Drinking in Moderation

[Turk]

I didn't study religions in university. I studied it by myself and none of my words were "street anectodes". I don't know streets of your city full of theologists and they keep discuss about religions, but here people doesn't talk about theology in streets.

1. St. Paul was a Jewish before he "converted" to Christianity. There's nothing wrong saying this. And i also not sure he's accepted as a saint by all Christians. I think he mostly accepted by Catholics as a saint, because he established church (some consider church as worldly establishment and Paul brought kingdom of heaven (i don't know in English, God's reign?) to earth and that's why they consider Paulus as traitor to Christianity, it's not just my thought some Christians share this thought too, maybe you can look that thread about Paulus in this forum) . I'll also send you a book about those stuff.

2. I know his letters are part of new testament, and i said they are not God's word. Everyone would accept these words are belong to Paulus's himself. That's why it can't be equivalent to Kur'an. Because we believe Kur'an is God's word. Unchanged and right.

3. Oh well, anti-semitisim stuff. Soft stomach of western people. Why? Because Jewish media and Jewish Hollywood keep impozing "anti-semitism is a very big crime". And even you say 1 negative comment about Jews you easily called "anti-semitic". Weird because Arabs are semitic too. But when you talked about "terrorist Arabs" nobody calls it as "crime against humanity" (like anti-semitism).

Anyway. It's a long subject. But anyway i'll defend my thoughts. It's clear Jews (of course not %100 of Jews but i talk for general) hates Jesus, history shows it. Since they are enemy of Jesus they also enemies of Christianity. I think there's nothing to prove about their hate against Muslims and Christians.

Ah, and a last word; you defended Paulus this much, even i just told truths. What about Jesus. As i see they disgustingly makes fun of Jesus in cartoons such as South Park or Simpsons. As a Muslim it offends me. What about Christians?

[Whifflingpin]

1. St. Paul was a Jewish before he "converted" to Christianity. There's nothing wrong saying this. And i also not sure he's accepted as a saint by all Christians.

2. I know his letters are part of new testament, and i said they are not God's word. Everyone would accept these words are belong to Paulus's himself. That's why it can't be equivalent to Kur'an. Because we believe Kur'an is God's word. Unchanged and right.

The first Christians were all Jews. Paul is credited with showing that the Christian message relates to non-Jews as well. Paul's letters are accepted as part of the Christian scriptures by all Christian denominations.

You may believe that the Kur'an is God's word, but I believe you are mistaken. I do not believe that God sends angels with books.

Christians believe that He speaks through his works and through the minds of men, like Paul, who are His messengers, and whom, therefore, you should treat with the respect that you expect for your religious teachers.

.

[*theReader*]

Our church just finished a study on this issue, and it is certainly a very interesting one. Forgive me if I am repeating what others have said. I do not have time to read all 11 pages!

My church practices exegesis and exposition. This means that our pastor (in my case, my dad) preaches through one book of the Bible at a time. Sometimes we study particular topics, but most of our study is through the New Testament books. Currently, we are studying 1 Timothy 3.

One of the qualifications of a deacon/servant of the church is that they are not given to much wine.

There are a few things to be considered in this description. First, the wine in NT days was much more diluted. John MacArthur says that wine was as much as up to 10 parts water, 1 part alcohol. The strongest wine would have been about 3 parts water to 1 part alcohol.

Second, Paul's epistle to Timothy was written in a day where water purification was scarce, if it existed at all, which is unlikely. Paul told Timothy later on in his letter to not abstain from wine completely since there were some health benefits. It is just plain wrong to say that abstinence is demanded in the Bible. There is no commandment that says "Thou shalt not drink." Don't look for it-- it isn't there.

Third, moderation is obviously a requirement. Moderation can mean different things for different people. I know many people who do not have a problem with drinking a glass of wine for dinner. Whatever cannot be done in faith should not be done at all (Romans 14 around verse 22-23 or something), and some people cannot drink alcoholic beverages in faith.

Today in our culture, I would advocate that alcohol abstinence is following the biblical path of wisdom for Christians. Alcoholism is a huge problem in America, and many non-Christians look down on Christians who drink, even in moderation or "social drinking."

1 Corinthians 6:12 “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything.

This verse, also penned by Paul, clearly states that we have freedom in Christ, but we are willing to respect others by not doing certain things for the Glory of God. Let's not get carried away by our freedom and use it as a lisence, however.

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

I think that this passage shows how we can balance lisence and liberty.

[Scheherazade]

Please carry on any 'unrelated' discussions through PMs. Further off-topic posts in this thread will be deleted.

[Shield&Sword]

According to statistics 40% of car accidents in USA is caused by drunk people.
How many houses are destroyed because of alcohol.
Even in america in the begining of the past century alcohol was forbidden, but they couldnt do anything infront the illegal trasport of alcohol throught borders so they allowed it finally.
Now which sosciety is better, the one that drink or the one that doesnt drink?
Here people ask me why you dont drink i respond its forbidden, they say no its ok if you drink a little bit (according to religioun) and then i ask that person have you been ever al least one time drunk and they remain scielent.
For me not drinking is better than drinking, even if you say i never was drunk you will, and perhaps in this one time you will do things you regret on, or perhaps you wont be able to regret.
In my belief Jesus or Moses or Noah (who was drunk according bible) or Lot (who was drunk and made adultery with his own doughters) peace be upon them never drink alcohol, i cant believe they do something that destoyed houses of thousands and thousands of people.
And logicly if you feel shy to drink infront people so they wont think bad of you i think the pure prophets wont either do it and even God wont allow it.

[Whifflingpin]

Here people ask me why you dont drink i respond its forbidden, they say no its ok if you drink a little bit (according to religioun) and then i ask that person have you been ever al least one time drunk and they remain scielent..

I've already said in this thread that I think it's OK to drink in moderation. Yes, I have been drunk, and yes, I think it is a bad thing to be drunk.

For me not drinking is better than drinking, even if you say i never was drunk you will, and perhaps in this one time you will do things you regret on, or perhaps you wont be able to regret.

I did regret being drunk - I was sick, and had a headache and did not enjoy it. I've also made myself sick eating rahat lokum.

When I'd been drunk often enough, I decided that it was a bad thing to be, and now I don't get drunk. And I eat Turkish delight in moderation. It's called learning, or growing up.


.

[Shield&Sword]

Well the point is what in this once time you were drunk something happened that will make you regret all your life, i mean what if you killed someone or did something wrong to your familly memeber or even died. Logiclly it will be better not to drink at all than to try to be drunk to know its bad, you can look around you and decide its so bad to drink, and for me the one who drink a little bit wont have problem to drink alot, how manny people started with this little bit and finished in jail, or became addicted to alcohol. The point is will God allow such thing? i mean drinking even a little bit? Anyway ...

[Whifflingpin]

According to statistics 100% of car accidents in USA involve cars. That is a reason to drive carefully, it is not a reason to ban cars.

.

[ennison]

Abstaining from alcohol and other things is not a sin nor is it enough to save one's soul. Temperance is recommended in alcohol as in other pursuits. (Too much of a good thing is a bad thing etc.) It would be love in practice not to offer a drink to a recovering alcoholic and to refuse one yourself if you were in his company. That is by way of loving support. What constitutes temperate or moderate drinking is variable. If it makes you aggressive or foul-mouthed it's too much. If it makes you ill or have accidents, it's too much. If you just become doigheil then it's probably moderate. There is a fair degree of sense in saying that most civilised societies make and use alcohol. But it's like fire - a good servant and a bad master. Some racial groups do not have a high tolerance for it and should steer clear of it. It was used ruthlessly at one time to undermine and destroy social cohesion in groups that various colonisers wished to trample on.

[Shield&Sword]

Wrong. The cars dont cause accidents, cars are not reason. People who drive it cause accidents and for sure the first thing is their condition,like stress, sleeping, being drunk.
According you the alcohol is not sin, according me it is, exactly like killing raping and so on behaiviours that some people do it in their normal condition and some of them do it after drinking. At the end you didnt add anything new being a sin or not is all up to your belief.
Saying that every thing that pass it's limits is bad doesnt agree with alcohol, from medical point of view the saying "glass of a beer a day is good" has been approoved to be wrong, and doctors advice is not to consume alcohol at all, secondary i said better not to consume at all than to consume even a little bit, and for alcohol any one will agree especially with the problems that alcohol cause, and for sure the one who doesnt drink will never be drunk but the one who drink cant guarantee that he wont be drunk, the funny thing is that alot of people drink and drink and when they become drunk they say "i am not drunk" and the strange behaiviours begin.

[ennison]

Too much sword - not enough shield pal.. 'Doctors is all swabs!' As the cap'n said before falling prey to an alcohol induced apoplectic fit. (Alcohol. Arabic in origin.Like algebra) Can't guarantee that he wont be drunk - true but the sober person can't guarantee that his / her behaviour wont be strange either. Or as Winston Churchill said after being accused of being drunk in The House of Commons. 'I may be drunk but the lady is certainly ugly. In the morning however I shall be sober'

[Shield&Sword]

No need to use shield, as you know using it depend on other part. I said the "one who doesnt drink wont be drunk" and didnt say "the one who doesnt drink will never drink", i think its clear the difference. Resolving all problems caused by alcohol are relaited to being drunk or not, and refusing the idea of drinking from the begining resolve the problem 100%, not "drinking in moderation" will resolve it. And as you said (understanding wrongly my previous post) "the one who doesnt drink doesnt mean he wont be drunk", but the major probability to be drunk is for sure: "the one who drink will be drunk", to resolve the problem the best solution is: "not to drink at all" that way we will resolve both situation.
The doctors words are said from a medical point of view (like reasons of deseases and phisiology) not about being drunk or not. In my Genetic book i have read this fact: "the child who is born for 2 addicted parents, but was raised with other 2 normal parents, has more probabiliy to become addicted, but its relaited to the sosciety were he live" (a sosciety that consume alcohol or not). Interesting no?

[alhara]

I have thought about this alot and I don´t think there is anything biblical that says you shouldn´t. Half the things that the chruch says you shouldn´t do are groundless, biblicaly. Though there are decenct reasons for it, to not drink and do drugs or smoke or any of that stuff is good because it is riding yourself ot the temptation of false god worship. when you become addictied to other substances you are robbing god of your own love, but part of it is also society and pratical reasons filtering through the chruch system. but moderation is fine though not addovocated by the chruch and viewed as a sin through society, though realigously even being drunk so long as drunkeness doesn´t lead to ungodly things (violence ect) can´t be a sin, it is simply a dangerous thing to do. We are realigously accountable for everything we do drunk or sober and thus drunkness is considered wrong because it can lead to wrong doing, it is not the drunkeness that is wrong but what you do while you are drunk. The major sin is addiction, so many realigous groups say lets just avoid the whole mess lump it all together and call it all a sin.

[Theshizznigg]

I drink, always in moderation. I have a genetic disorder which makes me resistant to alchohol. So if I wanted to get drunk, I'd have to do something stupid like down a copious amount of alchohol.
Do I think its wrong for Christians to drink, no, its says nothing against drinking, it does say things against drunkeness. Personally I drink to enjoy it the flavour of the drink, not like some simply to get drunk from it.
I think it was put best in the proverb, I forget which one. Bad quote probably too.
"Beer is a brawler, and wine leads to a mans ruin."

Shizz.

[andave_ya]

This thread made me laugh because always in old British novels the gentlemen socialize by decanting a fine port or brandy. It's only because of the stories I've read that I want to try the drinks I mentioned once I am old enough. Anyways, to the topic. My church is kind of divided on the issue. My parents say yeah, it's fine to drink in moderation, moderation being the key word. Which ties in to everything everyone else said.