WHY WHINE ABOUT WINE, or BE a BEAR ABOUT BEER?

[StanJ]

Did you like the alliteration in my title?

This is always a goody that brings out distinct battle lines.
Did you know there are denominations that agree on EVERYTHING, except wine & beer?
What is it that makes so many Christians go on a self righteous binge about this issue?
Seems it is ONLY a North American phenomina?

Along with Paul, I agree with 'All things in moderation'.

 

[brakelite]

Before I was converted 40 years ago, as a young man enjoying the world's offerings and pleasures, beer, wine, and a few other substances even more natural than those two, played a dominant role in my life. But again, that was before I was converted. Raised Catholic however, I was fully used to priests and laymen imbibing in said refreshments on a regular, very regular, basis. There was even a tavern in our town well known as the Marist Rugby clubs second headquarters. I and many of my friends, in fact all of my friends, were regular patrons. Again, before I was converted. And converted I was. I became a new person when born again. The former lifestyle simply fell away. It died. Those former habits and substances no longer had any attraction.
A person took their place. My joy, my pleasure, my delight, was no longer to be found in the things of this world. Jesus became Lord of my life, and He decided those things were superfluous to requirements. He took them away, and I have never felt the need or desire for them since. I have no biblical reference for that...no deep spiritual existential revelation concerning their evil...no theological template to guide the unwary...no reference to any philosophical doctor's paper on the subject to convince of the veracity or otherwise of the goodness or badness of alcohol or any other substance be it weed or tobacco.
All I can offer is the real life testimony of one whose God said to him, Brendan, that stuff ain't for you. I can take it all away. Is that what you would like? Yes please Lord, if that is what you think is best. Done.

 

[lforrest]

I don't think the "take all things in moderation" proverb from the bible; At least not directly. Some things are best left alone completely.

As for alcohol my view is its OK to drink a little, but if that is a temptation it would be wise to have none.

As for a hard fast rule for people in the congregation not to drink anything, I think that is stupid. I've seen people offended because of the mention of wine in church before. That kind of response to offending someone's religious dogmas is a big turnoff to me.

 

[Barrd]

I guess if you've lost someone to a drunk driver, as I have, you might be a bit biased against alcohol, as I am. I'm sure no one who knows me will be surprised that I am a member of MADD...
If it were strictly up to me, alcohol would still be illegal.
It's a no-brainer. If you're going to drink, fine. Go ahead and poison yourself, it's your life and your body. But stay the bloody blazes out from behind the wheel. One stupid mistake, and you can destroy a life...or many lives. You might even destroy your own life...

 

[StanJ]

Before I was converted 40 years ago, as a young man enjoying the world's offerings and pleasures, beer, wine, and a few other substances even more natural than those two, played a dominant role in my life. But again, that was before I was converted. Raised Catholic however, I was fully used to priests and laymen imbibing in said refreshments on a regular, very regular, basis. There was even a tavern in our town well known as the Marist Rugby clubs second headquarters. I and many of my friends, in fact all of my friends, were regular patrons. Again, before I was converted. And converted I was. I became a new person when born again. The former lifestyle simply fell away. It died. Those former habits and substances no longer had any attraction.
A person took their place. My joy, my pleasure, my delight, was no longer to be found in the things of this world. Jesus became Lord of my life, and He decided those things were superfluous to requirements. He took them away, and I have never felt the need or desire for them since. I have no biblical reference for that...no deep spiritual existential revelation concerning their evil...no theological template to guide the unwary...no reference to any philosophical doctor's paper on the subject to convince of the veracity or otherwise of the goodness or badness of alcohol or any other substance be it weed or tobacco.
All I can offer is the real life testimony of one whose God said to him, Brendan, that stuff ain't for you. I can take it all away. Is that what you would like? Yes please Lord, if that is what you think is best. Done.

And indeed when ones lifestyle is defined by their excesses, then usually all of that stuff is taken away. Personally I never smoked pot after I was saved, but never drank beer or wine before I was saved. I'm still not a big fan of beer and don't drink it but rarely. Red wine is enjoyable to me but again in moderation and never more than once a month. Don't like white wine.

 

[StanJ]

I don't think the "take all things in moderation" proverb from the bible; At least not directly. Some things are best left alone completely.
As for alcohol my view is its OK to drink a little, but if that is a temptation it would be wise to have none.
As for a hard fast rule for people in the congregation not to drink anything, I think that is stupid. I've seen people offended because of the mention of wine in church before. That kind of response to offending someone's religious dogmas is a big turnoff to me.

Paul dealt with a similar situation, although it was totally about immaturity in Christ as opposed to those who were much more free to eat meat sacrificed to idols. I know it's not an ideal comparison, but I'm only use it as an example of how we should be careful to not brag about out freedoms in Christ.
Personally, I have experienced negative repercusons in flaunting my freedoms at others that caused them to do things they should not have, so by no means am I advocating anyone here who does not have the freedom in faith go against their concious, because whatever is NOT of faith, to that oerson, it is sim.

 

[StanJ]

I guess if you've lost someone to a drunk driver, as I have, you might be a bit biased against alcohol, as I am. I'm sure no one who knows me will be surprised that I am a member of MADD...
If it were strictly up to me, alcohol would still be illegal.
It's a no-brainer. If you're going to drink, fine. Go ahead and poison yourself, it's your life and your body. But stay the bloody blazes out from behind the wheel. One stupid mistake, and you can destroy a life...or many lives. You might even destroy your own life...

I completely understand Barrd. Both my father and father-in-law were alcoholics. It killed my father when he was 40, but my father-in-law was saved when he was 40 and stopped. He is now 80 and still pastors seniors and shut-ins.I really am trying to deal with the social aspects of this when it comes to acceptability with the church. The negative aspects are very evident, and must be dealt with regardless if one is a believer or not.

 

[Barrd]

I completely understand Barrd. Both my father and father-in-law were alcoholics. It killed my father when he was 40, but my father-in-law was saved when he was 40 and stopped. He is now 80 and still pastors seniors and shut-ins.I really am trying to deal with the social aspects of this when it comes to acceptability with the church. The negative aspects are very evident, and must be dealt with regardless if one is a believer or not.

Well, thank you for that, Stan.
I am so sorry to hear about your Dad. 40 seems so young...much too young to die, especially of something so completely stupid as alchoholism.
Kudos to your father-in-law, though. It's a very hard habit to quit, or so I'm told.

My natural instincts tell me that it should not be acceptable with the church at all. But I do recognize my own bias, and I do want to be fair.
Jesus did turn water into wine for a wedding. But I'm pretty sure that no one got slobbering drunk at that wedding, you know? Nobody vomited down the bride's dress, nobody tried to get his hand inside the bride's maid's dress, nobody tried to pinch her Momma's behind, nobody insulted the host, nobody got aggressive and wanted to fight...and above all, nobody was killed by an out of control donkey cart because the driver was drunk. No family had to lose their husband and father because some idiot couldn't hold his liquor.

See, that's the problem, Stan...all of these things tend to happen when people abuse alcohol. And that is why the church should not condone it.

 

[StanJ]

I am so sorry to hear about your Dad. 40 seems so young...much too young to die, especially of something so completely stupid as alchoholism.
Kudos to your father-in-law, though. It's a very hard habit to quit, or so I'm told.

It's been longer as he was old at the time, and I always think about all the life I've had that he didn't. My father-in-law could never replace him but he has been a blessing in his own right. Just to be clear, alcoholism is a disease, not a habit. Drunk drivers are not always alcoholics, just stupid in not being responsible to act responsibly.

My natural instincts tell me that it should not be acceptable with the church at all. But I do recognize my own bias, and I do want to be fair.
Jesus did turn water into wine for a wedding. But I'm pretty sure that no one got slobbering drunk at that wedding, you know? Nobody vomited down the bride's dress, nobody tried to get his hand inside the bride's maid's dress, nobody tried to pinch her Momma's behind, nobody insulted the host, nobody got aggressive and wanted to fight...and above all, nobody was killed by an out of control donkey cart because the driver was drunk. No family had to lose their husband and father because some idiot couldn't hold his liquor.

You would have actually had to be there Barrd, but bottom line with Jesus turning the water into wine at the wedding was that the guest said it was the 'best' wine and kind of chastised the Father of the bride for saving it until last. The fact that the NT doesn't give us a blow by blow / play by play , doesn't mean none of that happened, it just isn't recorded, for obvious reasons.

See, that's the problem, Stan...all of these things tend to happen when people abuse alcohol. And that is why the church should not condone it.

Many bad things happen as a result of abuse Barrd, but we are called to be moderate in all things, which BTW, includes eating, which probably kills a lot more Christians than alcohol does. It almost killed me, but, God is gracious!!!

 

[Barrd]

It's been longer as he was old at the time, and I always think about all the life I've had that he didn't. My father-in-law could never replace him but he has been a blessing in his own right. Just to be clear, alcoholism is a disease, not a habit. Drunk drivers are not always alcoholics, just stupid in not being responsible to act responsibly.

Yes, Stan, I do realize that alcoholism is a disease. But it can be overcome, by someone who is determined enough.
But whether one has the disease called alcholholism, or not, drinking and driving is both stupid and irresponsible.

You would have actually had to be there Barrd, but bottom line with Jesus turning the water into wine at the wedding was that the guest said it was the 'best' wine and kind of chastised the Father of the bride for saving it until last. The fact that the NT doesn't give us a blow by blow / play by play , doesn't mean none of that happened, it just isn't recorded, for obvious reasons.

I always took that remark about it being the "best" wine as having to do with the taste of it rather than its alcohol content. Of course, as you say, I wasn't there...I can only imagine. I suspect that the wine Jesus provided would be a delicate, slightly sweet wine...maybe even bubbly, like champagne...
And I still believe that everyone at that wedding behaved themselves in a seemly manner. Remember, these were Jesus' mother's friends. And Jesus did this "first miracle" according to the Bible, at her request. I suppose I could be wrong, as you say, I wasn't there...but I think it's safe to say that I'm probably right...at least this once

Many bad things happen as a result of abuse Barrd, but we are called to be moderate in all things, which BTW, includes eating, which probably kills a lot more Christians than alcohol does. It almost killed me, but, God is gracious!!!

Good point, Stan!
Guess I need to get back on my diet, too! I'm not diabetic, for which I am grateful...but I do like to eat, and I am a fabulous cook...
opcorn: opcorn: opcorn: opcorn: opcorn: YUMMMMM!

 

[StanJ]

Yes, Stan, I do realize that alcoholism is a disease. But it can be overcome, by someone who is determined enough.
But whether one has the disease called alcholholism, or not, drinking and driving is both stupid and irresponsible.

But your response shows you think it is a matter of will, when it isn't. God may deliver some, but most have to go through programs like AA to even have a shot at living with it, because a recovering alcoholic is always an alcoholic.
There is no dispute that D & D is wrong. That is not the issue here.

I always took that remark about it being the "best" wine as having to do with the taste of it rather than its alcohol content. Of course, as you say, I wasn't there...I can only imagine. I suspect that the wine Jesus provided would be a delicate, slightly sweet wine...maybe even bubbly, like champagne...
And I still believe that everyone at that wedding behaved themselves in a seemly manner. Remember, these were Jesus' mother's friends. And Jesus did this "first miracle" according to the Bible, at her request. I suppose I could be wrong, as you say, I wasn't there...but I think it's safe to say that I'm probably right...at least this once.

Wine is wine...it all has alcoholic content, it just doesn't always taste the same. Today, all red wine is 11.5% alcohol. Back then nobody knows for sure.
A normal Jewish wedding was not what you may encounter today in a Christian wedding. Your wishful thinking is NOT consistent with what we know today.
Alcohol usually loosens inhibitions, it does NOT make them more polite.

 

[Barrd]

But your response shows you think it is a matter of will, when it isn't. God may deliver some, but most have to go through programs like AA to even have a shot at living with it, because a recovering alcoholic is always an alcoholic.
There is no dispute that D & D is wrong. That is not the issue here.

It isn't as if I've never known an alcoholic, Stan. I've known a few, actually. And I know what they go through. I don't think anyone ever puts that bottle down without God's help. Even with AA, and a supportive family, and a good church, and all the support a person could possibly have, it is impossible for some to cope. God isn't going to deliver someone who does not wish to be delivered. I do understand what you are trying to tell me...yet, in a way, it is a matter of will. The person has to be strong, and they have to want to be sober. They have to love themselves enough to face another sober day...every day. It takes guts and determination...

Anyone with half a brain knows that driving and drinking is stupid and irresponsible. But there it is...evidently, there are quite a few Americans who don't have half a brain...

Wine is wine...it all has alcoholic content, it just doesn't always taste the same.

:blink: I'm not quite as innocent as all that, Stan. I have drunk wine before.

Today, all red wine is 11.5% alcohol. Back then nobody knows for sure.

If you put fresh grape juice into a canteen made of animal skin, and let it sit in the desert sun for a bit, how long will it take for it to ferment? Just wondering...
I seem to remember reading somewhere that only a Scythian or a barbarian would drink wine unmixed with water...that might make a difference, yeah?

A normal Jewish wedding was not what you may encounter today in a Christian wedding.

First of all, I've been to a few Jewish weddings.
And second...what was "normal" when Jesus was around?

Your wishful thinking is NOT consistent with what we know today.

So, we know today that people got pee-on-themselves drunk at the wedding in Cana?
No one told me...

Alcohol usually loosens inhibitions, it does NOT make them more polite.

Have you ever met anyone who is a "happy drunk"? Someone who just wants to dance, and sing, and laugh, and be happy?

Loosening the inhibitions doesn't necessarily mean that people have to become monsters. It just means that the drunk will just be him or herself for a change, instead of hiding behind a "politically correct" wall of fake "niceness".
But some folks really are nice... <_<

 

[StanJ]

I don't think anyone ever puts that bottle down without God's help. Even with AA, and a supportive family, and a good church, and all the support a person could possibly have, it is impossible for some to cope. God isn't going to deliver someone who does not wish to be delivered. I do understand what you are trying to tell me...yet, in a way, it is a matter of will. The person has to be strong, and they have to want to be sober. They have to love themselves enough to face another sober day...every day. It takes guts and determination...

Exactly, and AA pushes that point. God does what's best for us, He knows best. As Paul taught in 2 Cor 12:9-10, it is when we are weakest that we are strongest in Him. You seem to be describing John Wayne. Sorry but he was never a Christian role model.

Anyone with half a brain knows that driving and drinking is stupid and irresponsible. But there it is...evidently, there are quite a few Americans who don't have half a brain...

And those with a full set of faculties Barrd. It's not just stupid people that drink and drive. Many of them think they are way superior than the regular Joe.

If you put fresh grape juice into a canteen made of animal skin, and let it sit in the desert sun for a bit, how long will it take for it to ferment? Just wondering...
I seem to remember reading somewhere that only a Scythian or a barbarian would drink wine unmixed with water...that might make a difference, yeah?

Yeh, you try that and lemme know how it works out for you.

First of all, I've been to a few Jewish weddings.
And second...what was "normal" when Jesus was around?

Of course you have, but my point WAS, you don't KNOW what went on, so opinion doesn't mean a thing except to support your own uninformed POV.

So, we know today that people got pee-on-themselves drunk at the wedding in Cana?
No one told me...

I just made the point that nobody does, but human nature being what it us, it is far more likely. Of course you not admitting to it with all this deflection doesn't really carry ANY weight.

Have you ever met anyone who is a "happy drunk"? Someone who just wants to dance, and sing, and laugh, and be happy?

Yes I have, along with mean ones, and very quiet ones. Your stereo typing doesn't really help.

Loosening the inhibitions doesn't necessarily mean that people have to become monsters. It just means that the drunk will just be him or herself for a change, instead of hiding behind a "politically correct" wall of fake "niceness".
But some folks really are nice...

Yep, but you can't judge a book by its cover, no matter how they appear, and this is still NOT the issue now is it?

 

[OzSpen]

Well, thank you for that, Stan.
I am so sorry to hear about your Dad. 40 seems so young...much too young to die, especially of something so completely stupid as alchoholism.
Kudos to your father-in-law, though. It's a very hard habit to quit, or so I'm told.

My natural instincts tell me that it should not be acceptable with the church at all. But I do recognize my own bias, and I do want to be fair.
Jesus did turn water into wine for a wedding. But I'm pretty sure that no one got slobbering drunk at that wedding, you know? Nobody vomited down the bride's dress, nobody tried to get his hand inside the bride's maid's dress, nobody tried to pinch her Momma's behind, nobody insulted the host, nobody got aggressive and wanted to fight...and above all, nobody was killed by an out of control donkey cart because the driver was drunk. No family had to lose their husband and father because some idiot couldn't hold his liquor.

See, that's the problem, Stan...all of these things tend to happen when people abuse alcohol. And that is why the church should not condone it.

The Barrd,

I'll step into the controversy because I'm convinced that the biblical evidence is that contemporary alcohol, wine and spirits are closer to what the OT called 'strong drink' and the use of it is forbidden. One of Norman Geisler's articles, 'A Christian perspective on wine-drinking', helped me to understand the difference between wine and strong drink. I have used much of the information from that article and contextualised it for Australia in my article, Alcohol and the Christian.

My wife and I have chosen to be teetotalers for all of our Christian lives (that's 54 years for me) but I'm not imposing that view on anyone on this forum. However, for me it's the safer view in an alcohol-soaked Aussie culture where the major drug problem is not ICE addiction but alcohol abuse.

As for alcoholism being a 'disease', that's based on a contemporary secular model. Scripture forbids us from using 'strong drink' and from becoming drunk (which is a work of darkness, Rom 13;13); drunkards are among the 'unrighteous' according to 1 Cor 6:10; we are not to associate with anyone who is a drunkard (1 Cor 5:11); and getting drunk with wine is debauchery (Eph 5:18), i.e. excessive indulgence. So drunkenness is a sin that will keep one out of God's kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-11). That doesn't sound like a disease model to me.

What I've said here will probably go down like a lead balloon.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Wine is wine...it all has alcoholic content, it just doesn't always taste the same. Today, all red wine is 11.5% alcohol. Back then nobody knows for sure.

Stan,

That's not the evidence I've uncovered.

Many Christians today assume that the NT wine is identical with wine in contemporary society. That’s an error. Today’s wine, beer and spirits are, by biblical definition, “strong drink.” And use of that is forbidden by the Bible. Wine in the Bible was essentially purified water (The following details are taken from Norman Geisler 1982:50-51). See the 'Works consulted' for a link to Geisler's article.

Homer was a Greek poet who lived in the 8th century before Christ. He said that in his day, wine was 20 parts water and one part wine (Odyssey 9: pp. 208-9).

A writer after the time of the NT, Pliny the Younger (lived in the 2nd century after Christ), spoke of wine being eight parts water and one part wine.

Aristophanes said wine was three parts water and two parts wine. Other Greek writers said it was three to one.

The average was about three or four parts of water to one part of wine.

In the ancient world, sometimes it was one part water and one part wine — that was considered strong wine. “Anyone who drank wine unmixed [with water] was looked on as a Scythian, a barbarian. That means the Greeks would say today, `You [Australians] are barbarians — drinking straight wine.'”

They said, “Mix it half and half and you get madness: unmixed — bodily collapse.” Here is a pagan saying: “Half and half is madness, and unmixed wine brings death.”

There are several instances in the O.T. where a distinction is made between wine and strong drink (Lev. 10:8-9; Deut. 14:26; 29:6; Judges 13:4).

The Jewish Talmud (writings at the time of the early church) states that the `wine’ of the Passover meal was three parts water and one part wine (cf. 2 Maccabees 15:39).

“In ancient times not many beverages were safe to drink… Water could be made safe in one of several ways. It could be boiled, but this was tedious and costly. Or it could be filtered, but this was not a safe method. Or some wine could be put in the water to kill the germs — one part wine with three or four parts water.”

It seems that wine, beer and spirits in Australia today have a much higher alcoholic content than wine in the N.T.

One researcher calculated that “in New Testament times one would need to drink twenty-two glasses of wine in order to consume the large amount of alcohol in two martinis today.”

He put it this way: “In other words, it is possible to become intoxicated from wine mixed with three parts water, but one’s drinking would probably affect the bladder long before the mind” (Robert H. Stein, in Geisler, p. 51).

Works consulted

Geisler, N L 1982. A Christian Perspective on Wine-Drinking. Bibliotheca Sacra (online), January-March, 6-56.

Oz

 

[Barrd]

The Barrd,

I'll step into the controversy because I'm convinced that the biblical evidence is that contemporary alcohol, wine and spirits are closer to what the OT called 'strong drink' and the use of it is forbidden. One of Norman Geisler's articles, 'A Christian perspective on wine-drinking', helped me to understand the difference between wine and strong drink. I have used much of the information from that article and contextualised it for Australia in my article, Alcohol and the Christian.

My wife and I have chosen to be teetotalers for all of our Christian lives (that's 54 years for me) but I'm not imposing that view on anyone on this forum. However, for me it's the safer view in an alcohol-soaked Aussie culture where the major drug problem is not ICE addiction but alcohol abuse.

As for alcoholism being a 'disease', that's based on a contemporary secular model. Scripture forbids us from using 'strong drink' and from becoming drunk (which is a work of darkness, Rom 13;13); drunkards are among the 'unrighteous' according to 1 Cor 6:10; we are not to associate with anyone who is a drunkard (1 Cor 5:11); and getting drunk with wine is debauchery (Eph 5:18), i.e. excessive indulgence. So drunkenness is a sin that will keep one out of God's kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-11). That doesn't sound like a disease model to me.

What I've said here will probably go down like a lead balloon.

Oz

Thanks, Oz!
As I said, my instincts tell me that the church should not tolerate drinking. Booze is not for Christians...

 

[Barrd]

Stan,

That's not the evidence I've uncovered.

Many Christians today assume that the NT wine is identical with wine in contemporary society. That’s an error. Today’s wine, beer and spirits are, by biblical definition, “strong drink.” And use of that is forbidden by the Bible. Wine in the Bible was essentially purified water (The following details are taken from Norman Geisler 1982:50-51). See the 'Works consulted' for a link to Geisler's article.

Homer was a Greek poet who lived in the 8th century before Christ. He said that in his day, wine was 20 parts water and one part wine (Odyssey 9: pp. 208-9).

A writer after the time of the NT, Pliny the Younger (lived in the 2nd century after Christ), spoke of wine being eight parts water and one part wine.

Aristophanes said wine was three parts water and two parts wine. Other Greek writers said it was three to one.

The average was about three or four parts of water to one part of wine.

In the ancient world, sometimes it was one part water and one part wine — that was considered strong wine. “Anyone who drank wine unmixed [with water] was looked on as a Scythian, a barbarian. That means the Greeks would say today, `You [Australians] are barbarians — drinking straight wine.'”

They said, “Mix it half and half and you get madness: unmixed — bodily collapse.” Here is a pagan saying: “Half and half is madness, and unmixed wine brings death.”

There are several instances in the O.T. where a distinction is made between wine and strong drink (Lev. 10:8-9; Deut. 14:26; 29:6; Judges 13:4).

The Jewish Talmud (writings at the time of the early church) states that the `wine’ of the Passover meal was three parts water and one part wine (cf. 2 Maccabees 15:39).

“In ancient times not many beverages were safe to drink… Water could be made safe in one of several ways. It could be boiled, but this was tedious and costly. Or it could be filtered, but this was not a safe method. Or some wine could be put in the water to kill the germs — one part wine with three or four parts water.”

It seems that wine, beer and spirits in Australia today have a much higher alcoholic content than wine in the N.T.

One researcher calculated that “in New Testament times one would need to drink twenty-two glasses of wine in order to consume the large amount of alcohol in two martinis today.”

He put it this way: “In other words, it is possible to become intoxicated from wine mixed with three parts water, but one’s drinking would probably affect the bladder long before the mind” (Robert H. Stein, in Geisler, p. 51).

Works consulted

Geisler, N L 1982. A Christian Perspective on Wine-Drinking. Bibliotheca Sacra (online), January-March, 6-56.

Oz

I knew I remembered reading somewhere that drinking wine unmixed with water was something uncivilized...only barbarians and Scythians would do such a thing.

:huh:

Uh, Oz?



Ummm....

What's a Scythian???? :unsure:

 

[StanJ]

Stan,

That's not the evidence I've uncovered.

Many Christians today assume that the NT wine is identical with wine in contemporary society. That’s an error. Today’s wine, beer and spirits are, by biblical definition, “strong drink.” And use of that is forbidden by the Bible. Wine in the Bible was essentially purified water (The following details are taken from Norman Geisler 1982:50-51). See the 'Works consulted' for a link to Geisler's article.

Homer was a Greek poet who lived in the 8th century before Christ. He said that in his day, wine was 20 parts water and one part wine (Odyssey 9: pp. 208-9).

A writer after the time of the NT, Pliny the Younger (lived in the 2nd century after Christ), spoke of wine being eight parts water and one part wine.

Aristophanes said wine was three parts water and two parts wine. Other Greek writers said it was three to one.

The average was about three or four parts of water to one part of wine.

In the ancient world, sometimes it was one part water and one part wine — that was considered strong wine. “Anyone who drank wine unmixed [with water] was looked on as a Scythian, a barbarian. That means the Greeks would say today, `You [Australians] are barbarians — drinking straight wine.'”

They said, “Mix it half and half and you get madness: unmixed — bodily collapse.” Here is a pagan saying: “Half and half is madness, and unmixed wine brings death.”

There are several instances in the O.T. where a distinction is made between wine and strong drink (Lev. 10:8-9; Deut. 14:26; 29:6; Judges 13:4).

The Jewish Talmud (writings at the time of the early church) states that the `wine’ of the Passover meal was three parts water and one part wine (cf. 2 Maccabees 15:39).

“In ancient times not many beverages were safe to drink… Water could be made safe in one of several ways. It could be boiled, but this was tedious and costly. Or it could be filtered, but this was not a safe method. Or some wine could be put in the water to kill the germs — one part wine with three or four parts water.”

It seems that wine, beer and spirits in Australia today have a much higher alcoholic content than wine in the N.T.

One researcher calculated that “in New Testament times one would need to drink twenty-two glasses of wine in order to consume the large amount of alcohol in two martinis today.”

He put it this way: “In other words, it is possible to become intoxicated from wine mixed with three parts water, but one’s drinking would probably affect the bladder long before the mind” (Robert H. Stein, in Geisler, p. 51).

Works consulted

Geisler, N L 1982. A Christian Perspective on Wine-Drinking. Bibliotheca Sacra (online), January-March, 6-56.

Oz

Oz,

I didn't say it the same as today. Modern wine making is much more sophisticated.

Tim Greenwood writes;
There are four different Greek words which are translated in the New Testament as "wine." These words are as follows:
G3631 - oy'-nos: wine, from yah-yin: meaning to effervesce (or fermented). (Used most places throughout the New Testament.)
G1098 - glyoo'-kos: (or glucose or a liquid fruit sugar), or a syrupy sweet fruit juice. (Used only one time.)
G3943 - par'-oy-nos: (From two words: 1. Para: near and 2. G3631 wine), meaning addicted to wine. (Used only twice.)
G3632 - oy-of-loog-ee'-ah: (From two words: 1. G3631 wine and 2. Floo'or-os: bubbly or to talk incessantly), meaning drunkenness or drunk on wine. (Used only once.)
And none of these words are interchangeable.

You can find much more at the following link, but for now, IMO, Geisler is flawed in his understanding.
https://www.tgm.org/WineInTheNewTestament.html

I could make all these facts known myself, but as it has already been done, I'll save myself the work.

 

[StanJ]

As for alcoholism being a 'disease', that's based on a contemporary secular model. Scripture forbids us from using 'strong drink' and from becoming drunk (which is a work of darkness, Rom 13;13); drunkards are among the 'unrighteous' according to 1 Cor 6:10; we are not to associate with anyone who is a drunkard (1 Cor 5:11); and getting drunk with wine is debauchery (Eph 5:18), i.e. excessive indulgence. So drunkenness is a sin that will keep one out of God's kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-11). That doesn't sound like a disease model to me.

The official NIAAA (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism)position is that "alcoholism is a disease. The craving that an alcoholic feels for alcohol can be as strong as the need for food or water. An alcoholic will continue to drink despite serious family, health, or legal problems.

The issue here is NOT that some people become alcoholics, it is whether those who aren't predisposed to that disease may drink if they are also believers. I see NOTHING you gave shown to refute that they may.

As to what sounds like a disease to you, only is valid if your doctorate is defined by MD.

 

[Born_Again]

Well, time ya'll learned something new about me. I am a recovered alcoholic. And by the grace of God I am still here to tell you about it. Alcoholism is a terrible thing. I don't mind if people drink without being stupid. I also could not care less if it were illegal. It doesn't really matter to me. With the strength of God, I have been sober for a looooong time. I don't drink anymore and haven't had a drink of any sorts since a glass of wine in March in 2015. I simply don't need it. So, there's my short story.

God Bless,

BA