GC, you are not being your usual self. You are avoiding questions and overlooking plain statements from the pen of inspiration. Ellen's comments are too clear to misunderstand. They cannot be misconstrued to mean Jesus permitted drinking alcohol and drunkenness in the past but has since then raised the standard to forbid it. I am very surprised at the way your are handling this topic and thread.

Kland,

No, I really cannot. I believe it would be a sin for me, yes. For someone else, I would not know. God is the Judge.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

What is "it"? Is that, being drunk? What is "being drunk" to you? That is, how would you know that you yourself was drunk? Now, that might lead to an amusing answer so keep in mind the drunk in the street slurring his words as he states he is NOT drunk.

Just to be absolutely clear then, you are retracting your past remark about others drinking is ok, but being drunk is not ok. Right?

kland,

To my view, drinking is not ok. Being drunk is not ok. But the Bible seemingly forbids neither--at least not to everyone. Mrs. White certainly forbids both. The standard has been raised.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Mike,

I'm a strong supporter of both Ellen White and the Bible. Always have been, and am still now. The reason you may see me as "handling" this topic unusually is simply because this is an unusually difficult one.

The Bible is said to be like a sword. A sword has two opposing slopes which finally meet in a knife-edge point. That point is sharp. It is where apparent opposites meet.

This topic is not without its opposites, that is for sure. In my analysis, Ellen White was a bit imprecise in her choice of words. Her affinity to superlatives and to absolutes has created an extra "opposite" for us to try to work out. I confess that I have a difficult time reconciling her statement that "The Bible nowhere sanctions the use of intoxicating wine."

To me, the Bible does sanction its use. It is notable, however, that Mrs. White never references or uses in any way those portions of the Bible which do so. In any case, one of those is from God Himself, the other supposedly by a King Lemuel.

To better see the knife's edge here, let's put the statements side-by-side.

"The Bible nowhere sanctions the use of intoxicating wine." (EGW)

"And thou shalt bestow that money {tithe} for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household..." (Deuteronomy 14:26)

"Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts." (Proverbs 31:6)


Most people, to resolve these "apparent contradictions," try to look carefully at the words to see if they might be defined or used in a manner which would still be consistent. For instance, we might look at the term "intoxicating" or the word "sanction" to see if these might have a meaning which would be consistent with what the Bible says.

I take the Bible above Mrs. White, if necessary. So that is my starting point. Jesus used the same scriptures as are quoted here when He was on this earth, and we do not see Him correcting them, nor in any way implying that they might be inexact.

Mrs. White's words, however, seem too clear to avoid the obvious contradiction. There is one possibility with the word "sanction" that we might choose to accept. Some will accept it, and some may not. But here it is: "sanction" has, as one of its definitions, the meaning of "to encourage." I must agree that if the word were used in that sense, I do not see the Bible as encouraging the use of strong drink. It allows it, permits it for certain occasions or people, but does not encourage it.

This is the only way I can possibly resolve the apparent contradiction at this point. If it comes to outright contradiction, in any case, I take the Bible first.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I recall some people saying Jesus was a good man, but he wasn't God. How can a fraud be good?
Perhaps, as pointed out, your definition of "sanction" might be different?

Well, it would not just be my definition. It seems to me that if there were to be truly no contradiction here, it would have to have been that Mrs. White herself had intended that specific usage of the word.

Webster's 1828 Dictionary has this: "SANCTION, v.t. To ratify; to confirm; to give validity or authority to."

I don't know if that is very helpful here.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

GC, thank you for taking the time to explain yourself. That's more like it, more like you. I'm surprised, though, that you are so quick to assume Ellen got it wrong. The "sanction" passage isn't, as you know, the only thing she wrote about it. Listen:


Her use of the phrases "expressly, explicitly forbade" are inspired and reflect her gift and calling as a prophet. To dismiss, discount, or discard what she wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is to call into question her prophetic gift. It is tantamount to rejecting the wisdom of God. To build a case in favor of alcoholic beverages and drunkenness based on two passages is unwise and dangerous. The overwhelming weight of evidence and inspiration clearly portrays God as adamantly opposed to alcoholic beverages and drunkenness issuing stern denunciations and condemnation. "He has forbidden their use, and enforced His prohibitions with strong warnings and threatenings." You are treading unsafe water, brother. Please reconsider your position.

Mike,

Those statements are not exactly in the same category. Each of those can be explained simply enough by recognizing that the standard has been raised. The standards may have been different in Bible times. Alternatively, these statements may refer to a particular context, such as the prohibitions for the priesthood. In the book of Exodus, God spoke of a future time when His people should be "a kingdom of priests." In Revelation, that is said to have been accomplished. I believe that refers to our day. As "priests," we are held to the high standard of spiritual leaders, not to the lower standard of the masses.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

GC, it is clear you have made up your mind and nothing I quote is going to persuade you otherwise. I have nothing further to say. Thank you for the dialog.