[chette777]

I am not advocating drinking for anyone. however the Sin for Lemuel would be in forgetting the law and prerverting justice that is why they are to put off wine and strong drink.

But Duet does say what it says. however it is for Israel only and I know that.

and the sin is in Drunkeness, drunkards and drunks. not in those who drink wine.

Again I am not saying nor did I say it was ok or alright for a Christian to drink alcohol I only said the sin was not in drinking but in being a drunkard and drunkeness.

If the sin is in the drinking of alcoholic wine, then God would be unrighteous to tell Israel to do so in Duet, and Jesus would be a sinner for drinking wine. (a winebibber is one who consumes to much Alcoholic wine not juice so the Pharisees knew it was alcoholic wine or they couldn't make the claim).

Neither God not Jesus are unrighteous or sinful. when a man says it is a sin to drink and he teaches that from his pulpit he is making God unrighteous and Jesus a sinner.

But if he will teach it correctly and show that drunkeness is where sinfulness arises and councels those who cannot control their addictive personalities to avoid drinking at all cost because it will lead them to drunkeness. and by example refrains from drinking alcoholic breverages. that man is teaching the whole council of God.

and he can use Prov 31 as a reason for avoiding drinking wine. for that verse does not teach drinking is a sin but clearly shows us if a person gets to drinking his addictive sinfulness leads him to drunkeness where he will forget the Law (have not inhibitions) and pervert justice (he will show biasness in his judgements and decisions.)

[Biblestudent]

Originally Posted by chette777

But if he will teach it correctly and show that drunkeness is where sinfulness arises and councels those who cannot control their addictive personalities to avoid drinking at all cost because it will lead them to drunkeness. and by example refrains from drinking alcoholic breverages. that man is teaching the whole council of God.

In that case, I see that we agree on that point 100%, Bro. Chette. Amen!

In researching this I came across a commentary and I agree with it:

Deut 14:22 - this is the tithe
Deut 14:23 - this tithe was to be EATEN
Deut 12:16 - not to eat blood
Duet 12:17-18 - they were not to eat in their gates, but they were eat before the Lord IN THE PLACE which God chose
Duet 14:23 - the Lord reminded them to eat this tithe IN THE PLACE, which is Jerusalem
So in Duet 14:23-25 God allowed them to sell their tithe, buy what ever they need for their offerings, and travel to Jerusalem

In Duet 14:23, the offering is described as corn, oil, wine and firstlings. The corn mixed with oil was a meat offering as in Lev.2:14-16, which was either fried in a pan, or baked in an oven(Lev.2:4-7). The firstlings were offered with corn flour,wine and oil according to their size(larger animals required larger quantities of corn,wine,oil - Num.15:3-11). In those offerings, the priests did not drink the wine (Lev.10:9). The wine was poured out unto the LORD or perhaps, applied to the sacrifice, like a marinate or sop. Therefore, the Lord said " thou shalt EAT there before the LORD thy God", because they were not drinking the wine, oil or strong drink when they offered in Jerusalem. As a matter of fact, according to Num 28:7, the strong drink ( or strong wine) was not drunk, but rather it was poured unto the LORD as a drink offering. So not to worry, Duet 14:23 does not advocate drinking strong drink. According to the Bible, we find the following negative connections concerning "strong drink":

Lev 10:9 it was forbidden to the priests in the tabernacle

Num 6:3 it was forbidden to the Nazarites

Deut 29:5-6 it was forbidden to the Jews in the wilderness [so that they might know the Lord]

Jud 13:4 it was forbidden to Samson's mother

Prov 20:1 it is raging and it is a deceiver

Prov 31:4 it is forbidden to kings and princes [see Rev 5:10]

Is 5:22-23 it perverts judgment

Is 28:7 it causes men to err

Is 56:12 it is addictive

Mic 2:11 it is the drink of choice of false prophets [like Catholic priests]

Lk 1:15 it was forbidden to John the Baptist


So in light of all this, it would be very difficult to for one to make a case that God wants us to drink strong drink!

In researching this I came across a commentary and I agree with it:

Deut 14:22 - this is the tithe
Deut 14:23 - this tithe was to be EATEN
Deut 12:16 - not to eat blood
Duet 12:17-18 - they were not to eat in their gates, but they were eat before the Lord IN THE PLACE which God chose
Duet 14:23 - the Lord reminded them to eat this tithe IN THE PLACE, which is Jerusalem
So in Duet 14:23-25 God allowed them to sell their tithe, buy what ever they need for their offerings, and travel to Jerusalem

In Duet 14:23, the offering is described as corn, oil, wine and firstlings. The corn mixed with oil was a meat offering as in Lev.2:14-16, which was either fried in a pan, or baked in an oven(Lev.2:4-7). The firstlings were offered with corn flour,wine and oil according to their size(larger animals required larger quantities of corn,wine,oil - Num.15:3-11). In those offerings, the priests did not drink the wine (Lev.10:9). The wine was poured out unto the LORD or perhaps, applied to the sacrifice, like a marinate or sop. Therefore, the Lord said " thou shalt EAT there before the LORD thy God", because they were not drinking the wine, oil or strong drink when they offered in Jerusalem. As a matter of fact, according to Num 28:7, the strong drink ( or strong wine) was not drunk, but rather it was poured unto the LORD as a drink offering. So not to worry, Duet 14:23 does not advocate drinking strong drink. According to the Bible, we find the following negative connections concerning "strong drink":

Lev 10:9 it was forbidden to the priests in the tabernacle

Num 6:3 it was forbidden to the Nazarites

Deut 29:5-6 it was forbidden to the Jews in the wilderness [so that they might know the Lord]

Jud 13:4 it was forbidden to Samson's mother

Prov 20:1 it is raging and it is a deceiver

Prov 31:4 it is forbidden to kings and princes [see Rev 5:10]

Is 5:22-23 it perverts judgment

Is 28:7 it causes men to err

Is 56:12 it is addictive

Mic 2:11 it is the drink of choice of false prophets [like Catholic priests]

Lk 1:15 it was forbidden to John the Baptist


So in light of all this, it would be very difficult to for one to make a case that God wants us to drink strong drink!

OOPS!! I posted twice, and I meant Duet 14:26 - my bag

[peopleoftheway]

Post twice about strong drink, think twice about strong drink

[LindaR]

Originally Posted by Debau

I don't have to explain anything away Lee. Yes they did have cooling methods then. They are called caves. Yes they did have preservatives, natural sulfites.

The only folks who want to believe Jesus made alcoholic wine are those who want to conform the Bible to their naturalistic thinking, and perhaps have their alcohol too. Wine is a generic term in the Bible, and is explained in context whether alcoholic or not, not by "convoluted reasoning". It is easily understood by those who have no problem with being under authority of God's preserved words.

AMEN!

Originally Posted by Luke

If New Wine is unfermented grape juice, then what does Acts 2:13 mean?

Other mocking said "these men are full of new wine"

And then Peter says that the men are not drunken, as they suppose....

If new wine is not alcoholic, what does acts 2:13 mean?

The key word in that phrase is the word 'mocking'. The ones mocking knew the wine that the Apostle's drank was not alcoholic in content.

Peter even affirmed this when he answered, These men are not drunk as ye suppose seeing it is but the third hour of the day...'

Paul wrote in 1 Thessalonians 5 that '...they that be drunken are drunken in the night.' Paul went on to say that we are 'of the day' and that we are to remain 'sober'.

Peter's statement affirms that they did not drink an alcoholic wine at all. They drank a non-alcoholic wine. This was the same wine that Isaiah recorded was found in the cluster. It was the same wine that Isaiah spoke of when he wrote 'shall tread out no wine in their presses'.

Talk to any vintner today and they will tell you their wines are not made in the presses at all, but rather after the fresh juice is removed from the presses.

Alcohol is made by a process after the juice has left the press. The wine spoken of by Isaiah the prophet in chapter 16 was a non fermented wine. It was this same wine that the Apostle's drank.

How can I be sure that they were drinking a non alcoholic wine?

By Jesus' words when He answered the Pharisees who accused Him of being a winebibber.... "But wisdom is justified of her children".

Just as Jesus was accused falsely of drinking alcohol, His Apostle's were later accused falsely of drinking alcohol

[LindaR]

Originally Posted by Luke

If New Wine is unfermented grape juice, then what does Acts 2:13 mean?

Other mocking said "these men are full of new wine"

And then Peter says that the men are not drunken, as they suppose....

If new wine is not alcoholic, what does acts 2:13 mean?

The Greek word for "new wine" in Acts 2:13 is gleukos. This is the only place in the NT where you will find this word. Here is the definition from Strongs:

gleukos glyoo'-kos
akin to 1099; sweet wine, i.e. (properly) must (fresh juice), but used of the more saccharine (and therefore highly inebriating) fermented wine:--new wine.

Apparently these mockers were trying to debunk the miracle of tongues and slander the apostles because of the many languages they were using to preach the Gospel. The apostles were certainly NOT "drunk in the Spirit"...they were "filled with the Spirit". Nowhere in Scriptures does it say to be "drunk in the Spirit"...but we are to be "filled with the Spirit":

And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; (Ephesians 5:18)

Originally Posted by LeeM1023

I think there's an assumption here that everyone who believes the KJV is the word of God is cut from the same cloth, so to speak. I don't believe everyone here represents the same kind of church background, theology, etc.

But we are all supposed to represent Christ.

Myself, when the Bible says "wine" I think it means "wine." There's a lot of convoluted reasoning that goes on to explain it as meaning something else, and I think that's an American cultural phenomenon.

When the Bible says wine, it does indeed wine. But reading Scripture in context will show one whether the wine was alcoholic or not. For instance, the word 'cider' can mean a non fermented apple juice, or it can mean a fermented beverage; yet it is the same word.

In both the Hebrew and Greek language, many words had more than one definition.

When we consider wine in the Bible times, we must ask ourselves, 'How can the Son of God approve of that which His Father referred to as poison in the last book of the Law, Deuteronomy 32:33? Why would the Son of God put a poison to another man's lips to manifest His glory at the first of His miracles as recorded in John 2:1-11?

The answer is obvious, He would not.

Cooling and preservation as we know them did not exist at the time of Christ. You could have fresh grape juice when it was fresh, and you could have wine or vinegar later, but there was no way to keep fruit juice as juice.

As we know them today, i.e., refridgerators, freezers, etc., cooling and preservation did not exist, true, but... indeed they did have methods of cooling and preservation.

Pliny, Plutarch, Aristotle, Columella, Josephus, and other Historians of Bible time have written extensively on preservation methods that were used to prevent fermentation of wine. One of those methods was to boil the juice of the grape down to a consistency like syrup. The bacteria that causes grape juice to ferment is killed of when the temperature of the juice reaches 176° Farhenheit. Grape juice does not boil until it reaches 212° Farhenheit. According to historical records then, by boiling the juice, they were assured of stopping the fermentation process.

I encourage you to go to a local library or a University library and look for a book called "On Agriculture". This book was written more than 1700 years ago and records methods for preserving wine in its unfermented state. Research all the historians I mentioned above as well.

You can't believe God preserved the words of Scripture in the AV, then decide you want to explain them away because the idea of drinking wine makes you uncomfortable . . .

Lee

Actually, since the Word of God commands 'Look thou not upon the wine when IT...,' not 'when you,' we have to stand on the Word of God and the command to abstinence.

Notice in Proverbs 23:31, the subject is the wine, not the person... Look not upon the wine when IT...

Many like to use that passage to say one can drink in moderation, but that passage teaches just the opposite.