Tony Erikson Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I don't know about that, I've never heard the excuse (of Christian belief) being used over here. Luckily not yet but you know when it does happen, we won't be allowed to question it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Well, what's more important for them to obay, God's command or man's law? By eye for an eye, thieves should be stolen from. Obey God first and foremost. We are his slaves after all. So by that interpretation, wine is also bad, and they drink wine in Holy Communion ? But that's the blood of Christ and is not taken for its intoxicating effects. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 That's Old Testament and certainly not part of Christ's teaching. He was more of the "turn the other cheek" persuasion. Indeed it was. It is not however unheard of for Christians to invoke parts of the OT which bolster their arguments (whilst ignoring the parts which they don't want to abide by). jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 Indeed it was. It is not however unheard of for Christians to invoke parts of the OT which bolster their arguments (whilst ignoring the parts which they don't want to abide by). jb Well, it also wasn't God's instruction, He specifically said the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Erikson Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 But that's the blood of Christ and is not taken for its intoxicating effects. jb So it's alright to drink blood but not smoke god's herbs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 So it's alright to drink blood but not smoke god's herbs? I think Barley was being a tad sarcastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Erikson Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I think Barley was being a tad sarcastic I did hope so but sadly, people do parrot stuff like that. I'm off to find my sense of humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 So it's alright to drink blood but not smoke god's herbs? I think Barley was being a tad sarcastic I wish I was being sarcastic. I have indeed heard that excuse from a Christian. jb ETA: More on Jesus and wine. http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/wine_in_the_bible/4.html We have examined at considerable length the major wine-related stories or sayings of Jesus that are commonly used to prove that our Savior made, commended, used and commanded the use of alcoholic wine until the end of time. We have found these claims to rest on unfounded assumptions, devoid of textual, contextual and historical support. The "good wine" Jesus made at Canaan was "good" not because of its high alcoholic content but because it was fresh, unfermented grape-juice. The "new wine" Jesus commended through the parable of the new wineskins is unfermented must, either boiled or filtered, because not even new wineskins could withstand the pressure of the gas produced by fermenting new wine. Jesus’ description of Himself as "eating and drinking" does not imply that He used alcoholic wine but that He associated with people freely at their meals and elsewhere. The "fruit of the vine" that Christ commanded to be used as a memorial of His redeeming blood was not fermented wine, which in the Scripture represents human depravity, corruption and divine indignation, but unfermented and pure grape juice, a fitting emblem of Christ’s untainted blood shed for the remission of our sins. The claim that Christ used and sanctioned the use of alcoholic beverages has been found to be unsubstantiated. The evidence we have submitted shows that Jesus abstained from all intoxicating substances and gave no sanction to His followers to use them. and if you're really bored http://www.learnthebible.org/jesus-and-wine.html So in summary, it looks as though there may be no sanction in the NT permitting the use of intoxicating substances, that is if we extrapolate from wine (there being no mention of cannabis per se). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuy Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 No it can't, read the next bit in purple. LOL, it must be true because its written in purple The purple bit is an obvious gross generalisation; I myself have probably been over the legal limit while driving in the past, did I drive like a maniac? no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 LOL, it must be true because its written in purple The purple bit is an obvious gross generalisation; I myself have probably been over the legal limit while driving in the past, did I drive like a maniac? no. No, I made it purple. I can't see it saying that anyone drives like a maniac. It's not a gross generalisation, it's a statement from the Department of Health, who usually base their conclusion on evidence. Well done on "probably" being over the limit by the way. If you were unsure that you were over the limit, I doubt there'd be enough alcohol in your system to make you drive like a maniac. Are you intent on derailing the thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.