Is coffee drinking really a sin?

[M. T. Cross]

OK.

"Stop drinking only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses." 1 Timothy 5:23

So what other sins are permissible if used for medicinal/therapeutic purposes?

I once read that researchers believe that the reason the plague was considerably less prevalent in Scandinavian countries was due to their high rate of alcohol consumption. The virus was spread in the drinking water of the time, and they drank more mead than water.

[OzarkWoman]

Drinking coffee is no more a sin than eating bacon or drinking tea. People are not going to eat and drink, or nt, their way into Heaven.

[Planey]

The wine Jesus made at the wedding feast was not fermented

You know this because...?

Graeme

[Tom Wetmore]

Actually, there is no evidence in the text of the story in John 2 to support grape juice. As with virtually every other usage of the Greek word for wine in the NT the context supports fermented wine. The Greek word describing the "good wine" to which the the master of the wedding feast positively compared Jesus' wine was intoxicating wine served first until the guests were too drunk to notice or care about the later served inferior quality wine. He chided the servants for bringing that good stuff out last.

As for the verse in Timothy, likewise a little grape juice for stomach and other such ailments instead of water doesn't make much sense, really. This is the same word as used elsewhere for fermented wine including the wine that would burst old wineskins of which Jesus spoke.

But you can of course believe otherwise if you wish. However, exxplicit proof that drinking alcohol is a sin is not what the Bible actually teaches. Drinking to excess or drunkeness is consistently condemned. But drinking a little or in moderation without drunkeness is not. However, those dedicated specially to God, such as Nazarines, were to avoid all intoxicating drink. I think a better argument is that we as Adventists have taken a similar vow (remember the temperance pledges we used to sign as youth?) as God's people.

[EmptyTomb]

Jesus Christ is the originator of all missionary work done in our world. He worked miracles to heal the sick, but He never worked a miracle in His own behalf. His first noted miracle was performed at a marriage feast in Cana, when He turned water into wine. . . . {CTr 230.2}

By this miracle Christ wished to teach that unfermented wine is far preferable to fermented wine. Christ never created fermented wine. The wine made on this occasion was exactly like the wine that comes fresh from the cluster. Christ knew the influence of fermented wine, and by giving them pure, unfermented wine, He showed them the only safe way in which to use grape juice. {CTr 230.3}

Do you think Ellen White just made this up??

--------------------------------------------

Also some scripture for you to consider:

"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise." (Proverbs 20:1)

"Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has contentions? Who has complaints? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who linger long at the wine, those who go in search of mixed wine. Do not look on the wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when it swirls around smoothly; At the last it bites like a serpent, and stings like a viper." (Proverbs 23:29-32)

Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!....Isaiah 5:11 (KJV)

The only way a person can get drunk is with fermentation.And to say Jesus got people drunk with something that is so obviously contrary to the SOP and scripture seems to imply the Bible and SOP are contradicting each other.

Can you imagine Jesus getting someone drunk and that person gets into a car accident and kills someone or worse that person dies a slow death because of liver failure?

ET

[CoAspen]

Quote:

If you know your bible you would know it is a sin CoAspen.

Total cop-put....as normal when people make pronouncements they can't support! I know my Bible, we have been down this road before, extensively, and still no Biblical support, as you requested, for support of your own post!!

[M. T. Cross]

ET, a while back in this thread you asked that things be backed with scripture. Just curious if you consider EGW to be scripture? Not judging you either way, but it might help this thread if you clarified that. If you do not then it opens up a lot of possibilities for people to quote the writings and/or thoughts of many people/beings.

[Tom Wetmore]

Yet the master of the feast tasted it and recognized it as fermented... Care to explain why EGW contradicts Scripture?

[EmptyTomb]

@CoAspen

@Tom Wetmore

@M.T.Cross

I believe I did post some scripture and SOP.Look 3 posts up.

All you have to do is read it.

@Tom Wetmore...you said the master of the feast tasted it and recognized it as fermented..

What verse says that??? He recognized it as fermented??

Actual bible quote:

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,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.

John 2:9-10 (KJV)

Perhaps the ruler of the feast liked the way the wine tasted..after all Jesus made this wine.

"Be not discouraged because your heart seems hard. Every obstacle, every internal foe, only increases your need of Christ. He came to take away the heart of stone, and give you a heart of flesh. Look to him for grace to overcome your special faults, to put away every darling sin."

{ST, June 19, 1884 par. 4}

Debateing none believers is tiring...

ET

[M. T. Cross]

Yes I realize you quote SOP. Earlier you said you wanted only scriptural backing. Its a bit confusing. So I am wonder ing you think they are one and the same thing.

Debateing none believers is tiring...

I am the only non believer (in EGW and/or the Bible) the rest just disagree with you.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

Debateing none believers is tiring... offtobed

Tiring yes! Especially when truth is not important! If you can't be effective with an 'unbeliever', what are your chances with those that read and study Bible and still arriving at different conclusions than you?

If you can find the 'Biblical support' you ask for then post it, should be rather easy! You made the statement, support it! It is not up to the listener to find your support. You are the accuser, prove it.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

It is no more necessary to require all to accept one's views and opinions as it is to wear diapers to one's debutante ball..

[M. T. Cross]

It is no more necessary to require all to accept one's views and opinions as it is to wear diapers to one's debutante ball..

I am not sure where I am going to use that, but I am saving it because that is one of the coolest things I have ever read.

[Tom Wetmore]

I believe I did post some scripture and SOP.Look 3 posts up.

All you have to do is read it.

@Tom Wetmore...you said the master of the feast tasted it and recognized it as fermented..

What verse says that??? He recognized it as fermented??

Actual bible quote:

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,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.

John 2:9-10 (KJV)

Perhaps the ruler of the feast liked the way the wine tasted..after all Jesus made this wine.

Debateing none believers is tiring...

ET

First of all engaging in the ad hominem tactic of accusing those who disagree with you of being unbelievers shows a lack of a real answer among other things. ( not to mention inappropriate conduct in these forums...)

I have already told you what verse. Verse 10. The Greek word translated in the KJV as "we'll drunk" is methyo. It unambiguously has only one meaning, to be intoxicated.

I don't think EGW consulted the Greek text...

Now read Romans 14. And consider the words of Jesus that it is not what goes into the mouth, but what comes out of it that makes one unclean in the sense of sinful. (Not to mention what he says about judging another...)

I have offered you plenty of Scripture to support what I say. But I still haven't seen any from you to say that drinking alcohol is a sin. (Shall we next talk about the sour wine that Jesus took from the soldiers when he was on the cross?)

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

how narrow the path to heaven really is.

“You can enter God’s Kingdom only through the narrow gate. The highway to hell is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose that way. 14 But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult, and only a few ever find it.Matt 7:13,14 NLT

Is it wiser to see how broad a path we can travel when there are alligators on both sides for those who get too close, or would we be more apt to make our way safely to the home Jesus has gone to prepare for us if we stick closer to the middle of the road.

Seems like Jesus gave us each some things to think through for ourselves, all including asking His advice if we're not quite sure.

God cares!

[Don777]

Yet the master of the feast tasted it and recognized it as fermented... Care to explain why EGW contradicts Scripture?

This has been answered in another post, I think. The master of the feast certainly liked the wine Jesus had made. He considered it superior. Ever watch a wine expert examine wine? Its more than just the fermentation of interest to the expert. The scriptural account leaves room for a "grape juice" interpretation. Though, it would be a minority view, probably. To call this minority view a contradiction is not necessary.

[Ted Oplinger]

I know full well the abstinence stand the Adventist church maintains, and that EGW wrote extensively concerning alcohol.

Yet, she contests not to go by her writings, but by the Scriptures first and foremost - then come to her writings to compare, that the Testimonies might drive one closer to the Lord.

The Bible does contain some rather curious statements for those adopting absolute stands on issue, and on the point of alcohol, Adventist eyes glaze over with respect to abstinence at this little gem....and I am surprised it has not yet come up in conversation in this thread just yet. Scripture, in context, was asked for, and here it is:

Deuteronomy 14:24-26

24 But if the journey is too long for you, so that you are not able to carry the tithe, or if the place the Lord chooses to put His name is too far from you, when the Lord your God has blessed you,

25 then you shall exchange it for money, take the money in your hand, and go to the place the Lord your God chooses,

26 and you shall spend that money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, for whatever your heart desires; you shall eat there before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice, you and your household."

For those wanting wiggle room...the Hebrew there does not give you that. The word translated "strong drink" is "shekar", the very word for strong, intoxicating drink.

This strongly implies the wine listed with it is NOT the unfermented juice, but the intoxicating kind.

In short, if one finds themselves living too far away from where the Lord would eventually set up His dwelling place (aka, Jerusalem), then all of the tithe stored throughout the year was to be converted to money, then the household was to journey to Jerusalem to make their payments, give to the Levites, and have a real feast-party before the Lord...complete with the adult beverages of one's desire.

And the Lord accepted this.

This also brings up some interesting thoughts on what could be done with our tithe...but that's for another thread

Any comments?

Food for thought...

[Tom Wetmore]

Yes, I recognize that calling it a contradiction is strong and perhaps harsh. But it does go to the blind reliance on EGW as the final authority and to the real and practical nature of her inspiration and gifts and how they become her written words. I think this is just one more example of the contradiction and tension we have in our understanding or her prophetic gifts. On the one hand our official Church position is inspiration of the individual, not verbal inspiration and that EGW was not infallible and inerrant. But on the other hand there is huge resistance to honestly dealing with apparent discrepancies and even errors in her writings. The very common treatment and interpretation of her writings treat them as being verbally inspired and that she could not possibly be wrong. That comes through very clearly in this discussion by the unfortunate and actually very offensive reaction that those who raise such questions are non-believers.

To the point of your correct observation that "grape juice" interpretation is a minority view, I think that it erodes our credibility to maintain this in the face of careful exegesis of the passage and comparisons to other Scripture. It tends to lead to strange conclusions and far-fetched theories of grape juice preservation in ancient times. What it is in reality is a clear example of eisegesis.

[Tom Wetmore]

Well said, Ted!

I have raised that passage before in discussions about tithe and the use of tithe. It is usually met with slack jawed disbelief.

On the topic at hand, it really does confirm that the Scriptural evidence is not that drinking alcohol is sin. If it were sin even one drop ingested would be sin. And the same would go for coffee and tea. To engage in sin for medicinal/therapeutic purposes would still be sin. And the eyes glazed over absolutist view could not accept that Jesus could have possibly ingested alcohol, even letting one drop passing his lips, and remain sinless. It also refuses to recognize the scientific fact that the fermentation begins immediately from the moment grapes are pressed into juice. And it conveniently overlooks the fact that the gospels record that the second time Jesus was offered sour wine on the cross, he took it.

This is very much like the absurd view that eating flesh food is a sin that some devoted Adventists maintain. When confronted with the facts of Scripture that Jesus did, there is denial and convoluted reasoning to try to explain away the facts or to suggest that the require standard of conduct then and now are different. Simply put, it was not sin in his time, but is now sin in the end of time. That absurdity just ignores the true defintion of sin and opens the door to relativism. Yet with as firm a resolve those same adherents will deny it going the other way - that what was sin then might not be sin now.

[EmptyTomb]

Jesus Christ is the originator of all missionary work done in our world. He worked miracles to heal the sick, but He never worked a miracle in His own behalf. His first noted miracle was performed at a marriage feast in Cana, when He turned water into wine. . . . {CTr 230.2}

By this miracle Christ wished to teach that unfermented wine is far preferable to fermented wine. Christ never created fermented wine. The wine made on this occasion was exactly like the wine that comes fresh from the cluster. Christ knew the influence of fermented wine, and by giving them pure, unfermented wine, He showed them the only safe way in which to use grape juice. {CTr 230.3}

Do you think Ellen White just made this up??

--------------------------------------------

Also some scripture for you to consider:

"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise." (Proverbs 20:1)

"Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has contentions? Who has complaints? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who linger long at the wine, those who go in search of mixed wine. Do not look on the wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when it swirls around smoothly; At the last it bites like a serpent, and stings like a viper." (Proverbs 23:29-32)

Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!....Isaiah 5:11 (KJV)

The only way a person can get drunk is with fermentation.And to say Jesus got people drunk with something that is so obviously contrary to the SOP and scripture seems to imply the Bible and SOP are contradicting each other.

Can you imagine Jesus getting someone drunk and that person gets into a car accident and kills someone or worse that person dies a slow death because of liver failure?

ET

@tomwetmore and coaspen:

In case you missed this post.If you have a problem with Ellen white and the Bible don,t take it out on me! Your arguements are not even clever just worldly. And if you do not believe what ellen white wrote or scripture i think that makes you unbelievers.So please go argue with God not me.

ET

[Tom Wetmore]

And that brings me back to my original point that EGW's use of the word "sin" was a poor choice of words. It gives rise to misunderstanding and strained (and strange) interpretations of Scripture.

I believe that a better understanding of her use of the word is that she was using it loosely in a common vernacular sense as some might use it today, like say, "That was sinfully delicious". She was not making a moral pronouncement so much as simply say it was a dietary sin. Confirmation of her loose use of the word sin is shown by a quick search of her writings to se what else she says is sin. (We have done this little exercise here before.). Did you know she says it is a sin to forget!

OK, I yield the floor...

[Neil D]

In case you missed this post.If you have a problem with Ellen white and the Bible don,t take it out on me! Your arguements are not even clever just worldly. And if you do not believe what ellen white wrote or scripture i think that makes you unbelievers.So please go argue with God not me.

ET

I have gone thru this, and looked over the texts and have arrived at a conclusion....

There is room, by making certain assumptions, to argue both sides...There are implications, though, that place EGW in strange contrasts...on both sides...

perhaps our understanding of "inspiration" is in need of being broader or growing as we grow older?...Do we really understand the spiritual side of understanding inspiration when we use literal understanding? There is a wealth of confusion for SDAs here....

And that is subject for another thread....As this thread is now coming to the "beating the dead horse phase" of discussion...

[lazarus]

However, exxplicit proof that drinking alcohol is a sin is not what the Bible actually teaches. Drinking to excess or drunkeness is consistently condemned. But drinking a little or in moderation without drunkeness is not. However, those dedicated specially to God, such as Nazarines, were to avoid all intoxicating drink. I think a better argument is that we as Adventists have taken a similar vow (remember the temperance pledges we used to sign as youth?) as God's people.

A few weeks ago we ordained some deacons and deaconesses. In our preparation meeting one our sharper ordinans noted that Paul says "Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience" (I Timothy 3:8-9).

Jokingly, he observed that as a newly ordained deacon he can still drink, but not much. The Apostle Paul did not go as far as SDA's go. I think it is good that we teach abstinence but we have to be honest and say that this is not what the Bible commands. We are about being true to scripture, right?

Isn't this thread about coffee tho' ?

BTW if drinking coffee is a sin then so is soda. A Sprite can keep you out of heaven.

[Tom Wetmore]

Referring to the careful exegesis as "worldly" is really little different than calling us non-believers. It suggests you really cannot directly address the points we have made.

The Scripture you have used still does not support that drinking alcohol is sin. What they speak to is not just drinking alcohol, but drinking to excess or drunkeness. Even a secular view condemns that without moral judgment. And those passages still do not call it sin. They speak to the bad consequences of drunkeness and drinking to excess.

Compare Scripture with Scripture and you see that context is important. If throwing a party with strong drink using tithe money is specifically directed in the passage noted by Ted how could it also be sin? Compare and reconcile your verses with the other ones I have posted. A consistent hermeneutic does not support the absolutist position that drinking alcohol is sin. Risky, yes. Too much, unwise and likely to lead to bad things. But not sin if done in moderation.

OK, now I'll yield the floor...

[EmptyTomb]

And that brings me back to my original point that EGW's use of the word "sin" was a poor choice of words. It gives rise to misunderstanding and strained (and strange) interpretations of Scripture.

I believe that a better understanding of her use of the word is that she was using it loosely in a common vernacular sense as some might use it today, like say, "That was sinfully delicious". She was not making a moral pronouncement so much as simply say it was a dietary sin. Confirmation of her loose use of the word sin is shown by a quick search of her writings to se what else she says is sin. (We have done this little exercise here before.). Did you know she says it is a sin to forget!

OK, I yield the floor...

Maybe we should edit Ellen whites writings or rewrite them so it fits in todays world? Or your way of thinking. I take her writings as literal and no need for special interpretations.

So based on that we will never agree.

Seems to me Ellen White is tossed in the trash heap with some folks on this thread and your main thing is to shake my faith and question the prophets authority. This also bears a false witness that you alone are responsible for.

ET