Sun., Nov. 28 Adult Bible Study — Alcohol and the Bible, Pt.2

See WINE in ISBE

Throughout the Old Testament, wine is regarded as a necessity of life and in no way as a mere luxury. It was a necessary part of even the simplest meal (Gen. 14:18; Judges 19:19; 1Sam. 16:20; Isa. 55:1, etc.), was an indispensable provision for a fortress (2Chr. 11:11), and was drunk by all classes and all ages, even by the very young (Lam. 2:12; Zech. _9:17). “Wine” is bracketed with “grain” as a basic staple (Gen. 27:28, etc.), and the failure of the wine crop or its destruction by foreigners was a terrible calamity (Deut. 28:30, Deut. 28:39; Isa. 62:8; Isa. 65:21; Mic. 6:15; Zeph. 1:13, etc.). On the other hand, abundance of wine was a special token of God's blessing (Gen. 27:28; Deut. 7:13; Amos 9:14, etc.), and extraordinary abundance would be a token of the Messianic age (Amos 9:13; Joel 3:18; Zech. 9:17). A moderate “gladdening of the heart” through wine was not looked upon as at all reprehensible (2Sam. 13:28; Est. 1:10; Psa. 104:15; Eccl. 9:7; Eccl. 10:19; Zech. 9:15; Zech. 10:7), and while Judges 9:13 represented a mere verbal remnant of a long-obsolete concept, yet the idea contained in the verse was not thought shocking. “Drink offerings,” indeed, were of course a part of the prescribed ritual (Lev. 23:13, etc.; see SACRIFICE), and a store of wine was kept in the temple (tabernacle) to insure their performance (1Chr. 9:29).

There have been and there are godly men on both sides of this question.

The following have all given their approval to the restrained use of intoxicating beverages:

Basil the Great (d. 379) see this Wikipedia article for a fuller treatment of this subject. It is fair and accurate.

Martin Luther: particularly fond of home-brewed beer. The two following quotes are from the linked web site.

"I opposed indulgences and all the papists, but never with force. I simply taught, preached and wrote God's Word; otherwise I did nothing. And while I slept [cf. Mark 4:26-29], or drank Wittenberg beer with my friends Philip and Amsdorf, the Word so greatly weakened the papacy that no prince or emperor ever inflicted such losses upon it."

Above all, Luther was a champion of moderation. In his Sermon on Soberness and Moderation, delivered on May 18, 1539, he noted:

    "It is possible to tolerate a little elevation, when a man takes a drink or two too much after working hard and when he is feeling low. This must be called a frolic. But to sit day and night, pouring it in and pouring it out again, is piggish... all food is a matter of freedom, even a modest drink for one's pleasure. If you do not wish to conduct yourself this way, if you are going to go beyond this and be a born pig and guzzle beer and wine, then, if this cannot be stopped by the rulers, you must know that you cannot be saved. For God will not admit such piggish drinkers into the kingdom of heaven [cf. Gal. 5:19-21]... If you are tired and downhearted, take a drink; but this does not mean being a pig and doing nothing but gorging and swilling... You should be moderate and sober; this means that we should not be drunken, though we may be exhilarated."

John Calvin liked to spend private moments on Lake Geneva while reading scripture along with drinking red wine.

He says in a sermon on Deuteronomy 14:26, (And you shall bestow that money for whatsoever your soul lusts after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever your soul desires: and you shall eat there before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice, and your household.): “When we drink wine or strong drink, we drink in the audience of the heavenly Vintner who expects us to enjoy his gifts.”

Puritans, Pilgrims, and Evangelists"

(From Wikipedia) As the Pilgrims set out for America, they brought a considerable amount of alcohol with them for the voyage (more than 28,617 liters = 7,560 gallons),[115] and once settled, they served alcohol at "virtually all functions, including ordinations, funerals, and regular Sabbath meals."[116] M. E. Lender summarizes the "colonists had assimilated alcohol use, based on Old World patterns, into their community lifestyles" and that "[l]ocal brewing began almost as soon as the colonists were safely ashore."[117] Increase Mather, a prominent colonial clergyman and president of Harvard, expressed the common view in a sermon against drunkenness: "Drink is in itself a good creature of God, and to be received with thankfulness, but the abuse of drink is from Satan; the wine is from God, but the drunkard is from the Devil."[118] This Old World attitude is likewise found among the early Methodists (John and Charles Wesley, George Whitefield, Adam Clarke,[119] Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury) and Baptists (John Gill and John Bunyan).

John Wesley

Wine...is one of the noblest cordials in nature.

He deplored distilled liquors, however, for general consumption.

God

Eccl. 9:7;

Eccl. 10:19

Jesus

Luke 7:34 Jesus was not known as a teetotaler. He apparently was open about drinking wine. He imbibed enough that his enemies called him a drunkard, even though he was abstemious in both eating and drinking.

The early followers of the risen Christ: Acts 2:13-15 – If Peter had been an American fundamentalist, he would have answered, “Are you kidding? We don’t even drink!” Instead, he answers that it was really too early to be bombed.

Church leaders:1Tim. 3:3; 1Tim 3:8; 1Tim 5:23; Titus 1:7; Titus2:3

1Peter 4:3 - no condemnation of drinking, but of excess

Rev. 6:6

Paul: 1Cor. 11:21-22 Note: Paul condemns the Corinthians for being drunk at their love feasts in which they observed the Lord’s Table. He does not condemn their drinking, but tells them to do it at home. Also note that wine here has to be more than diluted with water stuff, or they would have had exploding bladders.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How shall we then live?

Eph. 5:18 — We are not to be drunk with wine but we are to be filled with the Spirit. This is a two-sided command. To obey the one without obeying the other is still disobedience and sin. If we are filled with the Spirit (which will be obvious by demonstration of the behaviors in verses 19-21) we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh and the drinking of alcoholic beverage will not lead to over-indulgence. One aspect of the fruit of the Spirit is self-control (NASB) or temperance (KJV).

Col. 3:1-4 Our goal in life is to be preparing for our entrance into eternal life. Anything that impedes or impairs our journey there must be jettisoned. Anything that impedes or impairs another’s journey there must be jettisoned.

Rom_14:1-5; Rom_14:7; Rom_14:12-14; Rom_14:15-23

These verses specifically allow the drinking of wine … IF.

If you believe drinking alcoholic beverages is wrong, do not do it. It is sin for you.

If you believe drinking alcoholic beverages may be wrong, do not do it. It is sin for you.

If you believe drinking alcoholic beverages is or may be wrong, keep your views to yourself. It is not your business to judge others who believe contrary to you in this matter.

If you believe drinking alcohol is permissible, do not do it if it will cause another to sin or in any other way hurt them.

If you drink or if you abstain, do it unto the Lord and with his glory in mind.

Sun., Nov. 21 Adult Bible Study — Alcohol and the Bible, Pt. 1

John 2:1-11 — Jesus turned water into wine.

"Wine" in the Bible is wine. It is not grape juice.

These verses prove that wine in the Bible was intoxicating and alcoholic. Grape juice does not cause drunkenness.

Gen. 9:20-21 — first mention of wine; no condemnation of drinking

1Sam. 1:14  Hannah accused by Eli of being drunk. Hannah did not respond that “I don’t drink,” but “I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink.”

1Sam. 25:36-37  Nabal drunk

Job 32:19  speaks of the fermentation process

Psa. 104:15 wine making the heart of man glad, not something you could say about grape juice.

Mat.9:17 speaks of the fermentation process

Eph. 5:18 do not be drunk with wine; cannot apply to grape juice.

So it was wine that Jesus made, not grape juice. (Teetotalers would have you believe it was).

That it was alcoholic wine is deduced from the comments made about it. (v. 10) 

Does this authorize us to drink wine?

The following verses are used by Norman L. Geisler to support his contention that the Bible condemns intoxicating drinks. (The reader must not conclude that drinking of intoxicating beverages is being encouraged. However, truth must always be taught, even when it disagrees with our prejudices).

Pro. 20:1  Note: this verse is cautionary, not prohibitive.

Pro. 23:31-32  Note: this must be taken in the context of the preceding two verses.

Pro. 31:6  (along with verse 7) Note: This is prescriptive rather than proscriptive.

Isa. 5:11  Note: this is descriptive of addicts. It is not a proscription.

Isa. 28:7  "they are swallowed up of wine" = wino

Isa. 56:12  Again, not a proscription, but a description of the moral degeneracy of spiritual leadership.

Mic. 2:11  This was Jewry's version of the health and wealth gospel.

Lev. 10:9  This prohibition is limited and implies it was rightful for them to drink wine and strong drink at other times.

Num. 6:2-3  This prohibition was limited to those who took the vow of a Nazarite. It also prohibits their eating grapes and raisins. If this is a blanket proscription, it would be a sin for you to eat grapes, grape leaves, and raisins.

Deu.29:6  Not only did they not drink wine but they did not eat bread. By this logic, eating bread is also forbidden. This speaks of God's miraculous provision during the past 40 years by which he sustained them with food and drink. A classic case of scripture twisting.

CONCLUSION: Not one of these passages condemns the use of wine or of strong drink.

Non-biblical reasons to not drink:

   Alcohol is addictive.

   Alcohol affects your thought processes, often causing you to do stupid and embarrassing things.

   Alcohol affects almost every organ in the body.

   Alcohol can ruin even the saintliest saint (Noah)

   Alcohol does more damage than illicit drugs

   Money spent on alcohol could be better used elsewhere, such as supporting missionary endeavors, and advancing kingdom work.

Sun., Oct. 31 Bible Class Notes — John 2:1-11

John 2:1-11  And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: (2) And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. (3) And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. (4) Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. (5) His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. (6) And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. (7) Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. (8) And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. (9) When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, (10) And saith unto him, 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. (11) This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

Introduction: In these few verses Christ, by his actions, commends marriage, celebration, and the rightful use of wine in addition to demonstrating the power of God in his first miracle.

Verse 1: And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:

The third day: either from his discourse with Nathaniel (John 1:43) or of the marriage feast.

Jewish wedding feasts lasted seven to eight days.

Two Canas, therefore the mention of Galilee, about 6 mi. from Nazareth.

Verse 2: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.

Andrew, and the other disciple, that followed Jesus, and Simon Peter, and Philip, and Nathanael

Verse 3: And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.

The wine either had run out or was running out.

Embarrassment to the host

An additional six people did not make things any better.

Mary had as yet seen no miracles, so why did she put Jesus on the spot?

Verse 4: Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

Use of woman vs. mother — not a disrespectful address

“Woman, what have I to do with thee?” — What is that between us? It is not our responsibility to provide the food and wine.

“mine hour is not yet come.” — to perform miracles

Verse 6: And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.

Waterpots of stone. Many fragments of clay pots existed into recent history; none of stone.

Stone pots were used for purification because they were less susceptible to contamination

1 firkin = 8.5 to 9 gal. These pots would hold about 20 gal + or -.

Verses 7-9: No actions of Jesus are recorded. The liquid went in as water and came out as wine.

This miracle was done by the will of God alone. Jesus willed it and it happened.

Verse 10: And saith unto him, 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.

This description proves the wine was wine and not grape juice.

Good wine is always served first. Once the taste buds have had sufficient alcohol to become somewhat dulled, the lesser quality wine is served and most will not know the difference.

This wine was so good that it was immediately noticeable.

“well drunk” ≠ to being drunk, but to having imbibed enough to have destroyed “the keenness of their taste” (Barnes).

“worse” = inferior

“good wine” refers to quality, not to alcoholic content.

Verse 11: This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

This is Jesus’ first miracle. Fantastic stories (such as found in the Gospel of Thomas) of childhood miracles are complete fabrications and insulting to the dignity of the Savior.

Only God could have performed this miracle.

The disciples faith was cemented and confirmed.

Conclusion:

Jesus was sociable.

Jesus approved of marriage, finding it honorable.

Jesus was not an ascetic, but approved of the festivities of the wedding.

Jesus was gracious in performing this miracle.

The turning of water into wine was a “sign” that Jesus was truly the Messiah, the Son of God.

NEXT SUNDAY: Some thoughts on marriage and some things you can do to foster a long and happy marriage.

Sunday 11/14: Some thoughts on the use on non-use of alcohol.

The Nature of Man

Why do so many preachers and Bible teachers get it wrong when it comes to discussing the nature of man? What kind of nature does a man (or a woman) have? The answer is quite simple: a human nature. What else would you expect? Listen to enough contemporary preachers and teachers and you will soon hear that we do not have a human nature but we have a “sin nature.” In fact, one does not have to go far to see that. A blog I recently read entitled "The True Nature of Man." says: “First, I want to suggest that man, all of us are born in sin. That is with a sin nature... .”

Man does not have a sin nature, he has a human nature. Since Adam's lapse from grace our human nature has been corrupted, but it is still a human nature.

Why am I so particular about this? The answer is quite simple: if we had a sin nature than we would not be responsible for our sin. Dogs, which have a canine nature, sniff each other because that is what they do by nature. Humans that engage in such behavior are considered crazy. Birds fly by nature, cows moo by nature, kangaroos hop by nature. Sinning, however, is contrary to our nature. We were not made to sin and we shall be held accountable for our sin.

When God made Adam and Eve he created them in his own image. That is our nature. Before Adam bit into that forbidden fruit he knew no sin but was capable of it. Once having eaten, his human nature was taken captive by sin. In his post-Fall condition he could do nothing but sin. He did not lose his human nature, but sin entered in and has held him and us captive ever since. Our release from that bondage is only effected by the new birth in Jesus Christ.

I could spend a lot of time and space on this subject. I only want to provoke you into reconsidering the popular theology of a sin nature to see that it is an unscriptural and unbiblical term. There are two basic reasons for challenging the "sin nature" teaching:

• It puts the saving work of Christ Jesus in question. If man has a sin nature, what kind of nature then did Jesus Christ have? Is he not fully man?

• The Scriptures do not teach that man has a sin nature. You will find some translations (the New International Version, for instance) using the expression “sinful nature,” but that is an adjective modifying a noun. Our natures are sinful and that is a problem. That is the problem the new birth fixes. “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:” (Romans 8:3).

The problem of sin in its theoretical sense has plagued and divided man for ages. How do we explain sin in its operations? What makes us sin? Why do we sin? All these are questions that have answers but that does not mean the answers are easy to ascertain. Unfortunately, in the desire to be as simple as possible, erroneous explanations like having a sin nature have been taught as truth. The end result of such thinking manifests itself in the Alcoholics Anonymous statement that “I admit I am an alcoholic and am powerless to help myself,” a statement that is repeated as a mantra long after a person has dried out. If one is an alcoholic either by virtue of supposed disease or nature, than one has a good excuse for drinking. If an alcoholic is powerless to help himself, why then is he held accountable for being an alcoholic? This thinking can fit any sinful behavior.

The Christian has a renewed nature, as it says in Colossians 3:10: “And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:” When we sin, as we all-too-often do, we do not sin by nature. There is not one reason or excuse a Christian can give for sinning. So, if we do not sin by nature, why then do we sin? That may be the subject of another blog but a concise answer is given by St. James in his epistle: “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death” (James 1:14-15).

This may seem to be an inconsequential matter to you, but error can never be inconsequential. In this case, a proper understanding of why we sin and sin's relationship to our nature, has a great deal to do with our ability to live victorious Christian lives.