Results 1 - 20 of 32
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Rob Aronson Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68734 | ||
Joe , (but also Tim, Retxar, EdB, Hank, et al.), If you read my long history of posts on this thread, you'll see that we're of one mind concerning this point (using a myriad of applicable scriptures). The opposition has emplored everything from personal feelings, cultural alcoholism, to definitions of New Testament "wine." They have done so with little or thin scriptural backing, though we have supplied conclusive and convincing arguments based on many instances of scripture. There seems to be too much feeling and opinion concerning this matter. If we say that nothing biblical prohibits a glass of wine, then we appear to be making a case for drinking--which is certainly not so from either of us. If we say that drinking any alcoholic beverage (even wine) is evil, then we might possibly condemn even Jesus (because I believe for one that indeed He drank wine--though this is hard for some to take due to their feelings and opinions). I however, believe in being a "Romans 14:21" kind of guy as you've stated, and I don't want this issue to cause trouble. I would though, encourage everyone to read the posts made by John and myself, and see if you can BIBLICALLY refute point for point what we've shown. I've said if before, I'll say it again: we have to look at what the Bible actually says, not what we want it to say or think it says. Take care. I'm going to find a new topic :) I love every last one of ya's, -Rob Special note to Hank: I'm deeply sorry if I've said anything to offend you, in light of hearing about your son. God bless. |
||||||
2 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68729 | ||
EdB, If wine did not contain alcohol, why are there so many biblical instances that warn not to over indulge? Food for thought. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
3 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68728 | ||
Tim, I'm certainly not implying that 1 Timothy 3:8 is ambiguous. I think it speaks clearly through all versions, and consistently: 1Tm:3:8: Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;(KJV) 8 Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, (NKJV) 8 (1) Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, (2) or addicted to much wine (3) or fond of sordid gain, (NASB) 8Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. (NIV) I'm not drastically attempting to promote one view either. What I've done (and convincingly using applicable scriptures) is to show that drinking wine is not expressly forbidden, neither is it inherently evil--it's the over indulgence, which is drunkeness. However it is good that we have this discussion (even if it's a little drawn out) because it reveals the nature of sin. As I said before, is admiring beauty in a woman a sin? No, but to lust is. Is eating food a sin? No, but to be gluttonous is. Is drinking a glass of wine with a meal a sin? No, but to become drunk is. Now here is sin revealed and the confusion surrounding it. Let's look at eating. Eating is not a sin. When you begin to eat, you satisfy the needs of the body to sustain your life; still nothing wrong here. When your body is already satisfied, yet you continue to eat because the food tastes good (as with pizza, I used earlier), gluttony sets in--and there is sin. Now, there is a gray area between "satisfied" and "gluttonous." Within this gray area, confusion set in. This is the beginning of sin, which tempts us. If we give in to it, there is sin manifested; and whether it's eating food, admiring the beauty of a woman, or drinking a glass of wine this process holds true to form. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
4 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68726 | ||
Rextar, Yes indeed my friend. You're referring to the Revelation: Re:1:6: And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.(KJV) Other versions state this a bit differently, but since this is the one you've cited we'll discuss it (coincidentally, I think the KJV translates this verse best--but that's my opinion). Revelation 1:6 is a promise yet to come. Christ has done it, but we have not yet recieved that position in this world (though someday soon). However, what you're implying through the verses you've gathered together and along with this one, is a admonition not to drink alcohol. These verses collectively give you that general impression (and if you're wise you'll see that warning and follow it), but they do not expressly state it, neither is it a commandment (though there is some Levitical guidance for priests). Speaking for myself, I don't plan on consuming any alcohol during the millenial rule. I've certainly understood the "general message" that over-indulgence in alcohol is not consistent with following Christ. I have no problem conceeding this point. What I've said all along though, is that drinking wine is not the sin, but that drunkeness is. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
5 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68705 | ||
Retxar, I handle it like this: I don't drink. When I do, it's not very much, and there's usually some occasion (like a wedding or birthday). As I said before, I'm not making a case for alcohol consumption. But alright, let's see what you've cited. First Proverb 31:4: Prov 31:4 It is not for kings, O Lemuel, It is not for kings to drink wine, Or for rulers to desire strong drink, Who's doing the speaking here, where did this instruction/warning come from? His mother. This verse is not a command, and doesn't mean what you're implying. Prov 31:1 The words of King Lemuel, the oracle which his mother taught him: Next you cite Leviticus 10:9: Lev 10:9 "Do not drink wine or strong drink, neither you nor your sons with you, when you come into the tent of meeting, so that you will not die--it is a perpetual statute throughout your generations-- This is to Aaron and his sons telling them, do not drink wine or strong drink when you come into the Tent of Meeting. This verse fails to support your point. Next, Isaiah 28:7: Is 28:7 And these also reel with wine and stagger from strong drink: The priest and the prophet reel with strong drink, They are confused by wine, they stagger from strong drink; They reel while having visions, They totter (when rendering) judgment. This is not a command not to drink either, it's a pronouncement against Ephraim (when you read it in its proper context). This fails to support your point. Lastly, Ezekiel 44:21: Ezek 44:21 "Nor shall any of the priests drink wine when they enter the inner court. When? When shall they not drink wine, or before they do what? These verses don't support your claims. Again, I'm not making a case for alcohol, but only showing the Bible doesn't say about what most people think or want it to say. Yes, I know alcohol is deadly. Yes, I understand that it destroys lives. Etc, Etc, Etc. But it's not what I think or say about it that matters, but what the Bible says. Take care, Rob |
||||||
6 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68522 | ||
Retxar, I say this with nothing but love for you, but you seem to be missing the point despite a myriad of applicable verses being revealed that have shed light on this matter. Ask yourself this: are your objections to the scriptures we've cited based on other scriptures, or your own objections, and understanding? Take care, -Rob |
||||||
7 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68519 | ||
Hi Tim, I saw your post earlier from the other thread, but after the time that I originally posted. And yes, I'm aware of the translation concerns, but I was speaking more about people being mistaken to think that drinking alcohol (in any amount) is the sin. To give credance to my claim, I cited the rules for becoming a deacon established in the early church which relate that a deacon should not be given to much wine--it doesn't say "no wine at all", but "to much wine." Drinking is not the sin, drunkeness is. Eating is not the sin, gluttony is. Admiration of beauty is not the sin, lust is. These were my points; however today many seem to think that drinking even one drop of alcohol is a sin. I personally believe that Jesus made a pure wine at the wedding, the taste and effects of which we cannot probably comprehend. People recognized it as wine by taste, but were amazed about its extraordinary qualities. The mistaken assumption (and the charge leveled at Jesus) is that Jesus made wine, and drinking is a sin; therefore making Jesus a sinner and contributing to the sin of others. This is certainly not so, and my clarification about a drink vs drunkeness certainly helps a person to understand much better than saying that Jesus made grape juice (which sounds like a side-step to the alcohol question). If he did make grape juice, perfect; but understand that having a glass of wine with a meal is an ancient tradition and no more evil that taking a bite of steak. Take care (I always enjoy your posts, Tim), -Rob |
||||||
8 | Is astrology forbidden? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68495 | ||
Isa:47:13: Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee. Isa:47:14: Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it. There are many biblical references which condemn occultism and witchcraft, however, these are a couple of my favorite. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
9 | The beast with seven heads and ten horns | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68494 | ||
Here are the passages that you are referring to: Re:13:3: And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. Re:13:14: And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. These passages refer to either the death of the Antichrist, and his counterfeit ressurection; or more likely, the death and Revival of the old Roman Empire (which today is the European Union). Consider as well that there is a difference between the heads, the horns, and the crowns of the Beast: Daniel:7:8: I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. Amongst the seven heads and ten horns, another "little horn" emerges, who plucks up three of the other horns (rulers). The little horn is the Antichirst. Therefore, the wound to the head is probably not the physical death of the Antichrist (because he's a horn), but the death and revival of a kindgom (a head). Hope this helps, -Rob |
||||||
10 | Where are guardian angels mentioned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68484 | ||
Emmaus, It was my intention to show that the Prince of Perisia was indeed one of the fallen host. As for the references you quoted, how do they further the doctrine of individual permanently assigned gaurdian angels? I don't think they do. Here's what you cited: M't:18:10: Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.(KJV) This is questionable: Jesus says "their angels", not "each of their." While this may be the closest the Bible comes to hinting at guardian angels, it's incomplete--especially compared to the doctrine of the Trinity, which is explained clearly: 1John:5:7: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.(KJV) Next you cite Luke: Luke 16:22 "Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham's bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried.(NASB) This passage falls extremely short of supporting your contention. In fact, to use it as such is greatly stretching what it says. Your next reference is to the Psalms: Ps 34:7 The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear Him, And rescues them.(NASB) The Angel of the Lord is a specific personage. Consider: Ge:22:11: And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.(KJV) Concerning Psalm 91:10-13, it's in reference to the Messiah; and even if we do apply it to ourselves, it does not express individual assigned guardian angels for each person. You cite Job 33 (this is better, but...): Job 33:23-24 is questionable in using to support your claim because of its poetic context. Lastly, Zechariah: Zechariah 1:12? How do you figure? Zech 1:12 ΒΆ Then the angel of the LORD said, "O LORD of hosts, how long will You have no compassion for Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with which You have been indignant these seventy years?" (NASB) You seem to be confusing the "angel of the Lord", a specific personage, to "angels" in the plural sense--all of the heavenly host. This is not so, and a thorough reading of Genesis makes this apparent. Here's what you said at the end of your post: "As you can see from the references below, this teaching is not entirely wwithout scriptural reference especially Matt 18:10 even if the precise term like the term "guardian angel," like the term "Trinity" is not found in any texts explicitly. " Alright, now you're right about references, but I've just adequately refuted the ones you've chosen because they were too thin; and I have proven the doctrine of the Trinity using 1 John 5:7 (and there are many other passages which speak as clearly). Nowhere though do I see individually assigned life long guardian angels in the Bible. To me, this is a Catholic doctrine, and it's not fully supported by scripture. Guardian angels are certainly a nice thought, and I'd for one like it to be true--but it's just not supported or alluded to expressly enough for me to fully embrace and believe. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
11 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68477 | ||
Meredith, I'm guilty of the same thing, but do you understand why it's wrong? It's excessive, it's wastefull, it's greedy, and it's comparable to the sin of lust. It tastes good (sensuality), we eat it, we like, we keep eating it (even though we're already stuffed). Over-eating is giving in to fleshy desires based on sensation. We, however, are to live by the spirit in truth; not the flesh by desire. I always use the example of Pizza because everyone is guilty concerning it--including me :) Take care, -Rob |
||||||
12 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68475 | ||
And the process of forming a planet, vegetation, animals, and the first man took billions of years, right? Look folks, Jesus performed a miracle by turning water into wine--not grape juice. If the Bible says wine, I'm inclined to believe it instead of make up excuses because we think there is something evil about wine (which I've shown with my last post to be a mistaken assumption). Joh:2:9: When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, Joh:2:10: And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.(KJV) John 2:9 When the headwaiter tasted the water which had become wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the headwaiter *called the bridegroom, John 2:10 and *said to him, "Every man serves the good wine first, and when (the people) have drunk freely, (then he serves) the poorer (wine;) (but) you have kept the good wine until now." (NASB) I'm fond of saying, we have to look at what the Bible says--not what we want it to say, because times have changed, or we misunderstand. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
13 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68449 | ||
"Touch not wine?" Can't find that phrase in the KJV or the NASB. What version are you reading (or not reading)? Take care, -Rob |
||||||
14 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68447 | ||
Laughlin, This is a common question, and I've heard so many answers to it that it's not even funny (and some of those answers are just PLAIN funny themselves). I hear many people rationalize that Jesus didn't make wine, but grape juice (Jesus would never make wine--drinking alcohol is evil)! Wait a minute... First, let's clarify something. People seem to be under the impression that to drink alcohol is a sin. This is a mistaken assumption (though it does not give free license to be drinkers). Did you know that gluttony (overeating) is a sin? Let's understand why. Merrian-Webster's defines gluttony as: 1: excess in eating or drinking 2: greedy or excessive indulgence This definition brings to light the heart of the matter: excessive indulgence. Is it a sin to drink wine? If it is then Christ could not have saved me, be Jesus is without sin--yet He drank wine. Did he get drunk from wine or drink in excess? No. Even though Jesus Himself said that this was a claim the Pharisees would make against Him. M't:11:19: The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children. In short, to eat pizza is not a sin; but to eat that 20th piece in one sitting is gluttonous (you don't need it, but you continue to eat because it tastes good). This same holds true for alcohol. To drink alcohol is not the sin, but to drink in excess (which means to become drunk and lose self-control). Saying that drinking is not a sin, again, is not an endorsement to go out and drink a few beers. If you get drunk, that's sin; but if you have one drink (and you're of legal age to do so) there is no harm. Neither am I justifying anything with my answer, I almost never drink; but if I do, it's certainly in moderation and done using good judgement. There is a line, however, that you can cross in which good judgement goes out the window, and this is where sin sets in. One more pearl for you to consider if you don't want to take my word for it: 1Tm:3:8: Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; Here, there rules for becoming a deacon in the early church were established. Pay attention to what it says about wine: "not given to much wine." Is the requirement, "must not ever drink any wine at all?" Read it again if you're unsure. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
15 | Where are guardian angels mentioned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68443 | ||
Gomar, Consider these passages... Dan 10:13 "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia. Dan 10:21 "However, I will tell you what is inscribed in the writing of truth. Yet there is no one who stands firmly with me against these (forces) except Michael your prince. Dan 12:1 "Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands (guard) over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued. Rev 1:20 "As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches. We see from this that indeed there are "guardian" angels, but I prefer not to use this term. If I am not mistaken, the notion of personal guardian angels comes from Catholicism; however, there is nothing biblical which states that each person is given an angelic guardian. In terms of kingdoms though, it seems that each nation (or prominent nations) have national angelic princes, i.e. Micheal is the prince of Israel. In the Revelation, we see that each of the early churches had an angelic gaurdian. Moreover, the angel that came to Daniel was witheld 21 days from reaching him by the prince of Persia, and Michael had to come to his aid. From this scriptural account, we get a small glimpse at the angelic order and heirarchy, yet still, it is not even enough of a glimpse to fully support the claim I've made concerning national guardianship. How much more then should we question such a doctrine as "personal guardian angels" (for which there is no scripture for)? To believe this doctrine would require believing in something that the Bible doesn't fully back up. I don't think it's possible to fully comprehend the angelic order; after all, we have our own world to fully make sense of, which for any of us is plenty. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
16 | What are Calvins and Arminians? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68442 | ||
Hank, I agree completely. Denominationalism contributes nothing to our commission and serves as a perpetual hinderance and source of confusion for the unbeliever. Why would I want to be a Christian (as some say), when you guys can't ever seem to agree on anything? A Muslim friend recently threw that one at me. I'm quick to point out however, that if the Bible holds true, then such splintering is to be expected--even warned of. Though consider, if Christians were united we could transform the world; but before we can do that, an alternate plan has to unfold, and there will come a day when we will no longer hinder it from dominating the world for it's short time. I'm fond of saying that religion is a terrible thing, but reality is inescapable--no matter what we choose to believe. At the end of it all is One God, with one program, and only one way to Him. Take care, -Rob |
||||||
17 | What are Calvins and Arminians? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68429 | ||
Thanks Joe, Emmaus | ||||||
18 | What are Calvins and Arminians? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68427 | ||
Um.. did I say "wood working" :) Ahem. I meant "good working knowledge of the Bible." Guess next I'll learn English. |
||||||
19 | What are Calvins and Arminians? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68361 | ||
Hey Joe, Your words certainly hold merit, and in truth, one of the reasons I came to such a forum is to increase my historical knowledge of the church (as you know, this is a path that most have to seek independantly). I know well enough the differences between demoninations, and I certainly do regard myself as "Protestant" by nature (and moreover because I still protest Catholicism). I also look forward to learning more about the early great Christian thinkers and writers. I have a wood working knowledge of the Bible and I know what I believe; but I need to supplement that knowledge with the historical and lateral works of the early greats (I have Eusbius' Early Church History on the way, any other recommendation would be great). But you're right: "Christian" is a term that does not hold much relevance anymore. For example, when I tell people that I won't engage in certain activities because I'm Christian, they'll respond confusingly, "well so am I!" Thanks for your clarification Take care, Joe. -Rob |
||||||
20 | What are Calvins and Arminians? | Bible general Archive 1 | Rob Aronson | 68329 | ||
Norrie, I've enjoyed your post, and you bring to light something simple that many tend to miss. I too, label myself only as a "Christian" (a Christ-follower). I remember many years ago talking with a friend who asked me whether I was a Protestant or Catholic. "I'm a Christian", I replied. "Yeah but, if you're not a Catholic then you're Protestant, right?" Again I said, "I am neither a Catholic or a Protestant, I'm simply a Christian; a follower of Christ." Confused, my friend asked what my denomination was, to which I replied that I had no demonination. He finally drilled out of me the fact that I was brought up in a Baptist church, and self-satisfactorily concluded that I was a Protestant. "Please, try to understand", I told my friend, "when we begin to follow Jesus Christ, we transcend the labels of men, and claim a much more ancient heritage than that which any man has established through ideology, or cultural upheaval. I am a Christian, a follower of Christ, and I trace back my tradition to the early days of His frist followers; to whom He said the words which I have also heard in my heart, 'follow me.'" Take care, -Rob |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |