Originally posted by FMFMy Bible gives John 2:10 thus:
This verse suggests that Jesus had no objection to supplying "drunk" people with even more alcohol. Does this undermine the notion that alcohol "in moderation" is OK, as opposed to getting "drunk" being not OK?
"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."
It's a measure of time, not drunkenness.
18 Jan 15
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneGreek: methuó
My Bible gives John 2:10 thus:
"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."
It's a measure of time, not drunkenness.
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance : be drunk.
From another form of methe; to drink to intoxication, i.e. Get drunk -- drink well, make (be) drunk(-en).
see GREEK methe
http://biblehub.com/strongs/greek/3184.htm
The empirical evidence therefore does not corroborate your claim, the indication is that guests at times were indeed intoxicated. Although there is no indication that the guests at this wedding were intoxicated when Christ turned the water into wine.. I suggest therefore that its a much more honest policy to simply find out what the Greek actually says before imputing some kind of strict Calvinistic morality to the verse and trying to mask what it actually says because it offends your moral perceptions and sensibilities.
Indeed the New World translation of the Holy scriptures against which your prejudices knows no bounds, accurately translates the verse according to the original Greek,
and said to him: “Everyone else puts out the fine wine first, and when people are intoxicated, the inferior. You have saved the fine wine until now.” John 2:10 - New World translation of the Holy Scriptures.
which is of course what we have come to expect from the Worlds most accurate English translation.
saith, hath, doth, hast and thou are archaic and can lead to confusion in an inferior translation like the King James Bible.
19 Jan 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMy reading of it is that these words ... “Everyone else puts out the fine wine first, and when people are intoxicated, the inferior. You have saved the fine wine until now” ... are an indication (in plain English) that the guests were drunk. The word "now" links to "when people are intoxicated", while "first" refers to a time when the words "when people are intoxicated" do not or do not yet apply. I don't think this meaning is even particularly subtle or difficult to grasp, and a competent non-native speaker of English would most likely understand it as it is written above.
...the indication is that guests at times were indeed intoxicated. Although there is no indication that the guests at this wedding were intoxicated when Christ turned the water into wine.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie“Everyone else puts out the fine wine first, and when people are intoxicated, the inferior. You have saved the fine wine until now”.
Greek: ...
Do the Greek words used for "fine" or "fine wine" support Grampy Bobby's page 1 claim that "This [wine's] vintage was the finest ever served... before or since" or is his assertion extra-Biblical?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAlso back then weddings were about a week long and not just over night like in modern day countries. Alcohol is like a drug. One sip by the wrong person can get them hooked. And that would lead to other sins. So I would agree with this speaker that Jesus did not give them alcohol.
Greek: methuó
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance : be drunk.
From another form of methe; to drink to intoxication, i.e. Get drunk -- drink well, make (be) drunk(-en).
see GREEK methe
http://biblehub.com/strongs/greek/3184.htm
The empirical evidence therefore does not corroborate your claim, the indication is that guests at times were ind ...[text shortened]... thou are archaic and can lead to confusion in an inferior translation like the King James Bible.
19 Jan 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI have proved to you in the past that the NWT is one of the worst overall translations. Why don't you just throw it in the trash like I did and get one of the good translations?
Greek: methuó
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance : be drunk.
From another form of methe; to drink to intoxication, i.e. Get drunk -- drink well, make (be) drunk(-en).
see GREEK methe
http://biblehub.com/strongs/greek/3184.htm
The empirical evidence therefore does not corroborate your claim, the indication is that guests at times were ind ...[text shortened]... thou are archaic and can lead to confusion in an inferior translation like the King James Bible.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117006
19 Jan 15
Originally posted by FMFIt's extra-Biblical.
[b]“Everyone else puts out the fine wine first, and when people are intoxicated, the inferior. You have saved the fine wine until now”.
Do the Greek words used for "fine" or "fine wine" support Grampy Bobby's page 1 claim that "This [wine's] vintage was the finest ever served... before or since" or is his assertion extra-Biblical?[/b]
Originally posted by RBHILLsure ignore the empirical evidence in favour of an unsubstantiated and irrational belief. The scriptures say otherwise. You have NO basis for your claim, none whatsoever.
Also back then weddings were about a week long and not just over night like in modern day countries. Alcohol is like a drug. One sip by the wrong person can get them hooked. And that would lead to other sins. So I would agree with this speaker that Jesus did not give them alcohol.
Wine was an integral part of the diet and I have never heard of or read of anyone becoming an alcoholic with a single sip. Are you in your senses?
Originally posted by RJHindsI have demonstrated with reference to the original language just why the New world translation is a superior translation in this regard. As you cannot say in the case of John 2:10 why its not and instead resort to the usual balloon head reasoning which has marred your entire posting history, I really have nothing to say to you simply because you have posted nothing worthy of serious consideration.
I have proved to you in the past that the NWT is one of the worst overall translations. Why don't you just throw it in the trash like I did and get one of the good translations?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou have amnesia again. I have presented all kinds of evidence from some of the best Greek scholars that the NWT is an inferior translation. You pointed to only one Greek Scholar that thought otherwise and he was discredited and none of the Watchtower translators of the NWT were recognized Greek scholars and you know it. You are lying if you say they where.
I have demonstrated with reference to the original language just why the New world translation is a superior translation in this regard. As you cannot say in the case of John 2:10 why its not and instead resort to the usual balloon head reasoning which has marred your entire posting history, I really have nothing to say to you simply because you have posted nothing worthy of serious consideration.
Originally posted by RJHindsYou have said nothing about the New world translations superlative and accurate rendering of John 2:10 and nothing worthy of serious comment. Sorry but i have better things to do than remonstrate with people that believe nothing but their own propaganda. Please engage someone else I really have nothing to say to you.
You have amnesia again. I have presented all kinds of evidence from some of the best Greek scholars that the NWT is an inferior translation. You pointed to only one Greek Scholar that thought otherwise and he was discredited and none of the Watchtower translators of the NWT were recognized Greek scholars and you know it. You are lying if you say they where.
As for assertions of lying, you are a known cheat and have no basis for casting aspersions of moral iniquity against anyone.