Christians Hand Out Cupcakes

[Angel4Truth]

If getting drunk is not a sin, why are you trying so hard to prove these people weren't drunk? If it's not a sin, who cares?

You are who claim they were all drunk, you need to prove that, then you need to prove it was a sin under the 613 laws - then you need to show the penalty for that sin (after you have established a sin was committed) and compare that to the penalty for the sin of homosexual sex. (for your claim they are equal under the law - and remember the wedding is before the cross, they are all under OT law)

You have FAILED to back ANY of your claims. You just twist and writhe and lie, then bait and switch.

 

[WizardofOz]

In the Bible, the Greek word often translated “drunk” has broader meaning than drunkenness. Only by context can the word refer to drunkenness. The Greek word methuo means to be filled, rushed (with liquid), saturated, or satiated.

 

[Angel4Truth]

You are arguing what an English statement means. I am giving you the actual Greek word used in the bible.


If getting drunk is not a sin, why are you trying so hard to prove these people weren't drunk? If it's not a sin, who cares?

Another lie, i was correcting your claim of a what a phrase means that YOU cited, not me.

 

[Angel4Truth]

One more time- lying pothead - i only corrected YOUR definition of the phrase " having your fill"

It is completely implied in scripture as the host talks about how most people wait until the guests have "had their fill," and then bring out cheap wine, but Jesus, at that point, brought out excellent wine.

What comes after "having your fill" of wine? Why, having too much, of course.

having your fill, means to be full and satisfied. Get a dictionary.

I made no claim about the word from scripture, i only corrected your false definition of a phrase.

Does it bother you that other people can see you lying like a demon?

It's not false. It means "drunk".

having your fill (a phrase you brought up and keep claiming means drunk) actual definition:

From Cambrige dictionary - get your fill of something
( also have your fill of something)
› to have or experience as much as you want of something

It only means to be satisfied like i said.

Keep lying and acting like an idiot, i like people seeing you do it.

You are arguing what an English statement means. I am giving you the actual Greek word used in the bible.


If getting drunk is not a sin, why are you trying so hard to prove these people weren't drunk? If it's not a sin, who cares?

Another lie, i was correcting your claim of a what a phrase means that YOU cited, not me.

 

[Angel4Truth]

If getting drunk is not a sin, why are you trying so hard to prove these people weren't drunk? If it's not a sin, who cares?

Im not trying to prove they were not drunk or that they were. Scripture does not say they how much they had to drink, period.

Scripture has the host saying what happens at other weddings, period, nothing is stated about this one except they didnt have enough wine.

Since they didnt have enough, Jesus made some more. So they could all be satisified/filled.

Which is both what the phrase "had their fill" and the greek word used means.

 

[Angel4Truth]

John 2:1-11
Jesus Changes Water Into Wine
2 On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; 2 and both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus *said to Him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus *said to her, “Woman, [a]what does that have to do with us? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother *said to the servants, “Whatever He says to you, do it.” 6 Now there were six stone waterpots set there for the Jewish custom of purification, containing twenty or thirty gallons each. 7 Jesus *said to them, “Fill the waterpots with water.” So they filled them up to the brim. 8 And He *said to them, “Draw some out now and take it to the headwaiter.” So they took it to him. 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, 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.” 11 This beginning of His signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him.

Jesus mother said they have no more wine.

1) means maybe (since shag wants guessing to be happening here) that many at THIS wedding couldnt even "get their fill")

Then we have what the host said - he was stating what happens at OTHER WEDDINGS - where is it mentioned how MUCH to drink anyone has had AT THIS WEDDING? (hint: it doesnt)

Then did the bridegroom keep back wine at all? No, they had run out - didnt have enough for people to drink freely and get their fill at all, which is why Christ provided, just like He provided food for the hungry when He fed the 5000.

A Host guessing what happened is the same as you guessing what happened. It certainly isnt even implying that Christ gave more wine to a bunch of drunks like you suggest.

You dont even know whats happening there.

 

[shagster01]

Im not trying to prove they were not drunk or that they were. Scripture does not say they how much they had to drink, period.

Scripture has the host saying what happens at other weddings, period, nothing is stated about this one except they didnt have enough wine.

Since they didnt have enough, Jesus made some more. So they could all be satisified/filled.

Which is both what the phrase "had their fill" and the greek word used means.

So the host was saying, "most people serve good wine before people are drunk, but you are doing that too since they aren't drunk and you are serving good wine."

Yeah, that makes sense to put a "but" in there.

 

[Angel4Truth]

So the host was saying, "most people serve good wine before people are drunk, but you are doing that too since they aren't drunk and you are serving good wine."

Yeah, that makes sense to put a "but" in there.

Why does what the host said happens at other weddings, have anything to do with this one?

Where does it say in that passage anyone was drunk at this wedding?

You are so desperate, keep going. You look like a fool.

You keep claiming they were all drunk. Prove it.

 

[shagster01]

Why does what the host said happens at other weddings, have anything to do with this one?

Where does it say in that passage anyone was drunk at this wedding?

You are so desperate, keep going. You look like a fool.

Because he used the word "but" which connects contrasting things.

Why would he say what happens at other weddings, then say "but", and then say something unrelated to the other weddings?

 

[Angel4Truth]

In the Bible, the Greek word often translated “drunk” has broader meaning than drunkenness. Only by context can the word refer to drunkenness. The Greek word methuo means to be filled, rushed (with liquid), saturated, or satiated.

stoner shagster doesnt care about the truth.

 

[shagster01]

In the Bible, the Greek word often translated “drunk” has broader meaning than drunkenness. Only by context can the word refer to drunkenness. The Greek word methuo means to be filled, rushed (with liquid), saturated, or satiated.

Why would someone "satisfied" but not drunk with good wine, as you link states, then continue drinking low quality wine? That makes no sense.

 

[musterion]

Why would someone "satisfied" but not drunk with good wine, as you link states, then continue drinking low quality wine?

They wouldn't. Or they'd be miffed if asked to.

But for the fifth time, the steward was only pointing out that wine THAT good is usually brought out first, not saved for last when partiers are typically too drunk to appreciate it, thus wasting it on them. He did not confirm or even imply the people at that party were drunk -- he was only commenting on the quality of this wine.

And you have avoided the point that, if your premise is true, Mary and Christ promoted drunkenness.

 

[shagster01]

They wouldn't. Or they'd be miffed if asked to.

But for the fifth time, the steward was only pointing out that wine THAT good is usually brought out first, not saved for last when partiers are typically too drunk to appreciate it, thus wasting it on them. He did not confirm or even imply the people at that party were drunk -- he was only commenting on the quality of this wine.

And you have avoided the point that, if your premise is true, Mary and Christ promoted drunkenness.

Why the "but" then? It connects contrasting statements. But you make it connect two unrelated statements. If he was simply remarking about the quality of Jesus' wine, then telling us about drunk people at other weddings is pointless, and connecting the two with a "but" is pointless and bad grammar.

 

[Granite]

He served wine to unrepentant sinners.

Unless you believe everyone at that wedding was a disciple.

And also fed them, unless you think the loaves and fishes was a "believers only" meal...

 

[Granite]

Ok, I'll clear things up...

"Methuo" means drunk, not full like Angel4Truth claims.

"But" introduces a related contrasting statement to that which has already been stated. It does not connect two unconnected statements as Musterion says.

The verse says, " “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink (methuo); but you have saved the best till now.”

Also, the word for wine can mean wine, beer, or grape juice. You are fine implying wine. You are not fine with the meaning of "but". Why is that?

They wiped out the wine, probably had a very solid buzz on, and then got the real good stuff. Not. That. Hard.

 

[musterion]

If he was simply remarking about the quality of Jesus' wine, then telling us about drunk people at other weddings is pointless

Not if he was utterly shocked at how good the stuff was - which was VERY, evidently - and the timing at which it was brought to him.

You can stop any time now. You're doting about questions instead of answering the ones Angel keeps asking you to answer.

Lay off the weed.

 

[shagster01]

Not if he was utterly shocked at how good the stuff was - which was VERY, evidently - and the timing at which it was brought to him.

You can stop any time now. You're doting about questions instead of answering the ones Angel keeps asking you to answer.

Lay off the weed.

Why would he be surprised at the timing? If they weren't drunk, the timing was the same as every other wedding, which is before they drank too much.

 

[shagster01]

Let me also present this example...

My band has been hired by several churches to play music at their functions. We are not a Christian band by any means.

Many times a speaker will talk at these events about things I clearly disagree with as far as my beliefs go.

Am I being paid to condone their message, or to entertain the crowd? And am I condoning their message by offering my musical services at the event? Am I spreading the gospel by playing secular songs at this church event, or just doing the job I was commissioned to do?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Let me also present this example...

My band has been hired by several churches to play music at their functions. We are not a Christian band by any means.

Many times a speaker will talk at these events about things I clearly disagree with as far as my beliefs go.

Am I being paid to condone their message, or to entertain the crowd? And am I condoning their message by offering my musical services at the event? Am I spreading the gospel by playing secular songs at this church event, or just doing the job I was commissioned to do?

"Am I being paid to condone their message, or to entertain the crowd?"

You are being paid to entertain the crowd​

"And am I condoning their message by offering my musical services at the event?"

Yes, you are condoning the message.​

"Am I spreading the gospel by playing secular songs at this church event, or just doing the job I was commissioned to do?"

Neither you nor the people that hired you are spreading the gospel through your playing secular songs at a "church" event.​

 

[shagster01]

"Am I being paid to condone their message, or to entertain the crowd?"

You are being paid to entertain the crowd​

I agree. That is what I go there for.

"And am I condoning their message by offering my musical services at the event?"

Yes, you are condoning the message.​

How so? It's not my message. I'm simply there to play my guitar for money.

"Am I spreading the gospel by playing secular songs at this church event, or just doing the job I was commissioned to do?"

Neither you nor the people that hired you are spreading the gospel through your playing secular songs at a "church" event.​

We are a big regional draw. If we play at our local concert venue we bring in about 700-1000 people every time. If we bring people to a church event would you think of us bringing people to the message of the speaker, us drawing attention away from the message, or neither?