First off, every verse you have posted in this thread has had to do with drunkeness.
Isaiah 5:11
Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!
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
Proverbs 23:29 Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes?
30 They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine.
(Reading the rest of that scripture in Prov 23 actually describes a drunken fellow)
Yes, nazarites and priest when in service were not allowed to drink, BUT, the common Israelite was no where forbidden
That one verse in Deut 14:26 (if you believe in bible inerrancy) should be enough to show that wine and STRONG DRINK (my emphasis on strong drink..lol) are ok. But you shouldn't go against your conviction
Also, in Eph 5:18 "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit" shows Christians should not have excess wine. Now, how can Paul be warning against excess wine if the Ephesians were not to even drink wine at all?
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.
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 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?
I agree context is king and looking at scripture as a whole is important. I am glad that you pointed out what i had inadvertantly looked oved namely that both this scripture condemns both the offering of intoxicating beverages to a person and the making of a person drunk so as to look upon their nakedness.
No it doesn't. It is saying don't do one thing in order to do the other. To make a modern day analogy, it would be like saying "Do not buy that girl drink after drink so you can spend the night with her!". The person is NOT saying do not buy her a drink, but rather is saying do not buy her one for the obvious ulterior motives.
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...
Quote:
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?
Quote:
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.... )
__________________
...Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ...(Acts 20:21)
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.
What Jesus made was not fermented unless you believe that He gave what would cause women to have miscarriges and other birth abnormalities. Also He supplied the missing ingredient in a prolonged drunken stupor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGBTG
Why would drinking wine be even prohibited when the body already naturally produces alcohol? oh well....
Our bodies produce alot of things that we probably should not eat or drink.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGBTG
What is the true meaning of the verse?
A command to be filled with the Spirit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGBTG
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"
They also practiced keeping concubines and david also practised murder once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGBTG
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..."
THat is my point if i take a scripture that deals with a topic and pull it away from others that deal with the same topic i came believe some strange stuff lime polygamy being ok. ( as a side note i believe he was dealing with divorce and remarrige)
I will be the first to sin on the wine...lol seeing how this winery is within walking distance of my house...and yes temptaion does get the best of me...
No it doesn't. It is saying don't do one thing in order to do the other. To make a modern day analogy, it would be like saying "Do not buy that girl drink after drink so you can spend the night with her!". The person is NOT saying do not buy her a drink, but rather is saying do not buy her one for the obvious ulterior motives.
You are overlooking the conjunction that is there "AND"
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!
The only good thing about my thread being hijacked into a wine thread is that I no longer have some people trying to defend the crass and idiotic guy we encountered "witnessing".
__________________ "I think some people love spiritual bondage just the way some people love physical bondage. It makes them feel secure. In the end though it is not healthy for the one who is lost over it or the one who is lives under the oppression even if by their own choice"
Titus2woman on AFF
"We did not wear uniforms. The lady workers dressed in the current fashions of the day, ...silks...satins...jewels or whatever they happened to possess. They were very smartly turned out, so that they made an impressive appearance on the streets where a large part of our work was conducted in the early years.
"It was not until long after, when former Holiness preachers had become part of us, that strict plainness of dress began to be taught.
"Although Entire Sanctification was preached at the beginning of the Movement, it was from a Wesleyan viewpoint, and had in it very little of the later Holiness Movement characteristics. Nothing was ever said about apparel, for everyone was so taken up with the Lord that mode of dress seemingly never occurred to any of us."
Quote from Ethel Goss (widow of 1st UPC Gen Supt. Howard Goss) book "The Winds of God"
The only good thing about my thread being hijacked into a wine thread is that I no longer have some people trying to defend the crass and idiotic guy we encountered "witnessing".
Well, I didn't defend him exactly. But I did ask some questions (not you specifically), and there were no answers, that I can see. So, bump:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyWayne
That is so sad, and irritating, to hear.
One false christian can do as much or more damage than 1000 who actively oppose it.
False Christian?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple
. . .
Let us not use those who maybe lack such wisdom as an excuse for our own lack of witnessing. The world is filled with people who are not saved, dying to hear the truth.
Did the fellow use God's guidance and wisdom in telling the sinner he was a sinner and that God loves him?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
The only good thing about my thread being hijacked into a wine thread is that I no longer have some people trying to defend the crass and idiotic guy we encountered "witnessing".
No "wining" from you about that, right?
__________________
"If we don't learn to live together we're gonna die alone"
Jack Shephard.
)
Linear Mode
