Any ÷ of alcohol is sin! Passover only had grape juice!
Posted: Fri May 13, 2016 11:18 am
I could not seem to convince this fellow the ideas expressed in the subject header are silly. How to respond or show him these are silly ideas?
---
ME: "Did Jesus disciples only drink unfermented wine at the Passover? I seem to recall yourself or another being confident of such. Give the seasons for grapes, absence of refridgeration, and Paul recommending wine to most likely cleanse disentary from Timothy's water. . doesn't this prove against those who make such assertions that any ÷ of alcohol is automatically sin?
I suppose someone could say God revealed so but such could not be givem true revelation can never trump scripture.
This isn't of course to say that God could not reveal such a person who He knows to be: a) weak in the faith; b) prone to alcoholism; c) constantly surrounded by those who might be; d) more or all of the above.
http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-drink-wine.html
---
HIM: "...So I wasn't sure if you just wanted me to say quickly that I am not merely claiming a direct revelation about this and asking others to take my word for it, or if you wanted a detailed argument. I will have to write a detailed discussion later, maybe after I get back, if I remember. I suggest reading David Wilkerson's Sipping Saints for a nice survey of ancient writings indicating that the word translated "wine" in the NT was normally unfermented juice (there are a LOT of Greek and Roman writers that describe boiling grape juice to make "wine," which would make fermentation impossible). Or you can do a word search and see how many of the instances of "wine" in the Bible are negative in some way as opposed to positive (Micah 2:11, Jer 13, Psalm 75, and my current favorite, Proverbs 31), and ask yourself what the Scriptures say on balance. A search for the word "beer" yields an even more one-sided result. I think the wedding of Cana story was NOT an endorsement of drinking (the story doesn't even say that the "wine" was ever served to the guests, or that anyone there got saved, or that anyone even knew that a miracle had occurred), but instead was a prophetic "sign" fulfilling the prophecy in Jer 13 about jars being filled with wine of judgment (ESV) - sort of like the cursing of the fig tree miracle.
Or, I could sometime lay out a completely secular argument against alcohol (I think it should be illegal, actually), that has nothing to do with spiritual matters.
Christians who say it is OKAY to drink "in moderation" seem to think it is not that serious a sin to drink a bit too much sometimes, and their idea of "moderation" seems to include drinking enough that it affects them in their mind and emotions. Nobody in the world is more sanctified when they have drunk a little alcohol or less likely to sin or more prepared for a deep prayer time."
---
ME: "...Moderation is possible despite all those who have failed to do so. If one cannot have a single sip or glass over turkey dinner than Timothy was also in sin along with anyone who has ever ingested an iota of it medicinally. If moderation is not realistic then any percentage is sin. Silly."
---
HIM: "If you're starting by calling me silly, there is no reason to continue the discussion, thanks.
I do not empathize with people who want to do this. "
---
ME: "the idea of any percentage is silly"
"if you agree its silly the you must agree that moderation is possible and not sin. you cannot have it both ways.
thats my point"
---
HIM: "We disagree, but we should just agree to pray for each other about it. I do not think alcohol should be legal. I understand you think I am silly, and I'm fine with that."
---
ME: "i do not think you are. we all hold to ideas that are silly to varying degrees.
for the record i would not recommend for anyone to drink. to much risk for me to do so."
-------------------
So that's been basically the conversation so far. He also asked me if I prayed in tongues, but said that was on an unrelated note.
I agree we should probably avoid alcohol altogether, but am strongly against any wiff of legalism. Such legalism should be opposed, and such persons who hint at that, should, at the very least, admit that moderation is possible, and the hypocrisy of taking any medicine or food prepared with alcohol as an ingredient. If any % is sin, then they have to account for that. This is why I called the idea SILLY. It IS silly. Not a silly concern, but SILLY and flat out WRONG to forbid.
This same person also believes that God revealed to a neo-Pentecostal group we both left due to spiritual abuses there that "Pleading The Blood" and "Consulting The Word" (Bibliomancy) is a special new revelation from God. We've had some recent dicussions with some former pastors who also left the group. This guy was basically marginalized by the leaders there, yet still clings to the past, while these other former pastors have moved on. This one pastor who I quoted above needs to get over this. I worry about him. I think this superstitious mindset is part of what's driving him to not agree with me on this issue of alcohol.
---
ME: "Did Jesus disciples only drink unfermented wine at the Passover? I seem to recall yourself or another being confident of such. Give the seasons for grapes, absence of refridgeration, and Paul recommending wine to most likely cleanse disentary from Timothy's water. . doesn't this prove against those who make such assertions that any ÷ of alcohol is automatically sin?
I suppose someone could say God revealed so but such could not be givem true revelation can never trump scripture.
This isn't of course to say that God could not reveal such a person who He knows to be: a) weak in the faith; b) prone to alcoholism; c) constantly surrounded by those who might be; d) more or all of the above.
http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-drink-wine.html
---
HIM: "...So I wasn't sure if you just wanted me to say quickly that I am not merely claiming a direct revelation about this and asking others to take my word for it, or if you wanted a detailed argument. I will have to write a detailed discussion later, maybe after I get back, if I remember. I suggest reading David Wilkerson's Sipping Saints for a nice survey of ancient writings indicating that the word translated "wine" in the NT was normally unfermented juice (there are a LOT of Greek and Roman writers that describe boiling grape juice to make "wine," which would make fermentation impossible). Or you can do a word search and see how many of the instances of "wine" in the Bible are negative in some way as opposed to positive (Micah 2:11, Jer 13, Psalm 75, and my current favorite, Proverbs 31), and ask yourself what the Scriptures say on balance. A search for the word "beer" yields an even more one-sided result. I think the wedding of Cana story was NOT an endorsement of drinking (the story doesn't even say that the "wine" was ever served to the guests, or that anyone there got saved, or that anyone even knew that a miracle had occurred), but instead was a prophetic "sign" fulfilling the prophecy in Jer 13 about jars being filled with wine of judgment (ESV) - sort of like the cursing of the fig tree miracle.
Or, I could sometime lay out a completely secular argument against alcohol (I think it should be illegal, actually), that has nothing to do with spiritual matters.
Christians who say it is OKAY to drink "in moderation" seem to think it is not that serious a sin to drink a bit too much sometimes, and their idea of "moderation" seems to include drinking enough that it affects them in their mind and emotions. Nobody in the world is more sanctified when they have drunk a little alcohol or less likely to sin or more prepared for a deep prayer time."
---
ME: "...Moderation is possible despite all those who have failed to do so. If one cannot have a single sip or glass over turkey dinner than Timothy was also in sin along with anyone who has ever ingested an iota of it medicinally. If moderation is not realistic then any percentage is sin. Silly."
---
HIM: "If you're starting by calling me silly, there is no reason to continue the discussion, thanks.
I do not empathize with people who want to do this. "
---
ME: "the idea of any percentage is silly"
"if you agree its silly the you must agree that moderation is possible and not sin. you cannot have it both ways.
thats my point"
---
HIM: "We disagree, but we should just agree to pray for each other about it. I do not think alcohol should be legal. I understand you think I am silly, and I'm fine with that."
---
ME: "i do not think you are. we all hold to ideas that are silly to varying degrees.
for the record i would not recommend for anyone to drink. to much risk for me to do so."
-------------------
So that's been basically the conversation so far. He also asked me if I prayed in tongues, but said that was on an unrelated note.
I agree we should probably avoid alcohol altogether, but am strongly against any wiff of legalism. Such legalism should be opposed, and such persons who hint at that, should, at the very least, admit that moderation is possible, and the hypocrisy of taking any medicine or food prepared with alcohol as an ingredient. If any % is sin, then they have to account for that. This is why I called the idea SILLY. It IS silly. Not a silly concern, but SILLY and flat out WRONG to forbid.
This same person also believes that God revealed to a neo-Pentecostal group we both left due to spiritual abuses there that "Pleading The Blood" and "Consulting The Word" (Bibliomancy) is a special new revelation from God. We've had some recent dicussions with some former pastors who also left the group. This guy was basically marginalized by the leaders there, yet still clings to the past, while these other former pastors have moved on. This one pastor who I quoted above needs to get over this. I worry about him. I think this superstitious mindset is part of what's driving him to not agree with me on this issue of alcohol.