# Reading > Religious Texts >  Drinking in Moderation

## apstudent

I know a lot of people that believe it is wrong spiritually to drink alcohol at all. I am a strong believer myself, but I do not believe that the consumption of alcohol is wrong, as long as it is in moderation, aka not getting drunk. What do you all believe on this topic?

----------


## Admin

Didn't Jesus drink Wine? Many churches serve wine with the eucharist.

----------


## apstudent

That they do. I was sort of wanting to hear a legalist Christian's side on this. I know a lot of churches that will not allow the consumption of alcohol at church events like picnics and barbeques. I just wanted to see someone's reasoning behind that. How they can try to emulate Jesus, but forbid a bevarage that he drank himself.

----------


## Ickmeister

Manhattan Christian College does not allow any of their students to consume any alcohol, while they are students at the college. If you are seen drinking alcohol or entering a bar, you can be dissmissed from college. I have no idea why...

----------


## Shea

We drink grape juice at my congregation when we take communuion because it's the "fruit of the vine". The Bible doesn't forbid drinking in moderation (not to get drunk), but it does say not to be a stumbling block. Suppose another christian happened to see you drinking? They don't know the situation your in at the time your just moderately drinking. But many people would take it as a green light especially if they are new or weak christians. Probably the worst person to see a scene like that would be a recovering alcoholic.

----------


## DumbLikeAPoet

I am removing this comment 3 years later simply because I no longer believe it.

----------


## apstudent

> _Originally posted by DumbLikeAPoet_ 
> *
> I wouldn't want alcohol at a church event I go to just because I think it might send the wrong message to people who don't understand the concept of moderation. For example if I took a friend to a church event and he saw people drinking he might assume it is ok to get drunk. 
> 
> Jonus*


I completely agree with that. Thanks. So, tell me if this is what you are trying to say. It is all about the role models. If someone, especially a devout Christian, that could possibly be a role model to newer Christians, is seen drinking, even in moderation, then the newer Christian might get the wrong impression on Christianity's view on alcohol.

----------


## DumbLikeAPoet

I can't speak for Shea, but essentially yes that is what I'm saying.

Jonus

----------


## Shea

That's what I'm saying too. I also remember one of my teachers at the Bible college I attended saying that the alchohol level was much lower than it is now. I think the reason for having it at all was to prevent bacteria growth and such.

----------


## =Monkey_King=

The reason Jesus drank wine was because in such regions water was very hard to comeas by, wine was a common drink. Even in some parts of europe it was so, as groundwater in many areas are mixed with phosophorus, making it toxic. 

That leads to 
1 cup of coffee = same price 1 cup of spring water in france
 :Tongue: 

Im my opinion a lot of the religion is decided upon culture. 
I love this quote in the book Illusions by Richard Bach
"If you gave the messiah a guitar, will he say, "I cant play this thing?" 
I couldnt find the quote so I wrote from my memory  :Wink:

----------


## Shea

> _Originally posted by =Monkey_King=_ 
> [B]The reason Jesus drank wine was because in such regions water was very hard to comeas by, wine was a common drink. Even in some parts of europe it was so, as groundwater in many areas are mixed with phosophorus, making it toxic.


Sorry, what is your source for this? I have a hard time swallowing that. Where ever there is water, there are people. I don't mean to doubt, but a man once tried to justify to my Dad that he didn't need to be baptized because the regions in the Bible were mostly desert and there wasn't enough water to Baptize. That of course makes no rational sense in the first place.

----------


## =Monkey_King=

Im not sure where i got that from it was so long ago...
And by the way a person can be baptized in water but it might not be safe to drink. Im pretty sure that people in biblical times went to a large body of water in mass groups.

It could be that although water was present in the regions that i mentioned sometimes the groundwater supplies went very low and wine could be substituted... 

Im not sure really  :Biggrin:

----------


## Jay

I haven't heard of phosphor polluted water anywhere around... can't tell for sure, but I don't think it WAS sometime in the past.

----------


## Shea

Ok Monkey King. You'll have to excuse me. I don't like to take anyone's word without sources. Please let me know if your not real sure, It creates less confusion for me. :Wink:   :Biggrin:

----------


## =Monkey_King=

Its all right bah im too lazy to find the source  :Biggrin:  
But is is correct that in western Europe (Primarily France and Gertmany) they had wine because the water was heavily poluted. Each farming household had some fruits etc that could be made into wine.

I wouldnt be surprised if palestine had less water than some parts of europe 

 :Biggrin:

----------


## mrbillbenson

I have wrestled with this topic for quite awhile. I believe that the Bible is clear for its time, that wine was drunk by many. And not because water was scarce. What did they fill up at the marriage in Cana: water barrels. Water they had plenty of, it was wine they were short on! On the other hand, excess alcohol is a toxin, and hurts the body, which is the temple of the Living God. God is not at all happy with human vices which take people's mind off serving Him, or take their bodies out of commission. Hard to go to church in the morning w/ a hangover.

Jesus drank wine. He compared himself to John the baptist. John, he said in Luke 7, came neither eating bread nor drinking wine; whereas he, the Son of man, came eating and drinking. John wasn't trying to avoid grape juice, he was abstaining from alcohol. Wine in and of itself cannot be spiritually evil. Matthew 15:11 "...not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the man..."

We need to ask ourself in each situation, why do we desire to drink wine (or beer, or other substances). That should be what tells us it's ok or not, how we feel about the motivations and the truthfulness with which we face up to them (even if only to ourselves). I think a spiritually healthy attitude is understanding that there may be some times when something is ok, and other times when it isn't. My belief is that Jesus would handle the topic of alcohol on a case by case basis. The Bible is clear that certain things are absolutely against God, and it amazes me that church-run institutions would take a stand against drinking wine - but allow, for example, divorced people to remarry.

----------


## Shea

If it makes you feel any better, the only sort of divorced person that we allow for remarriage is one who's former spouse was unfaithful. (See Matthew 5:32)

----------


## mrbillbenson

An exception was granted for fornication, not for adultery.

Fornication referred to a "before marriage" condition, not an after-marriage condition. In other words, if you married someone and later found out you were lied to prior making the covenant. You were cheated into promising your own life-long love.

That was the only exception to otherwise not fulfilling one's own obligation to take "for better or for worse."

And what a congregation allows isn't my point, my point is God is clear in the text of the Bible what HE allows, and what Jesus gave example of. Churches need to be careful, we are the body, not the head. Getting something right, or getting it wrong, and giving either as "doctrine" is a risky thing. Again, churches put up the fence, but God knows where the property line really is, and when Jesus returns, He is going to point to a lot of fences that are not where they were supposed to be.

----------


## Shea

> _Originally posted by mrbillbenson_ 
> [B]An exception was granted for fornication, not for adultery.
> 
> Fornication referred to a "before marriage" condition, not an after-marriage condition. In other words, if you married someone and later found out you were lied to prior making the covenant. You were cheated into promising your own life-long love.


Where did you get your info? I have a program that shows me the original Greek text. The greek word for fornication in that verse is "porneia". It is a word that is described as being from harlotry, including adultery and incest. I didn't see anything that talked about a pre-marriage condition. 

But I agree that there are a lot of fences that are put in the wrong places. Our congregation does it's best to follow what God allows and doesn't.

----------


## mrbillbenson

No one has the "original Greek text". There are no original parchments left, only transcriptions. That said, I do think the King James scholars probably tried to do a reasonable job of collecting accurate materials from other languages. So I use common commercial sense: If you buy something and it isn't what was represented to you, you can take it back for a refund. This is also in the old testament concerning "tokens of virginity" Deut 22:15.

But what spouse can claim they had NOTHING to do with their own partner's infidelity? Who has, like Christ, been the perfect spouse?

(2) My source is the Spirit. I feel by the Spirit in me that there are three very important relationships which Jesus strove to emphasize, Father-Child (provision, duty), Brethren (unity), Bride-Bridegroom (undying love, sacrifice). It was clear what Jesus intended, that a man or woman would stay together, work through problems, show forgiveness. If they are made one flesh, how can that be put assunder, without hardness of heart? Then, it is not the unfaithfulness, it is the hardness of heart at the root cause.

(3) 7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 7:11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

The way I read this, people shouldn't leave one another (or put them away). And Jesus says both the one who remarries ... and the one who marries the divorcee, are adulterers. Not fornicators.

----------


## Shea

{THESE ARE MY HUSBAND'S WORDS}

We have one gospel from 125 AD called the Chester Beatty papyrus. We also have the entire New Testament from 330 As call the Codex Sinaiticus. All of the other copies from the 4th centruy are all almost exactly alike as it was only 300 years removed from the original, so your aguement is invalid without bringing up arguements about specific copies that strayed from most version available in the 4th century. (websites are available to validate this arguement if needed) Who told you that King James's scholars first allegiance was accuracy and not defending the unscriptual infrastructure of the Anglican church. James was head of the anglican church and if they would have translated anything that cast doubt on the anglican church system they would have been beheaded. (ie like Oliver Cromwell) Read about history before you make blind assumptions that mislead people from God's truth. 

Buying something is not the same act as marriage, Marriage is a commitment ordained by god, buying a pack of gum at 7-11 is not and so you shouldn't make that analogy. As far as "token of virginity" verse, what do you think Jesus was addressing in Matthew 19:8, if he wasn't addressing the Jewish practice of divorcing for any reason whatsoever....including "I don't think she was a vigin." 

{THESE ARE MY WORDS}

Neither one of us understood your argument in your second point. 

Your third point (for those who don't know, Bill is quoting 1 Corinthians 7:10-13) has nothing to do with the marital unfaithfullness issue of Matthew 5:32. You also failed to address that one of the definitions for the Greek word translated as fornication, is adultery.

----------


## mrbillbenson

I wasn't there to see the other texts written, nor the King James either. I believe the Spirit has to speak, and only can when we are willing to listen. The written word is dependent on language, the Spirit is not.

My point about relationships with a heavenly theme is that Christ's love for the church (his bride) is an important theme in heaven. He said any who would come to him would not be cast out. The relationship of marriage which you agree is ordained by God, should mirror that to the extent possible. Christ endured much sacrifice for the Bride, and bought her with his own blood. God refers to similar acts of redemption to his "wife" which played the harlot in some of the old testament writings. I don't know exact verses (but I can tell you do!)

Lastly, I believe that adulteries and fornications must be different because of Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies". What is the Greek for fornications in that verse?

Sorry, it's just me here, I don't have a tag team. Good night folks.

----------


## Shea

I already established my standpoint on "the Spirit" in the Masculinity thread, but to couple it with a point about your second paragraph, you are using human reasoning to make your arguement, which makes it not valid because your "putting up fences that don't belong." Did you read Matthew 19:8? That should have ended the discussion. And actually, I don't know what your reffering to about the OT (but from what I've seen of your knowlege of scripture, I can assume it's out of context).

For some reason, the last two times I've tried to open that program that shows me the Greek text, it makes the computer freeze up. I'll look up Matthew 15:19 after my husband fixes it.

----------


## mrbillbenson

OK, I read Matt 19:8. What is the point? Seems to be saying it was hardness of heart that caused Moses to give people the law allowing divorce. No one with a hard heart is going to be rewarded in the afterlife, so not a very safe example to follow.

One old testament reference was Jeremiah 3:1 "They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD." God seems to make it quite clear there is more love in his heart for the Children of Israel than the Law itself allows a man to have for his natural wife. 

I am saying that Jesus's example was divine love. A man divorcing a wife who has broken a promise of fidelity better not have ONE sin in that marriage, better not ONCE HAVE LOOKED ON A WOMAN TO LUST since he married that bride.

----------


## Shea

I'm sorry, I haven't read your last post, because it's getting late and I have class tomorrow. I'll read and respond afterwards. :Wink:

----------


## den

<reads posts> I have comments to add, but, they're not of biblical proportions so I'll bite my tongue.  :Wink:

----------


## AbdoRinbo

This discussion is boring.

----------


## AbdoRinbo

Oops, that's gonna rub some people the wrong way.

----------


## den

Well then, wanna start a fight or something? liven things up? You bite first  :Tongue: 




> _Originally posted by AbdoRinbo_ 
> *Oops, that's gonna rub some people the wrong way.*

----------


## sloegin

Moderation...f*ck moderation.

----------


## den

The keyboard has been drinking, not me...  :Eek:

----------


## sloegin

Denial?

----------


## den

Nope. I won't deny I don't know the bible...

----------


## sloegin

The dipsomaniacal display, implied by your sig.

----------


## sloegin

But, I like it.

----------


## den

<oh man! has to dig up dictionary.com link> 

You mean in regards to penchant for drunk people to talk or yell loudly?  :Tongue:  ... or the dipsy lalala characters? 




> _Originally posted by sloegin_ 
> *The dipsomaniacal display, implied by your sig.*

----------


## sloegin

The, abnormal and insatiable craving for alcohol.

Oh sh*t, I was talking about myself. Opps.

----------


## sloegin

It can refer to you, if you so desire.

If the shoe fits.....

----------


## mrbillbenson

How degenerative this became!

----------


## Shea

Ok, I know some people have found our discussion boring and off the topic of alcohol, but I still want to make this point clearer.

Matthew 19:8-9
Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." 

I've used the NIV because it's easier for the modern person to understand. I know that the KJV uses the word "fornication" in place of "marital unfaithfulness", but it's easier with these two verses to see why they mean the same thing. 

The Law that Moses gave about divorce was set for the pre-marriage thing, if she wasn't a virgin, he had a right to divorce her. So why would Jesus restate that law in verse 9? His words denote a change in decree, not a restatement.

----------


## mrbillbenson

Don't inherently know "why" Jesus would say anything... but I do know that I would rather ask HIM why, than someone else. I can only tell you what I feel/believe. And I feel/believe that Jesus would prefer people to stay married at all costs, but when the cost is too great, then the decision is permanent. If you divorce someone, then you have cast the first stone, so to speak. And as I said, Jesus regarded looking on another with lust in the heart every bit as sinful as extra-marital sex in the flesh. If you can cut off someone's avenue to repentance and reconciliation, you stand in judgment of them. If you do not forgive others, your Heavenly Father will not forgive you.

An unfaithful spouse cannot be a believing spouse. It is a complete contradiction. Therefore, if the unbelieving spouse desires to dwell with you, don't seek to be loosed. But if you do leave, Christ commands you to remain single.

As for keeping marriage sacred: If anyone searches their heart, they will know that they could have been more loving, could have been more giving, could have taken better care of themself and their partner ... and so bears some responsibility for any condition which impinges on the marriage - including infidelity. Only in the case of undisclosed premarital situations can a person can be truly said to bear no fault. Everything that comes after marriage is committed by two joint-heirs of salavation, and we have responsibility for one another.

It is the undisclosed fornication that Jesus referred to when saying that such reasons for break-up did not result in adultery conditions. Because in the eyes of God, and man, there was no marriage which was legally or morally entered into. Every prospective spouse has a right to know who they are marrying, inside and out.

If the Spirit has not taught someone the first principles of walking in faith (forgiveness), and they need justification in the written word to do what you want to do they will find it. Jesus, however, did not "let people off", but said very clearly if you do not forgive all of your brother's (or wife's or husband's... or are you going to say I am speculating, that he said "brother" so that is where it ends?!) trespasses, your Heavenly Father will not forgive you.

----------


## DumbLikeAPoet

I completly agree with Shea. mrbillbenson you are oh so very wrong. 

as for this comment...



> Moderation...f*ck moderation.


I agree.....unless you are a christian and want to follow the bible.

Jonus

----------


## mrbillbenson

Oh so very wrong ... about everything? OK.

----------


## DumbLikeAPoet

> Oh so very wrong ... about everything? OK.


Maybe not everything but everything you've said about biblical divorce.

Jonus

----------


## Shea

Mr. Bill, I'm going to give you two personal examples.

First, my stepfather. His first wife left him after he became a christian. He didn't ask for a divorce, she did. He married again to a woman who did a personality change after the vows. She also did the divorcing, not him. Then he met my mother. He showed her truth in the Bible, she was baptized and then they were married and have been happily so for 11 years now. They even survived quitting smoking together. I would not now be a christian if she hadn't met him.

Second story: There is a very sweet young woman who attends our congregation. She was raised in the church, her father is an elder at a congregation in Texas. She is expecting her first baby in about two weeks, and after the birth, she will move back to Texas to be with her family, without her husband. To everyone's very unexpected surprise, he decided to have an affair. He was always a very nice pleasant person, a little on the quiet side, but nobody expected his actions at all. Our elders and other members of the congregation did their best to talk with him, but he continued to press for a divorce, not her. But because of his actions, and the scriptures I've listed, if she wishes in the future, she will be able to marry again and not violate the scriptures.

The christian should do everything they can to keep a marriage whole. But if the other person is obviously not going to comply, then they are not bound to the marriage any longer. If you think about it, it makes better sense for the christian parent to find a christian spouse than to try and raise children to be christians in a home where one spouse is not faithful.

----------


## =Monkey_King=

In my humble opinion:
"Everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial"
-by Paul, one of my favorite quotes in the bible.

If drinking makes you crazy and violent, dont do it, but if it just adds hapiness, go ahead  :Biggrin:  Whats so bad about making life a illusion? Only those who cannot control it can be doing a wrong thing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also in my opinion every religion / philosophy is moderatively true. 
This is a quote from the Taoist philosophy, very similar to Christianity, but of course without the concept "God" and his son "Jesus." (God is refered to as "heaven" or "the way."

- The great sage lives amongst the people, but is not contaminated by them. Indeed, he posesses his own fragrance, like the beautiful water lilies blooming from the murky water.

----------


## mrbillbenson

Shea,

I feel you are wrong, but I can see how much you would like to be right. All the good intentions in the World do not make something that is a wrong rendering of Jesus's truths correct, no matter what the circumstances. I can say I do not know, when I do not  but this is not one of those times. You are speculating that fornication REALLY means adultery in this very instance, and you are wrong, plain and simple. You are saying someone can remarry because one (and only one) of the meanings of the Greek word you wrote  porneia, or whatever  can mean adultery. My concordance uses the term "including adultery" which is to say, it isn't always. It does not have to mean that at all, it most certainly can mean sex between two people who are not married. Jesus used two words for adultery in the same passage on the subject (Mark 7:21). The word for fornications is very nearly the same there as in Matthew 19.

You want the Scriptures to mean what feels good to you. What you want the scriptures to mean is what most fundamentalist "Christians" want it to mean. Those who are willing for some of God's law, but not all. Who can throw out Jesus's law of forgiveness. You rationalize the actions of a cuckolded spouse who destroys his partner's future by divorcing him or her. Who is probably just as guilty of sinfulness in some other areas of his walk before God, but still passes judgment on their mate and closes off all avenue of repentance and reconciliation. Nevermind that that person was besieged by Satan, same as the divorcer, just maybe not in the same way. And nevermind that the one being put away may have given all they ever had to their spouse for many years, but for one slip...

No, hardness of heart, which dispels forgiveness, is not acceptable to God. If the heat is too much, and you want to get out of the kitchen, then fine ... but don't go cook in another kitchen. You are trying to give license to someone  who made a vow to love for better or worse - to push a reset button on their life because they got disappointed. No way, Jesus would not have ANY of that.

Now, here's why Matthew 19 does NOT mean infidelity during marriage.

Firstly, because treating this usage of fornication to mean sex before marriage makes Jesus's words consistent with the Old Testament. He didn't come to destroy that law, he said. A bride given to a husband was supposed to be a virgin, and if she was not a virgin (Matthew 1:18-19 anyone?) then the marriage was not on proper terms. 

Secondly, the only times the exception is mentioned by Jesus, he is talking about a woman. That is to say, it has to do with a woman's requirement to be a virgin, in order to be worth the bride price, not the man. That's just the way it was, for what it's worth, not that I like it that way.

Third, Mark doesn't even mention the exception at all, so if it was such a blatant escape clause for every cuckolded mate to rely on, why would Mark leave it out? In fact, it was probably a pretty obscure occurrence (brides tended to marry pretty young, and most weddings would not go through with a bride who was secretly not a virgin)

Next, Jesus seemed pretty adamant that what God had joined should not be set apart by man. I would say, however, that a fraudulent marriage between a non-virgin bride and her unsuspecting groom was not something God had joined. I do admit this is ascribing more human fairness to God than he would take for himself, so I'm willing to let this assertion go if you like.

In all, the only reasonable answer is because he was referring to before-marriage sex by "fornication", and after-marriage sex by "adultery."

Suppose you were right about the meaning of fornication: adultery during marriage. Here are two scenarios that make your concept a moral contradiction. The first is an absurdity. The second, merely something that seems unfair in comparison to the first. (Note: I am not saying the second one is wrong, I am saying it is absurd in comparison to the first). Here they are:

Person A is unfaithful during the marriage (meets / falls in love with person C).
Person B divorces them. 
Person B gets remarried, which is their right, according to your reading.
Person A marries Person C. By your definition, this isn't adultery. If you disagree, go back to Matthew 19 and reread it. So you have two wrongs making a right, how interesting (rather, how absurd.)

Next situation:
Person A is an abuser. He beats his wife, Person B.
Person B runs away from Person A, bringing the children.
Person A never remarries. Person B cannot remarry because no one has committed adultery (yet).

Unfortunate as it is (and I know some cases where this has happened) the above situation is what the Scripture says. Paul also says that if the believing one departs, the Lord commands they remain single.

Anyway, the Bible was not meant to be fair, but it is meant to be understood as much as possible, and not to read into it what we *wish* were so.

----------


## DumbLikeAPoet

The only acceptable reason for divorce is fornication. 




> Matthew 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.


If you look up this instance of fornication in Strongs' you get this....




> G4202
> πορνεία
> porneia
> por-ni'-ah
> From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.


G4203 is this.....



> G4203
> πορνεύω
> porneuō
> porn-yoo'-o
> From G4204; to act the harlot, that is, (literally) indulge unlawful lust (of either sex), or (figuratively) practise idolatry: - commit (fornication).


Now as far as I can tell this is not speaking about Fornication before mairrage. The context of this verse is speaking about fornication at any time.....

Jonus

----------


## mrbillbenson

Jonus - you are simply wrong. Jesus meant before marriage sex ... Mark skips it entirely (it hardly ever happened); pre-marital sex is definitely one of the literal, possible meanings, and if you put in context of

Jesus's message about hardness of heart - things that God has joined not being put assunder - looking on someone with lust being equal in sinfulness to "doing it" you will understand better that he did NOT want people who believe in a resurrection, where all inequities will be more than compensated, to cut off another's avenue to repentance and reconciliation.

Right is right even if no one does it, and wrong is wrong even if everybody does it. Don't teach others to commit fornication and adultery.

You want to know why "wide is the way that leads to distruction and many there be that go in thereat ..." you are part of the reason. Because you sanction what at least half the world is doing; cheating on one another, breaking up, remarrying, and getting on with their "saved" existences.

Jesus will judge it all, not me. I just try to give people the skinny, the facts, and not pin hopes on misreading Jesus intent. That is why I believe in following a whole Bible, not a Bible full of holes.

Regards,

bill

----------


## DumbLikeAPoet

Unfortunatly for your theory the bible doesn't say fornication _before marriage_. It simply says fornication. It does not specify a time. 

I do not condone people cheating on their spouse in any way. But if my wife cheats on me the bible says that I can "put her away" ie divorce her. 

I'm sorry bill but the bible just does not bear out what you say. 

Jonus

----------


## mrbillbenson

I disagree with you. Thanks for expressing your thoughts.

Nice forum here, when used right. Everyone gets a say. I hope that people are praying, so that the Lord gets a say too!

 :Wink:

----------


## Tirananniel

The Bible does have a say about drinking, from moderate to drunkenness. Please check out the 75 Bible warnings(http://www.scionofzion.com/drinking.htm) against intoxicating wine. Please remember that there was fermented and unfermented wine in those times.

As far as fornication goes, there are many Bible references that tell us to flee from sexual impurity:

Abstain from sexual immorality. Acts 15:29

Flee from sexual immorality.1 Cor. 6:18

But among you there just not be even a hint of sexual immoralitybecause these are improper for Gods holy people. Eph. 5:3

Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: Sexual immorality [and] impurity. Col 3:5

It is Gods will that you  should avoid sexual immorality.. 1 Thess. 4:3


I could find more but I do not have the time right now. These are key verses.

Yes I know this thread seemed rather old, but it was not locked, so it is ok right?

----------


## Pendragon

It really depends on what you mean by "moderation". Paul told Timothy to use wine for medicinal purposes. (I Timothy 5:24) I can't see that being wrong. But having had an alcololic dad, I know that even a little can often be too much. I'd stay away from it.  :Nod:

----------


## Kaltrina

> I know that even a little can often be too much. I'd stay away from it.


 I agree with you but as you said when one is not an alcoholic it doesn't matter if you drink. but everything with a limit. for example by religion it ia forbidden to drink but as everybody said before Christ drank wine and Mohamed did drink wine also, but the only reason why drinking is forbidden is because people lose their senses and become aggressive, violent or can do anything stupid to themselves. so that's why everything has a limit,drinking should, especially.........

----------


## Pendragon

> Christ drank wine and Mohamed did drink wine also, but the only reason why drinking is forbidden is because people lose their senses and become aggressive, violent or can do anything stupid to themselves. that's why everything has a limit,drinking should, especially.........


I can't deny what the scriptures plainly say, so I won't try!  :Smile:  Carefully watch that limit, however.  :Smile:

----------


## Amra

"Mohamed did drink wine also, but the only reason why drinking is forbidden is because people lose their senses and become aggressive, violent or can do anything stupid to themselves. so that's why everything has a limit,drinking should, especially........."

Could you give some reference that Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) drank wine? Thank you.

----------


## Kaltrina

> Could you give some reference that Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) drank wine? Thank you.


 You know Amra I am muslim, and people from my religion, who have read Holy Quran and other things about our religion told me that Propheto Mohammed drank wine, because it is healthy for ones blood, but of course menaing only one glass, not getting drunk....  :Smile:

----------


## Amra

Assalamu aleikum,

I don't mean to be rude, but when we talk about Islam, we have to give valid references. People who merely practice the religion, and have no other qualifications to discuss it, are not valid references, and we cannot take their opinions on the issue if they cannot prove it with valid arguments. Prophet Mohammed a.s didn't drink because alcohol is strictly prohibited in Islam. There is no such thing as "moderation in drinking" because Islam goes by the principle that, one not only should not commit a sin, but shouldn't even come close to it. Alcohol, in any amounts, is strictly forbidden in Islam, and Prophet MOhammed a.s said:

"Surely Allah has cursed Al-Khamr(intoxicant) and cursed the one who brews it and the one for whom it is brewed, the one who drinks it and the one who serves it, the one who carries it and the one for whom it is carried, the one who buys and the one who eats (profits from) it's price. "

In the Holy Qu'ran, Allah s.v.t says:
"O you who believe! Intoxicants and gambling are an abomination of Satan's handiwork. Avoid such (abomination) that you may prosper. (Holy Quran, 5:90) "

----------


## okmit

The Taliban,(religious students) were cited by the United Nations as the worlds leading producer of opium,the raw material for heroin.

Maulvi Hafeezullah,an official in the Taliban"s Foreign Ministry stated;"We can unleash a heroin bomb to match the United States nuclear bomb."

What difference does it make what the Koran says if the Islamic powers don't obey it?

----------


## okmit

Wine aids in digestion and was drank at meals.It was also key in every orgie.I have never read that anyone drank grape juice at either.It has been written;Moses got totaly wasted just after getting off the boat!
I prefer weed myself,but if you must drink,please dont drive.

----------


## Amra

"What difference does it make what the Koran says if the Islamic powers don't obey it?"

ONe has nothing to do with the other. The fact that some people are not following Qur'an doesn't negate the existence of it. God doesn't depend on people, nor does our following or not following of His Law effect the existence of the Law.

----------


## okmit

Hmm..some people not following the Koran.Keen observation,but more importantly they are Clerics with a very large,very violent backing that claim they are following the Law!
I think they are upset over portions ?

----------


## Amra

I don't think I understand your observation. Are YOU upset about something?  :Smile:

----------


## okmit

God forbid I should be upset about anything.I find it interesting that a couple believers will quible over whether or not Muhammad ever tasted alcohol!Its the thing that schisms and wars are fought over.Did you know he married a 12 year old?

----------


## Amra

"Did you know he married a 12 year old?"

Actually, Aisha r.a was 9 when they were married.

----------


## okmit

> "Did you know he married a 12 year old?"
> 
> Actually, Aisha r.a was 9 when they were married.


Intresting,do you suppose they waited untill she turned 12 to consummate?

I was also curious as to how Khadijah,his first wife, an older ,urbane woman of the world,that gave him a job ,felt about Aisha,but couldn't find anything in the Sunnah?Got any input...and please include you source.
than,you...okmit

----------


## okmit

> "Did you know he married a 12 year old?"
> 
> Actually, Aisha r.a was 9 when they were married.


Intresting,do you suppose they waited untill she turned 12 to consummate?

I was also curious as to how Khadijah,his first wife, an older ,urbane woman of the world,that gave him a job ,felt about Aisha,but couldn't find anything in the Sunnah?Got any input...and please include you source.
than,you...okmit

----------


## adilyoussef

I want to ask some questions. Why do people drink wine? And what makes it different from other drinks? To help digesting? To have courage to do things? To feel cheerful and mery? If so, the one who drinks it lacks something in his/her life and finds in wine a surogate. But one day or another, it will be the cause of his/her destruction. Better face my destiny and manage my life without the help of stimulant than to find myself addicted due to a mistake of overdosage. 

For that a profet dranck wine during his life, is better to give a proof of it that to say herasy. That's why quotations are part of the English grammar.

----------


## Amra

"Intresting,do you suppose they waited untill she turned 12 to consummate?

I was also curious as to how Khadijah,his first wife, an older ,urbane woman of the world,that gave him a job ,felt about Aisha,but couldn't find anything in the Sunnah?Got any input...and please include you source.
than,you...okmit"

Khadijah was dead when Prophet Mohammed married Aisha r.a. If she ever felt anything about her, we certainly had no way to find out.  :Smile:

----------


## Sitaram

> "Intresting,do you suppose they waited untill she turned 12 to consummate?
> 
> I was also curious as to how Khadijah,his first wife, an older ,urbane woman of the world,that gave him a job ,felt about Aisha,but couldn't find anything in the Sunnah?Got any input...and please include you source.
> than,you...okmit"
> 
> Khadijah was dead when Prophet Mohammed married Aisha r.a. If she ever felt anything about her, we certainly had no way to find out.


According to Hadith, marriage at 6. Consummation at 9. This is why in Iran, the marriage age was lowered from 15 to 9. Kadijah, the first wife, died before the other wives were taken. This is my understanding.

----------


## Amra

"According to Hadith, marriage at 6. Consummation at 9. This is why in Iran, the marriage age was lowered from 15 to 9. Kadijah, the first wife, died before the other wives were taken. This is my understanding"

The age itself doesn't determine the maturity. It is the onset of puberty that determines it.

----------


## mono

> God forbid I should be upset about anything.I find it interesting that a couple believers will quible over whether or not Muhammad ever tasted alcohol!Its the thing that schisms and wars are fought over.Did you know he married a 12 year old?


I think one must consider the time period and cultural practices of the age, okmit. Of course, marrying a 12 year old nowadays, in civilized cultures, seems nearly unheard of, and frowned upon, for moral reasons.
One cannot judge someone for practicing their cultural norms, however, as I have no doubt other cultures point (and pointed) and laugh (and laughed) at us. I should also inform you that you type these messages on a literature forum; Edgar Allan Poe married his 13-year-old cousin, long after Mohammed's existence, but I doubt if anyone can refute his genius.

----------


## Sitaram

> I think one must consider the time period and cultural practices of the age, okmit. Of course, marrying a 12 year old nowadays, in civilized cultures, seems nearly unheard of, and frowned upon, for moral reasons.
> One cannot judge someone for practicing their cultural norms, however, as I have no doubt other cultures point (and pointed) and laugh (and laughed) at us. I should also inform you that you type these messages on a literature forum; Edgar Allan Poe married his 13-year-old cousin, long after Mohammed's existence, but I doubt if anyone can refute his genius.


I had a pen-pal in Tehran. I asked him once if he ever saw a nine year old bride. He said one only sees such young brides rarely in very remote areas, among nomadic tribes, but not in the big cities.

Gandhi, in his autobiography, writes in detail about his marriage to Kasturbai at age 6. The bride is brought into the family and they play as children. When he was twelve or so, an uncle took him aside and explained that now it was time for him to be with his wife, and then explained the details. For years, Gandhi wondered who it was who took Kasturbai aside, for she seem to know the details, but he never had the temerity to ask her. She died after they had been married 60 or more years. His grief was inconsolable at the loss of such a lifelong companion.

Gandhi states, in his autobiography, that personally he considered the practice of child marriage monstrous. The practice of child marriage was subsequently outlawed in India.

----------


## okmit

I wasnt being facetious.I wasnt sure if it was Muhammad,Edgar,or Jerry Lee Lewis of the "Great Balls A Fire" fame that married a 12 year old.I was a bit surprised by the sharia,6 & 9!
While West Virginia would frown on 6 & 9,its my understanding they are quite Liberal about little girls and cousins an such.(that is facetious.)

----------


## okmit

> I think one must consider the time period and cultural practices of the age, okmit. Of course, marrying a 12 year old nowadays, in civilized cultures, seems nearly unheard of, and frowned upon, for moral reasons.
> One cannot judge someone for practicing their cultural norms, however, as I have no doubt other cultures point (and pointed) and laugh (and laughed) at us. I should also inform you that you type these messages on a literature forum; Edgar Allan Poe married his 13-year-old cousin, long after Mohammed's existence, but I doubt if anyone can refute his genius.


 Mono,this is not the first time you have pointed out this is a literature forum.I am aware of that, and also aware of Edgars pedophilia,his getting thrown out of his uncles house,school ,and the military.His addiction to alcohol,and opium and the miserable life he lived, and I also believe his "genius"is refutable.

Now that you have lectured me,you might want to go back and re-read what I wrote and see if I was being judgmental or simply asking a question?
I accept your apology in advance...your literate correspondent,okmit

----------


## subterranean

Just FYI, until late 80-s, the earliest age for woman to be legally married in my country is 12 yo. This rule applied to accomodate the lifestyle of people living in the village, where level of education and knowledge of child/mother health care were still low. The age limitation then increase to 18 yo, which mostly aimed to lower death rate of mother and her baby due to early birth/pregnancy. 


As for drinking alcohol, if I'm not mistaken, there's a verse in Bible that said (more or less) " it is easier for camel to enter needle hole, than for rich man to enter kingdom of heaven". However, I don't think Christianity prohibits its followers to be rich. It's ok to eat; but if you eat excessively, then it'd lead to problems. So same thing apply with drinking alcohol I guess.

----------


## Sitaram

> Just FYI, until late 80-s, the earliest age for woman to be legally married in my country is 12 yo. This rule applied to accomodate the lifestyle of people living in the village, where level of education and knowledge of child/mother health care were still low. The age limitation then increase to 18 yo, which mostly aimed to lower death rate of mother and her baby due to early birth/pregnancy. 
> 
> 
> As for drinking alcohol, if I'm not mistaken, there's a verse in Bible that said (more or less) " it is easier for camel to enter needle hole, than for rich man to enter kingdom of heaven". However, I don't think Christianity prohibits its followers to be rich. It's ok to eat; but if you eat excessively, then it'd lead to problems. So same thing apply with drinking alcohol I guess.



There is a verse in the New Testament, in the Epistle of Timothy, which says " a *LITTLE* wine is good for the health." Theologians often point to this and emphasize that the verse recommends moderation rather than drinking a whole lot. Many Protestant groups believe very strongly that any alcohol is bad. One new minister to a certain church gave a sermon about the very first miracle which Jesus is said to have worked, at the marriage in Cana, changing water to wine. The parishoners became furious because the minister mentioned alcoholic beverage. There are Christian denominations which insist that Jesus used grape juice for the Eucharist at the Last Supper, and that "new wine" refers to grape juice. But this is obviously inaccurate, since in the Book of Acts, at Pentecost, it mentions that everyone thought the Apostles drunk with *new wine*.

----------


## Johnny Odd

I have my own little idealism that I live by - Do what you want to do, as long as, in doing this, you do not offend or hurt or expect others to do the same as you. This has served me well over the years, I do not follow any other eligion than this.
I have recently moved house and my new neighbours are two american christian faith workers... they travel to schools and churches to spread their love of Jesus. When I moved in they asked me to come and party with them. That was how they phrased it "Come party with us!!". So I turned up, when they said with a small bottle of vodka and a bottle of coke.
They were actually disgusted with the fact that I had brought alcohol to their place with the intension of getting a bit drunk.
I understand that it was THEIR house and I respect that they are (as I now know) not drinkers of alcohol - but as they threw me out the door I couldn't help but think, 'You could have simply not drank it!!'

----------


## Themis

> I want to ask some questions. Why do people drink wine? And what makes it different from other drinks? To help digesting? To have courage to do things? To feel cheerful and mery? If so, the one who drinks it lacks something in his/her life and finds in wine a surogate. But one day or another, it will be the cause of his/her destruction. Better face my destiny and manage my life without the help of stimulant than to find myself addicted due to a mistake of overdosage.


You forgot one thing: People could just like to drink wine. Some sorts of wine taste really good. (Not that I know that much about wine ... I'm just collecting (full) bottles.  :Wink:  )

----------


## Sitaram

> I have my own little idealism that I live by - Do what you want to do, as long as, in doing this, you do not offend or hurt or expect others to do the same as you. This has served me well over the years, I do not follow any other eligion than this.
> I have recently moved house and my new neighbours are two american christian faith workers... they travel to schools and churches to spread their love of Jesus. When I moved in they asked me to come and party with them. That was how they phrased it "Come party with us!!". So I turned up, when they said with a small bottle of vodka and a bottle of coke.
> They were actually disgusted with the fact that I had brought alcohol to their place with the intension of getting a bit drunk.
> I understand that it was THEIR house and I respect that they are (as I now know) not drinkers of alcohol - but as they threw me out the door I couldn't help but think, 'You could have simply not drank it!!'


The was a woman by the name of Carrie A. Nation who worked very hard in the movement to ban the sale of alcholic beverages in the U.S.A. In those days, around the late 1800's to early 1900's you would hear the phrase "demon rum." The movent to ban alcohol was called *The Temperance Movement*. I had a hard time remembering the term "temperance". I had to google for it. All I could think of was prohibition, abolition, and suffrage. The prohibition laws were eventually passed. This made possible the world which F. Scott Fitzgerald made famous in "The Great Gatsby".



There are Christian groups who literally believe that a devil is present in the alcohol. Perhaps this is part of the reason why you were "thrown out."

----------


## okmit

> I have my own little idealism that I live by - Do what you want to do, as long as, in doing this, you do not offend or hurt or expect others to do the same as you. This has served me well over the years, I do not follow any other eligion than this.
> I have recently moved house and my new neighbours are two american christian faith workers... they travel to schools and churches to spread their love of Jesus. When I moved in they asked me to come and party with them. That was how they phrased it "Come party with us!!". So I turned up, when they said with a small bottle of vodka and a bottle of coke.
> They were actually disgusted with the fact that I had brought alcohol to their place with the intension of getting a bit drunk.
> I understand that it was THEIR house and I respect that they are (as I now know) not drinkers of alcohol - but as they threw me out the door I couldn't help but think, 'You could have simply not drank it!!'


The only thing I find odd Johnny is in your own little idealism you think it possible to do SOMETHING you want without offending someone?I think your offended American,Christian ,neighbors bear this out.But I do agree with your assumption,and think they should have ask you to join them in a game of trivial pursuit (the bible edition,) instead of "come party with us."
OR if these Americans are from the United States they may have been upset because you didn't show up with a bag of weed,a little coke,and a hot chic to swap?Ya just never know!

----------


## Johnny Odd

WEll I did consider that, but I decided against taking copious amounts of hard drugs and loose girls over to my new neighbours!!
You see, okmit, the point about my idealism failing - this is where it demands a little amount of co-operation - the whole idea is based around respect, if I KNOW something will or would upset you I would certainly refrain from doing it and would expect the same treatment from you - if you knew your actions would offend or bother me (not that much really does) then you would try not to do so, right?
I did not realise my neighbours' objection to alcohol, but they should have realised that them physically ejecting me would offend and simply have said something - I would have instantly took the drink back to mine and appologised for misinterpreting the situation. It's simple: respect people and be respected.

----------


## okmit

> WEll I did consider that, but I decided against taking copious amounts of hard drugs and loose girls over to my new neighbours!!
> You see, okmit, the point about my idealism failing - this is where it demands a little amount of co-operation - the whole idea is based around respect, if I KNOW something will or would upset you I would certainly refrain from doing it and would expect the same treatment from you - if you knew your actions would offend or bother me (not that much really does) then you would try not to do so, right?
> I did not realise my neighbours' objection to alcohol, but they should have realised that them physically ejecting me would offend and simply have said something - I would have instantly took the drink back to mine and appologised for misinterpreting the situation. It's simple: respect people and be respected.


I was jesting about the drugs & such,and your conduct was much more in keeping with christian teachings than was your Christian neighbors.But tell me,how much respect do you now have for your illmannered neighbors that threw you out on your ear ,and how much do you think they have for you?
Giving or recieving respect is not simple and is the shortfall of all idealism.
I tell you,people are the most damnable creatures!

----------


## Johnny Odd

Tell me about it, we'd be much better off without them

----------


## subterranean

Regarding the term *new wine,* I always think it refers to something immaterial..like something that will refresh the spirit, the soul, strengthen the faith. Because there's this song I once heard which says (more or less, cause the song is in my language): new wine will be given, filled his people with joy, so true is his power.." I almost forgot the verse, since I heard that when I was still in juniour high.





> There is a verse in the New Testament, in the Epistle of Timothy, which says " a *LITTLE* wine is good for the health." Theologians often point to this and emphasize that the verse recommends moderation rather than drinking a whole lot. Many Protestant groups believe very strongly that any alcohol is bad. One new minister to a certain church gave a sermon about the very first miracle which Jesus is said to have worked, at the marriage in Cana, changing water to wine. The parishoners became furious because the minister mentioned alcoholic beverage. There are Christian denominations which insist that Jesus used grape juice for the Eucharist at the Last Supper, and that "new wine" refers to grape juice. But this is obviously inaccurate, since in the Book of Acts, at Pentecost, it mentions that everyone thought the Apostles drunk with *new wine*.

----------


## okmit

> Regarding the term *new wine,* I always think it refers to something immaterial..like something that will refresh the spirit, the soul, strengthen the faith. Because there's this song I once heard which says (more or less, cause the song is in my language): new wine will be given, filled his people with joy, so true is his power.." I almost forgot the verse, since I heard that when I was still in juniour high.


Lack of sterilisation techniques exposed wine to wild yeast and turned it to vinegar.
The lesson of not useing a new skin for new wine was not that the skin(usualy a goat stomach)would burst,but that it would certainly contaminate the "new wine."

----------


## subterranean

Thank you for the information  :Smile:

----------


## okmit

> Thank you for the information


Cheers,my friend.

----------


## Pendragon

> The was a woman by the name of Carrie A. Nation who worked very hard in the movement to ban the sale of alcholic beverages in the U.S.A.


 Ah, yes, I wondered when we'd get around to dear old "Hatchet Carrie". That was her nickname, you know, because she was so rabidly against the "demon rum" that she and her followers actually carried hatchets to destroy bars! You know what eventually stopped her? The bartenders got together, read the Bible, found scriptures like this one "Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto to those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more." PROVERBS 31:6-7, and posted them in large print in their saloons. Since Carrie couldn't deny that that WAS in the Bible, she had to back down. I still stand on moderation in everything, however. And I think Johnny Odd, that you were treated unfairly. I would have simply told you, "Sorry, but we don't drink here. Come on in and sit down and let's get to know each other." No call to "throw you out." How un-Christlike can you get?

----------


## Sitaram

> Ah, yes, I wondered when we'd get around to dear old "Hatchet Carrie". That was her nickname, you know, because she was so rabidly against the "demon rum" that she and her followers actually carried hatchets to destroy bars! You know what eventually stopped her? The bartenders got together, read the Bible, found scriptures like this one "Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto to those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more." PROVERBS 31:6-7, and posted them in large print in their saloons. Since Carrie couldn't deny that that WAS in the Bible, she had to back down. I still stand on moderation in everything, however. And I think Johnny Odd, that you were treated unfairly. I would have simply told you, "Sorry, but we don't drink here. Come on in and sit down and let's get to know each other." No call to "throw you out." How un-Christlike can you get?


Socrates basically said it all, in Plato's dialogues, when he said (repeatedly) that "eveyone by nature desires the good." Carrie Nation desired the good. The bartenders desired the good. The alcoholics desired the good. Hitler and Mother Theresa both desired the good. Even those Christians that tossed you out THOUGHT that it was good, desired the good. For no one wittingly, consicously says, "this is not so good, but I desire it anyway." We always somehow see what we chose as the good, at least at the moment we are choosing it.

I am grateful for that interesting verse from Proverbs, and the historical aside about the bartenders use of a Biblical verse.

The Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition holds that, around the 8th or 9th century, the people of Russia sent emissaries to find the best religion. Legend has it that they entered Saint Sophias in Constantinople, and were awestruck, and chose Orthodoxy, and Sts. Cyrl and Methodius travelled to Russia to baptize the nation.

But someone else observed to me that the Buddhists and Muslims both forbade alcohol, but the Orthodox of Byzantium permitted alcohol, and this was the basis for the decision of the Slavic people to choose Orthodoxy.

----------


## okmit

> Socrates basically said it all, in Plato's dialogues, when he said (repeatedly) that "eveyone by nature desires the good." Carrie Nation desired the good. The bartenders desired the good. The alcoholics desired the good. Hitler and Mother Theresa both desired the good. Even those Christians that tossed you out THOUGHT that it was good, desired the good. For no one wittingly, consicously says, "this is not so good, but I desire it anyway." We always somehow see what we chose as the good, at least at the moment we are choosing it.
> 
> I am grateful for that interesting verse from Proverbs, and the historical aside about the bartenders use of a Biblical verse.
> 
> The Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition holds that, around the 8th or 9th century, the people of Russia sent emissaries to find the best religion. Legend has it that they entered Saint Sophias in Constantinople, and were awestruck, and chose Orthodoxy, and Sts. Cyrl and Methodius travelled to Russia to baptize the nation.
> 
> But someone else observed to me that the Buddhists and Muslims both forbade alcohol, but the Orthodox of Byzantium permitted alcohol, and this was the basis for the decision of the Slavic people to choose Orthodoxy.



Cyril and Methodius had been converting heathens in Russ,(easten Austria an Russia) in 956 under reign of St.Olga,the first Russian ruler to embrace Christianity.
It was St. Vladimir The Great,(St. Olga's grandson)that sent an envoy to research neighboring religions (while he was still a heathen with intentions to expand his empire.)The envoy didn't like the Bulgarians who followed Mohammedan,the Jews of Khazan,or the German Latin rite,but was impressed with the Greek ritual(Liturgy)of the Byzantine.They also reminded him of his Grandmothers Christianity.
In 989 Vladimir sent an envoy to Emperor Basil II of Constantinople to ask for the hand of Basil's sister Ann under the threat of invasion if refused!Basil said,a Chritian coudn't marry a heathen,but if Vladimir was a Christian prince he would sanction a marriage.Vladimir agreed and was Baptised.

I think perhaps the someone that suggested that alcohol was in the mix may have been a fun loveing Slovenian?

----------


## Adelheid

While drinking alcohol beverages may not be wrong, King Solomon (the wisest man on earth) put it this way:

"Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is lead astray by it is not wise" Proverbs 20:1

As Shea said, it is better to refrain from drinking wine and such, then to be a stumbling block. Just for a little bit of pleasure, one would cause a brother or sister of your faith to fall? No, I don't think so. 

I think though, that not everybody agrees that Jesus drank wine. Some say that He drank grape juice, and others argue saying it's wine. Whatever it was- no point arguing about it, the fact still remains that if it is a stumbling block to others (as eating food offered to idols might be) refrain from it.

My dad used to drink wine, moderately of course.  :Wink:  But in the recent years, he has applied Proverbs, and not drank any. We are very thankful for it, that he can make a stand for himself and in what he believes.

As for Holy Communion, in my chourch, we normally just use grape juice more economical- besides not everybody drinks wine.  :Biggrin:

----------


## Pendragon

> While drinking alcohol beverages may not be wrong, King Solomon (the wisest man on earth) put it this way:
> 
> "Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is lead astray by it is not wise" Proverbs 20:1
> 
> As Shea said, it is better to refrain from drinking wine and such, then to be a stumbling block. Just for a little bit of pleasure, one would cause a brother or sister of your faith to fall? No, I don't think so. 
> 
> I think though, that not everybody agrees that Jesus drank wine. Some say that He drank grape juice, and others argue saying it's wine. Whatever it was- no point arguing about it, the fact still remains that if it is a stumbling block to others (as eating food offered to idols might be) refrain from it.


Quite so. I just gave the other quote (PROVERBS 31:6-7) as an example of how people can use the Bible to justify what they WANT to do, provided they read ONLY what they choose. I still stand by moderation if you must do it at all, but I agree it were better that you did not than to cause a brother to stumble. Paul calls this "uncharitible."  :Nod:

----------


## okmit

> While drinking alcohol beverages may not be wrong, King Solomon (the wisest man on earth) put it this way:
> 
> "Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is lead astray by it is not wise" Proverbs 20:1
> 
> As Shea said, it is better to refrain from drinking wine and such, then to be a stumbling block. Just for a little bit of pleasure, one would cause a brother or sister of your faith to fall? No, I don't think so. 
> 
> I think though, that not everybody agrees that Jesus drank wine. Some say that He drank grape juice, and others argue saying it's wine. Whatever it was- no point arguing about it, the fact still remains that if it is a stumbling block to others (as eating food offered to idols might be) refrain from it.
> 
> My dad used to drink wine, moderately of course.  But in the recent years, he has applied Proverbs, and not drank any. We are very thankful for it, that he can make a stand for himself and in what he believes.
> ...


Grape juice requires a minimum of 1.5 cups of sugar per qt.of boiled off ,screened grape pulp to be palatable.Without refrigeration or proper containers the concoction would have been a recipe for botulism!
No one drank grape juice 2000 years ago,and for the ones that didn't drink wine their only option was water.

----------


## subterranean

> No one drank grape juice 2000 years ago,and for the ones that didn't drink wine their only option was water.



This is interesting. I'm wondering, what's really the big deal if Jesus really did drink wine?

----------


## Pendragon

> No one drank grape juice 2000 years ago,and for the ones that didn't drink wine their only option was water.


You are 100% correct. It would especially spoil in the climate of Isreal, where it was stored in either wineskins or earthern jars. Fermented grape juice (wine) does not spoil so easily.  :Thumbs Up:  




> This is interesting. I'm wondering, what's really the big deal if Jesus really did drink wine?


An excellent question. Jesus' first miracle was to turn water into wine. This was not "grape juice" since the man in charge of the feast told the bridgroom, "every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." St. John 2:10. The thing is, nothing states that Jesus got drunk. He drank wine with his meals, as they all did, but not just for the purpose of getting wasted.  :Nod:

----------


## subterranean

Thank you Pendragon. Also, I need to comment a little about Adelheid's statement that,


> "Just for a little bit of pleasure, one would cause a brother or sister of your faith to fall? No, I don't think so."


, I don't see the significant connection with dringking wine moderately and becoming a stumbling block to others. If "outsiders" see Christians drink wine and then instantly judge them, then I have to say they're just seeing the cover without even bother to check out the contents.

----------


## okmit

> You are 100% correct. It would especially spoil in the climate of Isreal, where it was stored in either wineskins or earthern jars. Fermented grape juice (wine) does not spoil so easily.  
> 
> 
> 
> An excellent question. Jesus' first miracle was to turn water into wine. This was not "grape juice" since the man in charge of the feast told the bridgroom, "every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." St. John 2:10. The thing is, nothing states that Jesus got drunk. He drank wine with his meals, as they all did, but not just for the purpose of getting wasted.


I have just returned from vacation.I thank you for your concurence.

----------


## rachel

`Jesus lived close to water, the lake gennesaret and it was pure and clean and there was plenty of drinking water via wells. I think because many people don't even try to be moderate in drink and bring shame and embarrassment to a gathering it is preferred that we don't. and of course there are alchoholics who would be terribly tempted and that is not right. we are admonished not to eat or drink anything in someone's presence that would upset them.
But the fact is that our Lord enjoyed eating and he drank wine. A scripture says that John the Baptiser came not eating or drinking anything questionable and he was thought wierd. and then our Lord came eating and drinking (He made all things why not) and he was called a glutton and a winebibber by gossips who wanted to believe that.
there is nothing wrong with drinking wine as long as it is in moderation. more than that takes a person into a dark territory where they can hurt themselves and others.
I am a Catholic Jew and wine is always used, for the eucharist and for shabbat and such. I think each person must stand and fall on his or her own in this matter and quit forcing our worries and prejudices upon others. I myself don't drink because of my street ministry, too many addicted to substance but I will sit and have a meal with my friends who do. 

"What ever a man eats or drinks or does let him do it whole souled as to God"

----------


## Pendragon

I second Rachel. I always said, "in moderation". Thanks for that one scripture reference, Rachel-- 




> But the fact is that our Lord enjoyed eating and he drank wine. A scripture says that John the Baptiser came not eating or drinking anything questionable and he was thought wierd. and then our Lord came eating and drinking (He made all things why not) and he was called a glutton and a winebibber by gossips who wanted to believe that.


You see, people are going to think what they want about you anyway. They did our Lord, why should we expect to be treated differently? "The servant is not greater than his Master."

Live a simple, humble Christian life as best you know how and to the extent of your understanding, pray, read your Bible, and let they say what they will.
Paul says in Romans 14:22 "Hast thou faith? Have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth."

If even drinking with meals or in moderation bothers you, then don't do it. But don't condemn others for it.  :Angel:

----------


## Adelheid

Who knows? The wine that was 2000 years ago may have been different from the type of wine produced now.

It could have been fermented Grape juice, but not as much alcohol added as we do today. I don't know. I don't drink wine myself, so I am just like an armchair 'critic', although I am NOT critising anybody. I only wish to point out certain things in the Scripture which answers your question.

Paul has already said about the food to eat. (Whether eating food offered to idols was right or not) He said that if you are ignorant of it, give thanks and eat it. Don't be fussy or become a bad example to the unbelievers by seeming to be ungrateful. But if you are specially told by others that the food has been offered to idols, Paul says to not eat it. For the sake of your brothers and sisters in faith- don't be a stumbling block to them. Or even to the unbelievers! They know more than you think about the Scriptures, and to disobey God in front of them (to them at least, it's disobedience) it would become a stumbling block to them too, and they would have no reason to believe that your 'religion' is any better than theirs, since you are just as 'disobedient' as them.

It is the same thing about wine. Don't drink it if you don't want to. But drink it if you are ignorant, and don't complain. At least, that's what I think Paul was trying to bring across.  :Smile:

----------


## subterranean

> Who knows? The wine that was 2000 years ago may have been different from the type of wine produced now.
> 
> It could have been fermented Grape juice, but not as much alcohol added as we do today. I don't know. I don't drink wine myself, so I am just like an armchair 'critic', although I am NOT critising anybody. I only wish to point out certain things in the Scripture which answers your question.


I'm not sure with what you mean by "added", I thought the alcohol came from the fermetation process and the percentage of the alcohol contents vary, which depends on how you processed it...





> Paul has already said about the food to eat. (Whether eating food offered to idols was right or not) He said that if you are ignorant of it, give thanks and eat it. Don't be fussy or become a bad example to the unbelievers by seeming to be ungrateful. But if you are specially told by others that the food has been offered to idols, Paul says to not eat it. For the sake of your brothers and sisters in faith- don't be a stumbling block to them. Or even to the unbelievers! They know more than you think about the Scriptures, and to disobey God in front of them (to them at least, it's disobedience) it would become a stumbling block to them too, and they would have no reason to believe that your 'religion' is any better than theirs, since you are just as 'disobedient' as them.
> 
> It is the same thing about wine. Don't drink it if you don't want to. But drink it if you are ignorant, and don't complain. At least, that's what I think Paul was trying to bring across.


Well, I think the key lies on one of Jesus's sayings, "do onto others as you want them to do on to you"..or something like that.

----------


## Adelheid

Maybe it could have been so, but maybe the alcohol level was lower then than now. I don't know.  :Smile:

----------


## Pendragon

> Maybe it could have been so, but maybe the alcohol level was lower then than now. I don't know.


I couldn't say if this were true of Jesus' day, or even in the Middle East, since I believe Islam forbids drinking, but many countries used to make what they called "table wine." It was, as you state, less intoxicating than regular wine, and a person would have to really drink a lot of it to get drunken. In fact, I believe you'd probably get very sick far sooner. Again, I can't say whether this is the wine mentioned in the Bible, but I wanted you to know it does, or did, exist. The problem I have is when the Holy Ghost fell on the Day of Pentecost at the Upper Room and people thought they were drunk, Peter said "For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day." Acts 2:15, an indication that it was too early in the day to expect to see drunk people. But I agree, better not to do it, then to be a stumbling block for that is God's word.  :Angel:

----------


## okmit

I believe Jesus Christ Blessed the WINE and declared "THIS IS MY BLOOD."I do not understand how the FAITHFUL could believe HE was decieving them into a path of destruction!Before you consume communal wine it is diluted with water at the table of preperation,it is prayed over, and upon consumption is no longer wine but the BLOOD of Jesus Christ,Lord an Redeemer!IF YOU BELIEVE HIM,you can not believe a teaspoon,(a shot glass at most)of diluted wine that you have been told to consume will cause you grief !
Amen

----------


## Pendragon

I firmly believe that wine should be used for communion purposes as the Bible does say Christ blessed the wine as His blood and the bread as His body. We are speaking of drinking for other reasons. There it should be moderation or not at all. If you cannot control your drinking, it is certain that it will control you. To quote Poe "for what demon is like alcohol?" My dad was so bad an alcoholic that he would drink after-shave, rubbing alcohol, or anything when the desire took him.

----------


## Dr Eep

The problem is that some who do not understand moderation are also prone to other types of excess. Like excessive violence towards spouses and children.

I suppose banning alcohol outright might go a long way to reducing domestic violence and alcohol addiction. But... you can't take away a persons freedom to choose. As reprehensible as some of the acts committed whilst under the influence of alcohol are - it is a graver moral blight to consign a person to hell just because he or she has the odd glass of wine or whatever.

So, I don't know - I wish alcohol never existed in the first place, but partaking in it, although not particularly good for the body, doesn't make the person inherintly evil.

----------


## Virgil

> The problem is that some who do not understand moderation are also prone to other types of excess.


Well, that's their problem. Alcohol unlike drugs is part of our cultural heritage. It goes back thousands of years. People drink wine and beer with dinner and wine is a sacremental drink in many religions. If we were to start today, perhaps alcohol would fall into the drug catagory and be banned, but because it is linked into our culture it is impossible to ban it.




> Like excessive violence towards spouses and children.


You mean mild violence towards spouses and children should be allowed. :Confused:   :Eek:  




> I suppose banning alcohol outright might go a long way to reducing domestic violence and alcohol addiction. But... you can't take away a persons freedom to choose.


The united States tried outlawing alcohol in the 1920s and early 30s. It was called Prohibition. It was a disaster. You could probably Google it and read about it.

----------


## Dr Eep

Hey Virgil - are you drunk mate? You seem quick to retaliate to a non inflammatory post. Just because I say that excessive drinking can lead to excessive behaviour (the whole world understands this BTW)doesn't mean I condone violence in any form whatsoever. Where did you jump to that conclusion - did Jack Daniels suggest it in your ear?

That last sentence is uncalled for yes - but so is the implication that I somehow condone violence of any sort. Your little remark there is the exact opposite of what I was trying to stress - the avoidance of violence - what exactly is mild violence anyway?
Tell you what mate - the way you jumped at that - let's hope you don't drink!!

----------


## Virgil

Where do you see that I jumped at you. My comment on "mild violence" was a little bit of a joke on the logic of your sentence. Your sentence structure did imply (and I assume) by mistake that only excessive violence should be outlawed. As to the last sentence, I assumed you were not American and had never heard of Prohibition. So I pointed out you could look it up on google. I don't think I was being inflamatory anywhere. I wasn't retaliating.

----------


## haxan64

Does the Bible say Jesus blessed fermented wine?

wine
the juice, fermented or unfermented, of various other fruits or plants, used as a beverage, sauce, etc.: gooseberry wine; currant wine.

----------


## Dr Eep

:Smile:  Actually - the point about the failure of prohibition is a very good one and I was actually wondering about putting it into my first post there. :Smile:  Thanks for the explanation - I'm sorry I didn't catch the humor there. But, I understand now. Thanks - sorry. To aggree with what you were saying about culture. I visited Ireland recently and drinking is a massive part of their culture and yet they are known as some of the friendliest most hospitable people around and I can attest to that - so, I guess what I believe is drinking, in moderation, is OK. I just wish the other problems didn't exist though. :Cool:

----------


## Virgil

> Actually - the point about the failure of prohibition is a very good one and I was actually wondering about putting it into my first post there. Thanks for the explanation - I'm sorry I didn't catch the humor there. But, I understand now. Thanks - sorry. :


No need to apologize. I didn't put a smiley there so one guesses at the tone of the writer. We don't see people's faces on these posts so we sometimes go awry on the tone. I've made the same mistake a few times.  :Nod:   :Smile:  




> To aggree with what you were saying about culture. I visited Ireland recently and drinking is a massive part of their culture and yet they are known as some of the friendliest most hospitable people around and I can attest to that - so, I guess what I believe is drinking, in moderation, is OK. I just wish the other problems didn't exist though.:cool


Yes, I thought about this issue for a long time. I agree that I wish the problems didn't exist. Another one that you didn't mention was drunk driving, which kills a lot of people. But banning alcohol just won't work.

----------


## mtpspur

The church I attend rarely brings it up but I suspect table wine is acceptable. I personally do not drink because of MANY unpleasant exciting experiences living in a military dorm (too cheap to move out and if the barracks got too empty Uncle Sam would pull the housing allowance) enjoying celebrating life in North Dakota. One war story: Was dragged out my warm cozy bed one night because a sergeant from the Roads and Grounds department was demonstrating the use of a bull whip (5 years before Indiana Jones I might add). Fortunately said sergeant wasn't too far gone in alcohol that he didn't know who I was and I could make life miserabale if I had a mind to. But it was fun watching the 2 airmen stuck in a corner begging for him to stop the cracking.--Anyhoo--I believe the Bible teaches personal moderation with an eye towards not offending or setting bad examples for others.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

Drink whatever you want in whatever quantities you want. As long as you aren't harming anybody else, it's none of my business.

----------


## Turk

> The united States tried outlawing alcohol in the 1920s and early 30s. It was called Prohibition. It was a disaster. You could probably Google it and read about it.


I know about that ban. But i don't know a lot. It's interesting. Why did they banned alcohol in 20's?

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> I know about that ban. But i don't know a lot. It's interesting. Why did they banned alcohol in 20's?


The Temperance Movement, a religious group that held that the consumption of alcohol is immoral and destructive, was very influential and had broad support at the time. So much so that they managed to get a constitutional amendment banning the sale, production and distribution of alcohol (but not the consumption or possesion). It was a total disaster, as the law turned out to be completely unenforcable, and its main effect was to drive the price of alcohol through the roof, and the quality into the gutter. It was not uncommon to water down whiskey and then spike it with sulphur to mask the difference. Al Capone got rich brewing and distributing beer, as well as smuggling hard alcohol. When the Twenty-First amendment repealing prohibition was passed, the black market sellers of alcohol were largely driven out of business in most states (some states continued with prohibition) because they could not compete with the low prices offered at legal bars and liquor stores.

----------


## ShoutGrace

> Drink whatever you want in whatever quantities you want. As long as you aren't harming anybody else, it's none of my business.


Isn't that just the thing? Alcoholics _do_ harm others.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> Isn't that just the thing? Alcoholics _do_ harm others.


Yes, of course. Alcohlics also drink more than they want to, almost by definition. I don't mean to demean alcoholism or suggest that it is not something that needs treatment, but I do not think that what anybody chooses to drink should be the subject of moral judgements from anybody else (given, of course, the condition that they do not harm anybody by it).

That was definitely not one of my more well-considered posts.

----------


## miss tenderness

> Isn't that just the thing? Alcoholics _do_ harm others.



yes ,it does. :Thumbs Up:

----------


## Turk

Thanks for information.

Well, alcohol cannot ban. You can make it with just a piece of bread and juice. But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it.

----------


## miss tenderness

good one ,Turk :Thumbs Up:

----------


## Whifflingpin

"But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it."

I'm healthy and well-educated and I am perfectly happy to drink alcohol. 
Wine can be a pleasant drink, and can definitely enhance a meal. On a hot day, or after work, or in good company, beer is an excellent beverage. A fine whisky can satisfy the palate, just as a beautiful woman can satisfy the eye.

Alcohol should be thought of as one of God's gifts, to help mankind cope with a hostile world. The fact that humans are capable of abusing any good thing should not lead us to condemn those good things, or to feel any shame in enjoying them.

"But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it to excess," maybe.
.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> A fine whisky can satisfy the palate, just as a beautiful woman can satisfy the eye.


Yeah, but too many women has never caused me to say extremely stupid things and then pass out. 

Oh wait, nevermind.

----------


## Virgil

> "But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it."
> 
> I'm healthy and well-educated and I am perfectly happy to drink alcohol. 
> Wine can be a pleasant drink, and can definitely enhance a meal. On a hot day, or after work, or in good company, beer is an excellent beverage. A fine whisky can satisfy the palate, just as a beautiful woman can satisfy the eye.
> 
> Alcohol should be thought of as one of God's gifts, to help mankind cope with a hostile world. The fact that humans are capable of abusing any good thing should not lead us to condemn those good things, or to feel any shame in enjoying them.
> 
> "But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it to excess," maybe.
> .


Very well said, Whiff. I feel the same, but with the qualification that we must understand that some people are disposed biologically (I believe) to alcoholism.





> Yeah, but too many women has never caused me to say extremely stupid things and then pass out. 
> 
> Oh wait, nevermind.


 :FRlol:   :FRlol:  Great.

----------


## Turk

> "But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it."
> 
> I'm healthy and well-educated and I am perfectly happy to drink alcohol. 
> Wine can be a pleasant drink, and can definitely enhance a meal. On a hot day, or after work, or in good company, beer is an excellent beverage. A fine whisky can satisfy the palate, just as a beautiful woman can satisfy the eye.
> 
> Alcohol should be thought of as one of God's gifts, to help mankind cope with a hostile world. The fact that humans are capable of abusing any good thing should not lead us to condemn those good things, or to feel any shame in enjoying them.
> 
> "But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it to excess," maybe.
> .


I think you drank 2 bottles of whiskey and 1 bottle of vodka before writing this. That's why you think it's a God's gift.

----------


## Pendragon

> Yeah, but too many women has never caused me to say extremely stupid things and then pass out. 
> 
> Oh wait, nevermind.


A good point, Joe. I going to say something here that is going to sound crazy at first, but bear with me. It is perfectly legal to purchace alcohol, and people misusing it harm and even kill people every year. Yet it also may have beneficial value, and be harmless if used in moderation.

Now take marjuania. It is illeagal to purchace or possess. People "hopped up" on it cause many of the same problems as those who abuse alcohol. But Pot has it's own benefical value. It helps with glacoma, mirgrianes, and other illnesses. Why is one frowned upon while the other allowed?

----------


## Virgil

> Now take marjuania. It is illeagal to purchace or possess. People "hopped up" on it cause many of the same problems as those who abuse alcohol. But Pot has it's own benefical value. It helps with glacoma, mirgrianes, and other illnesses. Why is one frowned upon while the other allowed?


I think doctors say there are other drugs more effective than marijuana for those ailments, and it's just an excuse for the pro-legal people to get pot legalized. So there really is no reason to proscribe marijuana.

----------


## Pendragon

> I think doctors say there are other drugs more effective than marijuana for those ailments, and it's just an excuse for the pro-legal people to get pot legalized. So there really is no reason to proscribe marijuana.


Just a note, Virgil. I am *NOT PRO-LEGAL.* I just wonder why a person can get drunk out of their mind legally, but then other things that are equally self-destructive are illegal. Excuse the spelling in my first post, I've tried to edit it three times without success!  :Crash:

----------


## haxan64

> Just a note, Virgil. I am *NOT PRO-LEGAL.* I just wonder why a person can get drunk out of their mind legally, but then other things that are equally self-destructive are illegal. Excuse the spelling in my first post, I've tried to edit it three times without success!


I've also wondered that. You can't OD on marijuana. Marijuana is the safest mind altering drug. If you vaporize marijuana that even lowers the chance of lung cancer from using it.

----------


## Turk

I don't understand why a person would like to get drunken or mind altered by drugs unless he have serious problems?

----------


## haxan64

> I don't understand why a person would like to get drunken or mind altered by drugs unless he have serious problems?


I don't endorse the use of alcohol or any drug (I don't even use aspirin).

I just wonder why the law of my country allows me to retard my brain with alcohol but not with marijuana.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> Now take marjuania. It is illeagal to purchace or possess. People "hopped up" on it cause many of the same problems as those who abuse alcohol. But Pot has it's own benefical value. It helps with glacoma, mirgrianes, and other illnesses. Why is one frowned upon while the other allowed?


It makes sense to legalize marijuana, but there isn't a lot of pressure to because a) we have been lead to believe that it is somehow worse than alcohol (it isn't) and b) nobody will make any money by its legalization, because you can grow it in your basement.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> I don't understand why a person would like to get drunken or mind altered by drugs unless he have serious problems?


For fun, maybe?

----------


## Virgil

> It makes sense to legalize marijuana, but there isn't a lot of pressure to because a) we have been lead to believe that it is somehow worse than alcohol (it isn't) and b) nobody will make any money by its legalization, because you can grow it in your basement.


Logic is not how society runs. Logic is for robots and vulcans, not humans. The question remains, do you want to add to the vices within our culture or are we trying to minimize, if not subtract? Society has been striving to minimize and even subtract, not add vices.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> Logic is not how society runs.


Clearly. 


> Logic is for robots and vulcans, not humans.


Clearly


> The question remains, do you want to add to the vices within our culture or are we trying to minimize, if not subtract? Society has been striving to minimize and even subtract, not add vices.


Granted, I'd be opposed to smoking marijuana if it was manditory. However, I'd rather not have you deciding which of my habits are vices (and, admittedly, that one is) and which are not.

----------


## Virgil

> Granted, I'd be opposed to smoking marijuana if it was manditory. However, I'd rather not have you deciding which of my habits are vices (and, admittedly, that one is) and which are not.


Well, it's not me. You're country is a democracy/republic I take it. Its society through the democratic process that determines it. Hey there are many laws I don't agree with here, but I chose to be an American.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> Well, it's not me. You're country is a democracy/republic I take it. Its society through the democratic process that determines it. Hey there are many laws I don't agree with here, but I chose to be an American.


And again we're getting into the whole 'tyranny of the majority' bit. I wonder what happened to the principle that every individual can act as he wants so long as he does not harm others.

----------


## ShoutGrace

> And again we're getting into the whole 'tyranny of the majority' bit. I wonder what happened to the principle that every individual can act as he wants so long as he does not harm others.


Where was that priciple enacted? It seems like you're saying that it was in effect at one point and isn't anymore, and if it was, I'd like to study that. I'm deficient as far as history is concerned.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> Where was that priciple enacted? It seems like you're saying that it was in effect at one point and isn't anymore, and if it was, I'd like to study that. I'm deficient as far as history is concerned.


It's the harm principle, one of John Stuart Mill's major theses, and one of the main principles of liberalism (both the US and Canada are, technically, liberal democracies, no matter which party is in power). It's intended to be a guide for legislation, although there is nothing in any constitution to enforce it that I'm aware of, and it seems to have been forgotten almost as soon as it was written down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harm_principle

----------


## ShoutGrace

I was aware of the harm priciple, what I wasn't aware of is that John Mill was a politician. Why is the United States of America under any obligation to take his views into consideration? Or any government for that matter? The fact that Canada's and America's governments don't adhere to this individual's philosophy doesn't strike me as particularly earth shattering.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> I was aware of the harm priciple, what I wasn't aware of is that John Mill was a politician. Why is the United States of America under any obligation to take his views into consideration? Or any government for that matter? The fact that Canada's and America's governments don't adhere to this individual's philosophy doesn't strike me as particularly earth shattering.


It's not, I know. What upsets me is the fact that both are supposed to be liberal democracies, and both seem to think that it's their business to legislate the living arangements, vices and personal habits of their citizens.

Just so we're clear: the reason I'm bemoaning this is not that I think that the current situation runs contrary to any ingrained principle of the government of said countries or any sort of objective morality (which I don't believe in), but simply because I, personally, like the harm principle.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> I think doctors say there are other drugs more effective than marijuana for those ailments, and it's just an excuse for the pro-legal people to get pot legalized. So there really is no reason to proscribe marijuana.


As an aside: marijuana is at least as effect as the pain-killer that is currently most commonly prescribed to AIDS patients, and has fewer side effects.

----------


## Pendragon

> Logic is not how society runs. Logic is for robots and vulcans, not humans. The question remains, do you want to add to the vices within our culture or are we trying to minimize, if not subtract? Society has been striving to minimize and even subtract, not add vices.


That is a sensible question Virgil. Now let me give you a true story. The small town I grew up in had three bars on Main Street and one just a block off of Main. Then there was one on the outskirts of town, just outside the corporation limits. They drew the usual crowd of rowdy people. A cousin of mind was picked up regularly as he came out of the "Klub Kafe", very drunk, for public intoxication. Asked by the Judge why he was again in court for the same old charge, he boldly told the Judge, "Because I can't afford to go to the Lounge at the Holiday Inn and get drunk like your Honor!" 

We moved forward, and got rid of all the bars. Now we have restaurants that sell liquor-by-the-drink, and we have the same problem with public intoxication. Changing the atmosphere doesn't change the effect of too much to drink! I used to drink myself. I drank because there were certain types of liquor I liked the taste of. But I couldn't control it, it controlled me. So it had to go.

----------


## Virgil

> That is a sensible question Virgil. Now let me give you a true story. The small town I grew up in had three bars on Main Street and one just a block off of Main. Then there was one on the outskirts of town, just outside the corporation limits. They drew the usually crowd of rowdy people. A cousin of mind was picked up regularly as he came out of the "Klub Kafe", very drunk, for public intoxication. Asked by the Judge why he was again in court for the same old charge, he boldly told the Judge, "Because I can't afford to go to the Lounge at the Holiday Inn and get drunk like your Honor!" 
> 
> We moved forward, and got rid of all the bars. Now we have restaurants that sell liquor-by-the-drink, and we have the same problem with public intoxication. Changing the atmosphere doesn't change the effect of too much to drink! I used to drink myself. I drank because there were certain types of liquor I liked the taste of. But I couldn't control it, it controlled me. So it had to go.


I know it's a problem. It seems that some people are biologically predisposed to being alcoholics. The problems from it are serious. That's what drove the passion for prohibition. I enjoy a drink in moderation, but I'm lucky I guess I'm not predisposed. Despite my enjoyment of a drink of wine, I fully understand why we tried prohibition. I don't think it's prudent to open another pandora's box and legalize drugs.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> I don't think it's prudent to open another pandora's box and legalize drugs.


It's open, we're just pretending that we can put everything back in it through legislation.

----------


## Virgil

> It's open, we're just pretending that we can put everything back in it through legislation.


No it's not. It's not egal and it's not sanctioned by society.

----------


## Evi

Talking about prohibitions and drinks, i was in South Carolina and it was Sunday and one good friend of mine wanted to drink a beer and he drove miles in order to go in Charleston ( if i am not wrong) as this was the only near city in which alcoholic drinks were allowed on Sunday ( which is the day of God) Finally he drunk this bottle of beer. Is he alcooholic?Just a question. Are the laws of South Carolina good? Another question. 

Evi

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> No it's not. It's not egal and it's not sanctioned by society.


It sure is popular, though.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> Talking about prohibitions and drinks, i was in South Carolina and it was Sunday and one good friend of mine wanted to drink a beer and he drove miles in order to go in Charleston ( if i am not wrong) as this was the only near city in which alcoholic drinks were allowed on Sunday ( which is the day of God) Finally he drunk this bottle of beer. Is he alcooholic?Just a question. Are the laws of South Carolina good? Another question. 
> 
> Evi


To the first: if he only drank one bottle of beer, it's unlikely. To the second: no.

----------


## Hwin

:Yawnb:  
That is a good question for any believers.

But what is with drinking alcohol? Does it relly taste good? Nope.
If you are moderate it's all right. I don't mean it's wrong. And I'm sure some may like it. God said if we are ever to drink, we should be moderate. But I don't like alcohol and I will never touch it.

----------


## cuppajoe_9

> But what is with drinking alcohol? Does it relly taste good? Nope.


Friend, you are _entirely_ missing the point. Drinking alcohol because you like the taste is like shooting heroin because you like the feeling of having a needle in your arm.

----------


## Bookworm89

"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess." Ephesians 5:18

I don't believe that light consummtion of alcohol is wrong, but it carries the risk of addiction which is why I never plan on having alcohol.

----------


## Wizard272002

> We drink grape juice at my congregation when we take communuion because it's the "fruit of the vine". The Bible doesn't forbid drinking in moderation (not to get drunk), but it does say not to be a stumbling block. Suppose another christian happened to see you drinking? They don't know the situation your in at the time your just moderately drinking. But many people would take it as a green light especially if they are new or weak christians. Probably the worst person to see a scene like that would be a recovering alcoholic.


Wine is also "fruit of the vine", because it is grapes fermented. Grapejuice is double fermented.

----------


## Pendragon

> "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess." Ephesians 5:18
> 
> I don't believe that light consummtion of alcohol is wrong, but it carries the risk of addiction which is why I never plan on having alcohol.


Mon ami, I agree that moderation is what is best, and not at all is better for many. But when quoting scripture, beware lest it be thrown back into your own lap. Consider this one, for example:

PROVERBS 31:6-7

Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.

Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.

When Carrie Nation went on her famous "bar bashing spree" with Bible in hand, hatchet in the other, at war with the "demon rum", bartenders everywhere were in a pickle. This fearless woman and her backers would wreck a saloon, and bust the barrels of drink. What could they do? They read their Bibles. When her and her followers swooped down on the next helpless saloon, they came to a halt. Scriptures were posted in frames on the wall. They searched their Bibles. Yes, the scriptures were there. So, they left. 

It has been said "The Devil himself can quote scripture for his own ends."  :Smile:  

I agree with you, but just wanted to warn you that people will challange you, and use the Bible to do so.  :Nod:

----------


## zvix

I agree with not drinking the wine.....because the main precious thing that a human being can have is his awarness....and his mind..
.... so why a sensible man would like to lose the only thing that can make him different from an animal "sorry for using this term"by drinking the alcohol???
....it's very stupid to try it .... while you have the choice of keeping it..
you may say that you do drink the spiritual drinks..to forget your pain.....or to feel free......., well !! what you are doing is losing your freedom....cuz u'll be soon or later an addicted on alcohol.....whether u like it or not
all what i have said....was only about logice ..
....so it has nothing to do with religion..!!!
and you may find out that the religion does not say something just for the sake of saying it...., everything was said becoz of a purpose....


all the best
zvix

----------


## Pendragon

> I'm sure the Christian view is that Paul of Tarsus was a divinely ordained, Spirit inspired Apostle (I apologize because I haven't done any research or previous thought on the matter, because I've never come at Paul from this direction).


Don't worry, mon ami. You're still on firm soil.




> Without Paul the apostle Christianity wouldn't exist. Can you point out the problematic teachings of Paul which contradict Jesus', please?


 Correct also. They were first *called Christians* at Antioch, where Paul preached. Paul did not contridict Christ, so that is a moot question! 





> I'm not sure how to respond here, as I've never understood the enmity between Judaism and Christianity (_or been convinced that it actually exists_).


 The problem is that Judaism does not accept that the Messiah has ever came. Jesus may be reluctantly accepted as a prophet, but not the Messiah. I do not think they hate his teachings, just cannot accept Him as Messiah.

Everything I've ever said is moderation in all things, or don't drink at all. I had an acoholic for a dad, and it wasn't pretty. But if you preach it, any of us, then we are bound to practice what we preach!  :Smile:

----------


## Logos

Posts have been deleted because they were either insulting to some or they were quoting said insults and for me to go in and edit out all the insults they would end up not making sense. 

If you are insulted by a post or topic it is best to just ignore it, or, if you wish you can report it by clicking this icon on said post:

----------


## Virgil

I don't know Logos, sometimes leaving insults in shows the character or lack thereof of a person.

----------


## ShoutGrace

> Correct also. They were first *called Christians* at Antioch, where Paul preached. Paul did not contridict Christ, so that is a moot question!



Well, I didn't think he did either  :Wink: , which is why I was interested in hearing what that member would say in defence of his assertion . . .  :Biggrin: 





> Judaism does not accept that the Messiah has ever came. Jesus may be reluctantly accepted as a prophet, but not the Messiah. I do not think they hate his teachings, just cannot accept Him as Messiah.



I agree here too, which is why it might have been interesting to see the justification of that sentiment.

This is an interesting quote I've come across on this subject, namely, that of the disbelief that the world has had a Messiah.

_We know more deeply, more truly, that world history has not been turned upside down to its very foundations  that the world is not yet redeemed. We sense its unredeemedness._

--- Jurgen Moltmann, Judaic Theologian/Historian

----------


## Pendragon

> This is an interesting quote I've come across on this subject, namely, that of the disbelief that the world has had a Messiah.
> 
> _We know more deeply, more truly, that world history has not been turned upside down to its very foundations  that the world is not yet redeemed. We sense its unredeemedness._
> 
> --- Jurgen Moltmann, Judaic Theologian/Historian


As you say, an interesting quote indeed. But Jesus came to redeem the lost souls, by grace through faith that His blood made the sacrifice once and for all. Is the world ready to accept that redemption? I cannot answer that, for that would turn me into a judge, and God alone may judge the world. I think more are ready to accept it than we might think  :Smile:

----------


## Turk

Since my posts deleted i have to tell it again. There was no insult. If there's any insult i demand you to show me where did i insult Christianity. Since when saying Ephesians were letters of Paulus and not God's words. And since when it's wrong to say Paulus was a Jewish. I didn't use any slang or i didn't tell any lie. How can i insult then? This is just being unfair and biased. On other threads some people i wouldn't like to tell their names, told much worse things about İslam (and they were LIE) and those posts didn't deleted. You are very biased and unfair.

----------


## Logos

No, it means us mods are human and don't always catch every single instance of possible forum rule violations.

Please PM me specific links to specific instances of said violations, and please, lets keep moderation discussion/ issues off of the boards and not derail topics, or they will be closed.

----------


## Turk

But i don't understand, really i don't understand. Where did i insult Christianity? If Virgil could explain it to me i'll be really glad. If i'd know how i insulted Christianity i'll be comfortable, but since i don't know how i insulted i'm really uncomfortable about it.

----------


## Virgil

OK, but I don't have the exact wording that you used Turk.

But here's what obviously you don't understand:
(1) Paul is St. Paul, a saint in Christianity; not just anyone.
(2) His letters are part of the New Testament, the Christian Bible, the equivalent of your Koran.
(3) I don't remember the exact words, but your sentence was just filled with anti-semitism. Your hatred of Jews was clear.

In one sentence you insulted two religions. But I realize now that it comes from complete ignorance. Where did you study the religions of Christianity and Judiism? I doubt you studied them in a University. Obviously you just picked up anecdotes off the street. If I were to judge what I know of other religions, including yours, by what people say in the streets, then I would sound pretty ignorant too. No one here insults Islam or your beliefs.

----------


## Turk

I didn't study religions in university. I studied it by myself and none of my words were "street anectodes". I don't know streets of your city full of theologists and they keep discuss about religions, but here people doesn't talk about theology in streets.

1. St. Paul was a Jewish before he "converted" to Christianity. There's nothing wrong saying this. And i also not sure he's accepted as a saint by all Christians. I think he mostly accepted by Catholics as a saint, because he established church (some consider church as worldly establishment and Paul brought kingdom of heaven (i don't know in English, God's reign?) to earth and that's why they consider Paulus as traitor to Christianity, it's not just my thought some Christians share this thought too, maybe you can look that thread about Paulus in this forum) . I'll also send you a book about those stuff.

2. I know his letters are part of new testament, and i said they are not God's word. Everyone would accept these words are belong to Paulus's himself. That's why it can't be equivalent to Kur'an. Because we believe Kur'an is God's word. Unchanged and right. 

3. Oh well, anti-semitisim stuff. Soft stomach of western people. Why? Because Jewish media and Jewish Hollywood keep impozing "anti-semitism is a very big crime". And even you say 1 negative comment about Jews you easily called "anti-semitic". Weird because Arabs are semitic too. But when you talked about "terrorist Arabs" nobody calls it as "crime against humanity" (like anti-semitism).

Anyway. It's a long subject. But anyway i'll defend my thoughts. It's clear Jews (of course not %100 of Jews but i talk for general) hates Jesus, history shows it. Since they are enemy of Jesus they also enemies of Christianity. I think there's nothing to prove about their hate against Muslims and Christians.

Ah, and a last word; you defended Paulus this much, even i just told truths. What about Jesus. As i see they disgustingly makes fun of Jesus in cartoons such as South Park or Simpsons. As a Muslim it offends me. What about Christians?

----------


## Whifflingpin

> 1. St. Paul was a Jewish before he "converted" to Christianity. There's nothing wrong saying this. And i also not sure he's accepted as a saint by all Christians. 
> 
> 2. I know his letters are part of new testament, and i said they are not God's word. Everyone would accept these words are belong to Paulus's himself. That's why it can't be equivalent to Kur'an. Because we believe Kur'an is God's word. Unchanged and right.


The first Christians were all Jews. Paul is credited with showing that the Christian message relates to non-Jews as well. Paul's letters are accepted as part of the Christian scriptures by all Christian denominations.

You may believe that the Kur'an is God's word, but I believe you are mistaken. I do not believe that God sends angels with books. 

Christians believe that He speaks through his works and through the minds of men, like Paul, who are His messengers, and whom, therefore, you should treat with the respect that you expect for your religious teachers.

.

----------


## *theReader*

Our church just finished a study on this issue, and it is certainly a very interesting one. Forgive me if I am repeating what others have said. I do not have time to read all 11 pages!

My church practices exegesis and exposition. This means that our pastor (in my case, my dad) preaches through one book of the Bible at a time. Sometimes we study particular topics, but most of our study is through the New Testament books. Currently, we are studying 1 Timothy 3. 

One of the qualifications of a deacon/servant of the church is that they are not given to much wine. 

There are a few things to be considered in this description. First, the wine in NT days was much more diluted. John MacArthur says that wine was as much as up to 10 parts water, 1 part alcohol. The strongest wine would have been about 3 parts water to 1 part alcohol. 

Second, Paul's epistle to Timothy was written in a day where water purification was scarce, if it existed at all, which is unlikely. Paul told Timothy later on in his letter to not abstain from wine completely since there were some health benefits. It is just plain wrong to say that abstinence is demanded in the Bible. There is no commandment that says "Thou shalt not drink." Don't look for it-- it isn't there. 

Third, moderation is obviously a requirement. Moderation can mean different things for different people. I know many people who do not have a problem with drinking a glass of wine for dinner. Whatever cannot be done in faith should not be done at all (Romans 14 around verse 22-23 or something), and some people cannot drink alcoholic beverages in faith.

Today in our culture, I would advocate that alcohol abstinence is following the biblical path of wisdom for Christians. Alcoholism is a huge problem in America, and many non-Christians look down on Christians who drink, even in moderation or "social drinking." 

1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be enslaved by anything.

This verse, also penned by Paul, clearly states that we have freedom in Christ, but we are willing to respect others by not doing certain things for the Glory of God. Let's not get carried away by our freedom and use it as a lisence, however.

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

I think that this passage shows how we can balance lisence and liberty.

----------


## Scheherazade

*Please carry on any 'unrelated' discussions through PMs. Further off-topic posts in this thread will be deleted.*

----------


## Shield&Sword

According to statistics 40% of car accidents in USA is caused by drunk people.
How many houses are destroyed because of alcohol.
Even in america in the begining of the past century alcohol was forbidden, but they couldnt do anything infront the illegal trasport of alcohol throught borders so they allowed it finally.
Now which sosciety is better, the one that drink or the one that doesnt drink?
Here people ask me why you dont drink i respond its forbidden, they say no its ok if you drink a little bit (according to religioun) and then i ask that person have you been ever al least one time drunk and they remain scielent.
For me not drinking is better than drinking, even if you say i never was drunk you will, and perhaps in this one time you will do things you regret on, or perhaps you wont be able to regret.
In my belief Jesus or Moses or Noah (who was drunk according bible) or Lot (who was drunk and made adultery with his own doughters) peace be upon them never drink alcohol, i cant believe they do something that destoyed houses of thousands and thousands of people. 
And logicly if you feel shy to drink infront people so they wont think bad of you i think the pure prophets wont either do it and even God wont allow it.

----------


## Whifflingpin

> Here people ask me why you dont drink i respond its forbidden, they say no its ok if you drink a little bit (according to religioun) and then i ask that person have you been ever al least one time drunk and they remain scielent..


I've already said in this thread that I think it's OK to drink in moderation. Yes, I have been drunk, and yes, I think it is a bad thing to be drunk.




> For me not drinking is better than drinking, even if you say i never was drunk you will, and perhaps in this one time you will do things you regret on, or perhaps you wont be able to regret.


I did regret being drunk - I was sick, and had a headache and did not enjoy it. I've also made myself sick eating rahat lokum.

When I'd been drunk often enough, I decided that it was a bad thing to be, and now I don't get drunk. And I eat Turkish delight in moderation. It's called learning, or growing up.


.

----------


## Shield&Sword

Well the point is what in this once time you were drunk something happened that will make you regret all your life, i mean what if you killed someone or did something wrong to your familly memeber or even died. Logiclly it will be better not to drink at all than to try to be drunk to know its bad, you can look around you and decide its so bad to drink, and for me the one who drink a little bit wont have problem to drink alot, how manny people started with this little bit and finished in jail, or became addicted to alcohol. The point is will God allow such thing? i mean drinking even a little bit? Anyway ...

----------


## Whifflingpin

According to statistics 100% of car accidents in USA involve cars. That is a reason to drive carefully, it is not a reason to ban cars.

.

----------


## ennison

Abstaining from alcohol and other things is not a sin nor is it enough to save one's soul. Temperance is recommended in alcohol as in other pursuits. (Too much of a good thing is a bad thing etc.) It would be love in practice not to offer a drink to a recovering alcoholic and to refuse one yourself if you were in his company. That is by way of loving support. What constitutes temperate or moderate drinking is variable. If it makes you aggressive or foul-mouthed it's too much. If it makes you ill or have accidents, it's too much. If you just become doigheil then it's probably moderate. There is a fair degree of sense in saying that most civilised societies make and use alcohol. But it's like fire - a good servant and a bad master. Some racial groups do not have a high tolerance for it and should steer clear of it. It was used ruthlessly at one time to undermine and destroy social cohesion in groups that various colonisers wished to trample on.

----------


## Shield&Sword

Wrong. The cars dont cause accidents, cars are not reason. People who drive it cause accidents and for sure the first thing is their condition,like stress, sleeping, being drunk.
According you the alcohol is not sin, according me it is, exactly like killing raping and so on behaiviours that some people do it in their normal condition and some of them do it after drinking. At the end you didnt add anything new being a sin or not is all up to your belief.
Saying that every thing that pass it's limits is bad doesnt agree with alcohol, from medical point of view the saying "glass of a beer a day is good" has been approoved to be wrong, and doctors advice is not to consume alcohol at all, secondary i said better not to consume at all than to consume even a little bit, and for alcohol any one will agree especially with the problems that alcohol cause, and for sure the one who doesnt drink will never be drunk but the one who drink cant guarantee that he wont be drunk, the funny thing is that alot of people drink and drink and when they become drunk they say "i am not drunk" and the strange behaiviours begin.

----------


## ennison

Too much sword - not enough shield pal.. 'Doctors is all swabs!' As the cap'n said before falling prey to an alcohol induced apoplectic fit. (Alcohol. Arabic in origin.Like algebra) Can't guarantee that he wont be drunk - true but the sober person can't guarantee that his / her behaviour wont be strange either. Or as Winston Churchill said after being accused of being drunk in The House of Commons. 'I may be drunk but the lady is certainly ugly. In the morning however I shall be sober'

----------


## Shield&Sword

No need to use shield, as you know using it depend on other part. I said the "one who doesnt drink wont be drunk" and didnt say "the one who doesnt drink will never drink", i think its clear the difference. Resolving all problems caused by alcohol are relaited to being drunk or not, and refusing the idea of drinking from the begining resolve the problem 100%, not "drinking in moderation" will resolve it. And as you said (understanding wrongly my previous post) "the one who doesnt drink doesnt mean he wont be drunk", but the major probability to be drunk is for sure: "the one who drink will be drunk", to resolve the problem the best solution is: "not to drink at all" that way we will resolve both situation.
The doctors words are said from a medical point of view (like reasons of deseases and phisiology) not about being drunk or not. In my Genetic book i have read this fact: "the child who is born for 2 addicted parents, but was raised with other 2 normal parents, has more probabiliy to become addicted, but its relaited to the sosciety were he live" (a sosciety that consume alcohol or not). Interesting no?

----------


## alhara

I have thought about this alot and I don&#180;t think there is anything biblical that says you shouldn&#180;t. Half the things that the chruch says you shouldn&#180;t do are groundless, biblicaly. Though there are decenct reasons for it, to not drink and do drugs or smoke or any of that stuff is good because it is riding yourself ot the temptation of false god worship. when you become addictied to other substances you are robbing god of your own love, but part of it is also society and pratical reasons filtering through the chruch system. but moderation is fine though not addovocated by the chruch and viewed as a sin through society, though realigously even being drunk so long as drunkeness doesn&#180;t lead to ungodly things (violence ect) can&#180;t be a sin, it is simply a dangerous thing to do. We are realigously accountable for everything we do drunk or sober and thus drunkness is considered wrong because it can lead to wrong doing, it is not the drunkeness that is wrong but what you do while you are drunk. The major sin is addiction, so many realigous groups say lets just avoid the whole mess lump it all together and call it all a sin.

----------


## Theshizznigg

I drink, always in moderation. I have a genetic disorder which makes me resistant to alchohol. So if I wanted to get drunk, I'd have to do something stupid like down a copious amount of alchohol. 
Do I think its wrong for Christians to drink, no, its says nothing against drinking, it does say things against drunkeness. Personally I drink to enjoy it the flavour of the drink, not like some simply to get drunk from it.
I think it was put best in the proverb, I forget which one. Bad quote probably too. 
"Beer is a brawler, and wine leads to a mans ruin."

Shizz.

----------


## andave_ya

:Biggrin:  This thread made me laugh because always in old British novels the gentlemen socialize by decanting a fine port or brandy. It's only because of the stories I've read that I want to try the drinks I mentioned once I am old enough. Anyways, to the topic. My church is kind of divided on the issue. My parents say yeah, it's fine to drink in moderation, moderation being the key word. Which ties in to everything everyone else said.

----------


## quasimodo1

What can a twelve stepper add to this discussion. A warning. That stuff can sneak up on you. Still, many have no problem with the big A. Data from the Mayo Clinic indicates that 8oz of good red wine a day reduces your risk of heart attack by 40 to 50%. For myself, no longer an option. RJS

----------


## JackShea

Drinking is no longer an option for me. One small sip...one giant slip. I have seen the light, as they say, for I have felt the heat. If you want to know what hell is like...even if you don't believe in hell...let me know...JS

----------


## JackShea

"The first thing is to be there for support. Do not offer any advice as you are not qualified. Remember, by ***** checking himself in...and you have told him this...he has already made a positive decision. There is probably alcohol involved as well as pills. He is at his weakest and most vunerable right now. They, Detox, will probably put him on something to ease him off whatever he is on. So you will not see the same **** maybe. When Mom came to visit me I was so screwed up it took me a while to recognize her. Stress the positve. Ask about the meetings...not AA for he shouldn't tell you anything that goes on in the closed meetings. Better yet, let him bring it up. Keep in mind...HE IS SICK...both physically and mentally. Every day I have to admit I have a disease...I have the ability...with my support both at home and AA to at least put my illness at bay. But one small sip one giant slip. I know his Father will support him. Do not make him feel guilty for he is already going through that. Perhaps he has anxiety...supreme depression...suicidal thoughts...let the doctors handle that. A lot of this you already know. The most important thing is he hopefully will come to realize as this is very important to the healing process...Just as he took responsibility for putting himself in Detox...as time goes on he must cease the blame game and accept the blame himself. He has reached out to you as a friend. And to be honest...he loves you. Return the favor. Share this with his Dad if you like as I am way beyond caring about who knows about me. If I can help someone recover that helps me. Especially ***** for I love him like a son...I am always here if you need me Son...Love...Dad"

----------


## blazeofglory

> I know a lot of people that believe it is wrong spiritually to drink alcohol at all. I am a strong believer myself, but I do not believe that the consumption of alcohol is wrong, as long as it is in moderation, aka not getting drunk. What do you all believe on this topic?


In fact I do not drink and it is better we avoid it for there is nothing moderation and people can not stop drinking once hooked to this habit, yet there is nothing wrong if one can limit to moderation.

----------


## hellsapoppin

Jesus was accused of being a "wine bibber" meaning one who drank too much.

As for me, I don't anything other than an occasional beer. And I sure like it!

 :Smile:

----------


## bouquin

> We drink grape juice at my congregation when we take communuion because it's the "fruit of the vine". The Bible doesn't forbid drinking in moderation (not to get drunk), but it does say not to be a stumbling block. Suppose another christian happened to see you drinking? They don't know the situation your in at the time your just moderately drinking. But many people would take it as a green light especially if they are new or weak christians. Probably the worst person to see a scene like that would be a recovering alcoholic.





I live in France and I go to a Protestant church (Methodist-Evangelical) where we have a choice of either red wine or grape juice for the Lord's Supper. Goes without saying that the grape juice is largely ignored.  :Biggrin:  

At church socials (Christmas party, etc) we have wine or water, and fruit juice for the children. Don't expect to see a lot of soda. My impression is that Coke here is regarded as more "sinful" (harmful) than wine. 


________________________

_... the good life doesn't knock on the door. Joy is a job._
(from We Need to Talk about Kevin  - - by Lionel Shriver)

----------


## Trystan

I don't see anything wrong with alcohol. Then again, I'm not religious . . . but even so, I don't see why God would have such a problem with booze. He seems very antagonistic in general toward anything that produces pleasure, I wonder why this is.

There's nothing wrong with getting drunk now and again; it may not be very glamorous, but it is enjoyable.

----------


## aabbcc

Everybody in my family consumes alcohol in moderation. In fact, if I searched the apartment right now, I would probably find nearly two dozen of bottles of various alcoholic drinks in the living room buffet and kitchen, where they are kept. Yet, none of us in family has the habit of continuous drinking which is a purpose for itself - alcohol (we only have high quality, good alcoholic drinks) is treated as a more "special occassion" thing, perhaps sometimes we serve wine with dinner other than that, but normally it is something for when we have guests, or when something is celebrated. My parents taught me to drink rarely and in small quantities, to _enjoy_ alcohol and not to treat it as means of getting drunk, as most people of my age do. Sort of "drink with style" thing. I see nothing wrong with alcohol in moderation, in fact in some occassions I consider it almost inappropriate _not_ to serve alcohol. But then again, some other cultures perceive it as a nearly devilish drink - I never figured out any rational reason to consider alcohol to be such.

----------


## sprinks

I don't see anything wrong with drinking in moderation. I see everything wrong with getting drunk. And I'm talking about like "smashed-off-your-head" drunk. There is no reason to. It's just bad for you. If I was against drinking alcohol at all I'd be a hypocrite, as I have had it myself, but not much and not often. When given the chance to drink it I generally turn it down. I don't think I know any religious people that don't drink (they drink in moderation). 

Some of my relatives are introducing their children to alcohol at a young age, to curb the curiosity later on. I don't see the problem with this - although personally I think they should do it a little later on, the child is only 2 years old!! And he was liking it and managing to trick the other alcohol drinking adults into believing he hadn't had any yet and therefore getting more!!
I love the fact that the TWO year old drank more than the FIFTEEN year old (me) that day!!  :FRlol:

----------


## JBI

Jewish tradition requires getting drunk. Many of our holidays involve drinking, some one of which involves getting drunk until you can't remember the difference between the Villain Haman, and the Righteous Mordechai.

----------


## hellsapoppin

So far as I know, this was only in Purim according to the Talmud. But the Torah teaches moderation.

----------


## bouquin

> Friend, you are _entirely_ missing the point. Drinking alcohol because you like the taste is like shooting heroin because you like the feeling of having a needle in your arm.





What about having a cheeseburger because you like its taste? Would that also be like _shooting heroin because you like the feeling of having a needle in your arm_ ? 

For me drinking alcohol because I like its taste (otherwise why would I even touch it?) is like basking in the sun because it gives me such a wonderful sensation (especially after months and months of dark and cold winter). But I do insist that, like sunbathing, drinking should be done with utmost prudence and moderation.

----------


## El Viejo

> That they do. I was sort of wanting to hear a legalist Christian's side on this. I know a lot of churches that will not allow the consumption of alcohol at church events like picnics and barbeques. I just wanted to see someone's reasoning behind that. How they can try to emulate Jesus, but forbid a bevarage that he drank himself.


Just as the posts in these threads range far and away from the original question, so the doctrine of the many branches of Christianity strays from the teachings of the founder. In the first step away from Christ, the Epistles, we learn that there are degrees of good. Slaves are advised to submit to their masters, but if it is within their grasp they should pursue freedom. Men and women may marry, but for those who are able, a truly close relationship with God is best achieved through celibacy. Paul teaches that moderation is good, but often we should simply avoid things associated with evil for the sake of our weaker brothers. However tenuous the connection, alcohol is associated with drunkenness, dancing with promiscuity, card games with general irresponsibility, and so on. In other words, on these little farms, moderation is good, but abstinence is be-e-e-e-tter.

----------


## kelby_lake

getting drunk is not a great idea, no. i like alcohol  :Smile:

----------


## sun & sky

well , it is your choice in the first place .. !! 

yes it is pleaser , it is fun , as I see many people drink ..

but for me , I don`t drink at all .. not only because of religion , but also because of health .. mental state .. and mostly to avoid addiction to alcohol , do avoid damaging my liver .. 


so , it is up to you

----------


## DapperDrake

I think alcohol is best avoided from a health perspective; moderate, occasional consumption is fine - if you can stick to that.

Personally I drink far too much, I'm not drinking much (relatively) at the moment, the last couple of months I've had alcohol about 5 times but three of those times I got very drunk. The preceding 10 months or so I was drinking approx a minimum of 30 units a week - far, far too much.

alcohol is like pretty much all the recreational drugs, fairly unlikely to do you harm in occasional moderation but the impulse is to overindulge, to lean on the drug for psychological support... and that of course is a downward spiral. (of course not all recreational drugs are equal, the illegal ones are much more dangerous)

----------

