Employees at Southern Seminary agree to drink wine

I knew it!!! Before long those of the Reform Theology there at Southern will be having beer busts with the Lutherans.:smilewinkgrin: :laugh: :tongue3:

Bro Tony

 

It's about time we'd get back to more biblical forms of discussing theology!

 

Spoil sport.

 

This approaches the topic I wish to avoid. I don't care how you interpret any biblical passage. I only wish to squelch the fiction that there is a contradiction between the Abstract of Principles and the BF&M.

The arguments for and against boozing have been adequately made on this Board already, as were the arguments for interpreting any given passage in any given way. Although I could add some data that has never been mentioned, I perceived long ago that data doesn't matter to the argument. So I'll save myself the trouble.

Bottoms up!

 

gb93433, as can tell by my previous, we are in agreement. Some have asked what is the purpose of this thread. As in all of these threads they are to expound or find truth. When it is found we often find "truth" is not believed, because of "tradition" whether of long or short standing. It's what are we doing "now", not what was done before in our faith, and understanding.

God gave to man wine, and will make sure His people have it in the "kingdom" per Amos 9:14. This is the same wine that can make drunk in Leviticus 10:9, and then in 23:13 when something around a 1/3 of a gallon is used for a drink offering.

We agree there are just too many references in His Word to deny wine means wine, and not "grape juice".

 

Your statement implies that scripture and history indicate that "wine" cannot be used to refer to unfermented juice, even as it is used to refer to fermented juice. That implied claim is incorrect.

In Scripture, as elsewhere, the word "wine" is used to speak of the juice before fermentation and after fermentation. Therefore there is no contradiction between the Abstract of Principles and the BF&M.

You write much about God's desire that we drink alcohol. I haven't ever mentioned that question. I've made one point and I've made it repeatedly. You cannot refute it, for it is demonstrably inarguable. You're wasting bandwidth when you veer off into teen pregnancy and Spurgeon.

 

I wouldn't think, with the size of a cup used in communion, that using wine during the Lord's supper could be considered "drinking."

We offer both wine and juice, since we have some recovering alcoholics in our congregation. Only literalists care about that, anyway.

 

What I refuse is to be drawn into a debate over a topic other than the one I addressed.

I don't suppose it would be out of order here to state for the fifth time what I stated the other four times: the word wine is used in Scripture and elswhere to refer to both unfermented juice and fermented juice. Therefore there is no contradiction between the BF&M and Southern's Abstract of Principles.

You are arguing that there is a contradiction between the BF&M's position on beverage alcohol and the Bible's position. If you'll stop and think for a while, you'll realize that I have said nothing about that. I did not say that the BF&M is consistent with the Bible; I said that it is consistent with Southern's Abstract of Principles.

You agree, of course, that the word "wine" is used in Scripture to refer to unfermented juice, even as it is used to refer to fermented juice. Both of the uses are well attested and undeniable, even though there are debates about which is which sometimes. It is permissable, then, for a teetotaler to claim that he receives bread and wine at his BF&M-friendly Lord's Supper.

And that is why there is no contradiction between the BF&M and the Abstract of Principles.

 

Agree, and would think we are close in our servings, however we don't know the size cup used.

You do more than most. His blood saves, but also condemns. Wine Alcoholics use the real thing. It will bring them down. Can they now substitute for the real thing that they abused? By refusing the "blood", how can they commune with Him? This doesn't mean they are not now justified in Him, but they have placed themselves to where they are unable to "remember" Him, as He wished. They partook of which God gave to us to make our heart "glad", but they took too much, becoming "merry" just about all the time. But now they refuse.

Evidently your church (I don't believe there are many Baptist churches) does believe His Word reveals the truth, i.e. "wine" does represent His "blood" that was shed, or they would not allow what so many believe, and have this "sinful stuff", that nasty "blood" He said for us to drink.

If I were an alcoholic past, I would forget worrying about a "bad habit" I had and bite the bullet and take "wine", and look forward to the next time I could again remember Him as He requested, and have that "wine" at His table. Do we refuse our Savior of His One and only request? Not a command, not a pleading, and not an ordinance. "Do this in remembrance of me as oft as you will".

We can say "nothing doing", or perhaps O.K., but on my terms. You drink your "wine", and I'll remember you with my "grape juice". You know, is it His table that we are having our "bread", and our "????"?

 

I am 100 percent against it. Why? Glad you ask. Alcoholics, and believers who are recovering in their first stages, and a host of other reasons cry out against it.

I am not speaking to weather or not if a sip of wine is evil.

I can tell you first hand that those who argue it is ok to drink a glass of wine here and there or a can of been will only be blowing smoke around me. I have lived with an alcoholic, I have had my share of drinking.

The faintest trace of Alcohol for those struggling who are our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ could be the catalyst to spin them back into a former habit.

I can tell you this also, there isn't one argument that can win the battle that it is ok. If you have control over your body and you have the liberty to drink wine - it should be done in private and at home. I would not agree with that for my life but, I will leave the judgment of it to the Lord in your life.

If you insist on vine for communion would see you perhaps as an idealist, or someone who needs to spend a lot of time in a half way house or some other service around recovering alcoholics.

The argument that it will set off a diabetic attack can not even come close to the devastating outcome it has for the struggling believer who has been an alcoholic. If this is your argument sugger free juice is avaialble.

Folks it simply is not necessary.

:BangHead:

I predict it will not last. This practice will come to a halt because it sends the wrong message.

Once we justify this what is next. Some lines must be drawn. No - not legalism - and liberalism = Balance, common sense, understanding.

I live in a small southern town. Occasionally I run into a person from a large city. The question soon comes up: Why did you move here? I wanted to live in a community where my children are not exposed to the level of crime, drugs, sex, alcohol and on and on. As the conversation continues eventually the person say something along this line; "These people are so backward, I hate driving so far to get something to drink.

Just recently, I spoke to a restaurant owner. While he was preparing his restaurant for the public he was critical of the alcohol issue. He was from a large northern city. His arrogance reached a pitch and he expressed his personal feeling in the paper. Results: "He is going out of business.

My point is this. We want the best for others but we don't really believe that because we turn around and contradict ourselves in deed. I have give you a Christian example and a Non-Christian example.

The End. :1_grouphug:

Sorry one other thing:

Grapes were a common produce in the days of Christ and the Church. What kind of juice would it be had the culture been that of Apples, or oranges, cranberries, etc?

 

Bless your heart. I've not had that experience to live with in my house, but have had in my family, friends and co-workers, and see the effects that "over indulgence", in drinking, and eating, and drug's prescribed way past being effective. All of these things were given to us by God for our betterment, when used as prescribed, viz. use within limits, meaning to not overindulge. The problem is the person, and not the substance for Jesus told us it is not what we put in our mouth, but what comes out of our mouth. The first part of what He tells us will apply for He tells elsewhere (a good place to look is Psalms 104) what He has given us. We are to be glad in the Lord with what He gives to us. He didn't say we were to become "merry" in the wine.

If we cannot handle any gift that He has given us, and we cannot permanently break the habit on our own, then I agree to stay away from whatever cannot be broken by our will. We will just have to forego what He gave to us.

Some do have this innate inability to overcome.

You do have understanding. Are you saying wine is OK as long as it is not used in church? I have an answer I am looking for, and you may know what I will be asking in your reply to question, should you answer.

I have within my family a son, a diabetic since the age of 7, and he insisted from the start to give himself his shots as needed. He has learned to handle this very well and is in his middle '50's. He has a "wine cellar" in his home. He has learned to handle, with caution his intake of certain ingredients. He has an incurable "disease" (at least at this time), and lives with it, participating in what He enjoys.

The "alcoholic" does not have an "incurable disease". I broke a habit after 53 years of smoking-"cold turkey" because I decided to. The "alcoholic", or the "obesed caused by over indulgence" have a bad habit, wrongly believing they have a "disease". A "disease" brought on by their inability to realize the "bad habit" is allowed to remain in their minds. All habits are not bad for you. It has been over 10 years since I quit smoking, and to date no untoward effect has shown up in my body. Evidently one and a half packs a day for 53 years did no damage. To me it was not sin, as I didn't over do what I enjoyed doing for all those years. I just didn't enjoy smoking any more, so I quit. If I ever decide to smoke again, I'll light up, knowing not to "get too much of a good thing."

It is the mind, which is still allowing their body to control their lives. I know alcoholics past that still drink, but never get drunk. They conquered and do not go beyond the "speed limit". Those that defeat "obesity" do the same. They can't stop eating, or they will die, so they have learned to resist the "bodies desires". Our "bodies" are sinful and must be held in check.

If you have not read Psalms 104 by now, please do so to understand what your message disallows.

Gifts are given to men. We should avail of all, for He gave much.

Appreciate your point of view with analogies of man to confirm

Not an issue, for God says He gave to man "wine" to make our hearts glad. Does "apples, oranges, cranberries and such represent His Blood? When we accept His Word, it is so much easier than resisting.

 

ituttut, i enjoyed reading your response. well said.

 

Thank you. Noticed a post of yours on this subject you also can accept His Word without apology.