Printable View
I firmly believe that wine should be used for communion purposes as the Bible does say Christ blessed the wine as His blood and the bread as His body. We are speaking of drinking for other reasons. There it should be moderation or not at all. If you cannot control your drinking, it is certain that it will control you. To quote Poe "for what demon is like alcohol?" My dad was so bad an alcoholic that he would drink after-shave, rubbing alcohol, or anything when the desire took him.
The problem is that some who do not understand moderation are also prone to other types of excess. Like excessive violence towards spouses and children.
I suppose banning alcohol outright might go a long way to reducing domestic violence and alcohol addiction. But... you can't take away a persons freedom to choose. As reprehensible as some of the acts committed whilst under the influence of alcohol are - it is a graver moral blight to consign a person to hell just because he or she has the odd glass of wine or whatever.
So, I don't know - I wish alcohol never existed in the first place, but partaking in it, although not particularly good for the body, doesn't make the person inherintly evil.
Well, that's their problem. Alcohol unlike drugs is part of our cultural heritage. It goes back thousands of years. People drink wine and beer with dinner and wine is a sacremental drink in many religions. If we were to start today, perhaps alcohol would fall into the drug catagory and be banned, but because it is linked into our culture it is impossible to ban it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Eep
You mean mild violence towards spouses and children should be allowed.:confused: :eek:Quote:
Like excessive violence towards spouses and children.
The united States tried outlawing alcohol in the 1920s and early 30s. It was called Prohibition. It was a disaster. You could probably Google it and read about it.Quote:
I suppose banning alcohol outright might go a long way to reducing domestic violence and alcohol addiction. But... you can't take away a persons freedom to choose.
Hey Virgil - are you drunk mate? You seem quick to retaliate to a non inflammatory post. Just because I say that excessive drinking can lead to excessive behaviour (the whole world understands this BTW)doesn't mean I condone violence in any form whatsoever. Where did you jump to that conclusion - did Jack Daniels suggest it in your ear?
That last sentence is uncalled for yes - but so is the implication that I somehow condone violence of any sort. Your little remark there is the exact opposite of what I was trying to stress - the avoidance of violence - what exactly is mild violence anyway?
Tell you what mate - the way you jumped at that - let's hope you don't drink!!
Where do you see that I jumped at you. My comment on "mild violence" was a little bit of a joke on the logic of your sentence. Your sentence structure did imply (and I assume) by mistake that only excessive violence should be outlawed. As to the last sentence, I assumed you were not American and had never heard of Prohibition. So I pointed out you could look it up on google. I don't think I was being inflamatory anywhere. I wasn't retaliating.
Does the Bible say Jesus blessed fermented wine?
wine
the juice, fermented or unfermented, of various other fruits or plants, used as a beverage, sauce, etc.: gooseberry wine; currant wine.
:) Actually - the point about the failure of prohibition is a very good one and I was actually wondering about putting it into my first post there.:) Thanks for the explanation - I'm sorry I didn't catch the humor there. But, I understand now. Thanks - sorry. To aggree with what you were saying about culture. I visited Ireland recently and drinking is a massive part of their culture and yet they are known as some of the friendliest most hospitable people around and I can attest to that - so, I guess what I believe is drinking, in moderation, is OK. I just wish the other problems didn't exist though.:cool:
No need to apologize. I didn't put a smiley there so one guesses at the tone of the writer. We don't see people's faces on these posts so we sometimes go awry on the tone. I've made the same mistake a few times. :nod: :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Eep
Yes, I thought about this issue for a long time. I agree that I wish the problems didn't exist. Another one that you didn't mention was drunk driving, which kills a lot of people. But banning alcohol just won't work.Quote:
To aggree with what you were saying about culture. I visited Ireland recently and drinking is a massive part of their culture and yet they are known as some of the friendliest most hospitable people around and I can attest to that - so, I guess what I believe is drinking, in moderation, is OK. I just wish the other problems didn't exist though.:cool
The church I attend rarely brings it up but I suspect table wine is acceptable. I personally do not drink because of MANY unpleasant exciting experiences living in a military dorm (too cheap to move out and if the barracks got too empty Uncle Sam would pull the housing allowance) enjoying celebrating life in North Dakota. One war story: Was dragged out my warm cozy bed one night because a sergeant from the Roads and Grounds department was demonstrating the use of a bull whip (5 years before Indiana Jones I might add). Fortunately said sergeant wasn't too far gone in alcohol that he didn't know who I was and I could make life miserabale if I had a mind to. But it was fun watching the 2 airmen stuck in a corner begging for him to stop the cracking.--Anyhoo--I believe the Bible teaches personal moderation with an eye towards not offending or setting bad examples for others.
Drink whatever you want in whatever quantities you want. As long as you aren't harming anybody else, it's none of my business.
I know about that ban. But i don't know a lot. It's interesting. Why did they banned alcohol in 20's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
The Temperance Movement, a religious group that held that the consumption of alcohol is immoral and destructive, was very influential and had broad support at the time. So much so that they managed to get a constitutional amendment banning the sale, production and distribution of alcohol (but not the consumption or possesion). It was a total disaster, as the law turned out to be completely unenforcable, and its main effect was to drive the price of alcohol through the roof, and the quality into the gutter. It was not uncommon to water down whiskey and then spike it with sulphur to mask the difference. Al Capone got rich brewing and distributing beer, as well as smuggling hard alcohol. When the Twenty-First amendment repealing prohibition was passed, the black market sellers of alcohol were largely driven out of business in most states (some states continued with prohibition) because they could not compete with the low prices offered at legal bars and liquor stores.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
Isn't that just the thing? Alcoholics do harm others.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
Yes, of course. Alcohlics also drink more than they want to, almost by definition. I don't mean to demean alcoholism or suggest that it is not something that needs treatment, but I do not think that what anybody chooses to drink should be the subject of moral judgements from anybody else (given, of course, the condition that they do not harm anybody by it).Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
That was definitely not one of my more well-considered posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
yes ,it does.:thumbs_up