Wisdom In Witnessing (or the lack thereof)

[TGBTG]

Originally Posted by Luke

Proverbs 20:1 Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.

No drunkeness here.

Pro. 23:31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

If this one is followed it will keep you from drunkeness. Therefore this one is prevenitive care.

Habakkuk 2:15
Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!

This deals with simply offering it to someone and it deals with getting someone else drunk.
I am a strong believer in biblical inerrancy and did not say that verse was in error, rather i stated that one verse should not be used to discout the clear teaching of multiple clear passages.

Here are some examples:

Mark 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

If take this one verse and make it a stand alone passage then you and i and all others that claim to be saved had better start handleing snakes and healing everyone that is sick and possibley puting ourselves in places where we could drink deadly things.

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Does this passage teach a salvation of works in that if a man acts right and does right he is accepted of God apart from faith and repentace?

1 Corinthians 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

If we pull this one scripture out then i guess the mormons are correct in saying that we can baptize relatives of dead people and they can be given a second chance.

These are just a few passages that show the danger of pulling one scripture out and discounting all other passages that deal with the same topic.

We can go back and forth all day on whether wine is totally prohibited or not. Jesus even made the stuff, but that's not enough to show it's ok. So, there no point pushing it.

Why would drinking wine be even prohibited when the body already naturally produces alcohol? oh well...

Originally Posted by Luke

As to vyour statement regarding Eph 5:18 and attempting to make it say that a little bit was ok just not in excess. If that is the true meaning

What is the true meaning of the verse?

Originally Posted by Luke

then what of the passage that says the bishop is to be the husband of one wife does that mena that all the other men could practice polygamy?

Well, David and OT people practised polygamy, right? (Now before someone comes along to crucify me for advocating polygamy..lol), when did the practice of polygamy stop? After Jesus' resurrection? 70AD (for my preterist pals..lol)? Who announced "no more polygamy?..lol"

In any case, if you believe Paul's statement in 1 Tim 3 was about Bishops not being polygamous, then yes, that statement would imply other men were allowed to be polygamous. Else, what's the point of differentiating between the Bishop and other men if they were all to practise the same thing? (ofcourse, this assumes Paul was talking about polygamy...


CC1, we hijacked your thread....
)