FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Non Abrahamic Religions & Philosophies
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-30-2004, 09:06 AM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inquisitive01
Once again, did God say this, as you suggested earlier? Was it God that was using what you have interpreted as being an "approving tone?"
God does not say much, owing largely to the fact that he does not, in fact, exist. The words ascribed to god are as convincing and real as words ascribed to santa claus. Ho Ho Ho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by inquisitive01
First, Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Word in the flesh, and is said in the Bible to sit "at the right hand of God" (meaning, Jesus is not God himself, although some seem to believe this).
Evidence of paternity please? Please start by proving that your god exists and can father human children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by inquisitive01
Of course, if you wish to assume that everyone in Matthew 26:27 and John 2:1-11 got drunk on what they were drinking, that's your choice (but these Verses do not say that anyone got drunk, do they).
I also assume that everyone took a piss after all that drinking, but the bible doesn't explicitly say they did. Does this indicate to you that no-one urinated over the entire course of the wedding?

Imagine the following:
"At his sisters wedding, Billy-Bob drank a whole bottle of Jack Daniels, and then he shotgunned beer until the cooler was empty."
So Billy-Bob was drunk?
"I didn't say he was drunk, I said Billy-Bob drank a whole bottle of Jack Daniels, and then he shotgunned beer until the cooler was empty."
It sounds sort of stupid, doesn't it?

Cheers,

Naked Ape
Naked Ape is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 09:44 AM   #22
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: North West usa
Posts: 10,245
Default

Inquisitie01,

I too would like to see how you address this:
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.
in terms of a total banning of alcohol. How do you explain the above verses don't mean alcohol? I'm not suggesting that there is any approval of drunkenness. But certainly drinking alcohol by the masses was acceptable? Or do you even awknowledge that one can have a drink or two without being drunk (i.e. drunk: of the kind that leads to foolishness and such).
funinspace is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 09:49 AM   #23
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: East U.S.A.
Posts: 883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naked Ape
God does not say much, owing largely to the fact that he does not, in fact, exist. The words ascribed to god are as convincing and real as words ascribed to santa claus. Ho Ho Ho.

Evidence of paternity please? Please start by proving that your god exists and can father human children.
I also assume that everyone took a piss after all that drinking, but the bible doesn't explicitly say they did. Does this indicate to you that no-one urinated over the entire course of the wedding?

Imagine the following:
"At his sisters wedding, Billy-Bob drank a whole bottle of Jack Daniels, and then he shotgunned beer until the cooler was empty."
So Billy-Bob was drunk?
"I didn't say he was drunk, I said Billy-Bob drank a whole bottle of Jack Daniels, and then he shotgunned beer until the cooler was empty."
It sounds sort of stupid, doesn't it?

Cheers,

Naked Ape


Thank you for your opinion, but I can imagine quite a bit (only) IF I choose to. To both you and diana, I believe the links below (as stated earlier) address the issue of "wine" in the Bible sufficiently. I understand they are a bit long, but they are still quite thorough, nonetheless. Here they are again for your convenience:

http://www.andrews.edu/~samuele/book...e_bible/3.html

http://www.andrews.edu/~samuele/book...e_bible/4.html
inquisitive01 is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 10:42 AM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chapka
It's incredible to me that there are still Christians who believe that drinking alcohol is sinful. The fact is, the Bible just doesn't make sense unless you realize that alcohol was a feature of the cultures that produced it.

The temperance movement spurred the publication of a number of books and pamphlets attempting to prove that, in fact, Biblical persons only drank grape juice. But it simply doesn't work; we know too much about the ancient world and their habits. In addition, the text gives it away. The story of the Wedding at Cana, for example, makes sense if the water is turned to wine, and not if it's turned to grape juice.

Yes, the Bible says that drunkenness is a vice. It also says that gluttony is a vice. But people in the Bible still eat--and they still drink alcohol.
Who says drinking alcohol is a sin? Being drunk is a sin, not having a glass of wine on occasion. Jesus drank wine at passover.
Magus55 is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 10:50 AM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
Who says drinking alcohol is a sin?
Surprisingly many American Christian denominations, most notably many baptists and all Mormons. Also the Prohibition Party and the WCTU, both of whom are still around.

Quote:
Being drunk is a sin, not having a glass of wine on occasion. Jesus drank wine at passover.
That's exactly the argument I've been making. However, inquisitive01's apparent conflation of drinking and drunkenness mean he's unlikely to appreciate the distinction.
chapka is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 10:53 AM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,780
Default

Ah yes, a long winded explanation of how the author can't tell the difference between preserved and fresh fruit.
Quote:
WHO IS DR. SAMUELE BACCHIOCCHI?
Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi is an Italo-American scholar who has studied and lived in several countries. He was born and brought up in Rome, Italy, a stone-throw from the Vatican wall. For his college education he went to England where he earned a B. A. degree in Theology at Newbold College. From England he came to America for his graduate studies and earned a M. A. and a B. D. degrees at Andrews University Theological Seminary. Upon completing his seminary training in 1964, he went with his wife, Anna, to Ethiopia where he served for five years as Bible and History teacher.

In 1969 Dr. Bacchiocchi returned to his native city of Rome to study at the prestigious Pontifical Gregorian University, where he was the first non-Catholic to be admitted in over 450 years of its history. At the Gregoriana he spent the next five years working toward a Doctoratus in Church History. He was awarded a gold medal by Pope Paul VI for attaining the academic distinction of summa cum laude for his class-work and dissertation From Sabbath to Sunday.

After completing his doctorate in 1974, Dr. Bacchiocchi was invited to teach at Andrews University, in Berrien Springs, Michigan, where he has been serving as Professor of Theology and Church History.
Strange, but all the winemasters that I met last week in the Okanagan Valley have a background in bio-chemistry and not theology. Perhaps that explains why all their wine contains alcohol. They all tell me that yeast eats sugar and excretes alchohol and carbon dioxide.

Bacchiocchi's long screeds are focused more on linguistic smoke and mirrors, and rather light on the bio-chemistry. This is exactly the sort of misguided applogetics that make certain christians seem retarded.

Quote:
Genesis 1:29
Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.
Given that pot plants bear seed, and are therefore "yours for food", are hash brownies OK?
Quote:
POISON HEMLOCK
Conium maculatum
(parsnip family)
TOXICITY RATINGS: Moderate to high.
ANIMALS AFFECTED: All animals may be affected. Grazing animals, swine and animals that may eat the seeds (especially poultry) are more at risk than pets.
DANGEROUS PARTS OF PLANT: All parts, especially young leaves and seeds.
That seed thing is excellent advice from your allmighty one, except for all the poisonous shit out there that bears seed.


Cheers,

Naked Ape
Naked Ape is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 11:20 AM   #27
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: North West usa
Posts: 10,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inquisitive01
Thank you for your opinion, but I can imagine quite a bit (only) IF I choose to. To both you and diana, I believe the links below (as stated earlier) address the issue of "wine" in the Bible sufficiently. I understand they are a bit long, but they are still quite thorough, nonetheless. Here they are again for your convenience:

http://www.andrews.edu/~samuele/book...e_bible/3.html

http://www.andrews.edu/~samuele/book...e_bible/4.html
Well, I read the pages even though I'm not debating the capacity to preserve grape juice. It was actually quite interesting in that part...Thanks.

But, the sub-link that had the tirade against alcohol itself, that spinned real hard to explain that Jesus' made better grape juice would make a 7th Day Adventist proud. Not that I haven't seen versions of this before. However, there are thousands of verses available, and NOT a single one says "THOW SHALL NOT DRINK ALCOHOL". Funny how that is. It found room to condemn homosexuality in no uncertain terms (though I disagree with the xian sense of morality here). But it couldn't find room for this little itty bitty tiny injunction. It's because your trinity group didn't have a problem with moderation. I'm always confounded that it is that hard to see. Is it a sin to eat over 4 ounces of meat because the NT comments on gluttony; or to abstain from any form of sex outside of kid production, because the NT spends allot of energy condemning all sorts of sexual things; or condemning any form of wealth because the NT spends allot of energy condemning greed?
funinspace is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 04:06 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 912
Default

Did you read those methods? None of them are actually conducive to producing juice from the preserved fruit. Salting, dessicating, storing with syrup and alcohol... BTW, do you know what "must" is?
This is generally refered to as "grasping at straws"

BTW, I have some familiarity with "pre-modern" food preservation. Ever eaten jugged hare?
Graculus is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 06:13 PM   #29
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: East U.S.A.
Posts: 883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chapka
Surprisingly many American Christian denominations, most notably many baptists and all Mormons. Also the Prohibition Party and the WCTU, both of whom are still around.



That's exactly the argument I've been making. However, inquisitive01's apparent conflation of drinking and drunkenness mean he's unlikely to appreciate the distinction.


I know the difference between a few sips of an alcoholic beverage and getting drunk on that beverage. Therefore, your interpretation of my "apparent conflation of drinking and drunkenness" is incorrect. Once again, if you drink without getting drunk, that is not against what the Bible says. If you get drunk (buzzed/intoxicated) on what you drink, that IS against what the Bible says.


Funinspace, your welcome. I thought it was quite interesting, too. In case you're also wondering, I know the Bible does not say anything against just drinking alcohol without getting intoxicated (drunk). However, it definitely speaks against getting intoxicated (drunk). Plus, if you've ever seen gluttony, then you know that one will know it when he/she sees it.


Graculus, what more can be said? If this is not what you wanted to see, I can't help it. You all did suggest that none of the "wine" in the Bible could be plain ole' grape juice, didn't you?


Quote:
Originally Posted by From one of the links
Squeezed Grapes. The fact that the ancients knew several methods for preserving grapes fresh until the following vintage suggests that unfermented grape juice could be produced at any time of the year simply by squeezing grapes into a cup.

Grasping at straws? I don't think so. You can think so if you wish.


Naked Ape, you can question Dr. Bacchiocchi's credentials (sarcasm: would have never guessed that would have happened ) IF you choose to do so. You can also eat pot seeds IF you choose to do so.
inquisitive01 is offline  
Old 09-30-2004, 06:19 PM   #30
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: East U.S.A.
Posts: 883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naked Ape
Given that pot plants bear seed, and are therefore "yours for food", are hash brownies OK?
That seed thing is excellent advice from your allmighty one, except for all the poisonous sh## out there that bears seed.


Cheers,

Naked Ape


Funny you should mention poisonous things here in this thread. I suppose you've never heard of alcohol poisoning (and death from it)?
inquisitive01 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:41 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.