I don't believe you said that, GC. Does God have double standards, like human beings?

It's not so much a matter of double standard, Rosangela, as it's a matter of culture--and I hate to use that word because most people would mistake it to mean that since our culture has changed.... It might be better said as "law," but again that word brings up connotations that are inexact to what I mean. I'm sure there's a good word for it, but it's not coming to mind right now. Anyhow, according to the Biblical culture/law, a woman was the possession of a man. If still unmarried, she was her father's. If married, she belonged to her husband. She could not belong to more than one "master" at the same time.

Conversely, a man could have more than one woman belonging to him. Obviously, he could have both a wife and a daughter, or a number of daughters. But he was also permitted to have more than one wife.

Yes, the Bible treats women as property, but NOT (and I emphasize this) in our modern way of thinking in which this would be derogatory. God made Eve FOR Adam. Paul brings this up in his writings. They were equals, yet different.

The Bible never says, for example, "it is not good that woman should be alone." It says this of a man.

"For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (1 Timothy 2:13-14). Paul did not step gingerly around the issue of gender differences. He hit it straight on. He is, in fact, in the minority among the Bible authors to address gender differences and roles.

It may be the Bible standard, but I would not dare to call it a double standard.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

True, they didn't have such tests back then. But, we are in the here and now. You have made statements that we should not get drunk. How can we tell how much we can drink without being considered "drunk".
That is, what is drunk?

Honestly, I don't think the Bible advocates drunkenness. It merely allows it for some people.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Um...good point. I guess "chronic, habitual drunkeness" is NOT a sin. Thanks for pointing that out. (tongue-in-cheek)

This is very close to my point. I do not hold drinking to be a sin, but I do think a "drunken lifestyle" is. I'm also a bit confused by your question. What point are you arguing? You seem to have gone from "all alcohol is sinful" to "drunkeness is not a sin."

According to the Jewish culture, not according to the Biblical culture.


In the same way He made Adam FOR Eve. "It is not good that woman should be alone" just couldn't be said because man was created first.


God's moral standards are equal for both genders, and this is clear in the Bible. We will be judged by the same standard - the law of God. And what is adultery for one is adultery for the other. Paul says that if the woman is already married to one man and she marries another, she is adulterous. So in your opinion this doesn't apply to men, just to women?

Okay.
So, do we now have that you think the Bible says it's ok to drink but not be drunk, but it's up to each individual to think what drunk is?

But the question was, what do you think drunk is.

?
What is the difference between "chronic, habitual drunkenness" and a "drunken lifestyle"? Why is the latter a sin but the former isn't? To me, they are the same thing.

Paul says clearly that no drunkard will inherit the kingdom of God:

"Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God" (Gal. 5:19-21).

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9, 10).

I don't know how something can prevent someone from going to heaven and yet not be a sin.

My point is that drunkenness is a sin, a violation of one of the commandments of the law of God. But notice that no commandment mentions drunkenness specifically.

kland,

I think you're missing my point. I also happen to think that God sent the children of Israel quail to eat when I think He wanted them to eat manna instead. Did God allow them at that point to choose how much quail they would indulge in?

I think so. That does not mean that God approved of their eating the quail. It does mean, however, that God allowed it. More specifically, God even provided it for them.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.