• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Best Wine

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charles Meadows said:
SFIC,

HBSMN didn't send anyone to Hell - but what he did do was to invoke scriptural punishment on anyone who teaches falsely about Jesus - using his definitions and not the Bible's.

I do not drink nor do I suggest that Christians can drink even a little without entering into sin. But that fact does not allow me to say therefore - since I dislike alcohol - that Jesus never drank it.

I (again) challenge you or HBSMN to show how we know that Jesus did not drink wine.

Now if you were to assert that in your opinion Jesus would have abstained and drunk only grape juice I would respect it as your opinion, although I would disagree with it.

But you go further insisting that the Bible proves Jesus abstained from wine - which it does not.

And HBSMN goes even further suggesting that anyone disagreeing with his unsupported opinion is preaching a false Christ.

All the facts have been given, not just in this thread, but in many others as well. But the moderation advocates choose to ignore facts.

I cannot show you the proof, Charles, neither can sfiC show you the proof; although both we and DHK have presented the proof all through these many threads.

Jesus put it well when He stated, 'Having eyes to see, they see not.'

In saying that I am, as you put it 'invoking scriptural punishment,' you are not just refuting me, but the Apostle Paul who made the original statement. The Word of God clearly shows that Jesus could not have partook of alcohol.

If you would study, relying on the Spirit to reveal the truth, instead of your presuppositions as you have accused us of, you would see the truth. Jesus was sinless. He did not drink alcohol.
 

Magnetic Poles

New Member
His Blood Spoke My Name said:
MP, this thread is not about sex. Topics such as sex need to be in the men's or women's fellowship forum and not in the general public.

I would appreciate if you would respect that. Keep the thread on topic, or don't post.
HBSMN, my post was NOT about sex, but rather making a point. You are not the posting police, so if you don't like my posts, put me on ignore.

Thank you!
 

Magnetic Poles

New Member
His Blood Spoke My Name said:
I am not the posting police, true. But, I did open this thread, not to talk about sex, but to talk about alcohol.
Again, the post was about that, pointing out your ludicrous argument doesn't work. Your logic is flawed, and I did not discuss sex, but used it to illustrate a point about how one can misuse the Bible to hold a position on alcohol, an illustration which obviously you can't, or refuse to, comprehend.
 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
standingfirminChrist said:
It is adding to the Bible to say wine is alcoholic in every verse of the Bible, when it is plain that some wine was indeed non-alcoholic.

Has the wine deceived you and clouded your mind to the point that you think Christ partook of that which was forbidden?


It is impossible for wine to deceive me or cloud my mind since I don't drink it....
I just beleive what the Bible says, and it says wine... not juice, but wine..
I am not guilty of adding to the Word of God.... I am taking it at face value...

By saying that the wine in the Bible is only juice, is adding to scripture... Maybe you can write your own version of the Bible that deletes anything you don't agree with...
 
It is funny....

Every time alcohol is brought up, those that advocate it want to throw up a smokescreen using sex, food, or some other subject.

The fact is, enough proof has been presented to show we are to absain if we want to walk in the Spirit of Holiness, yet that proof is ignored because people do not want to give up that which gratifies their fleshly lusts.
 

Magnetic Poles

New Member
His Blood Spoke My Name said:
It is funny....

Every time alcohol is brought up, those that advocate it want to throw up a smokescreen using sex, food, or some other subject.

The fact is, enough proof has been presented to show we are to absain if we want to walk in the Spirit of Holiness, yet that proof is ignored because people do not want to give up that which gratifies their fleshly lusts.
Really now? FYI, I don't drink alcohol at all, but it is not because of any belief that it is inherently sinful. I just never developed a taste for it. So much for another of your strawman arguments.
 

Charles Meadows

New Member
HBSMN,

If you would study, relying on the Spirit to reveal the truth, instead of your presuppositions as you have accused us of, you would see the truth. Jesus was sinless. He did not drink alcohol.

I agree that Jesus was sinless.

We all have presuppositions - how do you that my presupposition is not that Jesus DID abstain from wine?

But presuppositions are one thing and proof is another. When I read the Bible I see Jesus living as a commoner in rural Palestine. He ate with sinners, tax collectors and others who were "unclean". I assert the He drank wine because that is what almost everyone did. I also assert that He was never drunk in excess.

We have alcohol in cough medicine. Does that mean a child sins when he/she is given NyQuil for a bad cold? Of course not! The child has no conception that alcohol is in any way bad - just as those in first century Palestine had no conception that a single glass of wine with a meal was in any way bad. For the apostle Paul to suggest that Timothy drink a little wine was not sin - for Paul would find no fault in drinking small amounts of alcohol with food to avoid water-borne illness.

Today it is different. Pasteurization has solved our problems of contaminated drinks! So today to drink wine is a much different thing.

In my view you approach this from a far too legalistic standpoint. Remember Jesus' statement in Mark 7:

That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

A God fearing believer in first century Palestine who drank wine with food had no concept that he was sinning - and thus he was not defiling himself.

You and SFIC have given your reasons for believing that Jesus never drank wine. I can respect opinions. But you have gone beyond giving opinions - asserting that those who suggests Jesus drank wine believe in a false Christ.





 

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
Let's try this and see if it makes sense... here are few verses that I have replaced the word wine with the word juice...
Let's see if it works.....

John 4:46
(46) So Jesus came again into Cana of Galilee, where he made the water juice. And there was a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum.

Acts 2:13
(13) Others mocking said, These men are full of new Juice.

Romans 14:21
(21) [It is] good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink juice, nor [any thing] whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.


Ephesians 5:18
(18) And be not drunk with juice, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;

1 Timothy 3:3
(3) Not given to juice, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

1 Timothy 3:8
(8) Likewise [must] the deacons [be] grave, not doubletongued, not given to much juice, not greedy of filthy lucre;


1 Timothy 5:23
(23) Drink no longer water, but use a little juice for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

1 Peter 4:3
(3) For the time past of [our] life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of juice, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:

Genesis 9:21
(21) And he drank of the juice, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

Proverbs 20:1
(1) Juice [is] a mocker, strong drink [is] raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.


Now that makes as much sense as a heart attack.
Imagine someone drinking so much juice they get drunk...
Oh, I get it, that is how the Corinthians were getting drunk at communion!!

See how wrong it is to replace what God says...
He said "wine" . It is a sin to replace it with "Juice"

One day those of you that are twisting and destroying His Words will have to stand in judgement for being liberals.
 

Smoky

Member
If wine is a generic term, (strong drink never is), then why is it mentioned twice - as wine and grape juice?
That's a good observation. However strong drink comes from the Hebrew word "sheckar" and just means a drink coming from another source besides the grape. It too can be generic. The word "strong" isn't even in the original! Grape juice in this particular passage means juice drank directly from the grape itself rather than juice processed into a beverage. The processed beverage can be fermented or non-fermented.
 

ASLANSPAL

New Member
The best wine ever made was at the wedding of Cana ...wish I had a bottle!

Link to WEBMD

Wine: How Much Is Good for You?
Studies show wine is heart healthy, but what about the calories?

A glass of wine a day keeps the doctor away. Could this be true? WebMD talks to experts to learn how we can get the health benefits of wine or alcohol while keeping our weight in check.


Link to WEBMD


Wine tasting in beatiful Napa Valley


Now if only Cana champagne could have been preserved in a bottle then it would be the most expensive wine ever! Like I said the best wine ever made was made on that day when Jesus the matchmaker of the two gave His best and He celebrated as well since he was ecstatic that the two were coming together and Himself the Mr. Fix it Man in that area for years had known them personally...His first Miracle was a home run...filled with joy and celebration.

but I would think Christian couples that have deep end fundys in their family must be careful not to offend...warn them in advance or ask them if its okay and if they are offended....then do not serve it around them or not at all ...have lots of options on the table.


Now are there dangers to people who are pre disposed to addiction I think there is and yes even one drink is too much ...again the Christian must ask if it offends and must be sensitized by th Holy Spirit into what to do but the freedom is still there and the Holy Spirit will provide options ..lots.
***Picture deleted---exceeds BB policy

http://www.terrificmusic.com/files/music/D/days_of_wine_and_roses_andy_williams.ram


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Days_of_Wine_and_Roses_%28movie%29

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055895/


Wisdom and the help of the Holy Spirit is the answer but it really was wine served that day in Cana at a Wedding that spoke volumes about our Lord
that Celebration was okay in the wonderful process of JOY!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gina B

Active Member
ACADEMIC said:
HAS edited my posts. If your neighbor is wronged do you only care about yourself?

You're both my neighbors. :wavey:

I happen to disagree with his stance and agree with yours, but I think you'll find that if you present your argument in a humble way, on topic and without an "attitude", you're much less likely to be edited. At least by that particular mod and most of the others.

There's occasionally unfairness. Part and parcel of a moderated forum. Just do your best to present properly and most of it's taken care of. I tend to save any post I think will be controversial so that if it's edited and I disagree, I can send it to an admin and ask for a review. Most likely pm'ing every other mod and asking the mod you disagree with to be punished is just gonna make you look silly.

Anyhow, about wine. Continue on. If nothing else, I'm certainly getting to read a number of scriptures on the topic by going through this thread! :thumbs:
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
ACADEMIC said:
You are the one who twisted my post because you hacked it to death and refused to see that the parts you deleted were the most important parts. Then you extract a tiny part of it from its original context and reply to it. That's is what is amazing here.

You are blinded by your bias. I suggest you recuse yourself from this thread, and I have written to all the senior moderators requesting you do so.

-------------------------------------------------
I quoted that which I deemed to be approptiate, and not the whole post. If you are unable to have an intelligent post, but only able to call names then I suggest you remove yourself from the board and find another place where you can call people names. Here is what you said:
Most folks around me don't even like grape juice. And grapes do not grow anywhere nearby. We prefer sweetened iced tea with lemon. That is the tradition around here. Snapple and Lipton are really good brands. A few times the store was out of grape juice. So we used Celestial Seasonings Red Zinger tea for communion, since it is red and contains no devil-hol, like Jesus' blood.
1. You and the folks around you don't care for grape juice. So what? What has that got to do with what the Bible says? We are not speaking of your preferences for hot dogs or otherwise. Keep to the subject.
2. You prefer iced tea with lemon. Again, So what! The Bible is not speaking about your preference of iced tea, nor is it mentioned in the Bible. Stick to the topic at hand.
3. "It is the tradition around here." I don't care what the tradition is around your aparts. I care about Biblical traditions and customs. It would be well if you would study more about the Bible and its traditions instead of your own.
4. "Snapple and Lipton are good brands." Do I care. No. I care what the Bible says; not about your preferences.
5. So you substitutue tea instead of grape juice for communion. I would never do that. I would wait until we had the proper elements available. Tea does not represent the blood of Christ. Christ did not command us to drink tea in remembrance of him. That is unbliblical. I don't throw away the Bible on a whim of what I prefer. Is your religion a religion of convenience or one of conviction. It seems it is one of convenience for you.
DHK
 

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
ASLANSPAL said:
Where throughout history do you find grape tasters or connoisseurs of grape juice non fermented...none...nada...zero...zilch but throughout history even till today you have wine connoisseurs and wine tasting to press out the quality and give out awards....the best wine ever made was at the wedding of Cana, if that wine was here today it would win every award known to wine.

1. Gen. 40:11 suggests that Pharaoh's butler had that function:

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.

Sounds like grape juice to me.


2. Unless a buzz is what they are really after, wouldn't nonalcoholic wines fill the bill for "moderation" advocates?

from http://www.arielvineyards.com:

"ARIEL has gained recognition from the world's leading wine critics and connoisseurs alike when their ARIEL Blanc wine was awarded the Gold Medal at the Los Angeles County Fair in 1986 in a blind tasting against wines with alcohol. Before this recognition, non-alcoholic wines were said to not have the same quality as alcoholic wines. However, ARIEL proved this notion untrue, and since then, they have gone on to win acclaim and numerous awards in competitions against alcoholic and non-alcoholic wines throughout the world."
 
Pliny, Plutarch and Horace all described wine which was good wine as being unfermented. They also confirmed that wine of non-alcoholic wine was the most common for people of that region.

Horace lived from 65 BC to 8 BC, so he is a good reference for knowing the wine of the time. Pliny and Plutarch both lived in the first century AD. I would say they were good authorities on what was the common drink in that time period.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gb93433

Active Member
Site Supporter
His Blood Spoke My Name said:
Pliny, Plutarch and Horace all described wine which was good wine as being unfermented. They also confirmed that wine of non-alcoholic wine was the most common for people of that region.

Horace lived from 65 BC to 8 BC, so he is a good reference for knowing the wine of the time. Pliny and Plutarch both lived in the first century AD. I would say they were good authorities on what was the common drink in that time period.

Could you give us a reference for each of those?
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
FERRON BRIMSTONE said:
You cannot not read scripture without prejudice and say that Jesus did not drink wine, though I believe it was usually much weaker than what we have today. Wine was also needed to purify water since in that arid climate the water would not always be safe to drink.

The real issue here seems to be whether it is ok to drink wine today. I choose to obstain from alcohol, because of those that might get the wrong idea if they see me buying it or drinking it.

Rom 14:1 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.

Rom 14:21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.
Rom 14:22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves.
Rom 14:23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

ESV
"The saloon is a liar. It promises good cheer and sends sorrow. It promises prosperity and sends adversity. It promises happiness and sends misery.... It is God's worst enemy and the devil's best friend."
-Billy Sunday

[FONT=&quot]To quote Gleason Archer; "If we really care about the souls of men, and if we are really in business for Christ, rather than for ourselves, then there seems to be no alternative to total abstinence-not as a matter of legalism, but rather as a matter of love.[/FONT]
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Hope of Glory said:
And earthquakes cause many more deaths than in times go by. Not because they're more severe or more prevalent, but because there are more people to get diseases or die from earthquakes.

For example, the earthquake that created Reelfoot lake was estimated to be greater than an 8 on the Richter scale, yet how many people died? Mostly, people shook a lot, fell down, then got up an went on their business. No skyscrapers to fall, no massive population centers, etc. (Although, in the 'quake of '64, which was a 9.2, 13 people died from the actual shaking, it was so violent and prolonged.)

If you have 100 peple living in an are of 25,000 square miles, I would hazard that there would far fewer cases of Beaver Fever than if you had 100,000 people in the same area, assuming that both were incapable of purifying water.
And what has this got to do with the fermentation of wines, or with the OP--the "Best Wines"? Are you off a red herring that has nothing to do with the topic at hand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top