Is Drinking, Smoking, and Dipping a Sin

[DHK]

One other note: I should have added that fermentation can stop in two ways. Either the alcohol will kill off the yeast, or the yeast will run out of sugar. In the latter case, you get a dry wine that will likely perish more quickly. Some winemakers will add sugar to those wines and let the process finish in order to end up with a yeast-free sweet wine.

Wrong again. Look again at Strong's definition:

akin to 1099; sweet wine, i.e. (properly) must (fresh juice), but used of the more saccharine (and therefore highly inebriating) fermented wine:--new wine. (Strong’s)

The sweet wine or new wine was also fermented.

 

[Snitzelhoff]

DHK, are you saying, then, that the Apostles weren't being accused of drunkenness?

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

The Apostle's were being accused of drunkenness. But the accusations were false.

 

[npetreley]

Wrong again. Look again at Strong's definition:

The sweet wine or new wine was also fermented.

Wrong? What are you talking about? I said wine is fermented. That means it has alcohol in it. That's what fermentation produces. All I added is the fact that fermentation can stop for two reasons - either the fuel supply (sugar) gets exhausted, leaving a dry alcoholic wine with yeast left in it, or the alcohol kills off the yeast before the sugar is exhausted, leaving a sweet wine with alcohol.

By the way, do you actually think they added their own yeast culture to make wine? Where did they get the culture from? Are you aware that until recent times all yeast was perpetuated by means of keeping sourdough (bread dough with grown yeast in it)? That's how they made leavened bread. They kept a portion of the leavened (yeast-grown) dough to use as a "starter" in the next batch. If they were without the sourdough, all they had to do was leave a bunch of dough out in the open where the abundance of yeast fungus in the air would find it.

You're right that they had no knowledge of microbiology. That's why there weren't able to isolate the yeast and use it for other purposes like making wine. And there was no need, since grapes are covered in yeast and mold. Like I said, natural unfermented grape juice is filled with yeast and mold - the stuff of corruption. They got rid of it by fermenting the grape juice, which produced alcoholic wine. The alcohol killed off the yeast.

So if it's blasphemy to equate yeast corruption with the Lord's supper, then natural grape juice (non-pasteurized) is the evil stuff. Wine is the stuff without corruption.

 

[Snitzelhoff]

The Apostle's were being accused of drunkenness. But the accusations were false.

Right, so what were they accused of being drunk on?

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

The new wine mentioned in Acts 2 is indeed gleukos, a fermented wine.

But npetrely and others seem to be under the delusion that all wines in the Bible are therefore fermented also. Their assumption is far from the truth.

Oinos, which is found 25 times in the New Testament, can be either fermented or non-fermented... depending on the context.

Many accuse Jesus of drinking or serving wine falsely when that say He gave it to the Apostle's at the Lord's Supper. He did not. He specifically stated that the drink at the Lord's Supper was the 'fruit of the vine'. He did not even say the word 'wine'. Why not? He used the word in other passages.

The truth is the 'fruit of the vine' was nothing but fresh grape juice... nothing more.

The wine at the wedding feast was also fresh grape juice. As much as was produced, surely Jesus would be contributing to someone's drunkenness if it were alcoholic. That would make Jesus unworthy to die on Calvary as the Spotless and sinless sacrifice if He gave to others that which Scripture forbid.

 

[npetreley]

The truth is the 'fruit of the vine' was nothing but fresh grape juice... nothing more.

Then it was yeast-filled grape juice. Like it or not, grape juice had yeast in it. You know, that symbol of corruption.

(By the way, if you're going to be literal, go the whole way. "Fruit of the vine" is grapes. So He must have been holding a cup full of grapes.)

I'm tired of this. Enjoy your self-righteousness. See where it gets you in the long run.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

My righteousness is found in the Lord Jesus Christ... where is yours?

 

[saturneptune]

My righteousness is found in the Lord Jesus Christ... where is yours?

Based on your responses to why you do not drink alcohol, and your sinless state of existence, it seems it is based on your trying to obey rules, not by the Spirit.

 

[blackbird]

Based on your responses to why you do not drink alcohol, and your sinless state of existence, it seems it is based on your trying to obey rules, not by the Spirit.

And exactly what does living by the Spirit imply---that there are no rules to obey?? You think that if you live by the Spirit that God just somehow throws the rule book away??

 

[Dale-c]

Based on your responses to why you do not drink alcohol, and your sinless state of existence, it seems it is based on your trying to obey rules, not by the Spirit.

Hey, Saturn! I actually quite agree with you for once... actually I don't even like wine but I think I might buy some today for my health.

There seem to be many health benefits to it so I think I will try it.

 

[Zenas]

Many accuse Jesus of drinking or serving wine falsely when that say He gave it to the Apostle's at the Lord's Supper. He did not. He specifically stated that the drink at the Lord's Supper was the 'fruit of the vine'. He did not even say the word 'wine'. Why not? He used the word in other passages.

The truth is the 'fruit of the vine' was nothing but fresh grape juice... nothing more.

You're right, HBSMN, nothing is said about wine in connection with the Last Supper. It's either called "the cup" or "fruit of the vine." But you're wrong about it being fresh grape juice. The feast of the passover was in the early spring and grapes get ripe in late summer. Welch's grape juice wasn't available in those days. So it had to be fermented, i.e., wine. As you know, grape juice won't sit around for weeks or months and retain its nonalcoholic character.

 

[saturneptune]

And exactly what does living by the Spirit imply---that there are no rules to obey?? You think that if you live by the Spirit that God just somehow throws the rule book away??

No, and that is not what I said. I said in this and other threads that the power to obey the rules, as you call them, is only through the power of God, not through self effort. And flawed and weak as we are, we still fall short. In this case, if you have read the posts, the difference is not drinking because the Spirit convicts, your witness to others, and many other things. That is quite different than not drinking because I wake up one morning and say, gee, I think I wont drink because I interpret a passage to say I should not. I would think that principle would be quite clear to a leader of ministries.

 

[saturneptune]

Hey, Saturn! I actually quite agree with you for once... actually I don't even like wine but I think I might buy some today for my health.

There seem to be many health benefits to it so I think I will try it.

Wonders never cease. I think we agree on more than you think. We got off the same track, as I recall, over the conservatism (ha) of George Bush. Theologically, I would say we are closer than you think.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Wine is an alcoholic beverage. Fruit juice does not, and is not called wine. Why do people change definition of words to suit their personal perjudices?

I can say my radio is a television, but since it has no screen it doesn't matter what I say. A television has a video screen, my radio does not, hence is is not a "non-video television". That is the same as saying the Biblical wine had no alcohol.

 

[mcdirector]

Wine is an alcoholic beverage. Fruit juice does not, and is not called wine. Why do people change definition of words to suit their personal perjudices?

I can say my radio is a television, but since it has no screen it doesn't matter what I say. A television has a video screen, my radio does not, hence is is not a "non-video television". That is the same as saying the Biblical wine had no alcohol.

I like this analogy.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

You're right, HBSMN, nothing is said about wine in connection with the Last Supper. It's either called "the cup" or "fruit of the vine." But you're wrong about it being fresh grape juice. The feast of the passover was in the early spring and grapes get ripe in late summer. Welch's grape juice wasn't available in those days. So it had to be fermented, i.e., wine. As you know, grape juice won't sit around for weeks or months and retain its nonalcoholic character.

Zenas,

If you did a study on grape juice in ancient times, you would find that Flavius Josephus recorded an instance of grape juice that was preserved that was over a hundred years old and yet still just as fresh as that which comes straight from the cluster.

The fruit of the vine at the Lord's Supper was grape juice.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

Wine is an alcoholic beverage. Fruit juice does not, and is not called wine. Why do people change definition of words to suit their personal perjudices?

I can say my radio is a television, but since it has no screen it doesn't matter what I say. A television has a video screen, my radio does not, hence is is not a "non-video television". That is the same as saying the Biblical wine had no alcohol.

Apparantly you have no idea how to rightly divide the Word of truth. Alcohol in the Bible, as I have previously pointed out, was either fermented or non-fermented... depending on the context.

Comparing Biblical wine to modern day wine, television, or radio is idiotic in the least and not even a true analogy.

 

[saturneptune]

Apparantly you have no idea how to rightly divide the Word of truth. Alcohol in the Bible, as I have previously pointed out, was either fermented or non-fermented... depending on the context.

Comparing Biblical wine to modern day wine, television, or radio is idiotic in the least and not even a true analogy.

You have no right to say who divides the Word correctly, of all posters.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

I certainly have given plenty of Scripture over the last year or more concerning wine in the Bible.

It is your and others choice to deny Scripture command for abstinence.

It is you and others who want to blaspheme the Lord by falsely putting alcohol into His hand as the Pharisee's did when He walked this earth.

The christ you are presenting in this room is not the Christ that died on the cross as the sacrificial Lamb that taketh away the sins of the world.