The Best Wine

The way you take that partial verse out of context reminds me very much of a woman I used to know who was having an affair and condoned it because the Bible says "God is love."

 

The way you take wine out of context reminds me of a wise man who said, 'There's a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof is the way of death.'

You want the whole verse? Here you go.

Proverbs 23:31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

It stills says look thou not upon fermented beverage whether in part or in whole.

Talk to God about it. I did not write His Word.

 

Putting something in context means more than completing the sentence.

However, the entire passage has been quoted on the wine threads, and to no avail.

If you look earlier in Proverbs 23 you will see

Do not join those who drink too much wine
or gorge themselves on meat,
for drunkards and gluttons become poor,
and drowsiness clothes them in rags.

note the "too much"
note the "gorge"
They are related to "drunkards" and "gluttons", respectively.

There is no prohibition against either eating meat or drinking wine in the above. There is a warning against too much of either.

Later on in chapter 23 is the verse so often quoted: "Do not gaze at the wine when it is red, when it smarkles in the cup, when it goes down smoothly!"

What is right before that?

This: Who has woe? Who has sorrow?
Who has strife? Who has complaints?
Who has needless bruises? Who has bloodshot eyes?
Those who linger over wine,
who go to sample bowls of mixed wine.

ah, it's the lingering and the repeated tasting which is warned against. And note: it is only a warning. Solomon is not writing the law there. Proverbs is called a book of wisdom, not a book of law. Therefore, just as an aside here, even getting drunk is not a sin, for it transgresses no law. It is just a foolish, stupid thing to do. It is not wise.

Now let's get back to Proverbs 23, and the verses after the one so often quoted:

Your eyes will see strange sights
and your mind imagine confusing things.

This is a state of drunkenness, which is definitely NOT after one glass of wine!

You will be like one sleeping on the high sees,
lying on top of the rigging.

You will be violently sick to your stomach. That is not the result of a glass of wine, but of drunkeness.

"They hit me," you will say, "but I'm not hurt!
They beat me, but I don't feel it!
When will I wake up so I can find another drink?"

The lack of sensation is the result of a very high alcohol level, not of a glass of wine. And the last line says it all -- this person is a confirmed alcoholic, thinking only of where the next drink will come from.

This is a far, far cry from the right and proper use of wine. Biblically, it makes the heart glad, or did you conveniently forget that verse? It helps heal stomach ulcers, or did you ignore that (grape juice would only make the ulcer worse)? Jesus was called a drunkard, or winebibber, not because He had fruit juice, but because He had -- and made miraculously -- wine.

I fully respect those, like my beloved husband, who choose to never partake an alcoholic beverage. But he also knows this is not a biblical imperative; it is a choice. For him, being a porphyriac, it was a God-led choice he made years before he knew of the disorder. For him, alcohol could lead to an acute phase which could leave him paralyzed.

He respect me, and I have a glass of wine occasionally. He has bought it for me and poured it for me.

Now, I do believe that the Bible says that it is God's kindness which leads people to repentance (if repentance is needed...). That's at the beginning of Romans 2. In John 16:8, Jesus says it is the Holy Spirit who is to convict of guilt regarding sin. So I would ask those of you who cannot seem to stop condemning and even damning folk who have a glass of wine occasionally to please consider that you may be trying to take over the Holy Spirit's function. He may not like that.

 

"Do not gaze at the wine when it is red, when it smarkles in the cup, when it goes down smoothly!"


Gaze implys lusting after... like an alcoholic.

Those that can handle one glass of wine at a nice dinner are not gazing at it...it is just a drink.

But the alcoholic will drool over it, until he gives in...

If you are tempted to drool over alcohol..... RUN from it.. don't be around it....

 

No, it doesn't say that. First of all, read it IN CONTEXT. Second, Tim responded very nicely to your claim.

Please, unfixate yourself, if you can.

 

"If the literal sense makes sense but you don't like it, seek another sense, lest it result in an affront to your presuppositions." HBSMN

:saint:

 

Charles, are you a child? If not, quit acting like one. That is not what HBSMN said and it is an attack on him to act so foolishly toward him as you do.

 

SFIC,

What does that statement say? You cannot claim to be a literalist and then reject the literal word for your own reading.

Do you believe that God made the world in 7 days? Or would you agree that those days were not literal days - since a thousand years is as a day with God?

Once you get onto the slippery slope of tinkering with the Bible you will open the door to more tan you wanted.

I assert that you and HBSMN approach the text with your mind made up, not honestly trying to read what the Bible really says. You can have opinions - but you should not foist such unproved opinions on the rest of the church as if the Bible spoke them instead of you.

 

Your wording indicates you are not absolutely sure.

Give us some documentation to support your opinion.

 

Charles, another unfounded and childish accusation on your part. Neither HSBMN, nor myself have any liberal views concerning this subject God's Word.

From what I have read of his posts in this and other threads HSBMN takes a firm stand against alcohol in the life of a believer. That is the opposite of liberalism.

Liberalism says 'Go ahead and live in sin, God has saved you so you have nothing to worry about.' Liberalism is totally contrary to God's Word. We do have liberty in Christ, not to sin as has been pointed out time and again, but liberty from sin.

Don't be so quick to call one who speaks the truth in love a liberal when it is those who advocate sin that are the liberals.

 

SFIC,

I don't think you read that last post right.

I would not call you a liberal. But I assert that you are unwittingly using some of the same tactics that liberals use to justify nonbiblical stances - interpreting the text with bias.

If you say Christians should avoid alcohol I will agree 100% with you. But if you say that the Bible is clear on that I will disagree because it is not.

 

Yes, when one ought to still be fasting.

If Daniel never ate of the king's delicacies then why did he give them up again in chapter 10?

 

Quite simple. Different kings. Daniel again made a vow not to eat the kings food and drink his wine.

The king in chapter 1 Nebuchadnezzar
The king in chapter 10 Cyrus

Also, Daniel did not say in chapter 10 it was the kings bread and wine. only that it was pleasant bread and wine.

Very well could be that Daniel had taken a Nazarite vow to not touch the unfermented wine.

 

The nazarite vow involved anything from the grape vine... not just wine.
So, no it probably wasn't the Nazarite vow.

 

Could be the Nazarite vow though, since it down not say he ate grapes.

Could be just the mourning time as mentioned in the previous verse.

At any rate, it does not say the wine he refused to drink in that passage was the kings wine, so it may have been the non-fermented wine.

 

In Daniel 1, this had nothing to do with either fermented or unfermented wine. Daniel requested pulse or vegetables to eat--a vegetarian diet. And he requested water to drink.

Daniel 1:12 Prove thy servants, I beseech thee, ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat, and water to drink.
DHK

 

DHK,

I was addressing the mention of Daniel not drinking wine in chapter 10...

Do you think it was because of different kings?
Nazarite Vow? or possibly the mourning mentioned in previous verse. I do lean toward the latter.

Also, as I pointed out, he did not say it was the king's wine in chapter 10. That makes me believe he was speaking of non-alcoholic wine there.