With that interpretation of the 5th commandment being over weight is a sin, being underweight is a sin, buying a new car is a sin (the "new car smell" causes cancer) owning a car is a sin, (exhaust will kill you), not getting sufficient exercise is a sin, too much exercise is a sin, too much sitting is a sin, too much looking at a computer screen is a sin, not arguing with your spouse is a sin (pent-up stress kills), working in an office building is a sin (sick-building syndrome), drinking from a Lexan water bottle is a sin (BPA), using aluminum pots is a sin (aluminum)... Need I go on?

And I also fail to grasp the "[robbing] God and your neighbor of the service you could render to them" by living longer line of thought. This makes simply moving to another town a sin, since I have just robbed my neighbors of my services. Oh, wait! By NOT MOVING, I have robbed the people in the next town of my services. So it is a sin to move and a sin to not move.

I thought I'd answered this already. No, I do not see Jesus saying this. However, there are others who did indeed seem to say it, would you not agree?

Jesus did not command the adultress to be stoned. Yet Moses commanded the Levites to kill "every man his neighbor" etc. following the worship of the Golden Calf. The difference? Time, place and circumstance?

Perhaps with wine it is the same difference.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

If you have found a scripture to answer that question of the dosage, I have not. What I have seen is relatively lacking in terms of quantification. But it says "a little wine." That is not the same as "a lot," but it does not tell us whether this would be a thimble full (like is in many cough syrups and elixirs today), or if it were a full glass. It probably does not mean a full pitcher, in any case, and therefore would be unlikely to have caused drunkenness.

For some reason, the communion wine which we partake of is given as but a thimble full. Is this to keep us from potential drunkenness? I hesitate to suggest such a sacrilegious thought. But I have often wondered why the communion ceremony boasts such small portions. I am certain the disciples with Jesus had larger ones. It was their supper.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Adultery can only be relations which are "illicit." Marriage, however, makes them "licit." One cannot commit adultery with his very own wife! If one has two wives, it is not adultery until he sleeps with someone else's wife, as did David with Bathsheba. David could have been with Abigail, and it would have been no adultery. He could have spent the night with Michal and no adultery. Or one of his other wives. But not Bathsheba. She did not belong to him.

Interestingly, I looked for the definition of "adultery" online, and came up with this definition from Eastman's dictionary which had been referenced on Wikipedia.



Here are the first three sentences of the page from Wikipedia, after which the reference to the above quote was given (emphasis added):


According to the biblical definition, a woman's marriage or betrothal (engagement) made her off limits. For a man to lie with her would be adultery, whether or not he was already married.

On the other hand, if she were neither married nor engaged, it mattered not if he were married, it would not be adultery, but only "fornication" for him to sleep with her without marrying her first.

I do agree with JAK that this is a separate topic from that of the thread. Perhaps I have erred in bringing it up. But it is clearly one of the gray areas in the Bible, and people tend to either recognize that such areas of gray exist, or they deny them. You, Rosangela, seem to prefer not to recognize them. In this case, it is easy for me to understand why you would be unable to accept the reality of the Bible's gray area with respect to wine.

Do you know of anyone in the Bible rebuked for having plural wives? Even one? Do you know of anyone rebuked for drinking wine?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

But the argument being made is from silence. While smoking may not be mentioned in the Bible, many other things are, which aren't specifically condemned.

The argument is, if something is not specifically condemned, is that ok to do? You seem to suggest so.

GC and JAK, what is "drunk"? Is it only with a blood alcohol content of .08 or greater?

Yes, all habits that tend to shorten your life are sins - almost all those which you mentioned. A car (or any other means of transportation) is a need, but if you can buy one which uses a non-pollutant fuel, by all means do it.
The Bible defines sin as the transgression of the law. You said chronic, habitual drunkenness is sin. Which commandment does it violate?

I do not think I am willing to try to guess at what is "drunk." Proverbs allows for drinking to the point of "forgetting." Whatever level that is. Certainly, they did not have blood alcohol tests.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I don't think Paul would agree with that.
"So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man" (Rom. 7:3).


I do believe there may be gray areas in the Bible. I just don't think this is one of them. As I said earlier in this thread, the Bible says, "Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31), and I don't see how drinking alcohol can be done for the glory of God (unless, of course, you need to be operated and there are no anesthetics, or alcohol is a necessary component of a medicine).

There is no conflict here. Polygamy may have been allowed in the Bible, but polyandry never was.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.