Strong Drink -The Baptist Truth

No, I am asking a question.
Webdog claims "it wasn't consumed directly after it was squeezed."

Genesis 40:11
And Pharaoh's cup was in my hand: and I took the grapes, and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup, and I gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand.

Do you see any indication of a time lapse in the verse?

 

Well, considering it's dream, I don't think one should be reading into the story that much detail.
But anyways, carry on with the dream interpretations.

 

And I took, etc. From this we find that wine anciently was the mere expressed juice of the grape, without fermentation. The saky, or cup-bearer, took the bunch, pressed the juice into the cup, and instantly delivered it to his master.
pressed. Ge 49:11; Le 10:9; Pr 3:10

hand. Ge 40:21; 1Ki 10:5; 2Ch 9:4; Ne 1:11-2:1
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

And I took the grapes and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup - From this we find that wine anciently was the mere expressed juice of the grape, without fermentation. The saky, or cup-bearer, took the bunch, pressed the juice into the cup, and instantly delivered it into the hands of his master. This was anciently the יין yain of the Hebrews, the οινος of the Greeks, and the mustum of the ancient Latins.
Adam Clarke

 

Yes, but the same people who would use this argument against alcohol is probably drinking and eating dozens if not hundreds of other things that are processed and tweaked by man, probably with unhealthy results too.

 

:laugh: Unfortunately most other people here don't, so they worry about what everybody else is doing wrong.

 

Wow, I thought you were a woman. No, really.

 

Yes, the flavinoids and antioxidants are also present in grape juice, but grape juice doesn't thin your blood at all, which is where the biggest advantage of drinking fermented wine comes from. Actually researchers have proved that moderate consumption of beer has about the same advantages as wine on your cardiovascular system due to the alcohol.

 

yer contradicting yerself, mes...

Which is it? you can't have both. BTW, if one obeys the written Word of God, not only will that one refrain from alcohol because the Word demands it in a Believer, but also that one will not 'agree to disagree' on topics. 'Agree to disagree should not be in the Christian vocabulary or their walk. The Christians should 'reason together and agree on what the Word of God says, not 'agree to disagree'.

 

"It is not now nor will it ever again be Baptist-related."
Bill Leonard, Dean of the Divinity School, referring to Wake Forest University, 2007.

 

Please show me from what was quoted for me that it was squeezed directly into a cup and consumed...
he squeezed them into a cup which the king held in his hand; and when he had strained the wine, he gave it to the king to drink, and that he received it from him with a pleasant countenance.

 

Why is it so hard to get a straight answer to a question?
What in the verse (or Josephus' recounting) necessitates a postulation of a "time lapse so fermentation can occur"?

 

The justification of the false premise that all wine was alcoholic in the Word of God necessitates a postulation of a "time lapse so fermentation can occur"

 

Can't argue with these words, but we cannot become "clones of the weak", or completely loose our personalities. I think here and in chapter 14 we are to understand all of this is in the area of alleged things not mentioned as definite sins, or wrong pointed out to be wrong in scripture. Paul gives a good list of sins before he approaches these "wrongs people have in their own minds", so to them what is sin to one, they wish it to be sin to another.

From the stance you are taking, if someone told you it is a sin to sleep for more than four hours in a 24 hour period, would you stop sleeping more that four hours for the rest of your life? We have to make sense of what Paul is talking about for we would be living everybody's life but our own.

Yes, and I just explained it to you above. It is really about the Gentile and the Jew. Tell me if you believe Paul is double-tongued in pointing out Peter's (Barnabas and others also) weakness for Peter was scared of James, and what that other gospel had taught them. There is an answer to what looks to be conflicting statements and actions by Paul. In your explanation's, I don't believe you can defend the actions of Paul in Galatians 2.

I was hoping you would follow through, and find the answer to what we have been talking about. Law verses Grace, and as pointed out in another post the weak tend to lean on the Law until they can stand on their own. Good work, but I don't know if you can see it. I find comfort in I Corinthians 2:15, "But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man."

I see we agree in part. I see in verse 17 to not let any tell us we are to do anything beyond believing on Christ Jesus. I shouldn't tell you to drink, and you shouldn't tell me I can't. You shouldn't tell me I have to be water baptized, and I shouldn't tell you not to. We work out our own salvation. What was once required were on shadows, but the substance is Christ Jesus - He is the Real Thing.In love and gratitude we live for him.

These Judaziers from Judah are of the circumcision gospel, and are under the rule of James, and if as you contend, James or the Apostles would not even eat with them. I believe you are sadly misinformed or have a wrong understanding that these would be Gentile proselytes. Read Acts 21:17-21. Then take a look at verse 28. No, I can't see the troublers were Gentiles from Jerusalem.

How can they know if they don't know about it?

I appreciate conversation with you. Hope you will see if we just leave Paul to break rules laid down, we have to come to the conclusion the Bible is at odds with itself.

 

I answered this already. You have.
A. grapes squeezed into a cup
B. wine in the cup strained
C. wine given to the king to drink.

Since we know wine is alcoholic (not fruit of the vine, juice of the grape, etc.), and the text clearly states it was wine, it shoudl be apparent. At any rate you have the contents of the cup being strained of something, so that in itself does not lend to the notion that a grape was squeezeed into a cup and immediately consumed.

 

How long does it take to strain a liquid through something? And since when does straining liquid through something cause that liquid to become alcoholic in content? Every study I have read on wine never says the straining of the grape juice causes it to become alcoholic in content.

Truth is, just as HBSMN pointed out, Josephus knew that it was mere grape juice handed back to the king.

 

Not only is that pure specultaion, but we know WINE was given back to the king. Wine is alcoholic.

 

After looking at the Biblical account in Genesis 40:11 again, I realized something important. It definitely was not an alcoholic beverage given back to the Pharaoh... it was grape juice.

Genesis 40:11 (KJV) And Pharaoh's cup [was] in my hand: and I took the grapes, and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup, and I gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand.

 

Some of you guys need to relax and have a drink.

 

If you do it right, you can mix alchohol with gas and your car will run. This is one of the reasons I try to avoid analogies. If they don't backfire (no pun intended), people get hung up on the analogy and forget the point.