Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
LW 54, no. 3476
Luther on drinking
- Thread starter Notthemama1984
- Start date
- Status
LW 54, no. 3476
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
The letter goes on to state that a Dr. Cordatus attempts to prevent him from drinking to which Luther states,
I really enjoyed reading this letter.
I really enjoyed reading this letter.
Mushroom
Puritan Board Doctor
Was the drunkeness of Noah sin?
The only thing I see addressed as sin in that event was Ham's behavior, so if Luther were to get as drunk as Noah, is it necessarily sinful?
Mushroom
Puritan Board Doctor
Brother Josh,
I would definitely agree that what my mind would normally perceive the word 'drunk' to mean would be sin, but this is the definition I find in Strong's for the word rendered 'drunk' in the aforementioned passage:
---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 PM ----------
I would definitely agree that what my mind would normally perceive the word 'drunk' to mean would be sin, but this is the definition I find in Strong's for the word rendered 'drunk' in the aforementioned passage:
Being reluctant to violate the ninth commandment by determining something of Noah that is not necessarily required by the text, could we charitably assume it means he was tipsy, and incidentally forgot to pull his blanket over himself? Or is there other scriptural warrant to ascribe a higher level of inebriation to our spiritual and biological ancestor?
---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 PM ----------
I don't know, but Mindy liked it!
The text seems to imply that Noah was unaware of the effects of alcohol, assuaging him of guilt. This is the first recorded instance of drunkenness in the Bible.
Mushroom
Puritan Board Doctor
But Josh, where is the implication that Noah's location was one that other folks would likely to be going? He was in his tent. Might that not be the equivalent of our modern bedrooms, a place normally not to be entered but by invitation? Would it not be proper to assume that Ham was the one who was doing wrong in a prohibited place?
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
I agree with Brad's questions. When I lay naked and tipsy in my tent, I usually don't like people romping through.
Sorry, JM, I understand now why you put this here. It's in the "Quotes Forum" and the title of the thread was "Luther on Drinking," so now I understand why you put it here.
It also proves that Luther believed drunkenness is a sin, if there was any question whether he was joking in the first quote.
Phil D.
ὁ βαπτιστὴς
"Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." (Galatians 5:19-21)
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I would point out that Genesis 43:34 and Haggai 1:6 use the same lemma as the Noah passage. These two passages seem to use the term in a positive manner.
Granted my Hebrew knowledge is non existent so there may be a simple reason as to why they are positive and all others negative.
I am not advocating drunkenness by any stretch, just stating that the word may not always mean drunk as we tend to think of being drunk.
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
While perusing old threads about the relationship between Genesis 1 and 2 a while back, I found discussions about the lack of plants in Gen. 2:5. I think someone (it might have even been you) pointed out that the plants which had not grown were plants that require cultivation, not plants indiscriminately. A vineyard certainly falls under that category, so it is possible no grapes had grown on day 3. Of course there was a millennium and a half or more between the garden and Noah's ark, but it still cannot be certain that a vineyard had been planted before Noah. The Hebrew of Gen. 9:20 can be translated, "Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard" according to the ESV footnote and a few other translations I checked.
Now I have no vested interest in whether Noah was the first to plant a vineyard and become drunk or not (there are no perfect men in the Bible except Jesus, after all), but I think it is within the realm of possibility that Noah did not know he would become drunk.
Do you suppose that if I spiked your drink with a powerful odorless, tasteless drug while you weren't looking, you would be accountable for the effects?
My response was that ridiculous? I would by no means assume that Noah was unfamiliar with wine and its effects, but neither can I assume otherwise without stronger evidence. This is the first recorded instance of drunkenness, and it happened to a very righteous man and resulted in no rebuke from God. That is not solid proof that Noah was ignorant, but it is worth considering.
And in the mean time, make sure you get a vacation
I'm going to visit my biological father and sisters in Kentucky from January 4th through 11th. I expect to meet the Phillips while I'm there, and possibly attend Midlane Park Presbyterian.
---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 PM ----------
Good question. I'm not sure. I consider it entirely possible that he did know.
AThornquist
Puritan Board Doctor
Whoa, Austin! Are you going through Owensboro?
Regrettably, no. I'm taking a plane. But you could drive to Louisville to attend Midlane Park and you would get the added benefit of meeting the Phillips.
I believe that the main problem here is t that Ham refused to honor is father. Carefully covering Noah then maintaining careful deliberation to avoid shaming their father would have been the right approach. A private affair handled within the family is the best away to approach an act of drunkenness: "Hey Dad, it looks like you hit the wine pretty hard last night; is this the right thing to do before God? This would have given Noah a chance to explain and or to confess and repent. Embarrassing his father by hang out and maybe describing the scene for others later would have been incredibly rude.
"
"
If you have Steinmetz's Luther in Context check out his article on Luther on the Drunkenness of Noah.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I will have to look it up. Thanks for the heads up.
TimV
Puritanboard Botanist
"A vineyard certainly falls under that category, so it is possible no grapes had grown on day 3. Of course there was a millennium and a half or more between the garden and Noah's ark, but it still cannot be certain that a vineyard had been planted before Noah."
No, you can only take grape cuttings from one year old wood. One year old wood is what produced the grapes last year. So, there is proof positive that Noah collected cuttings from several mature grape vines. Besides, fermentation happens on it's own. I've seen birds right here in CA fall of fences after eating pyracantha berries late in the season when they start to ferment. The birds keep coming back
No, you can only take grape cuttings from one year old wood. One year old wood is what produced the grapes last year. So, there is proof positive that Noah collected cuttings from several mature grape vines. Besides, fermentation happens on it's own. I've seen birds right here in CA fall of fences after eating pyracantha berries late in the season when they start to ferment. The birds keep coming back
- Status
