Strong Drink (Deut. 14:26)

Psalms 104:14-15, "He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth;
15. And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart." God does not give "forbidden fruit" for our daily bread, and drink.

We will notice as we divide out His Word in our studies, we are to weigh each verse, and each word to see its meaning, regardless of where it takes us. If it does not equal what we have been taught, we either continue on our way, or we agree with His Word.

Genesis 43:34, "And he took and sent messes unto them from before him: but Benjamin's mess was five times so much as any of theirs. And they drank, and were merry with him." See also Judges 9:27, and others. We look at this and say there is no way the Holy Spirit intends His interpretation to mean Joseph "got drunk", or tipsy. But this is exactly what it says and the Holy Spirit's interpretation.

Know you don't need all of this "preaching", but perhaps will help someone to become more clear in understanding the Word. This is a very happy gathering of God's own people, God's very family He created for Himself. Do we believe any of these rejoicing in the Lord, and among themselves are going to ask God to forgive them in this glorious moment brought to them by God?

They know, and understand their God, and know what sin is. To not get Drunk in scripture means not to become a Drunkard. A Drunkard is a chronic drinker, and getting drunk on an occasion such as this is not a sin unless a sin is committed while in that state. Evidently no crime was committed, so where is such as this prohibited in the Word of God. Staying in the "merry" state is the "sin", just as is the continual eating of the obese. We can let go in the proper setting on occasion (if we wish), but we are not to let any habit's (our human nature lust's) be formed in us to "over come us".

 

Actually, it doesn't. The whole section of the passage where the writer uses phrases translated into English, such as

Do not gaze at wine when it is red
(Implies a pleasureable look, "gazing" at it and taking pleasure in its appearance similar to an addiction)

When it sparkles in the cup
(This is a perception based on the appeal of wine to a drunkard, a temptation of sorts that cannot be resisted)

When it goes down smoothly
(The adverb "smoothly" implies easily, as a means of altering one's state of mind, and not merely as a beverage)

If correctly applied, the Hebrew term you used would make the context of the passage say, "Do not consider the use of wine as a way to induce pleasure," a statement that is echoed in the Apostle Paul's use of the same concept in Ephesians 5:18, an admonition not to get drunk on wine, or use it to excess. The other corroborating scriptures related to this concept, Leviticus 10:9 in particular, which is what Paul is referring to, say essentially the same thing. Wine is forbidden for certain purposes and in certain situations, particularly for priests before they enter the tent of meeting, and for the purpose of getting drunk. The Proverbs passage is a warning about excessive drinking, and the "admiration" of wine, leading to addiction.

Otherwise, you've got a real problem on your hands when Jesus supplies a wedding celebration with water jars full of it. And if you know your Hebrew and Greek, you know it wasn't just "grape juice!"

I'd take bets on how long it might take this thread to reach 20 pages, but I don't want to get sidetracked by arguments against gambling.

 

Sober = of uncertain affinity: to abstain from wine (keep sober), i.e. (figuratively) be discreet:--be sober, watch.

Paul gave the command that the Christian was to abstain from drinking alcoholic beverage in the above verses. To advocate drinking of alcoholic beverage is to reject the clear command to abstain written in God's Holy Word.

 

It is interesting, then, that Jesus himself would promote the drinking of wine by supplying it in a large quantity to guests at a wedding celebration, or even endorse its consumption by making an appearance there.

Obviously what you think is the "clear" teaching of scripture isn't quite so clear. Drinking wine with a meal, or in a small quantity, does not affect one's state of sobriety, it is only when it is consumed in excess that one's sobriety is affected. It is clear, from God's Holy Word, that there are situations and times when drinking a fermented beverage is prohibited, but there is no clear command to completely abstain from it. If that were the case, then you are setting yourself up above Jesus himself. The fact that Jesus turned water into wine (which the guests at the wedding considered to be the finest quality that they had consumed up to that point, clear evidence that the wine Jesus produced was indeed fermented) renders your interpretation of the scripture incorrect.

 

The wine that Jesus produced at the wedding feast of Cana could not have been an alcoholic beverage, Jack.

The guests had already drank all the wine that the governor of the feast had provided and more was needed. If it were alcoholic beverage, Jesus would have been adding to man's drunkenness by producing alcohol.

No, Jesus could not sin and it certainly would be sin to give alcohol to a drunk.

 

IF the context already established before vs 31 was about simply drinking at all, THEN what you say about vs. 31 might be accurate.

However, as the context had already been established in vs. 29 and 30 that this was speaking of those who 'linger over wine' - that is, those who have woes, bloodshot eyes, strife, bruises, complaints. So, as this context of 'those who linger over wine' had already been established, vs 31 must be read in that light.

Thus, the 'ra'ah' of vs. 31 would, in context, have to be interpreted in light of vs. 29,30. This would render the 'do not look' to refer to 'do not gaze upon like one who lingers over wine would'. The rendering of 'do not have anything at all to do with alcohol' simply doesn't fit the context of the passage.

And thats not even considering the other passages which speak of alcoholic drink with approbation.

 

Where does the context indicate that people were getting drunk or were about to get drunk? Weddings took place over several days, so the wine running out does not at all indicate that people were drinking to excess. Thus, if the passage does not indicate that people were drinking to excess, then Christ providing alcoholic wine could not be seen as adding to men's drunkenness.

IOW, your premise that men were getting drunk is not established by the passage and thus your conclusion is not sound.

 

Solomon was showing in Proverbs that those who get drunk have sorrows, in 29 and 30. In 31, Solomon clearly warned people, not to 'not get drunk' as you infer, but to 'avoid consumption of alcohol altogether. He then goes on to say what it will lead to... eventually death.

Even in Proverbs 20:1 Solomon warned that alcoholic beverage deceives.

Solomon was given wisdom to know that alcohol was not to be experienced or even considered in the least.

At the wedding feast, if Jesus had produced alcohol, He would have been putting a stumbling block in the path of one who was weak. Surely you do not think that at such an occasion there would be none who were drunkards who would greedily drink more than a sip or two?

No, Jesus would not have given any intoxicating drink to anyone. If He had, He would not be the spotless Sacrifice.

 

Where is vs. 31 does he do as you claim? The meaning of ka'ah as you give it. Please refer me to a lexicon which gives the definition you assert. What you will find as you do so is that the word has a broad range of meanings. If you argument for vs 31 is based on a particular definition of the word ka'ah, then you approach it out of context. The context of vs 31 (and thus the proper definitions of the words in the verse) must be interpreted in light of the context of the whole passage. Both the passage before and after refer clearly to those who are drunk. Thus, the meanings in vs 31 must be interpreted in that light.

So, lets first establish the possible meanings of ka'ah and see which one fits betst the context of the passage. I will be glad to let you pick the lexicon we will use to establish the range of meanings.

Actually it doesn't say that. It says that wine is a mocker and strong drink is raging. The warning is to those who are deceived by these things. The warning is NOT to those who drink them, but to those who are deceived by them.

So you claim, yet you continually refer to verses which speak of the dangers of being deceived by it and overindulging in it.

In addtion Solomon speaks with approbation of wine in Eccl:
Ec 9:7 Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works.
Ec 9:8 Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment.
Ec 9:9 Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun.


If he is against any drinking of wine, then why does he approve of it in Eccl? Why does he compare wine with the joys of eating bread and living joyfully with one's spouse? That would seem to contradict your claims for Solomons position on drinking of wine.

The logic doesn't work. Notice:
In the wilderness, if Jesus had provided fish and bread, He would have been putting a stumbling block in the path of one who was weak. Surely you do not think that as such an occasion there would be none who were gluttons who would greedily eat more than what they need to sate hunger?

If it doesn't work for the loaves and fishes, why would it work for the wedding feast?

This first presumes that giving of intoxicating drink was somehow wrong. If its not, then it would be akin to saying "No, Jesus would not have given any good food to anyone. If He had, He would not be the spotless Sacrifice."

Obviously this is fallacious because we know that there is nothing wrong with food but only with its abuse. The same is true of wine.

IOW, you must first show that drinking wine is wrong before you can claim it would be wrong to give. You are working on that with Proverbs...lets stick with that for now.

 

If one can only grasp the fact that there were both a non-alcoholic wine and an alcoholic wine mentioned by Solomon. When Solomon endorsed drinking wine, it was the non-alcoholic wine. When Solomon spoke against wine, it was alcoholic.

 

I don't want to get in the middle of your debate, but I think this is not really a good example. All the people that Jesus fed received their fill. It was an 'all you can eat' meal. Later He told them that's the only reason they followed Him, because they wanted another free meal. So there may not have been a glutton among them, but they were definitely interested in the food only, not in what Jesus was teaching them.

Ok, carry on.

 

We are to sleep at night unless our jobs require otherwise. We are to not sleep away our day, or drink the day away. We are to be alert, and sober during the day, as the next verse indicates.

We that do not have to be up all night are "people of the day". We are to stay sober during the day as we face the world. Lot's of enemy's out there.

Where in this verse can we find "you shall not have a drink"?

Again Peter says don't become a drunkard, for then the devil will have his way with us. One drink will keep us within the limits of soberness; allowing us to not do what the woman did in the Garden.

It's just as Deuteronomy 14 says- Did this girl have woe and sorrow, or what? This woman who Adam named Eve didn't do what she did on the spur of the moment. She looked, and then she snapped back and looked again, and the look became a gaze, and every man and woman knows what this means, and it is not always in innocence we do this. We all do exactly as this first woman did, so let's not try to tell ourselves otherwise. We are as guilty as sin, and that is the reason God had to come down here with us, and get us out the mess we have made of things.

In looking further at this woman we see she sins even before she outwardly commits the act of Lust. She lies to Satan (Satan knows this, and now has her where he wants her), opening herself up to sin again. We must be more on watch for the sin of lying, for it will always put us at a disadvantage.

Notice in verses 29-35 of 14 Deuteronomy it doesn't say the "fruit of the vine" is forbidden fruit. It asks who, and then tells us who. The verses continue giving instructions to not do as did Eve, for in the end (not just coincidence verse 32 mentions a poisonous snake) the "lust of the eyes " will draw us ever closer to the color that strangely begins to move, then into that sleep of tossing and turning. Hey, that "high" was great, and worth the aftereffect. Should I or shouldn't I. The drunkard can't wait to get started again.

We don't want to say anything that is not true, for then we open ourselves up to believing some other things the world tells us to believe.

Something is not kosher here. You have Paul speaking with forked tongue, or telling Timothy he is lost.

 

Paul was not speaking with a forked tongue. The wine he told Timothy to drink could not have been fermented. Timothy had stomach problems. Alcohol is not good for a stomach that has infirmities. Alcohol would only further the stomach ailment and make it worse.

 

Sober = of uncertain affinity: to abstain from wine (keep sober), i.e. (figuratively) be discreet:--be sober, watch.

To abstain from wine does not mean drink a little bit but don't get drunk, ittuttut... it means the same as Solomon wrote in Proverbs 23:31 "Have no experience with, don't even consider it". Whether you want to believe it or not, the Greek clearly says 'to abstain from wine' in 4 verses in the New Testament.

You can deny it all you want, but it is the Word of God.

 

I see you completely ignore His Word, or just do not read the post's you answer. Is it possible the Bible included inaccuracies in those verses you, and Hawaiiski posted?

I have thirteen different translations of the Bible including Strong's literal, for occasions just as this, the KJV being the primary. In each of those Bible's not one will venture to use any word but wine. If they had any proof at all they were mistranslating the word they all used for wine, why would any wish their name to be associated with an outright lie? The word wine means the wine that can make drunk.

I applaud your ability, and the time and effort you put into translating, but something is amiss when not agreeing with these various translators'. What english Bible do you use that has a word different than wine inserted in the verse in question?

If Timothy had a cold, a case could be made of what you have been taught. Grape juice may be fine for replacing fluids in you body, but I've never heard that it's good to calm the nerves. Timothy was not the robust, hail and hardy man that Titus was. Timothy was a more gentle and nervous person and needed personal handling from Paul. A "little wine" is good for certain ailments.

 

I agree if you abstain, you can't get drunk on wine. But if you don't abstain, you can drink without getting drunk (they do it all the way through the Bible) and remain sober. You need scripture to back up your claims, and you have none to show, for the simple reason there is not scripture that says it is a sin to drink wine or strong drink. What His Word does is warns us of the danger of becoming a drunkard. Everybody cannot handle it, and no one is trying to force any to ever take a drink. All we are saying is not a sin to drink.

I believe His every Word, and those He gives authority to speak for Him. Isaac, the same one in Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob from whom Jesus did spring holds a completely different view on the subject than you. "Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine", Genesis 27:28. This plenty means there will be lot's of it going to the "house of God", for God requires the "first fruits" of the land. That first picking of the grapes will be turned into wine, and as it is the first it is called new wine. In Acts 2:13 we see new wine makes drunk, just as we know old wine does.

 

A brother was seen with a gallon of moonshine and he said it was for medicipal purposes.

 

The word for wine in Eccl. is the same one used for alcoholic wine.

 

Amen. Just don't act like a Pentecostal when drinking!

 

I have a friend who drinks a little wine for municipal purposes.