To Drink or Not to drink that is the question

  • 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.
Aug 28, 2013
955
11
0
Everything is not fine. :(

1 Pet 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
That word "sober" is translated from the Greek word "nepho". Its primary meaning, according to the Strong's Greek is, "to abstain from wine"
 
May 3, 2013
8,719
75
0
Do you wnat to get drunk or enjoy wine or a beer to kill your thirst? Next tiem I hear there´s a party in Caná I´ll give you a phone call at Jn Chap. 2.
 
Aug 28, 2013
955
11
0
Yes be sober, not the same as don't drink. Jesus wouldn't have turned water to wine if drinking wine was bad. Because then Jesus would be helping sin and we know Jesus was perfect so...
The guests at the wedding feast had already well drunk. Jesus would not have made 120-150 gallons of alcohol for people who had already well drunk.

Had He made alcohol for guests that had already well drunk alcohol, He would have been contributing to their drunkenness... thereby helping them further and further down the dark road to destruction.

My Bible tells me Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost, not help them find their way to hell.
 
Aug 28, 2013
955
11
0
You think Peter and Paul was different in their teaching????because i see Paul telling timothy that it is OK to have a little wine.

1Ti 5:23 Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

Ofcourse Paul is mentioning abt the strong drink because, in another chapter he says this:

1Ti 3:8 . Likewise [must] the deacons [be] grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;

Ti 2:3 The aged women likewise, that [they be] in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;


Why would Paul say "not given to much wine", if wine was just grape juice? does it make sense? He does not say do not drink wine, ut do not drink wine in excess, don't get drunk...

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

I got this from one website- "It was a luxury that was not to be abused"

Sober can mean serious minded, most of the people will not be serious minded when they are drunk...there are alot of things in life which satisfies the carnal flesh. We do it, and we see there is no restrictions in the bible. Anything excess is dangerous, that is what i believe. By the way, i don't drink:)
It does not mean "serious minded" in these verses:

1 Thessalonians 5:6-8 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.

Notice the contrast? They that are drunken are drunken in the night as opposed to they that are of the day are sober.

Night/Day
Drunken/Sober

Primary definition of the Greek word 'nepho' is "to abstain from wine." It appears this is the message Paul was conveying to the reader.

Let us keep watch... Let us stay alert. Alcohol removes alertness from the one drinking it... a little at a time. The drinker thinks he is in control when in reality, it is the alcohol that is in control. It has deceived the drinker into believing he can handle it... all the while getting that much closer to falling down drunkenness.

Just because the drinker may not be falling down drunk does not mean he is not at some stage of drunkenness... some level of impairment. Paul says keep watch. Why would a drink that has the ability to deceive the drinker more and more with each drink be associated with one who is told to "keep watch"?
 
Aug 28, 2013
955
11
0
It Don't say in the bible not to drink, however Jesus says NOT to get drunk. We christians and non Christians has to think for ourselves and limit and consume what is the right amount. Though it don't say in the bible that Jesus drank wine, ( if it does? then I apologise that I not read it) but I'm sure he did as he ossociated with the crowd and the people. But we have to moderate and be careful how we consume alchohol as not to polute our bodies. As we all know our bodies are a temple.

Some people can go to far and get drunk, which then harm kicks in the long run. To be honest I don't drink any alchohol, but thats of my own choosing. Also depends of the situation the reason why we drink. Could be a wedding, christmas, birthday, a celebration of some sort. We can enjoy the gathering have a drink and enjoy the moment. But don't get drunk. You then will be going over board.

Ephesians 5:18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit.

1 Timothy 5:23
No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.

What Paul was saying that verse is that its good to have a drink of wine, but for ailments of your body, like for an upset stomach, wine is a help to restore the upset stomach. Its a proven fact even them times. but he is also saying not to go overboard and get drunk from it. So it's ok to drink, but not to get drunk. No drunkards are allowed to inherit the Kingdom of God.

1 Corinthians 6:10
Nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
The bolded above makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Alcohol is a toxin. That is why it is called an "inTOXICant". Even the least amount ingested has polluted the body.

Paul was not advocating Timothy drink an alcoholic beverage. He said drink a little wine for thine often infirmities. If Timothy's infirmities were often, then that means he would be drinking wine often to take care of those infirmities. Bishops were not to be given to wine.

Given the ability that alcohol has to deceive, Paul would have been contradicting himself, for Timothy would have been near wine often... which Paul says Bishops were not to be.

For his stomach's sake. Any doctor worth his salt will tell one who has stomach ailments not to drink alcohol. Alcohol breaks down the lining of the stomach. An already infirmed stomach would only be inflamed more if alcohol were introduced to it.

Paul could in no way have been prescribing an alcoholic wine. What he was prescribing was nothing more than grape juice... which was also called wine.

Deuteronomy 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.

Isaiah 65:8 Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all.

Paul was prescribing a wine that had not yet been fermented... freshly squeezed from the cluster.
 

gb9

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2011
11,838
6,376
113
you sidestepped my question. how is drinking different from taking and getting addicted to medicine. neither are wrong or sin, but like anything else if abused it can be. self-control is the key.
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
The guests at the wedding feast had already well drunk. Jesus would not have made 120-150 gallons of alcohol for people who had already well drunk.

Had He made alcohol for guests that had already well drunk alcohol, He would have been contributing to their drunkenness...
Actually, that is exactly what happened.
 
Aug 28, 2013
955
11
0
you sidestepped my question. how is drinking different from taking and getting addicted to medicine. neither are wrong or sin, but like anything else if abused it can be. self-control is the key.
If one is addicted to medicine, then it is a heart issue.

God's Word says not to look upon the wine when it is fermented. It doesn't say Look not upon the wine after you begin to feel the least effect. It says look not upon it when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

Again, God's Word says it is not for kings to drink wine. We who are saved have been made kings and priests unto God. It is not for kings to drink wine. Lest they forget the law
 
Aug 28, 2013
955
11
0
Actually, that is exactly what happened.
If Jesus made alcohol for a bunch of people who had already well drunk, then He disqualified Himself from being the sinless sacrifice needed to redeem mankind from a world of sin. His defeated His mission instead of accomplishing it, and all mankind is doomed to hell because Christ was not the sinless sacrifice that was needed.
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
The bolded above makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Alcohol is a toxin. That is why it is called an "inTOXICant". Even the least amount ingested has polluted the body.

Paul was not advocating Timothy drink an alcoholic beverage. He said drink a little wine for thine often infirmities. If Timothy's infirmities were often, then that means he would be drinking wine often to take care of those infirmities. Bishops were not to be given to wine.

Given the ability that alcohol has to deceive, Paul would have been contradicting himself, for Timothy would have been near wine often... which Paul says Bishops were not to be.

For his stomach's sake. Any doctor worth his salt will tell one who has stomach ailments not to drink alcohol. Alcohol breaks down the lining of the stomach. An already infirmed stomach would only be inflamed more if alcohol were introduced to it.

Paul could in no way have been prescribing an alcoholic wine. What he was prescribing was nothing more than grape juice... which was also called wine.

Deuteronomy 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.

Isaiah 65:8 Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all.

Paul was prescribing a wine that had not yet been fermented... freshly squeezed from the cluster.
Wine—including alcohol—is safer to drink than water in places where the water is not treated. Untreated water leads to stomach problems, as any American who has made the mistake of brushing their teeth with tap water in Mexico knows. The alcohol has an antiseptic property so it kills some of the more harmful elements.. Untreated water doesn't necessarily make the locals sick because they are accustomed to the impurities. It's the newcomers or travelers—such as missionaries like Paul and Timothy—that are likely to become ill.

Honestly, I am amazed at the logical acrobatics that so many are performing in attempt to make the Bible match their preconceptions. You have to read the Bible for what it says, not what you want it to say. Ask yourself, "How would the writer have phrased it any differently if he really did mean for Timothy to drink actual wine? How should he have phrased it if he meant grape juice?" And apply that to every other seemingly controversial scripture. The least complicated understanding of a passage is frequently the right one.
 

Misty77

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2013
1,746
45
0
If Jesus made alcohol for a bunch of people who had already well drunk, then He disqualified Himself from being the sinless sacrifice needed to redeem mankind from a world of sin. His defeated His mission instead of accomplishing it, and all mankind is doomed to hell because Christ was not the sinless sacrifice that was needed.
Or, more accurately, you need to redefine your understanding of sin. If Jesus did it, it can't be sin.
 
I

in2it

Guest
you sidestepped my question. how is drinking different from taking and getting addicted to medicine. neither are wrong or sin, but like anything else if abused it can be. self-control is the key.
I think that anytime a person takes a substance that alters their reality(slight buzz) they are removing themselves from this present reality. They are not alert to reality, neither can they be, they have a phony feeling of euphoria.

1. a state of intense happiness and self-confidence: She was flooded with euphoria as she went to the podium to receive her Student Research Award.

2. Psychology . a feeling of happiness, confidence, or well-being sometimes exaggerated in pathological states as mania.

This feeling is not generated from reality, it is artificial. When the alcohol wears off so does the euphoria.
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
If u don't get addicted to anyhting, everything is fine. God has commanded us not to be under the control of any thing.
Everything is not fine. :(

1 Pet 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
Yes be sober, not the same as don't drink. Jesus wouldn't have turned water to wine if drinking wine was bad. Because then Jesus would be helping sin and we know Jesus was perfect so...
:confused: The context is addiction, not whether anyone should have a drink or not.
 
I

in2it

Guest
God gave us the ability to feel euphoric naturally. Using a controlling substance to reach euphoria is not good. Not only does it mean that you don't appreciate Gods' gift of attaining euphoria naturally, but also that you believe alcohol is superior to Gods' creation. Rings the bell of idolatry.
 

Nautilus

Senior Member
Jun 29, 2012
6,488
53
48
The bolded above makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Alcohol is a toxin. That is why it is called an "inTOXICant". Even the least amount ingested has polluted the body.

Paul was not advocating Timothy drink an alcoholic beverage. He said drink a little wine for thine often infirmities. If Timothy's infirmities were often, then that means he would be drinking wine often to take care of those infirmities. Bishops were not to be given to wine.

Given the ability that alcohol has to deceive, Paul would have been contradicting himself, for Timothy would have been near wine often... which Paul says Bishops were not to be.

For his stomach's sake. Any doctor worth his salt will tell one who has stomach ailments not to drink alcohol. Alcohol breaks down the lining of the stomach. An already infirmed stomach would only be inflamed more if alcohol were introduced to it.

Paul could in no way have been prescribing an alcoholic wine. What he was prescribing was nothing more than grape juice... which was also called wine.

Deuteronomy 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.

Isaiah 65:8 Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all.

Paul was prescribing a wine that had not yet been fermented... freshly squeezed from the cluster.
You realize that red wine is actually good for the heart right in the proper amounts?
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
you sidestepped my question. how is drinking different from taking and getting addicted to medicine. neither are wrong or sin, but like anything else if abused it can be. self-control is the key.
Men have clearly demonstrated the mastery of self control throughout recorded history. Recreational drinking of beverages containing alcohol is unwise. Medicinal use requires discipline.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
L

LT

Guest
glukus is the word for grape juice or unfermented wine in Greek. It is not used in the Bible.
oinos is the word used for wine in the New Testament. It is the term for "fermented wine" specifically. It can be stretched to mean "product of grapes" or "of the vine", but it is only used this way artistically in high-form Greek, not in the common Greek that the New Testament was written in.
We see that in other literature contemporary to the gospels in 1st century ad, oinos(wine) is always fermented, unless it is proceeded or followed by an adjective describing it as "new" or "sweet".
There is no possible argument to say that "wine" Jesus made was non-alcoholic as it was called "the best". High quality wine has always been fermented regardless of the time period and culture.

The "Last Supper" is perhaps the only place where there might have been juice instead of wine. That has to do with Jewish culture and traditions during that time period for Passover ceremonies, prohibiting use of yeast and yeast products, which may have been applied to all alcohol, during the celebration. (This is not fact, just someone's speculation that I cannot disprove)

If God intended for us to not drink any alcohol, then it would say so in the Bible. It uses the term for "strong drink" both positively and negatively, but never says it is sinful. Drunkenness is obviously sinful, because it is spoken of in this way.

If your conscience tells you not to drink, then do not drink!
If you have struggled with drunkenness in your past, BE CAREFUL AROUND ALCOHOL.
If you have a clear conscience about drinking, but your friend does not, DO NOT DRINK IN FRONT OF THEM, or brag about your freedom to drink.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

breno785au

Senior Member
Jul 23, 2013
6,002
765
113
39
Australia
Act 15: 28-29
28 For it seemed best to the Holy Spirit and to us not to place any greater burden on you than these necessary rules: 29 that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from doing these things, you will do well. Farewell.

Sooo, is this the conclusion of the matter?
 
N

nw2u

Guest
Being able to afford to drink and choosing to do something other than drink which is more fulfilling would be wonderful. Don't you think? Life can be so tough, we look for a little respite. Drinking can give a short respite. Like anything else, it has it's consequences. It lowers inhibitions which allow us to consider doing and saying things we would not normally. It's a choice like any other in life. I don't think it's a sin in itself, but leads quickly to sin, especially if overdone.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
By what standard of measurement? I have met men who when they got saved walked away from very prosperous businesses because they involved the selling and consumption of booze. Are these not far more noble than Guinness? How many homes have been destroyed by Guinness beverages? How many children have gone to bed hungry or without shoes because a parent spent their money on a Guinness product? What shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

I find your logic and your assertion contradictory.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
Okay, maybe a should've said he was one of the most God-fearing businessmen ever. I read an incredible article about Guinness and his life as a testimony to Christ. It was in a faith magazine called "Relevant". Very powerful.