DRINKING AND THE SCRIPTURES

  • 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.
Mar 12, 2014
6,433
29
0
Joh 6:53 Then Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.
Joh 6:54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:55 For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.
Joh 6:56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

Now unless you believe in transubstantiation, the blood here is wine.
Mt 26:27-29 "And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 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."

In verse 28 Jesus calls it His blood but in the very next verse (29) He calls it fruit of the vine. So the liquid was never His blood it was always fruit of the vine, Jesus was obviously using a figure of speech in referring to the fruit of vine as blood.
 
Mar 12, 2014
6,433
29
0
To add to my previous post:


1 Cor 6:10,11 "Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

They WERE drunkards not still drunkards
 
Aug 15, 2009
9,745
179
0
sorry Stephen. been busy and then sleep. what I was talking about was simply saying that anyone who says the Bible says that having a drink is a sin is wrong. there is not one verse that says that. so for anyone to say the Word says something that it does not say it is in error. pastor, denomination, just regular folks , whoever it is should not play fill in the blanks. as I heard a well-known pastor say where the Bible speaks we speak, but where it is silent, we should be silent.
The Bible speaks loud & clear about offenses, yet nobody wants to talk about it.

[HR][/HR]Proverbs 18:19 (KJV) [SUP]19 [/SUP]A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city: and their contentions are like the bars of a castle.
[HR][/HR]Matthew 18:6 (KJV) [SUP]6 [/SUP]But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
[HR][/HR]Romans 14:21 (KJV) [SUP]21 [/SUP]It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
[HR][/HR]1 Corinthians 8:13 (KJV) [SUP]13 [/SUP]Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
[HR][/HR]2 Corinthians 11:29 (KJV) [SUP]29 [/SUP]Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?

Whenever a person doesn't care about offending, it's because the love of God isn't in him.
 
Jul 27, 2011
1,622
89
0
28 pages later and still turning. Thanks Stephen63 for the time and study you have put into this thread. stay strong, if your posts can only bring one out of a thousand to truth, it is well worth it.
 
Mar 12, 2014
6,433
29
0
The debauchery is in the drunkenness. You really believe that a bottle of wine in a warehouse somewhere is debauchery?



"occaisions of excess" - again, overdoing it. By the way, gluttony is considered just as much of a sin as drunkenness, just to be safe, shouldn't you quit eating?
References I have access to say the original language the "in ewhich" refers to the wine. In the context Paul is making a mutual exclusive contrast between being filled with wine or being filled with the spirit. It's an either-or propositon for one cannot be filled with some wine and some spirit at the same time. If Paul is allowing for moderaton, then he is defeating/contradicting his whole point of the verse.



(my emp)


The Antecedent of the Relative Pronoun. Paul’s admonition "Do not get drunk with wine" is followed by a warning which in the RSV is rendered "for that is debauchery." The question to be considered now is, What is debauchery? Is it wine as the causative agent of debauchery or drunkenness as a state of debauchery? The answer depends on which of the two is taken to be the antecedent of the relative clause "en ho--in which." A literal translation of the Greek text would read: "And do not get drunk with wine, in which[en ho] is debauchery[asotia—literally, ‘unsavableness’]." The RSV rendering of "en ho—in which" with "for that" makes the condition of being drunk with wine, rather than wine itself, the subject of "debauchery." This construction of the sentence, as Leon Field points out, "is expressly founded on the assumption that the use of wine is elsewhere allowed in the New Testament, and not on any exegetical necessities in the text itself."25

From a grammatical viewpoint, the subject of "in which" can be either the previous word "wine" or the drunkenness spoken of in the preceding clause. This fact is recognized by such commentators as R. C. H. Lenski, who says: "‘In which’ refers to the condition of being drunk with wine or to ‘wineas here used, a means for becoming drunk."26 Robert Young, the author of the Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, renders the relative clause "in which" accurately in his Bible translation: "And be not drunk with wine, in which is dissoluteness, but be filled in the Spirit."27

Preference for "Wine." Historically, numerous translators and commentators have seen "wine" rather than the state of drunkenness as the antecedent of "in which." The reason is suggested by the position of oino ("with wine"), which in Greek comes immediately after the verb "drunk" and before the relative "in which." Though the immediate juxtaposition of "wine" between the verb and the relative is not absolutely determinative, it strongly suggests that the warning of the relative clause is about wine as the active cause of dissoluteness rather than drunkenness as a state of dissoluteness.

Support for this view is provided also by the fact that the words "Do not get drunk with wine," as The Interpreter’s Bible commentary points out, "are cited from Prov. 23:31 (the LXX according to Codex A)."28 If Paul is quoting Proverbs 23:31 as found in the LXX, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, then we have reason to believe that Paul is warning against wine as such, since the text in Proverbs condemns the use of intoxicating wine ("Do not look at wine when it is red"), rather than its abuse.

Ancient Translations. This understanding of Ephesians 5:18 as a condemnation of intoxicating wine itself is supported by numerous ancient and modern translations. Tertullian (about A. D. 160-225), who is regarded as the father of Latin Christianity, renders the text as follows: "et nolite inebriari vino, in quo est luxuria " ("And be not inebriated with wine, in which is voluptuousness").29 The connection between vino "with wine" and quo "which" is unmistakable in this Latin translation, because the relative quo has the same neuter gender of vino, upon which it depends.

Besides his translation, Tertullian reveals his understanding of the text as a prohibition against wine drinking in his usage of the text in his treatise Against Marcion, where he says: "‘Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess,’—a precept which is suggested by the passage of the prophet, where the seducers of the consecrated [Nazirites] to drunkenness are rebuked: ‘Ye gave wine to my holy ones to drink’ [Amos 2:12]. This prohibition from drink was given also to the high priest Aaron and his sons."30

About two centuries after Tertullian, Jerome translated Ephesians 5:18 in exactly the same way in his famous Latin translation of the Bible, known as the Vulgate (about A. D. 400). The Vulgate has served through the centuries as the official Latin Bible of the Roman Catholic Church.

Jerome’s understanding of this text as an admonition to abstain from the use of wine is indicated also by his usage of the text. In a letter to Laeta, a lady who wrote to him asking how she should bring up her infant daughter, Jerome says: "Let her learn even now not to drink wine ‘wherein is excess’" (Eph 5:18).31 In another letter to Eustochium, Jerome relates the story of a noble Roman lady, Paula, who on her visit to the Holy Land "called to mind the cave in which Lot found refuge, and with tears in her eyes warned the virgins her companions to beware of ‘wine wherein is excess’ [Eph 5:18]; for it was to this that the Moabites and Ammonites owe their origin."32 Jerome’s understanding of Ephesians 5:18 is significant since he is regarded as the most famous early Christian translator of the Bible.

Modern Translations. Several classical and modern translations have followed the Vulgate in its faithful literalness. For example, the French Synodal Version reads: "Ne vous enivrez pas de vin: car le vin porte à la dissolution" ("Do not inebriate yourselves with wine, for wine leads to dissoluteness"). To remove any possibility for misunderstanding, the translators have repeated the word "wine" in the relative clause. Other French translations, such as the David Martin and the Version d’Ostervald also establish a clear connection between wine and the relative clause. Both read: "Ne vous enivrez point de vin, dans lequel il y a de la dissolution" ("Do not inebriate yourselves with wine, in which there is dissolution").

In English one could argue that the antecedent of "in which" is the drunkenness spoken of in the preceding clause. This uncertainty is caused by the fact that in the English language the relative pronoun "which" has no gender, and consequently can be connected to any antecedent. In French, however, "lequel" ("in which") is masculine and thus can only refer to "vin" ("wine") which is also masculine. The connection between the two is unmistakable in these French translations.

The same clear connection between "wine" and "dissoluteness" is found in the two Spanish versions, Cipriano de Valera (A. D. 1900) and Nácar, Colunga, where the relative clause reads respectively: "en el cual hay disolucion" ("in which is dissoluteness") and "en el cual está el desenfreno" ("in which is excess"). In both instances the relative "cual" ("which") is preceded by the masculine article "el," because it refers to the masculine noun "vino" ("wine"). The connection is even clearer in the Spanish Catholic Version which reads "vino fomento da la injuria" ("wine which causes harm"). A similar rendering is found in the margin of the New American Standard Bible which reads: "wine, in which is dissipation."

The Good News German Bible ("Die Gute Nachricht") provides another clear example where wine is the subject of the relative clause: "Betrinkt euch nicht; denn der Wein macht haltlos" ("Do not get drunk; because wine makes one unsteady or unprincipled").33 The Italian Protestant version Riveduta by Giovanni Luzzi, as well as the Catholic Version produced by the Pontifical Biblical Institute, follow the sentence construction of the French and Spanish versions cited above. The Riveduta reads: "E non v’inebriate di vino; esso porta alla dissolutezza" ("And do not inebriate yourselves with wine; it [wine] leads to dissoluteness"). The antecedent of "esso" ("it") is unmistakably "vino," because it is of the same masculine gender as "vino," since it depends upon it.

The sampling of ancient and modern translations cited above should suffice to show that historically many translators have understood the relative clause of Ephesians 5:18 as representing a condemnation not of drunkenness but of wine itself. If these translators are correct, as I believe they are for the reasons mentioned above, then Ephesians 5:18 provides a powerful indictment against the actual use of intoxicating wine and not merely against its abuse. A look at the noun asotia, rendered by the RSV as "debauchery," will help us appreciate the nature of the condemnation.

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D., Andrews University


25. Leon C. Field (n. 17), p. 118.
26. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians, to the Ephesians and to the Philippians (Columbus, Ohio, 1950), p. 618, emphasis supplied. In a similar vein S. D. F. Salmond writes: "The en ho refers not to the oinos alone . . . but to the whole phrase methuskesthe oino—the becoming drunk with wine" (The Expositor’s Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, 1956), vol. 3, p. 362.
27. Robert Young, trans., The Holy Bible Consisting of the Old and New Covenants (Edinburgh, 1911).
28. The Interpreter’s Bible (New York, 1970), vol. 11, p. 714.
29. Tertullian, On Modesty 17.
30. Tertullian, Against Marcion 5, 18, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, 1973), vol. 3, p. 468.
31. Jerome, Letter 107 to Laeta, eds. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Nicene and Post-Nice Fathers of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids, 1979), vol. 6, p. 193
 
Mar 12, 2014
6,433
29
0
"occaisions of excess" - again, overdoing it. By the way, gluttony is considered just as much of a sin as drunkenness, just to be safe, shouldn't you quit eating?
Gluttony and drunkenness are not the same. One can eat a normal meal amount and not be a glutton. One can drink four drinks and be some degree drunk.
 

Dude653

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2011
13,705
1,272
113
Even moderate drinking carries health risks. It increases the risk of breast cancer, osteoporosis and brain hemorrhage.

 

watcher2013

Senior Member
Aug 6, 2013
1,931
108
63
I am sure Paul was not condoning moderate drinking for deacons or aged women.

1 Cor 11:21 "For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken."

1 Cor 11:22 "What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not."

Drunken in v21 has a primary meaning of being intoxicated but has a secondary meaning of being full, satiated. It would be the secondary meaning of full contrasted to hungry/empty that Paul is using.

In the context, the church at Corinth had made a common meal out of the Lord's Supper and Paul was condemning them saying one is hungry while another drunken. If drunken carries the idea of intoxication in v21, then Paul is telling them do not eat and get intoxicated at church services during the Lord's Supper for you have houses to eat and get intoxicated in. Paul then would be condoning their intoxication at homes which contradicts the verses where Paul condemns drunkenness, as in Gal 5:21
Let me review your meaning:

Primary meaning - Intoxicated

Secondary meaning - full,satiated
FULL OF WHAT?

again:
Secondary Meaning - Full of wine = drunk...same as primary intoxicated...
Secondary meaning - full of food+grape Juice = Gluttony...
Secondary Meaning - Full of grape Juice = Stupidity (full of non sense)

Paul suggested you have house to eat and drink....He did not say get Drunk....


Drunkenness is the result of excessive drinking of (intoxicating) fluids..

Paul did not contradict himself...Your doctrine on the other hand contradict itself...

Bishop-No wine
Deacons - not too much
timothy - little wine
not drunk with wine in excess
Lord supper - cup of wine
aged man -Sober
Aged women -not given to much wine

Herein is the biblical margin
from nothing ---to---> little/ not much wine....

excessive drinking is not encourage and will result in drunkenness.
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,396
194
63
Mt 26:27-29 "And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 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."

In verse 28 Jesus calls it His blood but in the very next verse (29) He calls it fruit of the vine. So the liquid was never His blood it was always fruit of the vine, Jesus was obviously using a figure of speech in referring to the fruit of vine as blood.
Of course He was. The cup had wine in it.
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,396
194
63
Even moderate drinking carries health risks. It increases the risk of breast cancer, osteoporosis and brain hemorrhage.

No more than moderate eating. IN fact diet is the #1 contributor to the number one cause of death in the U.S. Shall we all quit eating?
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,396
194
63
Gluttony and drunkenness are not the same. One can eat a normal meal amount and not be a glutton. One can drink four drinks and be some degree drunk.
If one eats 10 plates of food at a sitting, he is considered a glutton. If he eats one plate, he is a 10% glutton.
 

watcher2013

Senior Member
Aug 6, 2013
1,931
108
63
The Bible speaks loud & clear about offenses, yet nobody wants to talk about it.

[HR][/HR]Proverbs 18:19 (KJV) [SUP]19 [/SUP]A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city: and their contentions are like the bars of a castle.
[HR][/HR]Matthew 18:6 (KJV) [SUP]6 [/SUP]But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
[HR][/HR]Romans 14:21 (KJV) [SUP]21 [/SUP]It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
[HR][/HR]1 Corinthians 8:13 (KJV) [SUP]13 [/SUP]Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
[HR][/HR]2 Corinthians 11:29 (KJV) [SUP]29 [/SUP]Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?

Whenever a person doesn't care about offending, it's because the love of God isn't in him.
If you are offended Stephen or any immature Christian...grow up and be mature...
If you will not grow up...
the same way those who drink have a choice not to drink
You also have a choice to go home...
 

homwardbound

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2012
18,127
881
113
Hi,

I assume you a referencing 1 Cor 6:12. Paul is talking about things that are expedient, but not those things that are against the law, sinful, immoral. What is lawful is lawful but not all lawful things are expedient. Drunkenness, stealing, adultery etc are not lawful so it not expedient for one to be drunk, a thief or an adulterer. No one can use this verse to try and get around law.
Not trying to get around Law. The law in itself is perfect, but when it flows in me in my flesh it shows me my impoerfection and need of the Savior Christ
[h=3]1 Corinthians 15:54-56[/h]Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

[SUP]54 [/SUP]So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. [SUP]55 [/SUP]O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? [SUP]56 [/SUP]The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

So I do not try of my own accord to obey Law, rather trust God through me to teach by his Spirit of truth to just Love as God does, shown best through Son by Faith and was led by God his Father our Father, those that God has accepted in this miraculous Mercy through Son to walk as Christ walked in the Spirit of God and none other
Thanks for your posts
 

homwardbound

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2012
18,127
881
113
All alcoholics start with the first drop of wine.
All injuries starts with the moving of the body.
All car accidents start with the first moving car.
All unwholesome talks start with talking.
All sins start with thinking.

The best approach in life is do not handle, do not taste, do not touch.
After the commandments of men
 
Aug 15, 2009
9,745
179
0
If one eats 10 plates of food at a sitting, he is considered a glutton. If he eats one plate, he is a 10% glutton.
I noticed you looked over his commentary posting. Are you going to deal with that, or hope it goes away?
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,396
194
63
I don't base my beliefs on opinion or commentary.

Barclay's

This is a text which has much troubled those who are advocates of total abstinence. It must be remembered that it does not give any man a licence to indulge in drink to excess; it simply approves the use of wine where it may be medicinally helpful. If it does lay down any principle at all, E. F. Brown has well stated it: "It shows that while total abstinence may be recommended as a wise counsel, it is never to be enforced as a religious obligation." Paul is simply saying that there is no virtue in an asceticism which does the body more harm than good.

Albert Barnes

Thus considered, this direction is as worthy to be given by an inspired teacher as it is to counsel a man to pay a proper regard to his health, and not needlessly to throw away his life; compare Mat_10:23. The phrase, “drink no longer water,” is equivalent to, “drink not water only;” see numerous instances in Wetstein. The Greek word here used does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament.
But use a little wine - Mingled with the water - the common method of drinking wine in the East; see Robinson’s Bibliotheca Sacra, 1:512, 513.

Expositor's Bible Commentary

It remains to ascertain the meaning of the curious parenthesis "Be no longer a drinker of water," and its connection with the rest of the passage.
It was probably suggested to St. Paul by the preceding words, "Beware of making yourself responsible for the sins of others. Keep your own life above suspicion." This charge reminds the Apostle that his beloved disciple has been using ill-advised means to do this very thing. Either in order to mark his abhorrence of the drunkenness which was one of the most conspicuous vices of the age, or in order to bring his own body more easily into subjection, Timothy had abandoned the use of wine altogether, in spite of his weak health. St. Paul, therefore, with characteristic affection, takes care that his charge is not misunderstood. In urging his representative to be strictly careful of his own conduct, he does not wish to be understood as encouraging him to give up whatever might be abused or made the basis of a slander, nor yet as approving his rigor in giving up the use of wine. On the contrary, he thinks it a mistake; and he takes this opportunity of telling him so, while it is in his mind. Christ’s ministers have important duties to perform, and have no right to play tricks with their health. We may here repeat, with renewed confidence, that a touch of this kind would never have occurred to a forger. Hence, in order to account for such natural touches as these, those who maintain that these Epistles are a fabrication now resort to the hypothesis that the forger had some genuine letters of St. Paul and worked parts of them into his own productions. It seems to be far more reasonable to believe that St. Paul wrote the whole of them.

John Gill

Drink no longer water,.... Though it was commendable in him to keep under his body, as the apostle did, by abstemious living, and not pamper the flesh and encourage the lusts of it, and so preserve purity and chastity; yet it was proper that he should take care of his health, that it was not impaired by too much severity, and so he be incapable of doing the work of the Lord. And it seems by this, that his long and only use of water for his drink had been prejudicial to his health: wherefore the following advice was judged proper:

but use a little wine; some, by "a little wine", understand not the quantity, but the quality of the wine; a thin, small, weak wine, or wine mixed with water; and so the Ethiopic version renders the words, "drink no more simple water", (or water only,) "but mix a little wine"; though rather the quantity is intended, and which is mentioned. Not as though there was any danger of Timothy's running into an excess of drinking; but for the sake of others, lest they should abuse such a direction, to indulge themselves in an excessive way; and chiefly to prevent the scoffs of profane persons; who otherwise would have insinuated that the apostle indulged intemperance and excess: whereas this advice to the use of wine, was not for pleasure, and for the satisfying of the flesh, but for health,

Matthew Henry

2. He charges him to take care of his health: Drink no longer water, etc. It seems Timothy was a mortified man to the pleasures of sense; he drank water, and he was a man of no strong constitution of body, and for this reason Paul advises him to use wine for the helping of his stomach and the recruiting of his nature. Observe, It is a little wine, for ministers must not be given to much wine; so much as may be for the health of the body, not so as to distemper it, for God has made wine to rejoice man's heart.

Now take your pick.
 
Aug 15, 2009
9,745
179
0
If you are offended Stephen or any immature Christian...grow up and be mature...
If you will not grow up...
the same way those who drink have a choice not to drink
You also have a choice to go home...
It amazes me how people pick & choose out of the posts. I wonder if they do their Bibles that way?

I would consider those that take our posts out of context for their personal gain bad enough to do the scriptures as well.

The Bible speaks loud & clear about offenses, yet nobody wants to talk about it.

[HR][/HR]Proverbs 18:19 (KJV) [SUP]19 [/SUP]A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city: and their contentions are like the bars of a castle.
[HR][/HR]Matthew 18:6 (KJV) [SUP]6 [/SUP]But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
[HR][/HR]Romans 14:21 (KJV) [SUP]21 [/SUP]It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
[HR][/HR]1 Corinthians 8:13 (KJV) [SUP]13 [/SUP]Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
[HR][/HR]2 Corinthians 11:29 (KJV) [SUP]29 [/SUP]Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?

Whenever a person doesn't care about offending, it's because the love of God isn't in him.
So you want to bypass all this scripture & tell me & other christians to grow up?

What about those who would rather keep drinking than grow up? If a person cannot put down a bottle for his brother's sake, it's usually because he loves the bottle more than his brother.
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,396
194
63
It amazes me how people pick & choose out of the posts. I wonder if they do their Bibles that way?

I would consider those that take our posts out of context for their personal gain bad enough to do the scriptures as well.


So you want to bypass all this scripture & tell me & other christians to grow up?

What about those who would rather keep drinking than grow up? If a person cannot put down a bottle for his brother's sake, it's usually because he loves the bottle more than his brother.
Are you really offended?
 

watcher2013

Senior Member
Aug 6, 2013
1,931
108
63
It amazes me how people pick & choose out of the posts. I wonder if they do their Bibles that way?

I would consider those that take our posts out of context for their personal gain bad enough to do the scriptures as well.


So you want to bypass all this scripture & tell me & other christians to grow up?

What about those who would rather keep drinking than grow up? If a person cannot put down a bottle for his brother's sake, it's usually because he loves the bottle more than his brother.
Have you really read my Post???
The same way those who drink have CHOICES NOT TO DRINK...
YOU have the CHOICES to GO HOME...