Alcohol - a world wide phenomena
- Thread starter ChristianSubMissionary
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
the Jews are actually known for meticulous wine-making, too.
https://www.jpost.com/arts-and-culture/food-and-wine/wine-talk-ancient-wine
it's an ancient art, going all the way back to righteous Noah - who certainly did not 'accidentally' plant a vineyard and make wine.
we ought to keep in mind that God calls him righteous, and untainted/unblemished (((Genesis 6:9)).
do we imagine he had no idea how to make wine before he got on the ark? where did he get the grape seeds and the idea? i'd say he had this intent already, and brought them on board. which would indicate he already had some skill at it before the flood. that's the only scenario that makes logical sense to me.
if Noah was a winemaker already pre-flood, how is it that God calls him blameless, if making wine is a sin?
seems to me that taking the position that any and all alcohol is evil is not compatible with scripture.
the example of Noah, and what happened with Ham, is a deep subject worth getting into - but i don't think we can do that as long as we have hang ups about wine, so that we de-facto think that what Noah did was wrong.
https://www.jpost.com/arts-and-culture/food-and-wine/wine-talk-ancient-wine
it's an ancient art, going all the way back to righteous Noah - who certainly did not 'accidentally' plant a vineyard and make wine.
we ought to keep in mind that God calls him righteous, and untainted/unblemished (((Genesis 6:9)).
do we imagine he had no idea how to make wine before he got on the ark? where did he get the grape seeds and the idea? i'd say he had this intent already, and brought them on board. which would indicate he already had some skill at it before the flood. that's the only scenario that makes logical sense to me.
if Noah was a winemaker already pre-flood, how is it that God calls him blameless, if making wine is a sin?
seems to me that taking the position that any and all alcohol is evil is not compatible with scripture.
the example of Noah, and what happened with Ham, is a deep subject worth getting into - but i don't think we can do that as long as we have hang ups about wine, so that we de-facto think that what Noah did was wrong.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
friend, your example refutes your own argument.
your premise is that they accused Christ and the disciples of being drunk on something that cannot possible make them drunk.
here, they accused Christ of being Himself demon-possessed. in reply Jesus points out that if Satan is casting out his own demons, then Satan's whole house is divided and his kingdom cannot stand.
please note that Jesus does not say it is an impossibility for a demon possessed person to cast out demons. Jesus actually says that such an occurrence would be evidence that Satan is defeated: which is in fact the case.
in fact, Satan does exactly that - driving Judas to kill himself, the legion of demons allowed into the pigs driving them also into their deaths in the sea, and in the last days the armies of antichrist being led to their certain doom. Satan is a murderer; he destroys all those who follow him. that is exactly evidence of his own kingdom being divided and unable to stand, as Jesus said to His accusers.
Matt. 9, 12, and Mark 3 do not fit your narrative.
in order to fit your narrative, and be an example of your argument, then Jesus would have had to say demon possession is an impossibility.
does that make sense?
you are saying their mocking consists of claiming something impossible is happening in the case of being drunk early in the day.
you say accusing Christ of being demon possessed is equivalent.
in order for that to be equivalent, then it must be impossible to be demon possessed.
this is clearly not the case.
what is equivalent is that the mockers were accusing the Lord & His disciples of plausible evil, and in both cases those accusations were false.
your premise is that they accused Christ and the disciples of being drunk on something that cannot possible make them drunk.
here, they accused Christ of being Himself demon-possessed. in reply Jesus points out that if Satan is casting out his own demons, then Satan's whole house is divided and his kingdom cannot stand.
please note that Jesus does not say it is an impossibility for a demon possessed person to cast out demons. Jesus actually says that such an occurrence would be evidence that Satan is defeated: which is in fact the case.
in fact, Satan does exactly that - driving Judas to kill himself, the legion of demons allowed into the pigs driving them also into their deaths in the sea, and in the last days the armies of antichrist being led to their certain doom. Satan is a murderer; he destroys all those who follow him. that is exactly evidence of his own kingdom being divided and unable to stand, as Jesus said to His accusers.
Matt. 9, 12, and Mark 3 do not fit your narrative.
in order to fit your narrative, and be an example of your argument, then Jesus would have had to say demon possession is an impossibility.
does that make sense?
you are saying their mocking consists of claiming something impossible is happening in the case of being drunk early in the day.
you say accusing Christ of being demon possessed is equivalent.
in order for that to be equivalent, then it must be impossible to be demon possessed.
this is clearly not the case.
what is equivalent is that the mockers were accusing the Lord & His disciples of plausible evil, and in both cases those accusations were false.
-
1
- Show all
Give strong drink to one who is perishing, and wine to the bitter in soul. Let him drink and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more. Proverbs 31:6-7 Clearly it depends who you are and your situation in life. Even Solomon, considered the wisest man in the world, did not say, do not drink at all. His counsel was to eat drink and be merry! He also said, Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for God has already approved what you do. Solomon's wise counsel was not to not drink at all, but not to join those who drink too much. How much can only be determined by each individual. For some that is none. You claim to know nobody who can have just one drink, but if everyone who drank always drank to the point of being totally inebriated and out of control, prohibition would be brought back. Or never have been rescinded in the first place. Plenty of people can have just one or even less. They can have a drinking habit which entails drinking one glass of wine once a week, or one a month, or once a year. Your attitude is that alcohol is good for nothing and wrong for everybody under any and all circumstances and in every situation. Scripture does not support your position.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
Did you read the study where the response to your misunderstanding is given? Yes/no will suffice. If yes, why do, you continue in your misunderstanding? If no, I will cease from interacting with you on this subject permanently until you complete what scripture requires of you. A non answer will be taken as the latter.
-
1
- Show all