Featured Should a pastor be permitted to have a beer once in while?

Attitude? I am attempting to eliminate any further conflict with one who is too proud to say he is sorry for flinging insults at another who merely stated his position in no uncertain terms. If he apologizes then the matter is at an end....just like Christ commanded.

Your prejudices are sticking out like a sore thumb, friend.

P.S. His position is a lie and I am not the only one who has revealed this truth from the scriptures, from science, and from the legal definitions of fermentation/intoxication. He will answer for it in due season.

 

annsni, Except what alternatives were there? Not many. They could have grape juice at the grape harvest but grape juice without refrigeration quickly turns. They didn't have Welch's back then.

Why don't you try being honest about it? BOTH fermented and unfermented wine existed THROUGHOUT the entire ages of biblical time. It took time for wine to degenerate into an intoxicating drink so what people drank BEFORE that process made it harmful was ............(guess what?) grape juice. That's why Jesus called it 'the fruit of the vine' at the Lord's supper. That designation was NOT accidental. There is nothing that Jesus did that was accidental.

Concerning His transformation of water to wine at Cana........do you actually believe that the Lord Jesus Christ created an intoxicating beverage so that the people at the wedding would get EVEN MORE DRUNK than (according to many of your persuasion) they already were in the first place? Considering that it was Word of God that placed a curse on those who cause their brothers to get drunk then it is akin to blasphemy to suggest such a thing.

The Bible plainly tells us that drunkards will not enter in the kingdom of heaven(I Corinth. 6:10); so you think that Christ would contribute to the very thing that would/will send drinkers to hell fire?

Had Eli seen Hannah drink? I don't know. Her behavior was such that he thought her drunk. Did people look at Jesus and see His behavior and think Him drunk because of that? I see no evidence in Scripture to support that. They accused him of being a drunkard because they SAW Him drink.

Yes, they saw Him drink. So you agree with the wicked pharisees that he was drinking fermented wine. Do you also agree with them that Jesus was a glutton? Yes/no (I don't think you've answered that question yet) The only answer to this question has to be 'no' on both counts. Why? Because fermented wines/liquors are intoxicating and corrupt and the Son of God would not and could not come in contact with corruption of any kind.

Psalm 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Ac 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

 

You are not telling the truth. Our argument on this matter is exceedingly strong and the Holy Spirit never leads contrary to His Word. If you wish to defend the drinking of intoxicating beverages (wine in particular) then that is your choice but you will bear the responsibility rejecting the truth that has been so plainly laid before you.

Concerning your comrade in error: just please let it go. If he really wants to apologize for his deliberate insults then he knows how to reach me. I'm an easy forgiver.

I believe we've covered the bases here. Best wishes to you.

 

Maybe you are being led by other than the Hold Spirit?

 

The ONLY reason I am returning to this thread to post is because (imo) Cassidy has put forth what I consider a biased view of what the Scriptures teach.

It is (imo) important that readers and posters are presented with a more factual account than given.

I am NOT going to go into other Scriptures, but rely totally upon that Cassidy offered, and make (imo) the corrections to the view he presented.

Please, folks, I highly regard Cassidy, and am not desiring to draw swords with him, rather I am attempting to bring a bit of balance to a thread that seeks (imo) to excuse.

Only because YOU deem it without merit. There is NO Scripture support for such a statement.

This is mere smoke and mirrors, Cassidy. You and I both know that the Greek word does not distinguish between that which is fermented and that which is yet fermented. One must always consider the context for how the word is used.

You are supposedly relying upon such arguments and contentions, but frankly, the historical / cultural records of the ancients were mostly written by folks who found pleasure in perverted religions in which intoxication and excess were part of the worship.

Which you have not done, but make a blanket statement at all "wine" in the Scriptures is fermented.

At least you are correct that the ONLY determiner is actually "its usage, the scriptureal meaning of wine can be defined."

The Hebrew word meaning is: grape, wine, fruit of the vine. There is NO mark indicating the fermentation or alcoholic state.

In CONTEXT used for Noah certainly it is used as a fermented beverage because of the end result.
The word may not carry that meaning in the context found in Genesis 14:18, nor in Amos 9:14.

Certainly, it might, and it just as well could not. Depends on what the reader "reads into" what is read.

This is really strange, Cassidy.

Here (Acts 2) you have the heathen claiming that the folks are drunk and specifically on "new (sweet) wine." Yet you contend that is "grape juice!"

You are most inconsistent and contending for a view that is one sided.

If you are going to go to the languages, then it is wise to state accurately that one must always place the use of the drink in context to determine the meaning. Unlike many other words, the use of wine in the context of one verse does not always carry the meaning and weight to other verses.

 

I would think that getting one's name right when railing on him would be considered common courtesy.

On the other hand, repeatedly getting it wrong could be considered a veiled insult.

 

He's not GETTING anything wrong. He's doing it out of disrespect.

 

Yep, pure disrespect.