?
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.

M: Do you really believe Jesus would advice a guy down on his luck to - Get drunk and forget about it!

GC: 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.

GC: By the way, the statement, Mike, that you made earlier about the wine recommended to Timothy for his stomach's sake being pure grape juice--that cannot be proven. The Greek word "wine" encompasses both grape juice and strong drink. Any time the word is used, it could be one or the other, or even both. There is simply no possibility of proving that the wine recommended to Timothy would have been understood by Timothy himself to mean only grape juice, and nothing more.

K: Was all that was recommended to Timothy, should that be recommended to us?

M: And, how much wine was dosed to treat stomach disorders? Did it cause drunkenness?

GC: 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.

GC: 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.

If not Jesus, who, then, in Prov 31 counseled people down on their luck to - Get drunk and forget about it?

There is no contradiction or evolution between Jesus in the NT and Jesus in the OT. It was Jesus who commanded Moses to kill ungodly people. We cannot assume, based on the mistaken notion there is a contradiction or evolution between Jesus in the OT and Jesus in the NT, that wine and strong drink and drunkenness, therefore, was advised in the OT and forbidden in the NT.

The facts are, things can and do change at times with respect to the circumstances and times.

M: Do you really believe Jesus would advice a guy down on his luck to - Get drunk and forget about it!

GC: 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.

M: If not Jesus, who, then, in Prov 31 counseled people down on their luck to - Get drunk and forget about it? There is no contradiction or evolution between Jesus in the NT and Jesus in the OT. It was Jesus who commanded Moses to kill ungodly people. We cannot assume, based on the mistaken notion there is a contradiction or evolution between Jesus in the OT and Jesus in the NT, that wine and strong drink and drunkenness, therefore, was advised in the OT and forbidden in the NT.

GC: I agree, Mike, that God has not changed. I will disagree, however, that the rules have never changed. There are many evidences of things which have changed. The facts are, things can and do change at times with respect to the circumstances and times. God is not vague in His expectations, but those expectations are not always the same. Here are a few examples so that you see where I'm coming from:

Sacrificial system
Meat eating
Aaronites vs Levites as priests
Theocracy / Monarchy / Foreign government
Stoning / Mercy?

GC: By the way, the statement, Mike, that you made earlier about the wine recommended to Timothy for his stomach's sake being pure grape juice--that cannot be proven. The Greek word "wine" encompasses both grape juice and strong drink. Any time the word is used, it could be one or the other, or even both. There is simply no possibility of proving that the wine recommended to Timothy would have been understood by Timothy himself to mean only grape juice, and nothing more.

K: Was all that was recommended to Timothy, should that be recommended to us?

M: And, how much wine was dosed to treat stomach disorders? Did it cause drunkenness?

GC: 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.

GC: 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.

But if God doesn't change, His moral standards don't change. What is right is always right, and what's wrong is always wrong. God may have tolerated some things in the OT. This doesn't mean He approved these things.

You've painted yourself into a corner, Rosangela. IF God doesn't change, and he tolerated something in the OT, then he tolerates it in the NT also, and today as well. (Which, by default, makes it O.K.)

Regardless of whether I miss or not miss any other points, the question still stands for GC and JAK,

The wine which Christ provided for the feast, and that which He gave to the disciples as a symbol of His own blood, was the pure juice of the grape. To this the prophet Isaiah refers when he speaks of the new wine "in the cluster," and says, "Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it." Isaiah 65:8. {DA 149.3}

It was Christ who in the Old Testament gave the warning to Israel, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Proverbs 20:1. And He Himself provided no such beverage. Satan tempts men to indulgence that will becloud reason and benumb the spiritual perceptions, but Christ teaches us to bring the lower nature into subjection. His whole life was an example of self-denial. In order to break the power of appetite, He suffered in our behalf the severest test that humanity could endure. It was Christ who directed that John the Baptist should drink neither wine nor strong drink. It was He who enjoined similar abstinence upon the wife of Manoah. And He pronounced a curse upon the man who should put the bottle to his neighbor's lips. Christ did not contradict His own teaching. The unfermented wine which He provided for the wedding guests was a wholesome and refreshing drink. Its effect was to bring the taste into harmony with a healthful appetite. {DA 149.4}

Persons who have inherited an appetite for unnatural stimulants should by no means have wine, beer, or cider in their sight, or within their reach; for this keeps the temptation constantly before them. Regarding sweet cider as harmless, many have no scruples in purchasing it freely. But it remains sweet for a short time only; then fermentation begins. The sharp taste which it then acquires makes it all the more acceptable to many palates, and the user is loath to admit that it has become hard, or fermented. {MH 331.4}

There is danger to health in the use of even sweet cider as ordinarily produced. If people could see what the microscope reveals in regard to the cider they buy, few would be willing to drink it. Often those who manufacture cider for the market are not careful as to the condition of the fruit used, and the juice of wormy and decayed apples is expressed. Those who would not think of using the poisonous, rotten apples in any other way, will drink the cider made from them, and call it a luxury; but the microscope shows that even when fresh from the press, this pleasant beverage is wholly unfit for use. {MH 332.1}

Intoxication is just as really produced by wine, beer, and cider as by stronger drinks. The use of these drinks awakens the taste for those that are stronger, and thus the liquor habit is established. Moderate drinking is the school in which men are educated for the drunkard's career. Yet so insidious is the work of these milder stimulants that the highway to drunkenness is entered before the victim suspects his danger. {MH 332.2}

Some who are never considered really drunk are always under the influence of mild intoxicants. They are feverish, unstable in mind, unbalanced. Imagining themselves secure, they go on and on, until every barrier is broken down, every principle sacrificed. The strongest resolutions are undermined, the highest considerations are not sufficient to keep the debased appetite under the control of reason. {MH 332.3}

The Bible nowhere sanctions the use of intoxicating wine. The wine that Christ made from water at the marriage feast of Cana was the pure juice of the grape. This is the "new wine . . . found in the cluster," of which the Scripture says, "Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it." Isaiah 65:8. {MH 333.1}

It was Christ who, in the Old Testament, gave the warning to Israel, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Proverbs 20:1. He Himself provided no such beverage. Satan tempts men to indulgence that will becloud reason and benumb the spiritual perceptions, but Christ teaches us to bring the lower nature into subjection. He never places before men that which would be a temptation. His whole life was an example of self-denial. It was to break the power of appetite that in the forty days' fast in the wilderness He suffered in our behalf the severest test that humanity could endure. It was Christ who directed that John the Baptist should drink neither wine nor strong drink. It was He who enjoined similar abstinence upon the wife of Manoah. Christ did not contradict His own teaching. The unfermented wine that He provided for the wedding guests was a wholesome and refreshing drink. This is the wine that was used by our Saviour and His disciples in the first Communion. It is the wine that should always be used on the Communion table as a symbol of the Saviour's blood. The sacramental service is designed to be soul-refreshing and life-giving. There is to be connected with it nothing that could minister to evil. {MH 333.2}