Alcohol - a world wide phenomena

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Christians should drink alcohol ...

  • Only once in a great long while, and only for special occasions chosen by God.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • In any amount, at any time, for God placed no restrictions on the drinking of alcohol.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • ???, I don't know if or when God allows the drinking of alcohol, as I am still studying this out.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Can only drink alcohol when in God's service or ministry.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    29
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
You can be kind of funny sometimes. :giggle:
Job 17:2: "Are there not mockers with me? and doth not mine eye continue in their provocation?"

Job 21:3: "Suffer me that I may speak; and after that I have spoken, mock on."

Acts 2:13: "Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine."

Heb 11:36: "And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:"

Do you see your part? I see my part.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,337
16,315
113
69
Tennessee
Yes, wine can make you drunk. I think we've got that. Lots of things can be taken to excess. We can find many verses on gluttony also. Lets all stop eating then.

btw, Didn't you say that new wine was grape juice? :confused:
Not according to Acts 2:13.
 
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
You said the new wine was grape juice. Jesus Christ is not grape juice. Try to get your ducks in a straight line please.
Deu 32:14: "Butter of kine, and milk of sheep, with fat of lambs, and rams of the breed of Bashan, and goats, with the fat of kidneys of wheat; and thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape."

Gen 49:11: "Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes:"

John 6:53: "Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you."

John 6:54: "Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

John 6:55: "For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed."

John 6:56: "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him."

1Cor 11:25: "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me."

1Cor 11:27: "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord."

Lev 17:11: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."

Mat 26:28: "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Mar 14:24: "And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many."

Luk 22:20: "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you."

Heb 9:18: "Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood."

Heb 9:20: "Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you."

Mat 26:29: "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."

Mar 14:25: "Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God."

Luk 22:18: "For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come."
 
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
Not according to Acts 2:13.
Acts 2:13: "Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine."

Notice the word "mocking".

There is a difference between the new and old wine.

Luk 5:39: "No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better."
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,337
16,315
113
69
Tennessee
Acts 2:13: "Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine."

Notice the word "mocking".

There is a difference between the new and old wine.

Luk 5:39: "No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better."
They were mocking them because they thought that they were drunk on the new wine. It would not be possible to be drunk if the new wine was unfermented grape juice.

The word 'mocking' has nothing whatsoever to do with the alcohol content, if any, of the new wine they thought that they had drunk.

The context of this passage dictates that the new wine had an alcoholic content, otherwise they would have said that they were full of old wine. New wine or old wine, both are alcohol. The old wine is preferable because the aging process brings out the character of the particular vintage.

The wine steward at the wedding at Cana stated that the best wine was saved for last. The context of the account at Cana dictates that the miracle that Jesus performed was turning water into wine. This wine had an alcoholic content. It was choice.

I would not advise anyone to start drinking but it clearly is not a sin to do so. Unwise perhaps, in come circumstances, but not a sin.

The passage that you provided supports the position that wine, whether new or old, is alcoholic in nature.
 
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
They were mocking them because they thought that they were drunk on the new wine. It would not be possible to be drunk if the new wine was unfermented grape juice.
Thus the mockery. The text isn't saying it is actually possible to be drunk on new wine (grape juice). The devil, through the unbelievers, is mocking the outpouring of the pure and holy Spirit in the life of these disciples and the miracle of languages witnessed in them.

The devil was insinuating that those persons were made inebriated from that which could not possibly have inebriated them, even at such an early time (3rd hour of the day, 9am), hours before the yearly feast (Pentecost, feast of weeks) was held in which the new wine (juice of the grape) was served at the festal meal.

Exo 34:22: "And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end."

Lev 23:22: "And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God."

Fresh grape juice, the new wine, was prepared in vast amounts for the thousands that had travelled to Jerusalem that year.

Deu 16:16: "Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty:"

In other words, the devil suggested, through an accusatory supposition, that the persons were so easily affected of mind/heart that even large amounts of the new wine (grape juice) caused them to be speaking as they did. It was a cruel mockery to their pure characters. It's like saying that they were so easily swayed, that even something as simple as fruit juice would stir them up to prolaim that a dead leader (Jesus was crucified just previous, three days earlier) was the Messiah and now alive. The religious leaders could not account for how the disciples spake as they were doing (spiritually from Heaven), and looked for an excuse in the natural (the new wine of the feast), even though it was known that it could not possibly account for the miracle taking place, yet they clung to this excuse anyway, as their hardened heart had for all the other miracles, which they tried to explain away with silly ideas.
 
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
The passage that you provided supports the position that wine, whether new or old, is alcoholic in nature.
No, it doesn't. Read my other reply.

New wine, juice of the grape is uninebriating. It's just fresh pressed juice.

Old wine, which, started out as New Wine at one point, became intoxicating through time and circumstances (sun, air, temperature, amount of water or lack thereof, sugar content, etc), as it occured to Noah. Some would have to stay around and be drinking such quite a while to even get a buzz, but as time (hence the word, "old") progressed it becomes more inebriating and moreso as larger quantities were consumed.
 
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
Secondary Poll:

How many who originally voted in the original Poll have stayed to read and research the positions taken and the texts cited by all who actually participated in this thread:

Vote "Aye" for voting originally and having stayed and read.

Vote "Nay" for voting originally and didn't bother with the rest, or very little at most.

My vote:

"Aye"
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,772
13,408
113
Thus the mockery. The text isn't saying it is actually possible to be drunk on new wine (grape juice). The devil, through the unbelievers, is mocking the outpouring of the pure and holy Spirit in the life of these disciples and the miracle of languages witnessed in them.
That's complete speculation. It was a highly religious culture where mocking God was taboo. Further, had they been drinking mere unfermented grape juice, there is nothing that would have changed their behaviour.

Fresh grape juice, the new wine, was prepared in vast amounts for the thousands that had travelled to Jerusalem that year.
They had no way to keep it from fermenting. The fermentation would have begun as soon as the juice was rendered.

Your position is a mockery of sound biblical interpretation, science, and logic.
 

Cabrillo

Active member
Sep 6, 2021
420
221
43
Secondary Poll:

How many who originally voted in the original Poll have stayed to read and research the positions taken and the texts cited by all who actually participated in this thread:

Vote "Aye" for voting originally and having stayed and read.

Vote "Nay" for voting originally and didn't bother with the rest, or very little at most.

My vote:

"Aye"
I never saw it. Their's 452 posts to look through though. Not today. :sleep:
 

Athanasius377

Active member
Aug 20, 2020
206
86
28
Northern Kentucky
That's complete speculation. It was a highly religious culture where mocking God was taboo. Further, had they been drinking mere unfermented grape juice, there is nothing that would have changed their behaviour.


They had no way to keep it from fermenting. The fermentation would have begun as soon as the juice was rendered.

Your position is a mockery of sound biblical interpretation, science, and logic.
Exactly. Mash up grapes and put the juice in a jar and come back in a few days and you will have fermented and still fermenting alcohol containing liquid. Fermentation begins the moment one mashes a grape. There is yeast naturally occurring on the outside of the grape and sugar in the juice on the inside. Yeast + sugar = alcohol. 100% of the time. There is no way around it.
 
Feb 7, 2022
646
75
28
Further, had they been drinking mere unfermented grape juice, there is nothing that would have changed their behaviour.
That's the point of the ridiculous suggestion by the unbelievers. Denial of truth always leads to ludicrous explanations. Just ask an atheist or evolutionist how everything came to be, and sit back and have a good laugh at the absurdity of their reply.