Drinking

[webdog]

Which proves that not all wines were the same in the Bible.

Those that brought blessings were not alcoholic.
Those that brought God's wrath were alcoholic.

Pure eisegesis.

 

[DHK]

Here is alcohol biblicaly and in context.
http://drbacchus.com/bible/alcohol.html

First is obviously a biased article.
Second, he often argues from a circular and thus illogical point of view.
One good example is here:

The third reference to wine in connection with Jesus is the sacrament he instituted during Passover, the Lord's Supper, as recorded in Matthew 26:27, Mark 14:23, and Luke 22:17. In all three references, the word wine is not mentioned. Instead it says, "He took the cup." Because the occasion was the Passover, we know that the cup contained wine. If use of wine were truly sinful it is unlikely Jesus would have used it as a foundational and ongoing ritual of the New Covenant.

He took the cup.
In each reference the word "wine" is used.
We "know" that the cup contained "wine."
If the use of wine were truly sinful it is unlikely Jesus would have used it...

The circular and illogical reasoning breaks down at every point.
We know he took the cup and the word for wine, oinos, which also means grape juice is used.
Thus we know that the cup contained "grape juice."
The use of alcoholic wine would have been sinful because of what the Bible teaches about wine and what it represents. Christ would not have used a sinful representation to symbolize the purity of his blood. We use his own argument against him. It was grape juice.

 

[webdog]

First is obviously a biased article.
Second, he often argues from a circular and thus illogical point of view.
One good example is here:

Actually, I thought it was one of the most unbiased articles written on alcohol.

He took the cup.
In each reference the word "wine" is used.
We "know" that the cup contained "wine."
If the use of wine were truly sinful it is unlikely Jesus would have used it...

The circular and illogical reasoning breaks down at every point.
We know he took the cup and the word for wine, oinos, which also means grape juice is used.
Thus we know that the cup contained "grape juice."
The use of alcoholic wine would have been sinful because of what the Bible teaches about wine and what it represents. Christ would not have used a sinful representation to symbolize the purity of his blood. We use his own argument against him. It was grape juice.

Wow. His logic is circular and "illogical" What you put forth is pure eisegesis.

Where was His grape juice stored, DHK from summer to spring? There weren't any grapes to harvest to make fresh juice, so please tell us where He got this

 

[annsni]

Here is alcohol biblicaly and in context.
http://drbacchus.com/bible/alcohol.html

That's a great article!! No emotion, no bias - just straight information.

 

[DHK]

Actually, I thought it was one of the most unbiased articles written on alcohol.

Wow. His logic is circular and "illogical" What you put forth is pure eisegesis.

Where was His grape juice stored, DHK from summer to spring? There weren't any grapes to harvest to make fresh juice, so please tell us where He got this

Round and round we go. I already did once. You ignored me. You apparently ignored a post I had directed to Moriah a couple of pages back detailing some of the history of wines in Israel. That will give you some good information as well. Read first what I posted instead of asking the same question over and over again.

 

[billwald]

If grapes were harvested in late summer, early fall, as they are now, the it would be impossible for Jesus to have access to plain (fresh) grape juice at Passover.


http://irenesharonhodes.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/3-2-1-go-the-2011-israeli-grape-harvest-begins/

Last Thursday, August 4, 2011, the harvest began at the Golan Heights Winery. The first varietal to be plucked from the vine? Pinot Noir. This is so exciting for me. I’m going to be going up to the Golan this week for a harvest party, and I may be going a few times, hopefully to the Golan and Galil, before it’s over. Here’s a short video taken a couple days ago – the first pressing of the first grapes of 2011:

http://www.prohibitionhangover.com/israelwine.html

Two terms for wine are used throughout the Bible. In the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament), the Hebrew word is yayin, while the Christian New Testament, written in Greek, used the word oinos, from which we get our word “wine.” Both meant the same thing: fermented wine. There is no word for unfermented wine in Scripture. Wine is wine. It was always fermented. . . .

After the Passover celebration in Jerusalem, the farmers returned home, where they had about a month before they harvested their winter wheat in April or May. They then made another pilgrimage to Jerusalem for Pentecost, fifty days after Passover.

The third annual pilgrimage, Sukkot, was the Feast of Tabernacles, which celebrated the fall harvest of grapes, olives and fruits. During the harvest, people slept in temporary huts in the vineyards. Once the harvest was in, the wine fermented and the olives pressed into oil, they made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem once again – this time commemorating their ancestors' journey from Egypt to Canaan, the land of plenty. Then they returned home, sowed their winter barley and wheat, and started the annual farming cycle over. (Another week-long festival was added in the 2nd century BCE: Hannukah, celebrating the successful Maccabean Revolt against the Syrians. That is considered to be a minor holiday compared to the big three.)

 

[annsni]

First is obviously a biased article.
Second, he often argues from a circular and thus illogical point of view.
One good example is here:

He took the cup.
In each reference the word "wine" is used.
We "know" that the cup contained "wine."
If the use of wine were truly sinful it is unlikely Jesus would have used it...

The circular and illogical reasoning breaks down at every point.
We know he took the cup and the word for wine, oinos, which also means grape juice is used.
Thus we know that the cup contained "grape juice."
The use of alcoholic wine would have been sinful because of what the Bible teaches about wine and what it represents. Christ would not have used a sinful representation to symbolize the purity of his blood. We use his own argument against him. It was grape juice.

If it were grape juice, Jesus would have used a sinful substance for the Passover meal. Grape juice contains leaven which occurs naturally on the grape skins. It couldn't be grape juice and HAS to be wine according to the Law.

 

[annsni]

Which proves that not all wines were the same in the Bible.

Those that brought blessings were not alcoholic.
Those that brought God's wrath were alcoholic.

You have no Scriptural support for this - just your own view. Your own view is interpreting the Scriptures instead of having Scripture interpret your view.

 

[Moriah]

I explained this answer in detail:

I have explained it in detail.

using Greek, Hebrew, English, and our older Shakespearean English which has now changed.

If you are enlightened, then you only need your language.
You tried to use the Greek word ‘oinos’ to prove your case, but it actually helped prove how wrong you are. Notice you do not reply to me about how you have been corrected of error, but you only come back with unfounded accusations against me.

I gave examples and facts from each one. Your rebuttal: "Wine means fermented wine."

Wine means a fermented drink in English, and Hebrew, and Greek, and all languages.

IOW you rejected all the evidence, trashed it, threw it out the door, disregarded it, don't care, and just remain with your one word/ one definition argument. That is not even logical or sane.

I use scripture to correct you, but you dismiss it. I even use English dictionaries to correct you in debates, but you think using English dictionaries are deceptive. LOL
I give you the definition for repent in English, which means to be sorry and desire to stop a sin; however, you say no. I give you the definition of wine being a fermented drink, but you say no. There is no such thing as wine being thought of as unfermented. That is ridiculous. Unless you deliberately look for an unfermented, or non-alcoholic wine. However, there is no such wording in the Bible.

Saying "unfermented wine" is an oxymoron.

How many words do you know have just one definition?
Look in your dictionary: "church," "ball," "box," or just any word that comes to the imagination. Look them up. Do they have just one definition? No, most words have more than one definition. You know that, and yet argue against all common sense that "wine" has only one definition. You are wrong.

Again, there is not a bunch of different meanings for wine. There is one, and it is an alcoholic drink.
I gave you scriptures that show you there is only one definition for wine. I also give English dictionary definition for wine, there is only one definition, and it is:
wine/wīn/
Noun: An alcoholic drink made from fermented grape juice.

There is not even a synonym for wine that would mean something else, for instance, liquor has the synonym drink and fluid, but NOT SO WITH WINE. Wine’s synonym is ‘vintage’! LOL
Show me one scripture that says, “Unfermented wine.” There is no such thing. Show me one scripture that says, "non-alcoholic wine." There is no such thing in the Bible.

1. Wine, in English, is a translation. Our Bible is a translation. Like Spanish, German, Cree, Maori, Hindi, and all the other languages of the world, the English Bible is a translation translated from the Hebrew and Greek. Thus the word "wine" becomes irrelevant, especially today, in the 21st century when our language has changed so much.

Do you think you can say anything and we will believe it?

2. The word "wine" has changed meanings in the last 400 years since the KJV was written, even in the last 200 years.
Even today one of the common definitions of wine still in use is:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/wine
But when the KJV was written the word "wine" always had the meaning of either fermented or unfermented wine. Only the context could determine the meaning.

Show me any Bible translation that says “unfermented wine.” Show me or concede.

2. The HEBREW word "Yayin," means both fermented or unfermented wined. Only the context can determine the meaning of the word.

English translators would have translated the UNFERMENTED WINE word into something else besides wine then.
Yayin means wine. Yayin does not mean unfermented wine. Wine is wine. Wine IS a fermented drink. Show me a scripture that says a wine is unfermented.

3. The GREEK word "oinos" means both fermented or unfermented wine. Only the context can determine the meaning of the word.

I have already explained it to you a couple of times, but you ignore the truth. Oinos means wine, it does NOT mean “unfermented wine.” The word ‘oinos’ is in the word drunkenness. The word ‘oinos’ is in the word ‘winebibber.’ The word ‘oinos’ is in the word tippling. Answer the question: How does the word you claim means unfermented wine also mean drunkenness and tippling? It is just not real what you say.

4. The same is true of the English word "cider." Only the context can determine whether or not it is alcoholic cider or non-alcoholic cider.

I have already explained this to you too. You cannot use the word cider to prove your false beliefs that wine means not fermented. In the U.S.A., they use the word cider for apple juice, which does not help your case one bit.

It is foolish to say that "wine" always refers to an alcoholic beverage because it doesn't; not even in our modern day English language does it refer all the time to an alcoholic beverage.

I have proven that wine is always a fermented drink in the Bible.

As a side note, have you ever, or seen others, buy non-alcoholic beer from a grocery store?? Or do you have it stuck in your mind that it is always alcoholic.

In the Bible, it says “wine and other fermented drink.” The Bible also says, “Vinegar made from wine” and “grape juice and “grapes” and “raisins.” The Bible covers all the drinking and eating concerned with GRAPES, but NOWHERE does the Bible say “non-alcoholic wine,” and “unfermented wine.” You do not try to reason with the truth, you bring up things that are not even in the Bible.
Now, please do not forget to answer the question about your claim that oines (wine) also being non-alcoholic, but the word for drunkenness is OINOphugia, and the word for tippling is parOINOS, and the word for winebibber is OINOpotes.

 

[Moriah]

We know he took the cup and the word for wine, oinos, which also means grape juice is used.

Oinos does NOT mean grape juice. I have a Greek dictionary right here. There are Greek dictionaries online. Give a link to the word oinos meaning grape juice.

The use of alcoholic wine would have been sinful because of what the Bible teaches about wine and what it represents. Christ would not have used a sinful representation to symbolize the purity of his blood. We use his own argument against him. It was grape juice.

You see how dangerous it is not to accept God’s word. Listen to the blasphemy spoken about if Jesus used wine, and he did!

 

[Steadfast Fred]

You have no Scriptural support for this - just your own view. Your own view is interpreting the Scriptures instead of having Scripture interpret your view.

You have no Scriptural support for the teaching that wine that was a blessing and wine that brought a curse were both alcoholic - just your own view. Your own view is interpreting the Scripture instead of having Scripture interpret your view.

 

[Don]

I got into this discussion with a gentleman here where I currently live; I mentioned that Nehemiah took the king his wine. He immediately launched into wine being "new wine" and non-alcoholic, etc., etc.

My question to him was, how did Noah and/or Lot get drunk on new wine?

I've never received an answer to that question. Could someone help me out?

Because otherwise, I'm forced to consider that the passages against drinking are actually talking about drunkards, and "taken to much wine," and otherwise abusing the substance.

HOWEVER, I do caution against the use if there are those present who find it sinful, and therefore it would cause a stumbling block between you and them (Romans 14, and all that).

 

[Steadfast Fred]

I got into this discussion with a gentleman here where I currently live; I mentioned that Nehemiah took the king his wine. He immediately launched into wine being "new wine" and non-alcoholic, etc., etc.

My question to him was, how did Noah and/or Lot get drunk on new wine?

I've never received an answer to that question. Could someone help me out?

Because otherwise, I'm forced to consider that the passages against drinking are actually talking about drunkards, and "taken to much wine," and otherwise abusing the substance.

HOWEVER, I do caution against the use if there are those present who find it sinful, and therefore it would cause a stumbling block between you and them (Romans 14, and all that).

Please provide the Scripture that says Noah and Lot got drunk on new wine.

 

[Don]

Please provide the Scripture that says Noah and Lot got drunk on new wine.

There isn't any; that's my point. Some folks make out this distinction about heroes of the faith not having anything to do with alcoholic wine; but scripture shows those heroes of the faith getting drunk on what was obviously *not* "new wine."

 

[annsni]

You have no Scriptural support for the teaching that wine that was a blessing and wine that brought a curse were both alcoholic - just your own view. Your own view is interpreting the Scripture instead of having Scripture interpret your view.

I go in reading the clear teaching of Scripture that even children can understand.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

There isn't any; that's my point. Some folks make out this distinction about heroes of the faith not having anything to do with alcoholic wine; but scripture shows those heroes of the faith getting drunk on what was obviously *not* "new wine."

Does Scripture say that Lot intended to get drunk on wine?

Proverbs 20:1 tells us that wine is a mocker and that it deceives.

Had they refrained from drinking at all, Noah would not have caused his son to look upon his nakedness and Lot would not have committed fornication with his daughters.

 

[annsni]

Does Scripture say that Lot intended to get drunk on wine?

Proverbs 20:1 tells us that wine is a mocker and that it deceives.

Had they refrained from drinking at all, Noah would not have caused his son to look upon his nakedness and Lot would not have committed fornication with his daughters.

Had they refrained from drinking to excess, Noah would not have caused his son to look upon his nakedness and Lot would not have committed fornication with his daughters.

 

[Don]

Does Scripture say that Lot intended to get drunk on wine?

So now it's not about whether the wine is alcoholic, but our intent?

Proverbs 20:1 tells us that wine is a mocker and that it deceives.

And Proverbs 23:20 tells us not to be among winebibbers; but the context (vs 21) tells us that it's talking about drunkenness, not staying away from wine entirely. Proverbs 23:30 talks about those that tarry at the wine, or seek the mixed wine. And Proverbs 31:6 tells us to give wine to those of heavy (bitter, pained) hearts.

Had they refrained from drinking at all, Noah would not have caused his son to look upon his nakedness and Lot would not have committed fornication with his daughters.

And if he'd only drank grape juice ("new wine"), it wouldn't have been a problem. But he didn't; and for some reason he didn't drink in moderation, and thus we have a scriptural principle about the evils of getting drunk -- but not necessarily against drinking.

 

[Moriah]

And if he'd only drank grape juice ("new wine"), it wouldn't have been a problem. But he didn't; and for some reason he didn't drink in moderation, and thus we have a scriptural principle about the evils of getting drunk -- but not necessarily against drinking.

New wine is new wine it is not grape juice.

A person can get drunk from new wine as they can from old wine.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
But others were mocking them as they said, “These have drunk new wine and have become drunk.”

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

American King James Version
Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

Other translations say new wine too.

 

[DHK]

You see how dangerous it is not to accept God’s word. Listen to the blasphemy spoken about if Jesus used wine, and he did!

You don't make sense.
This is what I said:

Originally Posted by DHK
The use of alcoholic wine would have been sinful because of what the Bible teaches about wine and what it represents. Christ would not have used a sinful representation to symbolize the purity of his blood. We use his own argument against him. It was grape juice.

The corrupted wine described as corrupted in Proverbs 23 would never be used to symbolize the precious blood of Christ. That is not a blasphemous view, but a Biblical view.

Your assertion that oinos has only one meaning is false.
It has two--both fermented and unfermented wine. Don't live in denial.