Actscelerate.com

spartanfan

Re: People don't "need" wine......

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3638 **8/19/15 1:38 pm**

Dave Dorsey

Re: People don't "need" wine......

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **8/19/15 2:35 pm**

bonnie knox

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **8/19/15 2:47 pm**

spartanfan

Hilarious

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3638 **8/19/15 3:08 pm**

you are going back to a different era. Move up into the 21st century. In that era (1920-1933) the automobile was fairly young and the number of cars on the road was steadily increasing with each year - thus you would have more people drinking and driving whether it was prohibition or not. Are you trying to say that fewer people died in alcohol related auto accidents in the earlier 1900's than did during prohibition because prohibition increased drunk driving? Do you not realize that the number of vehicles on the roads was dramatically increasing during the age of automation? Do you think I should say more people died of alcohol related horseback and horse drawn carriage accidents before prohibition than during prohibition, proving prohibition made the streets safer? So to say the number of deaths went up as the auto industry was really "taking off" in America then has nothing to do with now. Way more cars on the road during prohibition makes your comparison ridiculous.

Are you saying that we would have more alcohol related auto deaths now if we sold absolutely zero alcoholic beverages in America? Are you saying removing all alcohol from the stores and restaurants today would make the number of alcohol related auto deaths rise today? That is crazy. That's the kind of stuff people do to try to justify their unjustifiable sin.

You guys need to get out of the 1st century in Israel and the Roaring 20's so we can have an intelligent conversation about what's best for our kids and grandkids in the 21st century in America.

Dave Dorsey

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **8/19/15 3:22 pm**

You are really great at beating up straw men, and not so great at responding to what people are actually saying. It should have been obvious to anyone trying to dialogue intelligently and respectfully that I was referring to alcohol-related crimes and deaths, not specifically vehicular alcohol-related deaths.

Additionally, even if I were, your trite response is not logical. Incidence rates do not describe the overall number of times something is occurring, but rather the rate at which it is occurring, and could be compared regardless of the overall number of cars on the road. But that's not what I was talking about.

I'm done discussing this with you.

spartanfan

Crackin' Me Up

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3638 **8/19/15 3:48 pm**

bradfreeman

Re: Hilarious

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **8/19/15 3:55 pm**

krista

Golf Cart Mafia Capo Posts: 2960 **8/19/15 4:04 pm**

bradfreeman

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **8/19/15 4:12 pm**

Nature Boy Florida

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16646 **8/19/15 6:59 pm**

bradfreeman

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **8/19/15 9:18 pm**

Nature Boy Florida

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16646 **8/20/15 11:39 am**

bradfreeman

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **8/20/15 12:44 pm**

Eddie Robbins

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16509 **8/20/15 1:20 pm**

Simple question: Was the wine that Jesus made at the wedding capable of causing someone to get drunk?

bradfreeman

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **8/20/15 5:17 pm**

Eddie Robbins

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16509 **8/20/15 7:03 pm**

If it was, why would He do this knowing the lives that would be lost due to alcoholism? Why would He set such a bad example? No pastors here would have done that, yet, Jesus did? What do they know that Jesus didn't know? Don't you agree that the Word should have been clear on the subject of abstinence?

spartanfan

Really? Another round?

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3638 **8/20/15 8:56 pm**

International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, page 1070: "The most common mixture was wine diluted with water. The ratio of water to wine varied, but the quantity of water was almost always greater than that of wine. The favoured mixture for the Greeks was one part wine and three parts water...During Roman times the ordinary table beverage was wine mixed with water (see Ferguson). Since the water was not completely safe to drink, mixing wine with water had a purifying effect on the water (cf. 1Tim 5:23)."

Different time and different circumstances. You have good water available so you can't justify drinking something that is detrimental to you (proven) when anything beneficial in it can be gained from sources that have nothing detrimental to your health in it. You want to promote health? If you are serious about it then IMHO you're going to have to promote total abstinence.
It''s the wisest choice - absolutely no negatives can possibly be associated with it and some negatives definitely are associated with even a little wine.

Y'all keep going back to Christ's first miracle involving water becoming wine (oinos). It probably was NOT alcoholic.
John 4:46 says, "Once more he visited Cana in Galilee, where he had turned the water into wine (oinos). And there was a certain royal official whose son lay sick at Capernaum." Note the word "oinos." This is the wine that Jesus drank. The New Testament has another word that the Strong's Concordance says is used for alcoholic wine: gleukos. This was wine where the sugars had been allowed to ferment it. Strong's Concordance defines this word for wine as highly intoxicating, fermented wine. On the Day of Pentecost, the disciples are accused of having been drinking too much wine, gleukos, not oinos.

Some, however, made fun of them and said, "They have had too much wine (gleukos)."
Acts 2:13

The question isn’t really"Can a Christian drink alcohol?"
It's "should a Christian drink alcohol?"

There are new studies out from various Doctors and Health Associations linking even light to moderate drinking to a greater increase of cancer. I read a couple just today:

1Department of Nutrition, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA
2Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
3Channing Division of Network Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Correspondence to: E L Giovannucci egiovann@hsph.harvard.edu
Accepted 28 July 2015
Abstract
Objectives To quantify risk of overall cancer across all levels of alcohol consumption among women and men separately, with a focus on light to moderate drinking and never smokers; and assess the influence of drinking patterns on overall cancer risk.
Conclusion
Light to moderate drinking is associated with minimally increased risk of overall cancer. For men who have never smoked, risk of alcohol related cancers is not appreciably increased for light and moderate drinking (up to two drinks per day). However, for women who have never smoked, risk of alcohol related cancers (mainly breast cancer) increases even within the range of up to one alcoholic drink a day."

How about this one from Penn Medicine:
NEWS RELEASE JULY 10, 2014
New Study Shows Drinking Alcohol, Even Light-to-Moderate Amounts, Provides No Heart Health Benefit

If we use your line of reasoning then people will be promoting Mary Jane as a fine Christian alternative to a glass of wine:

New Study Finds Marijuana Safer Than Alcohol Or Tobacco
February 24, 2015 | by Justine Alford:

Using a novel method to measure the risk of mortality associated with the use of various legal and illegal drugs, scientists have confirmed what earlier studies have indicated: alcohol is the deadliest, while marijuana is the least risky.

According to the study, at the individual level, booze presents the highest risk of death, followed by nicotine, cocaine and heroin, suggesting the risks of alcohol consumption have likely been underestimated in the past. Marijuana was found to be significantly less deadly and sat at the other end of the spectrum, in agreement with previous research which has consistently ranked it as the safest recreational drug."

Where will it stop. Will Christians be smoking a joint and drinking a beer in front of their kids and expecting them to not be negatively effected by it? Say no now to all of it - promote abstinence because it's always the better choice.

As proven over and over again - we have other things to drink and we don't need wine/beer/strong drink for medicinal purposes and anything beneficial to be found there can be found in other sources with no threat of the negatives that are definitely found in them.

So it's not "can we?"- it's should we? The honest answer is no. So another round and I'm still standing tall in the winners circle on this one. Undeniably no. You should not. And anyone who promotes it as being the "best" choice for your health is believing and promoting a lie in my opinion. It is not the best - choose the best over what you think is the allowable. Promote abstinence, life and health if you really are interested in helping people live a better/healthier life. I know it's hard to do when you just enjoy the taste of that beverage going down the chute each evening. And it is habit forming too.

To my knowledge, Actscelerate discussions have never resulted in a changed lifestyle. I will not start drinking because of what you guys say about it and you won't quit because of the facts and good old common sense - and the Scriptures. But I appreciate the opportunity to hone my debating skills in case some poor misguided soul ever wants to try to get it out of the Practical Commitments Smile

[/b]

spartanfan

Not a problem...

Golf Cart Mafia Underboss Posts: 3638 **8/21/15 12:16 am**

I just have a problem sitting back while the guys post comment after comment advocating social drinking or the questionable practice of "drinking a little wine for your stomach's sake" now in the 21st century without someone bringing it back into center. When something swings far left - I push it equally hard to the right and get it back into the middle. I just don't want the site to look like it pushes back against the doctrine and practices adopted by our church. I probably shouldn't care and just let it go.

But I always fall for their deliberate attempts to get us teetotalers all riled up over social drinking in the church. Notice how almost all of these threads start and who starts them. It's not guys like me and Ed. But when there's not much action on the board - this topic is brought up and gets the fire flying.

The Matthew 11:18-19 passage is interesting indeed. I would say that I've read numerous interpretations of it. Some understand the passage in the light of Luke 5:33 which says, "And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink?" The often fasting of John and his disciples had been compared and contrasted with the non-fasting of Jesus and disciples. John fasted and didn't eat or drink with the people. Jesus did not come fasting but ate and drank with the people.

In His statement He never really confessed to being a gluttonous man and neither does He confess to having consumed alcoholic beverages. What He does say is that "they say" He was gluttonous (which I doubt He was) and they said that He was a drunkard (which I doubt He was - because having the choice I would think He would choose the non fermented juice).

I don't think that passage can be used to "prove" anything except that He didn't fast when with the people like John did and no matter which way one came preaching the Kingdom to them, in fasting or in fellowshipping at the table - they falsely accused the bearer of the Good News. When I look at the whole body of Scriptures concerning alcohol in the Bible (OT and NT) that seems to be the most consistent interpretation as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks for the kind words. And I don't mind at all you coming to the rescue of our mutual friends - they have taken a pretty good beating and I didn't always fight fair so they needed some help. You're a fine peacemaker. I'll lighten up. Peace Smile

bradfreeman

Re: To Spartanfan

Acts-dicted Posts: 9027 **8/21/15 5:45 am**

Eddie Robbins

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 16509 **8/21/15 6:37 am**

spartanfan, after all the discussions, the best you came up with was the wine that Jesus made "probably" didn't have alcohol. That's a good guess.