Is it a SIN???

A free-wheeling forum for discussion of Christian issues.

Moderators: Pastor Gary, The J2 Mod Squad

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 6:01 am

Ok, that's fair. But whoever wrote that ridiculous explanation needs to be aware that the Master of Ceremonies who was actually AT the feast, directly contradicts him.

and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper wine when the guests are drunk. You have kept the good wine until now!”

Who do you think was more familiar with their customs? The Steward of the Feast or the guy that wrote that asinine explanation?

dawgs10
The 1,000 Club
Posts: 1094
Joined: July 2nd, 2007, 3:42 pm
Location: USA,Georgia

Postby dawgs10 » January 9th, 2010, 6:30 am

Russell Roberts wrote:Ok, that's fair. But whoever wrote that ridiculous explanation needs to be aware that the Master of Ceremonies who was actually AT the feast, directly contradicts him.

and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper wine when the guests are drunk. You have kept the good wine until now!”

Who do you think was more familiar with their customs? The Steward of the Feast or the guy that wrote that asinine explanation?


the correct interpretation would be and after everyone had drunk freely. not, and after everyone was drunk. again i can drink something with a trace of alcohol and not get drunk for a long period of time.

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 6:42 am

Want to take a look at the Greek text?

User avatar
beckrl
Woohoo!
Posts: 1229
Joined: September 2nd, 2008, 12:17 pm
Location: USA,SouthCarolina

Postby beckrl » January 9th, 2010, 6:42 am

dawgs10 :applaud:
You bring many vaild point to this discussion.

The best would be served first then as it continues they would water down the wine. but as we see Christ maded the best wine last.
I take that to mean it wasn't water down. I don't think that was a matter of alcohol if it was just maded.

2 cents.
Last edited by beckrl on January 9th, 2010, 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 6:44 am

I copied and pasted this but I would be interested in hearing your argument against it.

Now I am looking all of this up in the original greek text so as to try and get the true meaning here. Those words come from a greek word "methusthosin". The greek root word here is "methuo". In Vines Expository Dictionary the first translation is-"to be drunk, is used in John 2:10 in the Passive Voice, and is translated in the P.V.,"have drunk freely"; A.V. "have well drunk". Vines then goes on to clarify the matter by again translating the greek root word "mathuo" and defining it-"signifies to be drunk with wine". It is used to indicate becoming intoxicated in Matt 24:49; Acts 2:15; 1 Cor 11:21; 1 Thess 5:7. The Passive Voice used above indicates that the men who were intoxicated (drunk) were becoming more so.

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 6:46 am

I'm wondering why Paul didn't want Timothy to appoint leaders who drank too much Welch's also. Could you explain that?

dawgs10
The 1,000 Club
Posts: 1094
Joined: July 2nd, 2007, 3:42 pm
Location: USA,Georgia

Postby dawgs10 » January 9th, 2010, 7:13 am

Russell Roberts wrote:Want to take a look at the Greek text?


John 2:10 Greek Study Bible (Apostolic/Interlinear) states the word Methusthosin means They drank much. it does not say anything about being drunk.

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 7:29 am

The implication is that they were getting drunk.

What would this have to do with important people visiting the feast?

Or have you abandoned that argument?

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 7:34 am

The length that people like you go to in order to find sin where there is none will never cease to amaze me. It hasn't yet anyhow. You will twist scripture to fit your doctrine instead of deriving meaning from the text and forming your doctrine around that.

If you don't want to drink, don't. But don't try to twist the bible in order to support your personal conviction.

dawgs10
The 1,000 Club
Posts: 1094
Joined: July 2nd, 2007, 3:42 pm
Location: USA,Georgia

Postby dawgs10 » January 9th, 2010, 7:42 am

Russell Roberts wrote:The length that people like you go to in order to find sin where there is none will never cease to amaze me. It hasn't yet anyhow. You will twist scripture to fit your doctrine instead of deriving meaning from the text and forming your doctrine around that.

If you don't want to drink, don't. But don't try to twist the bible in order to support your personal conviction.


Also, the Genevieve study Bible says this in commentary, To be drunken, does not always refer to being drunk in the evil sense in the Hebrew language, but signifies an abundant plentiful use of wine. (alcoholic or not.)
i am not leaving my original stance only saying that your interpretation is wide open for debate.

dawgs10
The 1,000 Club
Posts: 1094
Joined: July 2nd, 2007, 3:42 pm
Location: USA,Georgia

Postby dawgs10 » January 9th, 2010, 7:45 am

Russell Roberts wrote:The implication is that they were getting drunk.

What would this have to do with important people visiting the feast?

Or have you abandoned that argument?


the implication is not that they were getting drunk. it is implying they were drinking alot of what they had. watered down grape juice with a small amount of alcohol to purify the drink.

i can drink grape juice all day and not get drunk. therefore the implication is grape juice must not have alcohol or not enough to make me drunk.
Last edited by dawgs10 on January 9th, 2010, 8:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Poimen
What's next?
Posts: 3403
Joined: February 10th, 2003, 1:49 pm
Location: USA, Alabama

Postby Poimen » January 9th, 2010, 7:45 am

Russell Roberts wrote:I copied and pasted this but I would be interested in hearing your argument against it.

Now I am looking all of this up in the original greek text so as to try and get the true meaning here. Those words come from a greek word "methusthosin". The greek root word here is "methuo". In Vines Expository Dictionary the first translation is-"to be drunk, is used in John 2:10 in the Passive Voice, and is translated in the P.V.,"have drunk freely"; A.V. "have well drunk". Vines then goes on to clarify the matter by again translating the greek root word "mathuo" and defining it-"signifies to be drunk with wine". It is used to indicate becoming intoxicated in Matt 24:49; Acts 2:15; 1 Cor 11:21; 1 Thess 5:7. The Passive Voice used above indicates that the men who were intoxicated (drunk) were becoming more so.



Assuming you are correct on the meaning of "well drunk", and assuming Christ did indeed make fermented wine (as you intimate), then Christ became a participator in the sin of drunkenness & is proven a false prophet and a fake.

I'll keep the sinless son of God. You can have the wine-bibbing homie. ;-) :P
Last edited by Poimen on January 9th, 2010, 8:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

"I wish a buck was still silver, it was back when the country was strong." -- The Hag

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 8:00 am

Poimen do you have some kind of radar or something? :lol:

BTW, the Pharisees called him a winebibber. I wonder why?

Who is playing what role here Christopher?

User avatar
Poimen
What's next?
Posts: 3403
Joined: February 10th, 2003, 1:49 pm
Location: USA, Alabama

Postby Poimen » January 9th, 2010, 8:06 am

Russell Roberts wrote:Poimen do you have some kind of radar or something? :lol:

BTW, the Pharisees called him a winebibber. I wonder why?

Who is playing what role here Christopher?


I'm not calling him a winebibber. I'm saying to make Christ complicate in a drunken party is to make Him a winebibber and the minister of sin. Whatever one's views on the permissibleness of alcohol, when that view contradicts the teaching on the nature and person of Christ it is patently wrong.
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

"I wish a buck was still silver, it was back when the country was strong." -- The Hag

User avatar
Russell Roberts
Hey, hey, hey
Posts: 1617
Joined: September 30th, 2008, 1:19 pm
Location: USA,Mississippi
Contact:

Postby Russell Roberts » January 9th, 2010, 8:08 am

Poimen,

I guess then, since God equipped us with certain anatomical features that might be misused, he is complicit with sin? Give me a break brother.


Return to “Jude 2 General Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

cron

Login  •  Register