Wine & Alcohol part 37

A little one sided, don't you think?

 

Nope. It's one man's viewpoint -- to which he is entitled. How about posting a rebuttal link. The medicinal qualities of wine would be a good rebuttal, wouldn't it?

 

The entire artical speaks to the effects of the sin of drunkeness. But both the artical and your post are titled with alcohol.

It would be like me starting a post titled "Cheese cake and Turkey Sandwitches"

Then posting the effects of glutony. Trying to make a case that cheese cake and sandwitches are sinfull based on the effects of overeating.

 

One thing very noticeable in all threads about alcohol is that gluttony comes up. Yes, it is a fact that gluttony is a sin. Yes, it is a fact that many Baptists fall short in that area (like church pot lucks). Yes, it is a fact that the sin is not addressed from the pulpit very much.

What does that have to do with alcohol? Does the fact that one person is a glutton make alcohol any less destructive? It seems like a contest. My sin is worse than your sin. The solution is to start teaching all the things the Bible speaks against, not to have some license to drink until others stop eating.

For me, drinking alcohol is wrong. Yes, it is techncially not in the Bible not to drink, but it certainly is to get drunk, which is why the vast majority drink. For me, it is a matter of, what good is it? Is it a good example for my kids? Is it a good example for the people I teach in Sunday School? Is it a good witness? What am I gaining by making a technical case that it is ok to drink? From my days in the Navy, its not a good idea for me to drink anyhow. What right do I have to tell others not to drink, none, only encourage.

 

You miss the point. Gluttony and drunkennes , Eating and drinking are parallels. They compair perfictly together. In the bible gluttony is a sin, yet nobody says eating is a sin. In the bible drunkenness is as sin, so half of you take this to mean any alcohol is a sin.

Iam not the only one to compair drunks and gluttons. The bible compairs them and uses them together thruout the bible. After all drunkeness is glutony of alcohol.

If it is not good for you then you should not drink. I am all for that but I have a problem with people who say I can not drink. Even though I do it in small amounts and have no problem with it.

I also find overwhelming evidence that Jesus and jews from his time drank alcohol, at least during the passover. I also find evidence that the wine served in Heaven is alcoholic.

 

One thing I have learned in these discussions. Most of the defenders of drink/alcohol are themselves drinkers. I say "MOST". Not all but most.

Another thing I have learned in these discussions. The defenders almost without exception say "Jesus drank it!!!" As if...

Another thing I have learned is that the users/ defenders all say "I don't have a problem with it".

What if I said I like a little Percodan after work to unwind? It is legal. Any doctor will prescribe it for chronic pain, and believe me, MY work is a pain.:laugh:

But I digress.

Here is the rub. You people who are defending "Demon Rum" in the name of 'christian liberty' haven't really thought it through have you? Don't you realize that you are supporting a drug which has caused more harm in this world throughout history than all the wars combined? And you are helping to promote the concept that "just a nip or two' never hurt anybody? Must we remind you that all it takes is 'just a nip or two' by that soccer mom down the street and BAMMMO! you just lost your child to yet another driver who is not in control of their vehicle? That nice lady down the street who drives all the kids to soccer practice? Certainly not her! Why she's just the sweetest thing! Statistics prove that it is NOT the drunkards killing our kids, dads, moms, etc.. on the roads because of booze, it is, more often than not, the average "social" drinker. And yet you people, who claim the name of Christ, SUPPORT that drug???

Oh and by the way; allow me to shoot that red herring. Food has NEVER caused someone to go into a rage and beat their own child to death, so get OFF that lame comparison.

 

Who could argue with such strong evidence, like as if.

You would be intentionaly ignoring the obvious difference to make a point

you have no bias

I see a post empty of substance. With an emotional argument that is based on nothing but your need to make rules for everyone. Oh and adultry has never caused somebody to go off on a rage and kill somebody.

OH and what if I told you that I know somebody who was stabbed over cake. leading to several more stabbings. TRUE STORY

 

Nobody seems to study the history of Baptists ( or religous movements ) to find out why some do and do not drink. They listen too much to hear say and bipass history books.


Alcohol consumption was something done daily by the puritans due to the fact that the water was not acceptable to drink. As time progressed there was a change in society that made improvements to daily living, people had acess to cleaner drinking water, beer was taken out of the daily diet.

Fastforward, as the first and second great awakenings occured, social movements intertwined with religious movements. Northern baptists started to adhere to the temperance movement which removed alcohol consumption from their diet, while their southern breatheren did not, until this movement swept south.

Drinking is not something a true christain should partake in, it doesnt lead to anything good and it has ruined many lives.

 

I don't believe that drinking alcohol is a sin. However to lose control in drunkeness is a sin. And any sin can be done after drinking, when we lose control of ourselves and sin after drinking alcohol we are just as accountable for our bad actions as if we would be if we haven't drank any alcohol.

All things should be done in moderation. My husband has one margareta with a mexican meal once or twice a year and I don't see a difference in his behavior.

I don't drink because I do have alcoholism in the history of my family and I wouldn't want to be tempted more than I can bear so I stick with Pepsi.

If you drink in front of your children you must be responsible enough to teach them the dangers of being drunk and having control. These things I teach my children anyway. I do warn them that they should probably chose not to drink because of the history of alcohol in our family.

I will not judge those who chose to drink because I have seen people who do it right.

Vicki

 

Hardly worth comment.

 

I added emphasis to your post...

While no one can prove or disprove whether Jesus ever really consumed alcocholoic beverages, during religious ceremonial periods (ie passover) all leavening agents were removed from the home and from all food items... including wine. Therefore, during passover... Welch's only.

The Greek term oinos can refer to anything from Welch's to Cabernet, so it is a difficult propsition to make certin determinations.

 

Amen Peter!

For Dee Jay:
Alcohol Crash Facts

Using the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) criteria for Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), it is estimated that an alcohol crash occurs every 32 minutes. NHTSA defines an alcohol-related fatal crash as one that was reported by a law enforcement agency and involved a vehicle operator or a non-occupant (e.g., pedestrian) with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.01 grams per deciliter (0.01 g/dl) or greater. In 1997, 16,189 alcohol-related fatalities occurred, 38.6% of the total fatalities for the year.
In other NHTSA statistics, alcohol-related fatalities for large truck operators declined by almost 60%, the largest such decline noted. Nearly one-third of the pedestrians 16 years or older who were killed by automobiles were intoxicated, i.e., had a BAC of 0.01 g/dl. In 1997, 29% of all fatal crashes that took place on weekdays involved alcohol. This percentage increased to 52% on weekends. For all crashes, the alcohol involvement on weekends was 12% and on weekdays, 5%. Alaska had the highest rate of fatal alcohol-related crashes using the FARS criteria and comparing total traffic fatalities to any alcohol involvement. (See Table 1.) Utah had the lowest rate. (See Table 2.)
In 1996 and 1997, approximately 1.5 million individuals were arrested for drunk or drugged driving. This is a ratio of one out of every 122 licensed vehicle operators.
For further information on alcohol involvement in traffic fatalities, contact the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, NRD-31, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590; (800) 934-8517; fax (202) 366-7078 (ask for publication number DOT HS 808 764). General information on highway traffic safety can be accessed at www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa.

Table 1
States With Highest Rates of Fatal Alcohol-Related Crashes
Alaska
52.8%
Texas
49.8%
North Dakota
47.8%
Massachusetts
47.4%
Arizona
45.5%

Table 2
States With Lowest Rates of Fatal Alcohol-Related Crashes
Utah
20.6%
New York
27.4%
Arkansas
29.2%
Kansas
29.5%
Wyoming
31.5%

​

There are many more facts that alcohol consumption destroys lives should one wish to find them. I can see your mind is made up so I will burden you no further with the facts.


One more AMEN for Peter.!!!:thumbs:

 

Thanks for the hearty AMENs... but for integrity's sake, I probably need to say that I do partake of the occasional glass of Port after dinner (maybe 4 times a year).

So, I tend to agree that while I certainly believe that I have freedom to consume anything I desire (within the bounds of the law and my own conscience), the greater issue for me is are my actions causing others to stumble. If they are, my responsibity is to discontinue that bahavior. TRUE CHRISTIANS need to be more about laying down their rights for others than to take them up for selfish reasons.

 

Peter;
You are a man of integrity. Amen.
But perhaps, if I may encourage you, you ought to lay that stuff aside permanently. I don't think we as Christians should be imbibing in something which has brought so much evil to this world.


:tear:

 

I certainly understand what you are saying and I don't necessarily disagree with the spirit of it, but if we are to be truly biblical this must be an issue left to the individual to decide on their own as the Word is not clear. What is clear in the Word can be summed up in two statements:

1. We cannot condemn others over what they eat or drink.

2. The only true source of evil in this world is man, as it was man not Satan who brought evil into the world, but us.

 

Whine 101

I skimmed the article....the "Rev" cherry picked ONE passage that suited his needs and played statistics. Hardly convincing. OK, I drink beer because.....I like it, its that simple. I prefer anything Canadian because the waters better but I do like German because it has a good bite. For those whose sensibilities I've offended, what do you do with Deut. 12.1-28? Or Deut 14.21-27? More specifically Deut. 14.26? You may consider Paul stating not to be drunk with wine which is excess, but be filled with the Spirit. The key is that if you are drunk with wine, you drank excessivly....rather than drink wine in excess, be filled with the Spirit. Paul wasn't against drink, just drunk. No amount of statistical argument can change my mind---as a matter of fact, you can quote statistics until you evolve into an acutary and my mind will be just as closed on the matter. Still want to talk statistics? How about running some numbers on those making a profession of Faith seven years and younger who have been run out of the Faith by their local congregations "spiritual giants" who pile up extra-biblical regulations on their shoulders that they themselves couldn't stand under? I'm finished with my rant. At ease.

 

Very well said. I couldn't have said it better myself!!!!!!!!!!!
:wavey:

 

Best wine ever made was at Cana

-----Images have been removed because they exceeded the size limit regulation and thus in violation of BB rule #12----images must not exceed the size of the BB logo in subject header--------

Wedding + Celebration= The best Champagne ever made in the entire history of the universe .