the fact that it can bite like a serpent.
Anyways, may God's love shine upon and please be well.



...

 

[ToBeLoved]

Ah, I see. You think I cannot use my own words along with the Word of God as a part of my rebuke. You are saying that I am only allowed to rebuke with just quoting Scripture alone (with no words of my own). However, many times Paul rebuked others using hIs own words and Scripture. So I do not see why believers of the future cannot do so, as well.


..

That all went right over your head. Think simple Jason.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That all went right over your head. Think simple Jason.

Sorry, I am not buying it. I believe you are not revealing what you are talking about because you know you made a mistake. Unless of course you want to enlighten the rest of us. But that's okay. You don't have to. This is not what this thread is about, anyways.



...

 

[ToBeLoved]

jason, I don't disagree that alcohol is a dangerous thing to drink. I do disagree with your assumption about the wine the Jews drank or the passage regarding drinking wine for Timothy's intestinal troubles. I think the issue in Timothy was the water itself was unhealthy to drink hence the suggestion to drink a little wine instead.

Paul was also told by Luke to drink wine for his pain.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Sorry, I am not buying it. I believe you are not revealing what you are talking about because you know you made a mistake. Unless of course you want to enlighten the rest of us. But that's okay. You don't have to. This is not what this thread is about, anyways.



...

Like a boxer, you duck and weave.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Like a boxer, you duck and weave.

"So I run with purpose in every step. I am not just shadowboxing." (1 Corinthians 9:26 NLT).


...

 

[ToBeLoved]

"So I run with purpose in every step. I am not just shadowboxing." (1 Corinthians 9:26 NLT).


...

If your theology was good, that would be a good thing. But bad theology that is SCREAMED from the rooftops, creates more people with bad theology.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Paul was also told by Luke to drink wine for his pain.

Where in Scripture is that?

Luke's relationship with Paul is pretty mysterious. All we know is that they are fellow labourors in Christ.

Philemon 1:23-24:
"There salute thee Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus; Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas [Luke], my fellow-labourers."

Colossians 4:14:
"Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you."

2 Timothy 4:11:
"Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry."


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If your theology was good, that would be a good thing. But bad theology that is SCREAMED from the rooftops, creates more people with bad theology.

"Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt..." (Colossians 4:6).
"To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, showing all meekness unto all men." (Titus 3:2).

Anyways, may God bless you.


...