Caddeo Controversy

---

August 3, 2007

Dear brother Silvio,

I have been in prayer for you before undertaking this effort to write to you. After hosting you in my home on numerous occasions and helping you on your way during your missionary endeavors I feel that we have grown close over the years. Therefore, it makes it all the more difficult to write this letter to you after having read your defense for Christians drinking wine. I have my serious doubts that anything that I write may cause you to change your position on wine considering the effort and time that you have put in to trying to justify social drinking for those of the household of God. This is not going to be an attempt to answer your every argument that you proposed in you papers (in fact I have not even received all of them). It is also for the above reason that I do not desire a long drawn-out discussion on the topic. Such debating will not be fruitful, in my opinion, for one that has already made up his mind. Nevertheless, I have heard these types of arguments before and will make this effort out of a spirit of love for you and a concern for your soul.

However, before I continue, I do want to state that I find it strange what took place here in Ukraine back in November of 1995. You may recall that I was teaching a class on “Ethics” for the men of the Kiev Bible School” which was being conducted in my apartment here in Kiev. There were five of us present (including myself) as well as you. We were specifically covering the topic of alcohol and the brethren asked you specifically and directly if it would be wrong for a Christian to drink. I remember distinctly that your answer was that “It would be wrong for a Christian to drink.” How do I remember so clearly? Because there were some of the brethren here that had great concerns over your position in this knowing that some Christians in Italy drink wine. It was the very reason that prompted the question. I remember feeling relieved over your answer and defending your soundness on several occasions afterwards. How very shocking for me to now find out that you indeed teach the exact opposite. Logically, either you have changed your position since November 1995 or you lied to the brethren that were gathered at my apartment. Which one is it? Should we add the sin of lying, deception and situational ethics to your problem of error?

Oddly enough, since your articles supporting the consumption of alcoholic beverages have appeared here, one brother here has come forward and stated that while we were in America and you were traveling through Kiev and using our facilities, that you tried to convince him in my own apartment that it was perfectly acceptable for Christians to drink. It was difficult for me to believe my ears after hosting you for so many times to know that you would come to my home and undermine the teaching that we have been involved in here since 1992.

Your articles (that I have read); which are filled with personal stories; do not persuade nor convince me nor the Christians here that it is acceptable for Christians to drink socially. You do greatly err in your analysis of the Biblical texts that you do use to support your position. For Christians to remain sober and pure is not an idea that sprang from the American Puritans as you have suggested, but comes from the word of God.

I will share a few ideas concerning why Christians should not involve themselves with alcohol before a few final observations.

You should already well know that the word "wine," whether in the Old Testament, or in the New Testament is a generic word and could refer to an alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverage. Context will help us in determining which is to be the case.

No honest student of the Bible supposes that the "new wine" (”oinos”) that Jesus referred to in Matthew 9:17 and Mark 2:22 refers to alcoholic wine, yet, it is the same Greek word used in John 2:3, 9, 10 (”oinon”, accusative singular of “oinos”). The parable of the wineskins make up for 10 of the 33 times that the word "oinos" is used in the New Testament. What does this prove? It verifies the fact that even in the New Testament, as in the Old Testament, the word is a generic term and that context is the only way to determine its usage.

In An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words with their Precise Meanings by W.E. Vine, it gives the following definition of the Greek word “Oinos”: "Oinos is the general word for wine." Do you pretend to know more than the Greek scholars?

Consider also the word "winepress" as it is used in Revelation 19:15. Here, the word is used metaphorically with reference to the execution of Divine judgment. Yet, in the original Greek the word "wine," (“oinoi”_genitive singular of “oinos”), is added to the word winepress making it literally, "winepress of the wine." Wine from the winepress is non-alcoholic juice!

You have accused our Lord of making and imbibing wine. Did Jesus turn water into grape juice or did he turn into an alcoholic wine? Through your argumentation you obviously expect us to believe that He turned water into alcoholic wine. This passage contextually prohibits wine being used in an alcoholic sense. Otherwise, Jesus is charged with giving those who had already "drunk well" (with alcoholic wine, according to you), even more alcoholic wine. The picture is one of Jesus, his mother who ordered the extra wine, and his disciples being at a drunken party. If this be true, then He would have sinned in violating both Proverbs 23:31 and Habakkuk 2:15. No one can deny those present in John 2:11 had well drunk before Jesus gave them extra wine.

According to Habakkuk 2:15, all those who give their neighbors intoxicating drink sin. According to your view of John 2:1-11, Jesus gave his neighbors intoxicating drink. If this is indeed the case, we must conclude that Jesus sinned. However, we know that the Bible teaches that Jesus did no sin, (Hebrews. 4:15; 1 Peter 2:22). Therefore, Jesus did not give his neighbors intoxicating drink and make them drunken.

Although many other points can be considered let me quote from a College Press commentator, Mr. Butler who wrote the following statement about the matter:

"The burden of proving that Jesus did make intoxicating wine is with those who make the accusations. They are the ones who say the wine was intoxicating. John does not say so! It is a prejudiced and unscholarly determination that says the Greek word ‘oinos’ (the word used here) must always mean intoxicating wine wherever the word is used. In fact, New Testament and classical usage show that the word may mean a number of things.

Aristotle, Pliny and Nicander speak of ‘oinos’ that does not intoxicate. Classical writings could be cited to show that the ancients knew of five ways of keeping grape juice from fermentation, and they called such preserved juice ‘oinos.’ No one should use this instance to justify drinking today unless he can prove absolutely that the wine Jesus made is just like the wine they propose to drink !" (Emphasis added, KLS).

Also, in the People's New Testament Commentary, one writer makes the following observation concerning the miracle of Jesus in John 2:

"In Palestine there were three kinds of wine:
(1) Fermented wines, which, however, were very unlike our fiery
liquors, and contained only a small per cent of alcohol.
These were mixed with two or three parts of water. The
fermented wine was only intoxicating when used in enormous
quantities.
(2) The unfermented juice of the grape.
(3) An intoxicating drink called "new wine" in Acts 2:13.
Whedon writes: 'We see no reason for supposing that the wine of the present occasion was that upon which Scripture places its strongest interdict'"

So what, then, was involved in the miracle of the wedding feast in Cana? The miracle of transcending the normal amount of time and the natural process that it takes to produce and harvest grape juice. That which normally takes months, took Jesus but a moment. Augustine wrote,

"For he on that marriage day made wine in the six jars which he ordered to be filled with water he who now makes it every year in the vines; for, as what the servants had poured into the jars-water was turned into wine by the power of the Lord, so, also, that which the clouds pour fourth is turned into wine by the power of the self-same Lord" (As quoted in "Bible Wines" by William Patton, page 91).

The Bible teaches that “social drinking” is a sin because it is a violation of passages such as: 1 Thess 5: 22 "Abstain from all appearance of evil," Also, Ephesians 5:11 "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." Additionally, 1 Peter 2:11 "Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul."

Can drinking alcohol socially be associated with the "appearance of evil" and one of the "unfruitful works of darkness?" If so, then it is a sin. Consider the fact that God has given Christians today examples, principles, and commands to remind them of the effects of alcohol. Noah and his family suffered because of Noah's sin with alcohol (Genesis 9:20-27). Babylon fell as a result of a drunken party of the king (Daniel 5:1-2; 23-31). Strong drink aided in the downfall of Israel. (Amos 6:1-6; 2: 8). We must not overlook the effects that social drinking has on nations, the home and our personal lives.

Society at large recognizes the evils associated with alcohol. Notice the problems listed in the following quotes from the 1998 Britannica Encyclopedia:

“The existence of over 5,000,000 alcoholics in the U.S., plus possibly 4,000,000 other problem drinkers, of whom perhaps between 5 and 10 percent become alcoholics each year, places alcoholism in the front rank of public-health problems. Its gravity is underlined by the higher rates of mortality (2.5 times normal) among alcoholics. Suicide rates are 2.5 times higher; accidental death rates are seven times higher; and there is an enormously higher rate of general morbidity among alcoholics. . . . These statistics do not include pre-alcoholics and problem drinkers, although, from the viewpoint of preventive public health, they are those most in need of study and help.”

Alcoholism is an enormous public health problem. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences estimates that alcoholism and alcohol abuse in the United States costs society from $40 to $60 billion annually due to lost production, health and medical care, motor vehicle accidents, violent crime, and social programs that respond to alcohol problems. One-half of all traffic fatalities and one-third of all traffic injuries are related to the abuse of alcohol. Also, one-third of all suicides and one-third of all mental health disorders are estimated to be associated with serious alcohol abuse. Accidents and suicides associated with alcohol problems are especially prominent among teenagers. It has been estimated that there are over 3 million problem drinkers between the ages of 14 and 17 in the United States.”

With the secrecy involved in the history of the former USSR, it has been difficult to gather information concerning the seriousness of the problem here in Ukraine. Nevertheless, the information that is now available shows us that the problem is serious indeed.

"Variations in the definition of alcoholism make it difficult to compare U.S. rates with those of other countries...In the Soviet Union a change in the internal political situation with the death of Stalin resulted in a shift from official denial that any significant problem of alcoholism existed to an outcry that its prevalence was widespread and serious.

In Russia the growing program of establishing sobering-up stations and treatment clinics in many cities, often with research-oriented staffs, indicates a recognition that alcoholism is a serious problem. Vodka is the national drink, though native wines are increasingly being promoted" (1994-1998 Encyclopedia Britannica).”

“In a speech delivered on Jan. 27, 1987 Mikhail Gorbachev attacked the former party leadership of the 1970's and early 1980's, charging that the period was characterized by rigid bureaucracy, stagnation, favoritism, a spread of alcohol and drug abuse, bribe-taking and corruption, and a general cynicism in the ‘moral atmosphere’ of Soviet society.” (1996 Grolier Encyclopedia)

All of the above quotations are but a fraction of the many that could be cited which show a direct connection with alcohol and the numerous sinful activities of the world. Worldly people admittedly recognize it. It is a tremendous shame to see those that claim to be living holy lives who will not acknowledge the association that alcohol has with evil. Since we are commanded to, "Abstain from that which is evil," social drinking is sinful.

Also consider that “social drinking” is a sin because God commands sobriety, holiness, purity and temperance (1 Peter 1:13-16; 1 Thess. 5:6-8; 2 Cor. 11:2; 1 Peter 3:2; Phil 4:8, Titus 2:12-14).

In Vines expository dictionary of New Testament words, the definition of the word "sober" (Gk. “Nepho”) is defined in this way: ”Nepho” signifies “to be free from the influence of intoxicants." This word is used in the following passages: 1 Thessalonians 5:6; 2 Timothy 4:5; 1 Peter 1:13. In the New Testament it can be used metaphorically to mean "vigilant, circumspect."

Other definitions of the word "sober" in its various forms are translated as being,

"of sound mind, self-controlled, temperate, training in the cultivation of sound judgment and prudence, exercise of self-restraint that governs all passions and desires, enabling the believer to be conformed to the mind of Christ "

All of these definitions show us that social drinking is condemned of God because alcohol in any amount would cause a Christian to lose self-restraint in varying degrees and therefore is sinful

In Galatians 5:19-21, Paul lists some of the things that have to do with the works of the flesh, but notice what he mentions in connection with our subject: “Uncleanness” or “Impurity” - This is allowing those things in the world to come in & corrupt us. “Lasciviousness” - Lasciviousness and sensuality means that we're ruled by sensual things. There's nothing wrong with the senses, but when they rule and take us to places that God doesn't want us to go, then something is wrong. The word "lasciviousness" means allowing one's self to go without restraint.

Alcohol loosens restraint and hinders judgment. The first primary effect of even the social drink is the loss of restraint to some degree. It is foolishness to accept the teaching that one is not drunk in the eyes of the Lord when he takes his first drink in order to justify social drinking. The one which does is condemned after the first drink because of the effects the alcohol causes. The word "lasciviousness" means allowing one's self to go without restraint. No lascivious person can go to heaven. (Galatians 5:19-21)

Sobriety, purity and holiness are basic and important principles for considering moral decisions that are before us in this life. God would have His people to be holy and pure without spot or blemish. Paul writes to Titus in Titus 2 and says that God's grace is to teach us these concepts.

“Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (Titus 2:12-14).

Does social drinking aid Christians in these areas or hinder us? Consider also the area of temperance. Temperance denotes exercising self-control. In Proverbs 23:31, the teaching is not to, "look upon the wine when it is red," by the term, "red," we understand that the wine has reached its fermentation process and has developed the strength to intoxicate. Our society is plagued with substance abuse, (as they're now calling it), people allowing substances to take control of their bodies, to alter them in one way or another where they do or say things that they are not really in control of. They have allowed something to enter into their body that takes control of them and this is totally against what the Bible is teaching here. Alcohol begins to do this in degrees after the first drink by loosening our inhibitions.

Also, “social drinking” is a sin because it harms our influence for good. In Matthew 5:13-16, we find out that we are the salt of the earth, we are the light of the world. Jesus said that “a city set on a hill cannot be hidden and that we are to let our light so shine before men that they will see our” what? Questionable works? Improper deeds? No! Our "good works and glorify the Father who is in heaven."

Does social drinking cause people to look at the social drinking Christian and glorify God? I have never met a worldly person that ever had the idea that Christianity and social drinking go together. The overwhelming majority have the idea that Christians don't drink. Not just in America, but the same has held true wherever I have been. Of course, you promote the idea that God has different standards for different countries, cultures and customs, but the Bible no where teaches such. There is ONE moral standard for the world. Of course, the worldly minded man has an improper view of what a priest is, but he never connects a "priest" with social drinking. The New Testament calls Christians today "kings and priests unto God" (Revelation 1:6), both of which were commanded under Old Testament law never to drink alcohol (Proverbs 31:4-5, Leviticus 10:8-10). Can God's priests today drink alcohol socially and influence others to holy living? Certainly not! In fact, the result will be just the opposite. They will be stumbling blocks to the worldly minded. There is no need to quote all the verses about being a stumbling block to others. It is enough to say that it is a sin that will cause people to lose their soul.

Peter writes,

"Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin; That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God. For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries" (1 Peter 4:1-3).

Christians are certainly not to live the rest of their time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God. In this list Peter gives us is the word "banquetings." Literally it means, "a drinking." It has to do with social drinking parties. Since the text already includes the word "debaucheries" which can be translated as "drunkenness," social drinking parties is that which is listed as sinful apart from drunkenness. These things are compatible with the works of the flesh that Paul list in Galatians 5:19-21. Those that partake in such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Anyone that practices such sins are stumbling blocks to others.

Finally, “social drinking” is a sin because it harms our health. Encyclopedia Britannica places alcoholism in the front rank of public-health problems. In statistics concerning death, it is rated Number 3 in the United States. Only cancer and heart disease claim more lives! Why would it be different in countries where alcohol is used more frequently? Notice these facts about alcohol on the body:

"Alcohol is a depressant drug that works on our central nervous system. It reaches our brain through the bloodstream and acts first on the part of the brain that controls restraint and judgment . As consumption increases, it affects physical performance: blurred speech, lack of coordination, slowed reflexes, impaired ability to learn or understand, and loss of memory.

Organs that control important chemical processes in the body are affected by alcohol's action on the brain, and this, in turn, affects the way other glands or organs work. When such a process is repeated habitually, it causes permanent injury to body tissue and organs. This can result in stomach, liver, and kidney ailments, and various forms of neuritis. One of the most serious diseases brought on in this way is cirrhosis of the liver"

Notice this quote from a report of the affects of alcohol on the body:

"A startling conclusion was made by a team of scientists headed by Dr. Melvin H. Knesely, Professor of Anatomy at the Medical University of South Carolina. For years it has been known that alcoholics suffer serious brain damage, but most doctors dismissed this as an end effect after years of hard drinking. Dr. Knesely and his team now demonstrate that brain damage is not merely an end effect. It occurs progressively from the first brain cells destroyed by the very first drink a person takes. The damage accumulates relentlessly with every drink. According to governmental and university reports, the average person suffers the impairments of alcohol when there is 0.05 per cent alcohol in the blood. It takes only one beer or one average highball to produce this in an average person. To be declared legally drunk in most states, the blood must contain 0.15 per cent alcohol. We can readily see that the moderate, or social drinker, suffers all the physical damages that the hard drinker suffers" (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, PHS Publication No. 730).

One drink does affect us and causes us to sin by damaging the “earthen vessels,” (2 Corinthians 4:7), that God has given us. When we look at 1 Corinthians 6:19 we find out why it is that our bodies are so important. We do not own our bodies! Our bodies are the conveyance by which we travel about and do the work of God. If we impede the body; if we hamper it; if we cause it to go to an early grave; we shorten the life that we have as well as our influence and the good that we can do. We must live disciplined lives with respect to our physical bodies and realize that we do not own them. God owns them! God gave us life and to the Christian even more so by the blood of Christ. Our bodies belong to Him and those things that bring honor to His name, to which, alcohol is not included.

These facts are not just true for those that are heavy drinkers. Beer and moderate drinking are as harmful as vodka. One Eastern American alcohol clinic reported that two-thirds of all the patients admitted were treated for alcoholism due to the drinking of beer!

Space will not permit the consideration of numerous other Biblical principles that could be listed which would equally convince that alcohol does nothing to bring us or others closer to God, but to the contrary it leads people away from God.

It is sad that now that you have “retired” and started receiving your pension that you now have started to teach a different doctrine. You say that we should just “preach Christ” and forget about the differences of whether or not Christians should drink or not drink alcohol. I wonder how you would feel if the question was not over alcohol, but marijuana or cigarette smoking or cocaine, etc. What about instrumental music or prayer beads or icons? Do you now lead the way in taking the church back in to what you came out of? Do you now promise brethren “liberty” yet bring them into “bondage”? (cf. II Pet. 2:19).

Brother, look well at the faces I've posted. I know of a certainty that you know some of these men. Others you are probably familiar with. What do all of these men have in common? All of these men died as a direct result of drinking. The first, brother, Vladimir Denisov, you should remember, he was in the third-year men’s class back in 1995. I now wonder if you talked to him privately and persuaded him that it was “acceptable for a Christian to drink”? The second man you should also remember, Vitali Lisnyak, he is the father of our good sister Lena Shkirenko. He was involved in “social drinking” on New Year’s Day 2000 and died directly from his drinking that day. Did you influence him as well? Yana’s father is the only one that was not a Christian. You would not remember him as he never came to worship, although we tried desperately to get him to come. However, you should remember his wife and daughter, Tatyana and Yana Layhk. Both of them have been faithful members at the Kiev congregation for years. Note, he was only 51 when he died from drinking. He never got to see retirement as you have. I wonder if you might persuade his wife and daughter that it is alright to drink alcohol? They are still having a difficult time dealing with the loss.

Brother, I write these things without malice towards you. These things are not being written with a spirit of animosity, but rather with great concern, as to the teaching that you are now promoting. You are far from being a new Christian, yet have somehow failed to see the Biblical teaching concerning a Christian’s purity and influence in this world. This substance that you now so openly support has brought physical and eternal death to millions of people; including Christians who at one time were faithful to Christ. It is shocking for me to see you promoting that which the Bible clearly condemns.

In the letter to the seven churches of Asia, the Lord's message is clear. He knows our “works.” When there was a departure, the Lord called them back to "repentance" and to return to their "first love." In conclusion
Let me beg you earnestly to reconsider your teaching and the influence you will have on others throughout the world. As all of us, you too will give an account before the Lord concerning this and all other matters. I ask you sincerely to consider well your ways.

In as much as this teaching affects the churches in Ukraine and those that have supported your efforts here, a copy of this letter is being sent to interested Christians. I would be appreciative if you sent a copy of this correspondence to everyone on your mailing list as well that they might have an opportunity to see the opposing view.

Sincerely in the love of Christ,

Kerry L. Sword,
servant of Christ.

August 3, 2007

Hello brother Silvio,

My name is Yuri Shkirenko, I’m from the Kiev congregation of the church of Christ in Ukraine. We meet at Raisy Okipnoi Street, #9 (on the “Left Bank”). We met several times before when you were visiting Kiev.

Dear brother, many people in our congregation know and respect you. We appreciate the work you have done for the cause of Christ when you were here in Ukraine. For many members of our congregation, you are looked upon as a spiritually mature brother; that has been in Christ for many years.

You were among some of the first missionaries who came to Ukraine in order to teach the Gospel.
It was a big surprise for me to hear that you teach that it is acceptable for a Christian to drink alcoholic beverages. At first I thought that it was just a mistake and that I misunderstood what was said about your belief. From the articles, however, I learned myself your position that you write in support of alcohol.

I write you this letter because I don’t want to be indifferent. I am not indifferent towards what will happen with your soul. Love will be shown if we warn brothers about sin or error.

Every Christian belongs to Christ’s family and he is His follower, a follower of Christ’s teachings. All of us have to understand our responsibility before God and before those people to whom we preach.

Dear brother Silvio, you now do not preach the truth and you need to reconsider your views. I ask you to think about the fact that even non-Christians protest against social drinking because the use of alcohol in this way brings a lot of grief.

The Bible speaks against social drinking. And if you do not following the Bible’s teachings then we cannot consider you a faithful brother. We pray that you turn to the truth. We love you and want to help you. You may read my article “Why Not Wine?”, that I’m sending you. I hope the arguments that I give from the Bible will help you.


With Christian love and respect,

your brother Yuri. August 3, 2007.



“Why Not Wine?”

Sometimes people ask a question: “Why don’t you use alcoholic wine for the Lord’s Supper?” Where do people get the idea that alcohol should be used for the Lord’s Supper? Let us consider several passages from the Bible where it mentions the Lord’s Supper:

“And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” - (Mt.26:27-29)

“And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” - (Mk.14:23-25)

“Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.” - (Lk.22:20)

“After the same manner also the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink , in remembrance of me.” - (1Cor. 11:25).

In the Greek text, the passages speaks about the fruit of the vine. That is why Christians use the juice of the grape. But would it be right to use alcoholic wine or it should only be grape juice? Let’s remember the biblical story of Aaron’s sons - Nadab and Abihu. They were priests and served in the tabernacle. The tabernacle was a hand carried tent where worship to the Lord was conducted. The reason why I’m giving attention to the word tabernacle and the connection with our topic you will see further in this article.

What happened with Nadab and Abihu during their service? The Scripture says: “And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.” - (Lev.10:1, 2). And what does God’s Word say in connection with the story? We see that after the punishment of Nadab and Abihu there follows a prohibition for the priests to drink alcohol: “And the LORD spoke unto Aaron, saying, Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: a statute for ever throughout your generations: And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses.” (Lev.10:8-11).

Why does a prohibition for the priests to drink alcohol follow the story of the killing of Nadab and Abihu? Because it’s obvious that the use of alcoholic drinks in particular was the reason for the disobedience of Nadab and Abihu. Everyone will agree that alcoholic wine will not help with a person’s reasoning ability. On the contrary, the Scriptures warn: “Wine a mocker, strong drink raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.” (Prov.20:1).

God’s Word also says about priests: “For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he the messenger of the LORD of hosts.” (Mal.2:7). Imagine a priest who instead of edification by the word of God and teaching others the truth will drink wine. The Scriptures warn us against this. If the priest drinks alcoholic wine then situation will look like this: “But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble judgment.” (Isa.28:7).

Why is it that people are reluctant to speak with a person who is drunk? Unpleasant? Why? It’s because a drunk person can’t think logically and proclaim the truth. Imagine a drunk priest - is it possible for drunk man to speak right about God and to teach other people? Would you send your children to school knowing that the teachers there are in a state of intoxication? I think not. But some may say: “Is it drunkenness to have just a little bit of wine?” God commended priests: “Neither shall any priest drink wine, when they enter into the inner court” - (Ezek.44:21).

What is the quantity discussed in this verse? It states only that they should not drink wine, implying a prohibition to drink alcohol. However, some may say: “It was the Old Testament and it was only stated that there are limitations for the priest serving in the temple”. Yes, it’s true. But we know that God does not change: “For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed” (Mal.3:6). In other words, the character of God is unchangeable. Yes, we live under the New Testament, but God stays the same both in the Old and New Testaments.

From the Scriptures we know about Zachariah the father of John the Baptist about whom we read: “And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course, According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord” (Lk. 1:8, 9). Zachariah lived under the Old Testament during which priests served in the temple in the order of their course. We as Christians live according to the law of Christ - the New Testament - and are priests of the Most high God: “But ye a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light…” (1 Pet. 2:9). What does Jesus Christ demand from us? God’s Word tells us: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15).

We always have to be able to stand for our faith, taking the Gospel to those that are perishing. Apostle Peter, being moved by the Holy Spirit, wrote: “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and ready always to an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear” (1 Pet. 3:15). Please pay attention to the word always. The Christian is a priest; he has to be always ready to fight for the truth. Will it be acceptable for a Christian to use alcohol, blacking out his perceptions and in this condition to serve the Lord? Certainly not!

God wants us to be holy. We will not see the Lord without holiness: “Follow peace with all , and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord…” (Heb.12:14). Drinking alcohol will deprive one’s holiness: “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God” (1Cor. 6:9, 10).

Our bodies are the temple of God: “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's” (1 Cor.6:19, 20). So, will we as priests in the temple (our body) bring alcoholic beverages during services to God? Jesus Christ by His mercy made us kings and priests: “And from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.” - (Rev.1:5, 6).

What does the Scripture say about kings and drinking alcohol: “ not for kings, O Lemuel, not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink: Lest they drink, and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted.” (Prov.31:4, 5). Yes, it is stated in Old Testament, but the principal stays the same. Christians are priests, God’s children, God’s slaves, the temple, kings.

Remember whose name we bear: “A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than silver and gold…” (Prov.22:1).
Reply to Kerry Sword,

Dear Brother Kerry,

When I received your E-mail titled “Support for social drinking”, I thought that you were referring to someone else since in my series of articles I have always made a distinction between drinking a glass (or half a glass) during the regular meal, which is part of millions of people’s culture, and social drinking, excess drinking, hardcore drinks drinking, all habits that lead to alcoholism which I never supported.

I remember with joy the days we spent together in Kiev and I am happy to hear that you have a good souvenir of me. We can say that even though sometimes we disagreed in certain things. You know, being brothers in Christ it means also to speak frankly, isn’t? Otherwise, what kind of brothers are we?

In those years, you were not the only one in Kiev. In the city there are about 3.5 millions of people and many missionaries have worked in there, maybe 100 of them.

In ten years I came in Kiev, from what I can remember, I met some missionaries in your house and outside of your house; in another congregation, in a meeting of many missionaries in one hotel and others at the airport who were passing by. I did because I wanted to collaborate with all, as long as it was possible. Therefore, I hope you will not feel personally touched every time I speak bout my experience in the cosmopolite city of Kiev.

Furthermore, I have never mentioned your name in my articles. It is not my style to personally hurt people, especially those who have hosted me. In my articles I presented some personal experiences, and really I do not understand why you react in this way.

I like to start with what Paul wrote, “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouth, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionated to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgive you” (Ep 4:29-32).

I have quoted this passage of Paul because I do not like useless polemics, accusing brothers, mentioning names, especially when they are involved in the missionary work, however, I feel it is always my duty the correct certain extremisms.

I do not understand why you have involved other brothers in this personal dispute. I noticed that you have excluded the missionaries who do not necessarily agree with you. Anyway, from my part I do not intend to involve more brothers. I have nothing to hide because usually I am an open book, but my duty is to remind you that in this specific case, writing this long letter to all, you have violated a biblical principle. If I have done something wrong you should have spoken or write to me first and eventually, after, with two or three brothers and only later on to more brothers (Mt 18:15-17). Few days ago, I called you, why you did not tell me anything? You have my E-mail address why you did not contact me personally? Why now this show off? Is it a reprimand? You know that it does not work with me because I am a quite independent person who does not accept an imposition that is not motivated by the Bible teachings.

You said that I am not a scholar, that I should listen what the scholars say. Well, I do not know what you mean by “scholar”. I am studying the Bible for more than fifty years; most of them full time. I do not like to speak about me, but you have forced me, as Paul has been (2 Co 11:16-29). I have been graduated in two Bible Schools and one Canadian university in Religion Studies. For about 40 years most of my studies are based on the Hebrew and Greek texts. Very few preachers can do that. Usually before of doing an article I scrupulously consult the principal dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek; the same I used in the Concordia University of Montréal. You should accept that some believers are serious and well educated even though they have a different opinion from your.

I do not intend now to make a summary for you of all the 15 articles that I have already written on the subject, about 300 pages, but I can say that it is completely inaccurate to affirm, as you do, that in the Bible the word “wine” is generic term and it could mean a beverage alcoholic and not as grape juice. Where is that written in the Gospel? Please tell me just one biblical passage that supports that statement. Every time someone invent a new terminology, it is because he is trying to teach something that is not biblical (2 Pe 3:15-16).

There is not one serious dictionary used in the many universities in the entire word that support that very opinionated theory. The wine is wine as the bread is bread and some people should stop to play with the words to support their opinion, otherwise they do not serve Jesus but their human traditions or their personal emotion.

In the Bible two words mean wine (Hebrew-yayin and Greek-oinos), how is it possible that both of them are not clear? why the holy writers persevered in using words that are not clear? Why did they do that in a so important issue as the one of the wine? Was it to confuse us? Of course not! If there was any problem about the use of the word wine, in Hebrew and also in Greek, for sure the Holy Spirit would have found the way to clarify it for us. I hope that at least you agree about that because both we believe in the work of the Holy Spirit.

The number of quotations in your letter is very impressive; you have even quoted the eminent Encyclopedia Britannica, that is really encouraging, but you have forgotten to report what the definition of “wine” is in that authoritative source. That is a partisan way of quoting a book, isn’t? Do you know that to sell a bottle of grape juice with the wine label is illegal and one could go to jail?

An elder from a big congregation in Tennessee wrote to me recently that in the church there is no more the phobia against the wine, but you are an example of how this problem is still very much alive among us and that it is seriously hurting our missionary work. As you can see, in the church of the Lord, I am not alone to think in this way. However, the big difference between you and me is that I do not panic because of your opinions. I accept you as you are, because I am ready to justify you (1 Co 13:7), but you do not accept me as I am, with my opinions. What a pity! I remind you that where there is the Spirit of the Lord there is freedom (2 Co 3:17).

There is nothing wrong to change our mind in certain subjects when we understand better, otherwise why are we studying? About wine, I have not changed my position recently. It is true that I have been always discreet or tactful with weak people or with ex alcoholic brothers because my principal interest is to keep the church united and to save souls (1 Co 9:19-23). However, I have always been sincere when I was asked. I am an honest person and because of that, sometimes, I have been persecuted or put aside as a not reliable person, but others have encouraged me to continue with my work.

What I think about the moderate consumption of wine as a part of the diet among people from many countries, was well known in the brotherhood and by the American missionary who baptized me in 1958, a very nice person that I deeply respect. It was known by the elders of my supporting congregation in Houston since 1970. It was known also by the elders of my supporting congregation in Searcy since 1982. Everyone who is familiar with me knows it, in Italy and also in Canada, but I have always discouraged to drink those who have a problem with it or who have previously been alcoholic.

I understand that you tried to help many people in Kiev, that some alcoholic men came expecting to be helped and that after, notwithstanding your many efforts, died because of alcohol or it better to say because of vodka. No one of them died because was drinking a glass of wine during his regular meal, but because of vodka, plenty of vodka, at any time of the day and the night.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with me. I never spoke about wine with them and they never bought alcoholics with my money. You presented a list of people who died because of vodka and it is a terrible. We cannot remain indifferent about that tragedy. When I was in Ukraine I noticed that many people were used to drink a lot of vodka because they felt cheated by the Communism and were helpless.

I have been touched by those examples, but I can present you also a long list of people, in North America, who died because they were not able to control their temper. They had problems with their character or because of excess of coffee made them very nervous. Many died because excess of eating that produces obesity, vascular diseases and blindness. Many died because of smoking cigarettes, they got lung cancer. Many died because of the green-house effect that is caused by pollution. Many others died invading Iraq thinking that they are serving the Lord (Jn 16:1-2). What a shame! Unfortunately, many more people will die in future if certain political-religious leaders do not change their mind and become less aggressive. We cannot try to be number one in the world and to go to heaven. We have to make a choice, to make ourselves humble and small (Mt 11:28-30).

We should pray intensively that the Lord would come soon to liberate us from this world that is dominated by the Devil; no one Country is excluded, as John wrote, “We know that we are children of God, and that the entire world is under the control of the evil” (1 Jn 5:19).

In a sense I can understand you negative reaction because you have not read all my articles and that is really a pity because I sent them to you since the beginning. Anyway, you should be more patient because I have already written over and over that I am against social drinking and you should be careful before making certain accusations.

I include an attachment of my sixth article of February 2007, where I have spoken strongly against the plague of social drinking. Some of the brothers to whom you have sent your letter have already received that article, number 6, and so they can confirm what I have written against social drinking long ago.

I love you, your wife Karla and your children.

Please bring my greetings to all Ukrainian brothers and sisters in Kiev who have always been very nice with me, I miss them.

In His Name, Silvio Caddeo

Montréal, the fourth of August, 2007

To: "Silvio & Luciana Caddeo" , "Artem Bondarenko" , "Artem Bondarenko" , "Kiev Church of Christ" , "Nickoli Goodkovich" , "Yuri & Helen Shkirenko" , "Timothy Makarchuk" , "Daniel Zamoyski" , "Charles Musisi" , "Kingsley Opara" , "Igor Chernishenko" , "Serghei Garkusha" , "Valia Onofryichuck" , "Chuck & Patricia Damron" , "Gene Clemons" , "BILL FARRIS" , "Anatoly Shcrabin" , "Alexander Zotov" [e-mail]

August 6, 2007

Dear brother Silvio,

I have just received and read your answer to my letter dated August 3, 2007. It is difficult to understand everything that you write about, (as in your articles that I have received), because some of your sentences are poorly constructed. That is not meant to be an insult to you, but since English is not your first language I will not try to answer points where it is not really clear to me what you are saying.

Let me say first of all that there are no hidden motives or “show off” (as you accuse me of for writing to you) other than my deep concern for your soul and those that you will influence. You mention your phone call to me and asked why I did not mention anything at that time. In fact I did want to discuss this with you, but you yourself honestly know that we could not hear each other. You were using Skype and the connection was not clear. You know very well that I had to say in a loud voice several times, “I cannot hear you!” How would it then be possible to discuss this most serious topic over the telephone at that time? Our conversation itself lasted no more than literally one minute. Why do you write this? Is it to make me appear to be dishonest in the eyes of others that will read this?

I disagree with you that I have violated any Biblical principle in connection with Matthew 18. The context there is when one brother has offended another brother privately. Your offence was far from a private matter between you and me, but was done publicly and even internationally. I do not see Scriptural support for your idea that if one teaches error publicly, that we need to go to them in private and try to resolve the matter. For example, I know the Pope teaches error because of what I have read and heard on the television. Do you maintain that I need to go to him personally before speaking out against him publicly? Have you done such with the Pope or Billy Graham, Max Lucado, Rubel Shelly, etc? The idea is ludicrous.

Your use of Ephesians 4:29-32 is inappropriate in view of such passages as 2 Timothy 4:2-4 & Titus 2:11-15. Although I would be interested in knowing what Bible verse I used in my last letter to you that you thought was “unwholesome.” Or perhaps you are accusing me of “bitterness, rage, anger, brawling, slander, and malice”? What is your point? Are you trying to say that when people teach error that we should just forgive them and build them up? That itself is contrary to sound doctrine. The word of God teaches us to “preach the word” when it’s convenient and when it’s not (II Timothy 4:2).The man of God is to continue “Holding fast the faithful word” and stop the mouths of those teaching error (Titus 1:9-11).

Your aggression in your letter is clearly evident. You are not the loving spiritual brother that gently leads the “weaker” brothers into the light as you pretend. You boast of your education as a badge that somehow proves you to be right while anyone that opposes you is wrong. You have also twisted my words as well as the Scriptures to your own intent and made false implications. For example, you suggest that I was selective as to whom I sent my letter. Your implication is as evil as it is false. The addresses that were chosen were ALL of the addresses that I had of those that had worked with you in the past that I knew of; as well as to the men of the Kiev congregation. The majority of the men here already know you and in view of the fact that you mentioned a possible trip here in 2008, all need to be warned. Nevertheless, I invited you to send my response to everyone on your mailing list; a request that thus far you have ignored. Does that sound like I am being selective as to who reads my letter? I again ask you and even encourage you to send out my letters that even those with an opposing view can see arguments from the other side. I do not know of whom you refer to that I ignored in sending out my letter, but if you send me their addresses I will see that they get a copy.

I do not understand why you wrote, “I have never mentioned your name in my articles” I never accused you of that and never inferred such. You wrote, “You said that I am not a scholar.” I never did say that, but did write however, “Do you pretend to know more than the scholars?” It is apparent that you obviously consider yourself to be a “scholar.” There were such “scholars” in the days of Jesus also that totally perverted the Scriptures. So what’s your point???

Furthermore, you write, “it is completely inaccurate to affirm, as you do, that in the Bible the word “wine” is generic term and it could mean a beverage alcoholic and not as grape juice.” When one demands “just one biblical passage” (as you have) they could be in danger of looking to the “letter of the law” and missing the “Spirit and intent of the law” (2 Corinthians 3:6). Once I taught a class on Hermeneutics and a young student cried out “That’s the teaching of men! Where does the Bible ever use such terminology?!” When I explained exactly what Hermeneutics is, he agreed and thereafter sat quietly and was attentive. The word “evangelism” is not “Biblical terminology,” but I would be very surprised if you said that you never used the word. God expects us to reason from the Scriptures correctly. The fact is that there are some Bible words that have changed in their meanings from the modern day usage and we must be careful to see how they were used when the words were penned. Do you want me to believe that there is only one type of usage for “oinos” in the Bible and that it always means “fermented grape juice”? Such a conclusion is unwarranted and inaccurate. Actually, it’s somewhat difficult to comment on this point because your sentence regarding this is not clear. Are you saying it is wrong to say that the word “wine” could mean “alcohol”? Are you saying it is wrong to say that the word “wine” could mean “grape juice” or both? Regardless, the fact is that “wine” is a generic term in both the Old and New Testaments and I was not the one to say it. I quoted for you from An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words with their Precise Meanings, where it states, “Oinos is the general word for wine.” Apparently, you question the soundness of Vines Expository Dictionary when you wrote, “There is not one serious dictionary used in the many universities in the entire word that support that very opinionated theory.”(sic) That is indeed very sad, because this book only confirms what a good student of the Bible may conclude on his own solely from a careful investigation of the texts. Obviously, when “Yayin” is on the vine, it is not the kind of “wine” that intoxicates. Yet, when it is condemned, as in Proverbs 20:1, it obviously refers to fermented “wine.”
You seem enamored with quotations from Encyclopedia Britannica and accuse me of having “forgotten to report what the definition of ‘wine’ is in that authoritative source.” If you’re looking for a “modern” definition of “wine” from Britannica, it is: “Wine - Alcoholic beverage made from the fermented juice of grapes.” (Britannica Encyclopedia, 2007). Of course you already knew that, thus your reason for bringing it up. Correct? Yet, it is inappropriate to look to modern definitions for ancient words. If a quote from Britannica was given that suggested an alternative variation to the word “wine” (i.e. non-alcoholic) would you then concede and give up this teaching? Then consider the following quote taken from an article on

Jean-Antoine Chaptal.

"Chaptal was especially a popularizer of science, attempting to apply to industry and agriculture the discoveries of chemistry. In this way, he contributed largely to the development of modern industry. The process of adding sugar to UNFERMENTED WINE in order to increase the final alcohol level is known as chaptalization after him." (Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition) (Emphasis mine KLS)

Obviously, what proves too much, proves nothing. The fact is that Britannica Encyclopedia is not my source of authority for life and godliness and I hope not yours either. Although, I do believe some valid points can be made from it, or any other human source of writing (cf. Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12).

Again, “wine” whether in the Old Testament or New Testament is a generic term. To say otherwise is false. I will attach an article by John L. Kachelman, Jr. below that further illustrates the point, but consider these quotes about “wine”:

“A generic word which designates the juice of the grape in all its stages. There “are four generic words, yayin, oinos, vinum, and wine, all expressing the same generic idea, as including all sorts and kinds of the juice of the grape. Wine is generic, just as the words groceries, hardware, merchandise, fruit, grain, and other words.” (William Patton, Bible Wines, (Fort Worth: StarBible and Tract Corp, 1976). p. 62).

“Wine - 1. the juice of the grape, 2. a liquor extracted from other fruit besides the grape, 3. the vapour of wine, as wine disturbs his reason.” (Benjamin Marin's lingua Britannica Reformatta, Published 1748).

“Must - new wine - wine pressed from grapes but not fermented” (Webster's Dictionary, 1828).

“Wine - 1. The fermented juice of the grape: in loose language the juice of the grape whether fermented or not” (Funk & Wagnall’s New 'Standard' dictionary of the English Language, 1955).

Also, please consider this excerpt from Wayne Jackson’s article in the Christian Courier on July 4, 2000,

What About Social Drinking and the Old Testament?
The Hebrew terms rendered wine (yayin) and strong drink (shechar) are apparently more generic than some have supposed.

Yayin is found 141 times in the Old Testament. It can mean:

a. A grape vine (Num. 6:4);
b. Products of the vineyard that can be gathered, drunk, or eaten (Deut. 28: 39; cf. Jer.40:10, 12);
c. The liquid that comes from the winepress (Isa. 16:10; Jer. 48:33); or,
d. Fermented grape juice (Prov. 23:31).

Yayin is thus a general term referring to a variety of products from the grape vine (cf. “all sorts of wine” - Neh. 5:18), and the context in which the term is employed will determine its meaning in a given circumstance.

Similarly, shechar (23 times as a noun in the Old Testament) was used by ancient writers to denote:
a. Sweet syrups (the term is related to our words “sugar” and “saccharine”) such as the honey of
dates or palm syrup. It was employed for sweet drinks and articles of food;
b. “Date or palm wine in its fresh and unfermented state” (Frederick Lees, Ph.D., in Cyclopedia of Biblical
Literature, John Kitto, Ed. , 1880, I, 585; this material is indispensable for the careful student); and,
c. Intoxicating beverages from non-grape products (e.g., date palm juice and grains - cf. Isa. 5:11).

Thus, with reference to the passage under discussion, Dr. Lees comments that: “. . . shechar might also include the sense of ‘sweet-fruit,’ as in Deut. 14:26, where it and yayin are placed amongst the tithe-offerings as solids to be eaten” (584). While this is not the general view of this controversial verse, it certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility. In view of the numerous warnings against the dangers of strong drink in the Old Testament, does it seem likely that Moses would encourage its use in a celebration to Jehovah?

''Oinos'' is indeed a “generic term” which includes both intoxicating wine and non intoxicating wine. You asked for a verse to demonstrate such and one was already provided for you that you chose to ignore. This was demonstrated conclusively in the parable of the wineskins. In Matthew 9:17 (and parallel records Mark 2; Luke 5) we read of ''new wine'' (neos oinos) being put in new wine skins as the wise thing to do. The loss of the wine was the thing to be avoided. What is put in the wine skin must be unfermented wine, or else the whole story loses its point. If the wine is already fermented then there is no danger of losing the wine due to its expansion while fermenting. If it is unfermented (which it has to be) then we see ''oinos'' being used of unfermented wine.

Yes, it is widely believed, even among Christians, that moderation in drinking is a sufficient precaution against the dangers in alcohol. But we must not believe the flattering lies of Satan. Until recently, many Christians saw nothing wrong in smoking a few cigarettes every day, even though the church as a whole took a stand and labeled tobacco use as sin. This firm rejection of smoking has since been vindicated. Research has shown that smoking even in moderation appreciably increases the risk of many kinds of health problems. The same has proven true of drinking in moderation. Already, it is known that alcohol in “moderate amounts” in the bloodstream can damage chromosomes and brain cells and increase the risk of breast cancer in women (see information below).

Even if an occasional drinker escapes serious harm to his own body, he must reckon with the effects of his drinking upon other people. He cannot drink without encouraging others to drink also. Anything he does to make drinking easier or more attractive for others puts social pressure on them to drink. A man can introduce a friend to drinking by offering him a beer or glass of wine, by taking him to a place where everyone else is drinking, or just by imposing on him the idea that drinking is a good thing. He tells his friend, "Just one drink won't hurt you. It will only help you to relax" He doesn’t need to say anything to get his family drinking. His wife will join him. His children will see his example and follow suit in the years to come. Yet the one you lure into drinking may not be able to handle it. They may begin with the intention of avoiding excess, but soon find themselves addicted with an irresistible craving for more alcohol and who is to blame in all of this? How about the one that influenced people with the idea that “just a little is acceptable!”

Some scientific studies suggest that some people have a natural predisposition to alcoholism, as a result of traits in their brain chemistry favoring dependence upon alcohol as the only means of sustaining a sense of well being. Such studies do not, however, support the idea that alcoholism is simply a disease. A man may be powerless to resist a disease, but though he has a predisposition to alcoholism, he need not be an alcoholic. He can resist and escape it altogether by exercising his freedom of will. A predisposition to alcoholism, if it exists, is nothing but a weakness for the sin of drunkenness, like the weaknesses some people have for the sins of lust or gambling. Everyone has points of special vulnerability.
Nevertheless, God has promised that when we are faced with temptation, He will provide a way of escape (1 Cor. 10:13). For anyone easily drawn into uncontrolled drinking, the way of escape is TOTAL ABSTINENCE. A little alcohol might be enough to get him started on the road to alcoholism. Even drinking in “moderation” will be enough to lead a man to ruin just like those true-life examples that I sent you.
Three considerations demonstrate that this same standard is appropriate for everyone, not just for potential alcoholics. First, there is no certain way of telling who is a potential alcoholic. Second, God wishes the fellowship of believers to be a refuge from companions who drink and who encourage drinking. The brother prone to alcoholism finds it much easier to remain firm in total abstinence when this is the practice of all Christians. Third, anyone who drinks even a little alcohol immediately suffers a degree of intoxication, with resulting impairment of the body and dulling of moral inhibition. This was covered in the list of moral principles that I sent to you that teach us why Christians should abstain from alcohol.

Regardless of how many names you may drop of those that support you in this in the “big” churches it is of no concern to me. Exodus 23:2 states, “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil….” Yes, we indeed do have “freedom” in Christ, but not freedom to sin or cause others to lose their souls.

It is interesting for me that you write that you have “been always discreet or tactful with weak people or with ex alcoholic brothers because my principal interest is to keep the church united and to save souls (1 Co 9:19-23).” Yet, as already mentioned, it is impossible for you to know everyone’s situation or weakness to alcohol. The fact that you exercise caution with those that you describe as “weak brothers” shows that there is a grave danger in causing one to lose their soul over the issue. Why risk it? The Apostle Paul wrote, “It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak” (Romans 14:21). Even if only one soul stumbles because of your insistence to drink, is that price not too high?

In reference to those men that died here in the church because of drinking, you want to insist that it was “vodka” that led to their demise (as if comparing the evils of vodka to the goodness of a glass of wine). You assume it was vodka that killed them, but I didn’t say that. Would it make a difference if it were vodka, wine, or beer?

With all due love and respect, brother, I caution you towards your words against “leaders”; whether they are world leaders or religious leaders. For the Scriptures are clear, “But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. (2 Peter 2:10-11). Concerning Iraq or any other nation, I remind you that it is God that is in control of the rise and fall of nations (Daniel 4:17).

While it is true that I have not read all of your articles (I only received the first copy of any of the articles on Sat Jun 23, 2007 (Crusade XIV) and only recently received your promised 6th article), yet I have read enough to see that you are playing word games when you say that, “I have already written over and over that I am against social drinking.” The term “Social Drinking” can be defined as such:

What is "Social" drinking?
Moderate or "social" drinking is defined as no more than one drink a day for most women, and no more than two drinks a day for most men. A standard drink is generally considered to be 12ounces of beer, 5 ounces of wine, or 1.5 ounces of 80-proof distilled "spirits". (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism No. 16 PH 315 April 1992)

Actually, there were so many references to the term “Social Drinking” being link to “a glass of wine at dinner” the references were too many to list. Simply do a word search on the internet and type “Social Drinking” and “a glass of wine at dinner” and you will have more than enough references to see that even a “glass of wine at dinner” can be defined as “Social Drinking”. Here are just a few examples:
During social drinking: alcoholic beverages are consumed in moderation - a glass of wine at dinner, a beer or two at a party; alcohol consumption supplements other primary activities. (Bridgewater State College Student Handbook 2007-2008. All Rights Reserved.)

At his talk at Kushner, Green never directly asked students to refrain from drinking. Instead, he urged responsible drinking and an understanding of the poor decisions that often accompany drinking “to get wasted” as opposed to SOCIAL DRINKING that might entail a GLASS OF WINE WITH DINNER. (Counselor serves students warnings on binge drinking, by Johanna Ginsberg New Jersey Jewish News Staff Writer) (Emphasis mine KLS).

Wine can improve your blood-cholesterol level. Beyond the ability of moderate alcohol consumption to raise levels of heart-protective HDL cholesterol, a 1998 Finnish study of 300 middle-aged men suggests that SOCIAL DRINKING (DEFINED HERE AS ONE TO FOUR GLASSES OF WINE A WEEK) may also reduce blood concentrations of Lp (a) lipoprotein. (The Good News on Wine: Ten of the best reasons to enjoy a glass. By Stacey Colino) (Emphasis mine KLS).

IMO you can be a SOCIAL DRINKER (enjoying a GLASS OF WINE WITH DINNER) but not a "social gambler." (elysian Post: #1 Roman Catholic Approval of Gambling, Drinking ) (Emphasis mine KLS).

The fact is, the term “social drinking” can and is defined by many in different ways. Some like to make the distinction between “social drinking” and “moderate drinking.” Others use phrases like “low-risk drinking.” The Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission acknowledges this point when they write, “The definition of moderate, low-risk drinking has been the subject of study and debate for a long time. (from the article: “Social Drinking” - Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission, 1999). Or notice the following quote from the University of Wisconsin, “Moderate alcohol drinking is difficult to define because it means different things to different people.” (Source: University of Wisconsin Center for Health Sciences, 1988)

However, in all of the explanations I can and have found little distinctions in their definitions. A glass of wine at dinner with friends or family can constitute what is defined as “social drinking.” You may want to argue that point and say that you are against “social drinking” (to be defined by you). However, if you don’t want to even acknowledge what it is that I stand against, we will forever be lost is a sea of mixed-up terminology and endless debate. To say that you don’t understand what I mean by the term “social drinking” even when it has been explained, for one that presents himself as a noted “scholar,” I find to be most dishonest.

You refused to answer my questions about other substances such as cigarette smoking, marijuana, or cocaine (much less “instrumental music” or the Biblical principles that I mentioned). However, the question still stands, are these substances also acceptable in moderation?

You also refused to touch my comments on coming here and undermining the work here by teaching in my apartment (while I was away) that it is acceptable for Christians to drink alcohol. Did you or did you not do this? Would this not be an act of sowing division in the congregation here?

We are doing what I said in the beginning I wanted to avoid, a long drawn-out discussion on this topic. It is already clear to me from you first response that there is no hope for me ever changing your position on drinking. Your background and support for those that drink alcohol seems to prohibit you from looking at this subject objectively. Because of that, you will continue to be a stumbling block for people sincerely desiring to draw closer to God. The soul is for eternity, Silvio. The battle you now wage to defend alcohol is not worth the risks or the efforts. If even one soul is lost because of your teaching, indeed you will give an answer for it on the Day of Judgment.

So that you know in advance, brother, while we love you and have fond memories of the times that we have spent together, your “teaching” on alcohol will not be tolerated by faithful churches here in Ukraine. Additionally, we will continue to actively teach against such heresies.

It is my earnest prayer that you may reconsider you position.

For the love of truth,

Kerry L. Sword

The Christian & “Social Drinking” (2)
John L. Kachelman, Jr.

Proverbs 23:29

Introduction:

There is a great problem facing our society regarding the use of alcoholic beverages. This problem plagues the Church as well as society. It is a problem that will confront everyone at some point in life. Within recent years there has been a concerted effort in schools to educate our youth about the dangers of alcoholic beverages. Even with the emphasis in schools many Churches are silent on this topic. (See article at end of notes.).

There are some sobering facts about alcoholic beverages that society seems to have forgotten (Louis Rushmore, Beverage Alcohol). We need to remind ourselves of these facts:

1. Alcohol is the most frequently used drug in our nation.
Alcohol abuse costs $100 billion annually. This is approximately five times more than the monies generated by retail sales. Alcohol claims at least 100,000 lives per year, 25 times as many lives as all illegal drugs combined.

2. Alcohol is associated with most crimes.
It is involved in 70%!o(MISSING)f all murders; 41%!o(MISSING)f assaults; 50%!o(MISSING)f rapes; 60%!o(MISSING)f sex crimes against children; 56%!o(MISSING)f fights/assaults; 37%!o(MISSING)f suicides; 55%!o(MISSING)f all arrests.

3. Alcohol is a safety hazard.
It is involved in 66%!o(MISSING)f fatal accidents; 53%!o(MISSING)f fire deaths; 36%!o(MISSING)f pedestrian accidents; 22%!o(MISSING)f home accidents; 45%!o(MISSING)f drownings; 50%!o(MISSING)f skiing accidents; 50%!o(MISSING)f traffic accidents; it is the #1 killer of people 25 years old and under.

4. Alcohol is a medical hazard.
It is poisonous (“intoxication” from the Latin “toxicum” meaning “poison.”). Alcohol kills brain cells and causes memory loss. It damages stomach, liver, and kidneys. It is a depressant drug affecting the central nervous system.

The purpose of our lesson series is specific - we want to explore and explain the use of “wine” in Scripture. We want to observe the impact of Scripture’s teaching regarding the use of alcoholic beverages. There is an urgent need for this series. Three critical facts immediately confront us as we begin this study:

1. There is no debate whenever we suggest that “drunkenness is wrong and contrary to God’s will” - ALL agree here!

2. Many are hesitant to declare “moderate” drinking of alcoholic beverages as sinful.

3. The problem revolves around the use of the word “wine.” It is argued, “The sin is not in the USE of the substance by in the ABUSE of the substance!”

It is readily admitted that ALL will not agree with what is suggested in this five part series. There are some who want to believe that it is all right to drink alcoholic beverages “in moderation.” No logic will sway them. But whatever objection may be presented against the thesis of these lessons it cannot be said we are inconsistent in our position. One basic principle has been discovered which will direct our lessons - God NEVER commands or condones the use of alcoholic beverages in ANY form or to any amount! All comments offered will be in total harmony with this principle.

There are two options for the Christian when considering alcoholic beverages.
1. The first choice allows the partaking and condoning the use of alcoholic beverages in any amount.

2. The second choice condemns the use of alcoholic beverages in any amount because the Bible never authorizes the use.

3. That all should follow the second option, because of God’s governing principles, becomes clear as the series progresses. At the conclusion of this series there will be a clear and consistent argument for total abstinence of alcoholic beverages.

In the present lesson we seek to establish a foundation upon which the term “wine” can be understood in biblical context. These first two lessons may seem unnecessary but they are essential if we are to gain a proper understanding of the issue. Lessons 3-5 will examine various texts and harmonize them in a consistent manner with the principle stated above.

THE REAL ISSUE
The REAL conflict in the social drinking discussion focuses upon one point - it is the interpretation that attempts to confine the word “wine” in the Bible to refer exclusively to alcoholic beverages. This is an unfounded assumption that has been historically taught and that many believe (without questioning) and such leads them to fail to see that drinking any amount of alcoholic beverage as contrary to God’s will. Thus there is failure to recognize social drinking as a “SIN.”

Those who argue that “wine” refers only to fermented beverages often state — “When the word is the same, the thing is the same. If therefore ‘wine’ means intoxicating drink when used in the cases of Lot and Noah, it must have the exact meaning when used in Psalms or Gospels.” However, there is another viewpoint to this issue. There are a number of references where wine does not refer to an intoxicating beverage. “Wine” - A certain amount of juice exuded from the ripe fruit from its own pressure before the treading commenced. This appears to have been kept separate from the rest of the juice, and to have formed the ‘sweet wine’ noticed in Acts 2:13 ... The ‘treading’ was effected by one or more men, according to the size of the vat ... The expressed juice escaped by an aperture into the lower vat, or was at once collected in vessels ... Sometimes it was preserved in its unfermented state and drunk as must ... The wines of antiquity were more like sirups; many of them were not intoxicant” (Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, Article “Wine,” p. 746, 747).

As a careful study of the Scriptures is made it becomes evident that “wine” can be placed under three headings . . .

1. Wine is mentioned with nothing to denote its character.

2. Wine is spoken of as the cause of misery, emblem of punishment, and eternal wrath.

3. Wine is a blessing and emblem of eternal happiness.

Thus, it is clear that not only were intoxicating “wines” consumed, but also non-intoxicating “wines” were consumed. There is then the clear possibility that some references to “wine” have been assumed to be alcoholic wines when in fact they were not alcoholic at all! This is a critical consideration in this series.

FERMENTATION PROCESSES OF THE ANCIENTS

The laws of fermentation are fixed. Order demands that if the sugar matter is to turn into alcohol the following factors must be present . . ..

1. There must be sugar and yeast.

2. Temperatures must be above 50 degrees.

3. The juice must have certain factors. Thick syrup will not undergo fermentation. Too much water will dilute the matter to a point where it will soon sour.

4. Note: This process was known; people could produce fermented drinks. But this was not a natural process! It produced that which was contrary to nature.

Just as “wine” could be fermented, it could also be preserved in an unfermented state. This was accomplished by one of four processes. Note: this is a fact that advocates of social drinking choose to ignore!

1. Figs, dates, grapes, etc., could be kept in a fresh condition for long periods of time (cf. Josephus, bk vii, c.viii, 4).
2. Fermentation could be avoided (See Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine In The Bible. Berrien Springs, Michigan 49103: Biblical Perspective, 1989 p. 115ff). The four major processes for preventing fermentation and allow the juice to remain unfermented are:
a. Boiling
b. Filtration
c. Subsidence
d. Fumigation

The conclusion has to be admitted - the ancients knew how to preserve “wine,” for long periods of time, in an unfermented state! This is not “my” conclusion but the conclusion of history. Those who often argue for social drinking contend that the only way beverages could be preserved was via fermentation. WHERE is their documentation? This is a fact assumed, not proven.

Although this issue is settled for many, our observations force us to admit that “wine” to the ancients did not refer to “wine” as understood today. “Common honesty demands that we interpret the Scriptures with the eyes, the taste, and the usage of the ancients, and not the eye, the taste, and the usage of the moderns” (Patton, 45).

These observations have been discovered in the Bible and established via principles of biblical interpretation:

1. Unfermented beverages existed and were a common drink among the ancients.

2. Unfermented beverages could be preserved and the majority endeavored to keep “wine” in an unfermented state.

3. These unfermented beverages were called “wines,” were used, and highly favored over fermented “wines.”
It is obvious that alcoholic “wines” were not the only “wines” available. Consider now the Hebrew/Greek words used to translate “wine.”

To further establish the principle suggested in the first lesson, it is necessary to look closer at the word “wine” in the original languages. Such a study may appear boring, but it is necessary. Remember, we have to interpret the words of the Bible in the meaning of their times, not our times!

Body:
I. A BRIEF STUDY OF HEBREW WORDS

A. YAYIN a general term used in the Bible to include every species of wine made from grapes (used 141 times).

1. In its broadest sense it means grape juice, “the liquid which the fruit of the vine yields.” This may refer to old or new, sweet or sour, fermented or unfermented. It is used 141 times. This word conveys the simple idea of “grape juice” and the specific sense of the word must be found from its context!

2. This word does not always signify fermented beverages. Sometimes it is used to refer to grapes as fresh fruit or the vine itself (Num 6:3, 4); grapes dried as raisins, prepared as jam, or preserved by boiling for storage, or as a thick syrup for spreading as we do butter (Song of Solomon 5:1).

3. Of the 141 references in the OT it is used 71 times to refer to unfermented grape juice and 70 times to fermented juice. Some references are hard to distinguish the character of the “wine” (Bacchiocchi, 65).

a. Examples of intoxicating YAYIN - Gn 9:20,21; 19:32,33; 1 Sa 25:36,37; 2 Sa 13:28; Est 1:10; etc.). Disapproval of this kind of YAYIN is found in - Pr 23:29-35; 20:1; Is 28:7.

b. Examples of unfermented YAYIN - In these texts one looks at the context to find the unfermented nature of the “wine.”

1) Isaiah 16:10 - The “wine” from the treading vat was obviously fresh juice which had not begun fermentation. The YAYIN is not looked at what it may become but at what it actually is. It is a blessing from God that will be lost (cf Jere 48:33).

2) Jeremiah 40:10,12 - YAYIN refers to the fruit still on the vine. Alcoholic wine is not gathered from the fields.

3) Nehemiah 13:15 - YAYIN is used to designate freshly squeezed grape juice.

4. There are secular references to YAYIN that help us understand this term.

a. The Jewish Encyclopedia - “Fresh wine before fermenting was called ‘yayin mi-gat’ (wine of the vat; Sanh 70a).” (Bacchiocchi, 62).

b. Encyclopedia Judaica - “The newly pressed wine prior to fermentation was known as yayin mi-gat” (Bacchiocchi, 62).

c. The Jewish culture described the newly pressed grape juice as “new wine.”

B. SHAKAR is a word usually translated as “strong drink.” The English reader invariably gets a wrong idea from this translation. The true rendering is “a liquid obtained from dates and other fruits (except grapes), or barley, millet, etc.” (Patton 48). This is used 23 times. Note: This term would INCLUDE the alcoholic beverage we call “beer.” Some think they are justified in drinking beer because they claim the Bible does not mention “beer.”

C. TIROSH is a reference to a specific kind of wine and is not used in the general sense. It can refer to fruit in its natural state and produce of the land (Is 62:8; Hos 9:2; Joel 1:10; Gn 27:28).

1. In the KJV this is translated “wine” 26 times and “new wine” 11 times. In the majority of cases a much better translation would be “vinefruit” (cf Hag 1:11).

2. It is generally used in a good sense of reward and indicates an UNINTOXICATING beverage when referring to liquid drinks, but there are exceptions (Hos 4:11).

D. (C)KHEMER describes the foaming appearance of the juice of the grape newly pressed, or in the process of fermentation (Dt 32:14; Ez 6:9; 7:22; Ps 75:8; Is 27:2; Da 5:1; 2:4, 23).

E. AHSIS is applied to fresh trodden grape juice or other fruit. Hence it could not be fermented (Joel 1:5; 3:18; Amos 9:13).

F. SOVEH denotes a luscious boiled wine (hence nonalcoholic). See Isaiah 1:22; Hosea 4:18; Nahum 1:14).

G. MESEK is literally a mixture and denotes some liquid compounded by various ingredients (Ps 75:8; Pr 23:30; Is 65:11; 19:14; Pr 9:2, 5; Ps 102:9).

H. ASHISHAH signifies some kind of fruitcake, probably a cake of pressed grapes or raisins (2 Sa 6:19; 1 Chr 16:3; Hos 3:1).

I. SHEMARIM signifies the things preserved (Ps 75:8; Is 25:6; Jer 48:11; Zep 1:12).

J. MAMTAQQIM denotes sweetness (Neh 8:10).

II. A STUDY OF THE GREEK WORD
The Greek Word for “wine” is OINOS (oinoj) . It literally means the “fruit of the grape plant.” It corresponds to the Hebrew YAYIN. This designates the juice of the grape in all stages. It can also refer to beverages made from other substances. This word DOES NOT always signify fermented drinks.

“It is widely believed both in secular and biblical Greek the word OINOS ... meant exclusively fermented grape juice ... It is important to ascertain if indeed it is true that in classical Greek OINOS meant only fermented grape juice. If this claim is shown to be untrue ... then it is certainly possible that the same dual meaning of OINOS is present also in the New Testament” (Bacchiocchi, 60).

1. There are numerous references showing that OINOS was used to refer to unfermented “wine.” Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) referred to OINOS that was boiled and had solidified an obvious reference to grape juice that had been boiled and thus unfermented. Athenaeus (c. 200 A.D.) Described a “sweet wine” Which “though called ‘wine’ it has not the effect of wine, for it does not taste like wine and does not intoxicate like ordinary wine.” He called this unfermented wine “lesbian” because its potency had been removed.

2. “Nicander of Colophon speculates the OINOS derives from the name of a man ‘Oineus,’ who first squeezed grapes into a cup: ‘And Oineus first squeezed it out into hollow cups and called it OINOS ... this suggests the origin of OINOS” to the very act of squeezing the juice out of grapes and the juice became known by the name of the one doing it (Bacchiocchi, 61). Obviously this would be unfermented juice.
“Consequently the contention of some . . . that the Greek OINOS, always meant fermented and intoxicating liquor is totally inaccurate, and only arises from ignorance, or prejudice in favor of the delusion of the commentators of the Dark Ages who fancied drunkenness as the highest delight, and intoxication an imperative Christian practice.” (Patton).

Examples of fermented OINOS - Ep 5:18; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 17:1,2.
Note: Ephesians 5:18 - Our English versions often take Ep 5:18 and translate it in an unacceptable manner making “drunkenness” rather than “wine” the cause of debauchery. The Greek text however allows for a different reading - “And do not get drunk with wine, in which is debauchery.” The subject of “in which” can be “wine” OR “drunkenness.”

Examples of unfermented OINOS - Mt 9:17; Rv 6:6.

III. A STUDY OF THE LATIN WORD
The Latin word for “wine.” VINUM is the Latin word that corresponds to the Greek OINOS. “New wine” (from the Latin mustum) is translated “wine yet on the tree.” The Latin word has been used to translate either the fermented or unfermented juice.

IV. A STUDY OF THE ENGLISH WORD
The English word for “wine.” WINE is the English word commonly understood to refer to an intoxicating beverage. Translators of Scripture have translated the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin words discussed above with the single English word “wine.” It is unfortunate that the word “wine” is commonly understood as an alcoholic beverage. However the English word “wine” has not always referred only to the alcoholic wine.
Past dictionaries have defined “wine” as including both fermented/unfermented beverages. See Bacchiocchi, 55-58.

This explains why we have the confusion in our Bibles today. When the KJV was produced (1604-1611) its translators would have understood the word “wine” to refer to both fermented and unfermented wines. Uniformly the translators used “wine” to communicate the meaning of YAYIN and OINOS because they understood the terms to include either kinds of “wine.” Today the word “wine” has become more restrictive but there was no efforts to educate people on the differences in “wine.” Most were quite willing to accept the cultural definitions. By failing to distinguish between the two kinds of “wine” modern Bible readers are misled into believing that all references to “wine” in the Bible refer to fermented beverages. This translation bias is also illustrated by the transliteration of âáðôßæù by the generic term “baptism.” The exact same bias is present but we have long sought to correct it so the Bible could accurately communicate God’s will. WHY have we been so lax in doing this with “wine”?

V. OBSERVATIONS FROM THIS BRIEF WORD STUDY

The words YAYIN and OINOS are generic and should be understood in this sense.
We should understand that the ancients used “wine” in a sense that they seldom referred to an intoxicating drink with which we associate the word “wine” today. The majority of “wines” to the ancients were as harmless as our teas, coffees, and cocoas.

Thus, when we read “wine” let us remember that it refers to a simple fruit syrup EXCEPT when especially limited by context to refer to an intoxicating drink.

A. TWO CATEGORIES RESULTING FROM THIS WORD STUDY
There is a category that we term “bad wine.” All references falling within this category depict wine as an evil, sin producing, God alienating beverage.

1. It is the cause of intoxication (Gn 9:21; 1 Co 6:10).
2. It is the cause of violence/woe (Pr 4:17; 23:29, 30; Ro 13:13).
3. It is the cause of self-security and irreligion (Is 56:12; Hab 2:5; Is 28:7; Lk 21:34).
4. It is poisonous and destructive (Pr 23:31; Dt 32:33; Hos 7:5; Hab 2:15; Mt 24:49).
5. It is condemning to those who drink (Is 5:22; I Co 6:10).
6. It is pictured as the emblem of punishment and eternal ruin (Ps 60:3; 75:8; Is 51:17; Rv 14:10; 16:19).
7. It is that forbidden by priests to consume (Lv 10:8-11; cf 1 Pt 2:5, 9).
8. It is wrong for rulers to drink (Pr 31:4,5).
9. It is unfit to even look upon (Pr 23:31).
10. Its use demonstrates one is foolish and not wise (Pr 20:1).
11. It leads one to err (Is 28:7; Gn 9:21,22).
12. It is the cause of defilement (Da 1:5-8).
13. If one gives it to another s/he has committed a crime (Hab 2:15; 1 Co 5:11).

There is a category that we term “good wine.” All reference to this is commendable and is pictured as a blessing and nutritious.

1. It is offered at the altar (Num 18:12, 13; 15:10; Neh 10:37, 39). Note: All fermented substances (leaven) were forbidden by the Law to be present during worship (Lv 2:11; Ex 23:18; 34:25; Lv 6:17; 7:12; 10:12).

2. It is classified among the blessings, comforts, and necessities of life (Gn 27:28; Dt 7:13; Is 65:8; Joel
3:18; Ps 104:14, 15; Zech 9:17).

3. It is the emblem of spiritual blessings (Is 55:1; Pr 9:2; S of S 5:1).

4. It is the emblem of the atonement (Mt 26:26-28; I Co 10:16).

B. OBSERVATIONS ARISING FROM THESE TWO CATEGORIES

1. The character of the “bad” is certain - it is likened to gall and poison. It causes one to lose control. It stands condemning those who partake of it.

2. The “good” had no lisp of warning, no intimation of danger, no hint of disapprobation, but always approval.

3. Compare the two types of “wine” existing - intoxicating and unintoxicating. Knowing the character of each, the results each bears, the consequences each brings - which would you classify as “bad” or “good”? How can one willingly partake of the “bad” knowing the danger associated with it?

CONCLUSION:

After our study, is it possible for anyone to conclude that every time “wine” is used in the Scriptures it refers to an intoxicating drink? Can a thing in the same state, be good and bad; a symbol of wrath and mercy; a thing to be sought and avoided?

The only reasonable conclusion - God does not approve of alcoholic beverages because they are the direct cause of wretchedness and woe in this life and eternal ruin in the next! However, God does condone the use of natural fruit juices for they are unfermented!

We have thus far established these points . . .

1. There are two kinds of wine in the Bible (good and bad).

2. Unfermented (good) wine could be preserved many years.

3. The original words are often generic and must be defined by context.

4. God’s condemnation rests upon those who take the “bad” wine. This applies to ALL beverages containing any amount of alcohol!


End



Ask an Expert: Alcohol and breast cancer risk

Q: I enjoy a glass of red wine with dinner each night and thought it was good for my health. Now I hear having a glass of wine each day can increase your risk of developing breast cancer. Is that true?
Answer from the expert staff of the Ruth J. Spear Breast Center at Providence St. Vincent Medical Center: Yes, research has shown that even moderate amounts of alcohol, consumed on a regular basis, could increase a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer. Recent studies have found that drinking one glass of beer, wine or liquor per day could increase a woman’s lifetime risk of developing breast cancer anywhere from 7 to 11 percent. The link between alcohol and breast cancer appears to be even more pronounced in women who:


Have a blood relative with a history of breast cancer;


Have completed menopause; or


Drink more than one glass of alcohol per day.
We still do not know exactly how alcohol affects breast cancer risk. Some think alcohol has a direct effect on hormones in the body, while others believe stress and other lifestyle factors associated with regular drinking actually cause the cancer. More research is needed to better understand how alcohol consumption affects breast cancer risk.

While an occasional glass of alcohol is unlikely to pose a problem for most women, you may wish to avoid daily alcohol consumption if any of the above risk factors apply to you. You might also consider your social drinking patterns; one recent research study found that women who regularly consume more than two drinks on a single occasion (e.g., at a party or happy hour) may be at greater risk of developing breast cancer than those who drink less on each occasion.

If you are at risk for cardiovascular disease, your health provider can talk with you about the heart-healthy benefits of moderate daily alcohol consumption and help you weigh those benefits against the potential increased risk of breast cancer.
_______________________________________
Home · Facilities · Health Information
Classes · Employment · Donate
My Providence · Site Map · Notice of Privacy Practices
Copyright © 1997-2007 Providence Health System. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Disclaimer


Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,

"A startling conclusion was made by a team of scientists headed by Dr. Melvin H. Knesely, Professor of Anatomy at the Medical University of South Carolina. For years it has been known that alcoholics suffer serious brain damage, but most doctors dismissed this as an end effect after years of hard drinking. Dr. Knesely and his team now demonstrate that brain damage is not merely an end effect. It occurs progressively from the first brain cells destroyed by the very first drink a person takes. The damage accumulates relentlessly with every drink. According to governmental and university reports, the average person suffers the impairments of alcohol when there is 0.05 per cent alcohol in the blood. It takes only one beer or one average highball to produce this in an average person. To be declared legally drunk in most states, the blood must contain 0.15 per cent alcohol. We can readily see that the moderate, or social drinker, suffers all the physical damages that the hard drinker suffers" (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, PHS Publication No. 730).



Moderate Alcohol Consumption Linked to Brain Shrinkage

From Johns Hopkins News Release

Moderate Alcohol Use Does Not Lower Stroke Risk


A study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and other institutions found a link between low to moderate alcohol consumption and a decrease in the brain size of middle-aged adults. Brain atrophy is associated with impaired cognition and motor functions.
The researchers also found that low or moderate consumption did not reduce the risk of stroke, which contradicts the findings of some previous studies. The study is published in the rapid access edition of Stroke: The Journal of the American Heart Association.

"Previous studies conducted with older adults found an association between heavy drinking, brain atrophy and an increased risk for stroke. We studied a younger, middle-aged population and found that low amounts of alcohol consumption are also associated with decreases in brain size," said Jingzhong Ding, PhD, lead author of the study and a research associate in the Department of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health. "Our findings do not support the hypothesis that low or moderate alcohol intake offers any protection against cerebral abnormalities or the risk of stroke in middle-aged adults."

For the study, Dr. Ding and his colleagues used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to measure the brains of 1,909 men and women, age 55 and older. All were randomly selected from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. The MRI was used to access brain size and to detect infarcts and white matter lesions, which are changes in the brain associated with an increased risk for stroke. The researchers categorized the participant's drinking habits either as never drank, former drinker, occasional drinker (less than one drink per week), low drinker (one to six drinks per week) or moderate drinker (seven to 14 drinks per week).

The researchers found as alcohol consumption increased, the MRI detected increases in the ventricular and sulcal areas of the brain, which are spaces that do not contain brain tissue and an indication of brain atrophy. However, they found no consistent association between alcohol intake and the presence of infarctions or white matter lesions.

Former drinkers and moderate drinkers were more likely to have infarctions compared to those who never drank without adjusting for other factors. After adjusting for factors such as smoking habits, body mass and income, the researchers found no reduction or protection in infarction associated with former drinkers or moderate drinkers. In addition, they did not find an association between alcohol intake and white matter lesions.

"Because MRI measures in the brain were only conducted once during follow up, a causal relationship between alcohol intake and brain atrophy is difficult to establish," explained Dr. Ding. "The strength of the study lies in the large population-based sample and the consistency of the findings by gender and race."

Created: December 5, 2003

Cognitive Impairment and Recovery




Alcohol Alert From NIAAA

Brain damage is a common and potentially severe consequence of long-term, heavy alcohol consumption. Even mild-to-moderate drinking can adversely affect cognitive functioning (i.e., mental activities that involve acquiring, storing, retrieving, and using information) (1). Persistent cognitive impairment can contribute to poor job performance in adult alcoholics, and can interfere with learning and academic achievement in adolescents with an established pattern of chronic heavy drinking (2).

A small but significant proportion of the heaviest drinkers may develop devastating, irreversible brain-damage syndromes, such as Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome, a disorder in which the patient is incapable of remembering new information for more than a few seconds (3).

It stands to reason that cognitive impairment also may impede recovery from alcoholism, although evidence has not conclusively shown this to be the case. For example, Morgenstern and Bates (4) studied whether deficits in a patient’s learning and planning abilities—core aspects of many treatment strategies—affected recovery from alcoholism.

They found that impairment was not a significant predictor of poor treatment response. On the other hand, evidence does support the possibility that brain damage, whether resulting from or predating alcohol use, may contribute to the development and progression of alcoholism (5).
Designing practical strategies to cope with the complex combination of alcoholism and cognitive impairment requires an understanding of the nature of cognitive functions and their interactions with structural and functional brain abnormalities.

This issue of Alcohol Alert describes the nature and consequences of common alcohol-associated cognitive defects, explores the extent to which some cognitive abilities recover with abstinence, and summarizes recent research on the effects of cognitive deficits on alcoholism treatment outcome.
Cognition and Alcohol

Most alcoholics exhibit mild-to-moderate deficiencies in intellectual functioning (6), along with diminished brain size and regional changes in brain-cell activity. The most prevalent alcohol-associated brain impairments affect visuospatial abilities and higher cognitive functioning (7). Visuospatial abilities include perceiving and remembering the relative locations of objects in 2- and 3-dimensional space. Examples include driving a car or assembling a piece of furniture based on instructions contained in a line drawing. Higher cognitive functioning includes the abstract-thinking capabilities needed to organize a plan, set it in motion, and change it as needed (2).

Most alcoholics entering treatment perform as well as nonalcoholics on tests of overall intelligence. However, alcoholics perform poorly on neuropsychological tests that measure specific cognitive abilities (8). For example, an alcoholic who has remained abstinent after treatment may have no apparent difficulty filing office documents correctly, a task that engages multiple brain regions. However, that same person might be unable to devise a completely different filing system, a task closely associated with higher cognitive functioning.

How Much Is Too Much?

The link between duration and lifetime quantity of drinking and the development of cognitive problems is unclear. Some investigators have proposed that cognitive performance worsens in direct proportion to the severity and duration of alcoholism (6,9). Studies suggest that social drinkers who consume more than 21 drinks per week also fit into this category (6). Other investigators have suggested that cognitive deficits may be detectable only in those alcoholics who have been drinking regularly for 10 years or more (8,10). Long-term, light-to-moderate social drinkers have been found to fall into this category as well, showing cognitive deficits equivalent to those found in detoxified alcoholics (8). Although further research is needed to determine how a person's pattern of drinking is related to cognitive impairment, some deficits are possible even in people who are not heavy drinkers.

Tracking Structural and Functional Brain Abnormalities

Structural and functional brain abnormalities generally are measured by noninvasive imaging techniques that provide a picture of the living brain with minimal risk to the individual. Structural imaging techniques, such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, are used to generate computerized pictures of living tissue. Functional imaging techniques, such as positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance spectroscopy, permit scientists to study cell activity by tracking blood flow and energy metabolism. For more information about imaging, see Alcohol Alert No. 47, “Imaging and Alcoholism: A Window on the Brain.”

Structural imaging consistently reveals that compared with nonalcoholics, most alcoholics’ brains are smaller and less dense (11,12). Loss of brain volume is most noticeable in two areas: the outer layer (i.e., the cortex) of the frontal lobe, which is considered a major center of higher mental functions (7,12,13); and the cerebellum, which is responsible largely for gait and balance as well as certain aspects of learning (14). Support for these results is provided by functional imaging studies, which reveal altered brain activity throughout the cortex and cerebellum of heavy drinkers (15). In addition, functional imaging often is sufficiently sensitive to detect these irregularities before they can be observed by structural imaging techniques, and even before major cognitive problems themselves become manifest. This suggests that functional imaging may be particularly useful for detecting the early stages of cognitive decline (15).

Understanding the Basis of Cognitive Impairment

Accurate measurement of cognitive abilities is challenging, and relating those abilities to a specific brain irregularity simply may not be possible with the current technology (16). Discrepancies among research findings have led scientists to develop improved cognitive-measuring techniques. Using a battery of tests, Beatty and colleagues (9) have suggested that widespread (i.e., diffuse) cognitive impairment could arise from damage to multiple brain areas, each of which regulates distinct but related abilities. Likewise, damaging the network of brain cells that synchronizes the overall activity of those multiple areas may produce the same cognitive impairments previously attributed to localized damage (9).
Is Impairment Reversible?

Certain alcohol-related cognitive impairment is reversible with abstinence (17). Newly detoxified adult alcoholics often exhibit mild yet significant deficits in some cognitive abilities, especially problem-solving, short-term memory, and visuospatial abilities (18). By remaining abstinent, however, the recovering alcoholic will continue to recover brain function over a period of several months to 1 year (19)—with improvements in working memory, visuospatial functioning, and attention—accompanied by significant increases in brain volume, compared with treated alcoholics who have subsequently relapsed to drinking (18).

Rewiring Brain Networks

Reversibility of alcohol-related cognitive function also may be the result of a reorganization of key brain-cell networks. Some researchers have proposed that such reorganization may contribute to the success of alcoholism treatment. Using advanced imaging techniques, Pfefferbaum and colleagues (20) examined the brain activity of cognitively impaired alcoholic participants during a series of tests designed to assess cognitive function. They found that although the alcoholic subjects had abnormal patterns of brain activation, compared with control subjects, they were able to complete the tasks equally well, suggesting that the brain systems in alcoholics can be functionally reorganized so that tasks formerly performed by alcohol-damaged brain systems are shunted to alternative brain systems. This finding—that cognitively impaired alcoholic patients use different brain pathways than unimpaired patients to achieve equivalent outcome—also was suggested in a study of patients in 12-step treatment programs (4). Functional brain reorganization may be particularly advantageous for adolescent alcohol abusers in treatment, because their developing brains are still in the process of establishing nerve-cell networks (21).
Cognitive Function and Alcoholism Treatment

The exact role that cognitive function has in alcoholism treatment success is unclear. Structural and functional imaging, as well as more specific cognitive tests, may provide scientists with the tools needed to reveal subtle relationships between alcohol-related cognitive impairment and recovery. Meanwhile, certain conclusions can be drawn from existing research that help to explain how cognitive function may influence alcoholism treatment:

• Cognitive deficits have been hypothesized to affect the efficacy of alcoholism treatment, although a clear association has not been established. One view finds that cognitively impaired patients may not be able to comprehend the information imparted during therapy and, thus, may not make full use of the strategies presented, thereby hampering recovery. Another view is that cognitive functioning may not directly influence treatment outcome, but may impact other factors that, in turn, contribute to treatment success (22). Focusing on those factors—such as improved nutrition, opportunities for exercise, careful evaluation of comorbid mental or medical disorders, and/or treatment strategies aimed at enticing the patient out of long-standing social isolation—ultimately may be more beneficial than focusing exclusively on recovery from alcoholism.

• Other types of non-alcohol-related brain damage also can produce symptoms resembling those associated with chronic alcoholism. Clinicians must be aware that no matter the cause of the impairment, it may have an impact on the patient's ability to benefit fully from alcohol-treatment strategies.

• Cognitive impairment is usually most severe during the first weeks of abstinence, perhaps making it difficult for some alcoholics to benefit from educational and skill-development sessions, which are important components of many treatment programs (22,23). For example, one study found that alcoholics tested soon after entering treatment were unable to recall treatment-related information presented in a film they had just been shown (4). As time goes by and cognitive function improves, however, patients may make better use of information presented to them in individual and group therapy, educational programs, and 12-step programs.

Cognitive Impairment and Recovery From Alcoholism—

A Commentary by NIAAA Director Enoch Gordis, M.D.

The new noninvasive imaging techniques that allow us to “see” how the brain operates have been a boon to the study of cognition. Through this medium, we now know that the brain is capable of “rewiring” itself. In doing so, the brain can regain some of the cognitive abilities previously diminished as a result of damage from alcohol or other diseases. The brain's remarkable ability to recover is important for at least two reasons. First, alcohol use over a period of time, even at low levels of drinking, can produce varying degrees of cognitive damage, a problem that is of particular concern because alcohol use is so widespread. Thus, the brain's self-repairing ability may help defer or reduce alcohol-induced cognitive problems among a large portion of the population. Second, the brain's ability to rewire itself may have implications in terms of adolescent drinking. Recent evidence suggests that the adolescent brain, which is still forming important cellular connections, is more vulnerable than the adult brain to alcohol-induced damage. This is particularly troubling, given the problems associated with chronic binge drinking, which is all too common among young people. The brain's ability to rewire important neurological systems might help mitigate a lifetime of cognitive difficulties resulting from chronic drinking during adolescence, but we do not yet know if this is true. Future research will help clarify this and other important questions about alcohol's effect on cognition.


References
(1) Evert, D.L., and Oscar-Berman, M. Alcohol-related cognitive impairments: An overview of how alcoholism may affect the workings of the brain. Alcohol Health Res World 19(2):89-96, 1995. (2) Giancola, P.R., and Moss, H.B. Executive cognitive functioning in alcohol use disorders. In: Galanter, M., ed. Recent Developments in Alcoholism: Volume 14. The Consequences of Alcoholism.New York: Plenum Press, 1998. pp. 227-251. (3) Oscar-Berman, M. Severe brain dysfunction: Alcoholic Korsakoff's syndrome. Alcohol Health Res World 14(2):120-129, 1990. (4) Morgenstern, J., and Bates, M.E. Effects of executive function impairment on change processes and substance use outcomes in 12-step treatment. J Stud Alcohol 60(6)846-855, 1999. (5) Bowden, S.C.; Crews, F.T.; Bates, M.E.; et al. Neurotoxicity and neurocognitive impairments with alcohol and drug-use disorders: Potential roles in addiction and recovery. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 25(2):317-321, 2001. (6) Parsons, O.A. Neurocognitive deficits in alcoholics and social drinkers: A continuum? Alcohol Clin Exp Res 22(4):954-961, 1998. (7) Oscar-Berman, M.; Shagrin, B.; Evert, D.L.; and Epstein, C. Impairments of brain and behavior: The neurological effects of alcohol. Alcohol Health Res World 21(1):65-75, 1997. (8) Parsons, O.A., and Nixon, S.J. Cognitive functioning in sober social drinkers: A review of the research since 1986. J Stud Alcohol 59(2):180-190, 1998. (9) Beatty, W.W.; Tivis, R.; Stott, H.D; Nixon, S.J.; and Parsons, O.A. Neuropsychological deficits in sober alcoholics: Influences of chronicity and recent alcohol consumption. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 24(2):149-154, 2000. (10) Eckardt, M.J.; File, S.E.; Gessa, G.L.; et al. Effects of moderate alcohol consumption on the central nervous system. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 22(5):998-1040, 1998. (11) Pfefferbaum, A.; Rosenbloom, M.; Crusan, K.; and Jernigan, T.L. Brain CT changes in alcoholics: Effects of age and alcohol consumption. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 12(1):81-87, 1988. (12) Pfefferbaum, A.; Lim, K.O.; Zipursky, R.B.; et al. Brain gray and white matter volume loss accelerates with aging in chronic alcoholics: A quantitative MRI study. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 16(6):1078-1089, 1992. (13) Lyvers, M. “Loss of control” in alcoholism and drug addiction: A neuroscientific interpretation. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol8(2):225-249, 2000. (14) Sullivan, E.V.; Rosenbloom, M.J.; Deshmukh, A.; et al. Alcohol and the cerebellum: Effects on balance, motor coordination, and cognition. Alcohol Health Res World 19(2):138-141, 1995. (15) Eberling, J.L., and Jagust, W.J. Imaging studies of aging, neurodegenerative disease, and alcoholism. Alcohol Health Res World 19(4):279-286, 1995. (16) Parsons, O.A. Determinants of cognitive deficits in alcoholics: The search continues. Clin Neuropsychologist 8(1):39-58, 1994. (17) Volkow, N.; Wang, G.J.; and Doria, J.J. Monitoring the brain’s response to alcohol with positron emission tomography. Alcohol Health Res World 19(4):296-299, 1995. (18) Sullivan, E.V.; Rosenbloom, M.J.; Lim, K.O.; and Pfefferbaum, A. Longitudinal changes in cognition, gait, and balance in abstinent and relapsed alcoholic men: Relationships to changes in brain structure. Neuropsychology 14(2):178-188, 2000a. (19) Sullivan, E.V.; Rosenbloom, M.J.; and Pfefferbaum, A. Pattern of motor and cognitive deficits in detoxified alcoholic men. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 24(5):611-621, 2000 b. (20) Pfefferbaum, A.; Desmond, J.E.; Galloway, C.; et al. Reorganization of frontal systems used by alcoholics for spatial working memory: An fMRI study. NeuroImage 13:1-14, 2001. (21) Spear, L. Modeling adolescent development and alcohol use in animals. Alcohol Res Health 24(2):115-123, 2000. (22) Allen, D.N.; Goldstein, G.; and Seaton, B.E. Cognitive rehabilitation of chronic alcohol abusers. Neuropsych Review 7(1):21-39, 1997. (23) McCrady, B.S., and Smith, D.E. Implications of cognitive impairment for the treatment of alcoholism. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 10(2):145-149, 1986.


Information furnished by National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Brain damage risks
AMA report on alcohol's adverse effects on the brains of children, adolescents and college students

What is the summary report?

Harmful Consequences of Alcohol Use on the Brains of Children, Adolescents, and College Students (PDF, 69KB) is a compilation and summary of two decades of comprehensive research on how alcohol affects the brains of youth. The report's aggregation of extensive scientific and medical information reveals just how harmful drinking is to the developing brain and serves as a wakeup call to parents, physicians, elected officials, law enforcement, purveyors of alcohol - including the alcohol industry - and young drinkers themselves.

Why is this report important?

The average age of a child's first drink is now 12, and nearly 20 percent of 12 to 20 year-olds are considered binge drinkers. While many believe that underage drinking is an inevitable "rite of passage" that adolescents can easily recover from because their bodies are more resilient, the opposite is true.

The adolescent brain

The brain goes through dynamic change during adolescence, and alcohol can seriously damage long- and short-term growth processes. Frontal lobe development and the refinement of pathways and connections continue until age 16, and a high rate of energy is used as the brain matures until age 20. Damage from alcohol at this time can be long-term and irreversible. In addition, short-term or moderate drinking impairs learning and memory far more in youth than adults. Adolescents need only drink half as much to suffer the same negative effects.

Drinkers vs. non-drinkers: research findings
• Adolescent drinkers scored worse than non-users on vocabulary, general information, memory, memory retrieval and at least three other tests

• Verbal and nonverbal information recall was most heavily affected, with a 10 percent performance decrease in alcohol users

• Significant neuropsychological deficits exist in early to middle adolescents (ages 15 and 16) with histories of extensive alcohol use

• Adolescent drinkers perform worse in school, are more likely to fall behind and have an increased risk of social problems, depression, suicidal thoughts and violence

• Alcohol affects the sleep cycle, resulting in impaired learning and memory as well as disrupted release of hormones necessary for growth and maturation

• Alcohol use increases risk of stroke among young drinkers

Adverse effects of alcohol on the brain: research findings

Youth who drink can have a significant reduction in learning and memory, and teen alcohol users are most susceptible to damaging two key brain areas that are undergoing dramatic changes in adolescence:

• The hippocampus handles many types of memory and learning and suffers from the worst alcohol-related brain damage in teens. Those who had been drinking more and for longer had significantly smaller hippocampi (10 percent).

• The prefrontal area (behind the forehead) undergoes the most change during adolescence. Researchers found that adolescent drinking could cause severe changes in this area and others, which play an important role in forming adult personality and behavior and is often called the CEO of the brain.
Lasting implications

Compared to students who drink moderately or not at all, frequent drinkers may never be able to catch up in adulthood, since alcohol inhibits systems crucial for storing new information as long-term memories and makes it difficult to immediately remember what was just learned.

Additionally, those who binge once a week or increase their drinking from age 18 to 24 may have problems attaining the goals of young adulthood—marriage, educational attainment, employment, and financial independence. And rather than "outgrowing" alcohol use, young abusers are significantly more likely to have drinking problems as adults.

What can be done to stop this epidemic?

The AMA advocates numerous ways to combat this growing epidemic, including:

• Reducing access to alcohol for children and youth
• Reducing sales and provision of alcohol to children and youth
• Increasing enforcement of underage drinking laws
• Providing more education about the harmful effects of alcohol abuse
• Reducing the demand for alcohol and the normalization of alcohol use by children and youth

A major source of the normalization of alcohol use by children and youth is alcohol advertising. Television networks and cable stations have profited tremendously from the alcohol industry's aggressive marketing to underage drinkers. These ads are proven to heavily influence the normalization and glamorization of drinking in the minds of children, and television has continued to endanger the health of these young viewers in spite of such findings.

With these new findings of the adverse effects of alcohol on the brain of children and adolescents, the AMA calls on cable TV and the TV networks to pledge not to run alcohol ads targeted at underage youth. This means no alcohol ads before 10 p.m., none on shows with 15 percent or more underage viewers and no commercials with cartoons, mascots or other youth-focused images.

What can I do?

Please visit our Web site to learn 10 things you can do to combat underage drinking as well as to send an e-mail or a fax to the TV networks and cable TV about your concerns about advertising alcohol to youth.

Last updated: Feb 02, 2007
Content provided by: Alcohol & Drug Abuse





Drinking Can Lead to Hearing Loss


Posted on: Tuesday, 16 March 2004, 06:00 CST
By Steven Reinberg, HealthDay Reporter

HealthDayNews -- A new German study suggests drinking can cause some hearing loss, in a finding that's sure to fuel the debate on the health risks and benefits of alcohol.

While studies have shown moderate drinking can lower your risk for heart disease, excess alcohol can damage your liver and brain and increase your risk for certain cancers.

The new study finds that even moderate drinking can cause some degree of hearing loss by increasing the time it takes to process sound in the auditory brainstem. This nerve damage is caused by the long-term, cumulative effect of drinking, the researchers say.

"High, life-long alcohol consumption leads to damage in the central auditory cortex of the brain," says lead researcher Dr. Elisabeth Stephanie Smith, from the Ear, Nose and Throat Clinic at the University of Ulm.

The study appears in the March issue of Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research.
In their study, the investigators looked at electrical currents in the brain called brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs), which are a measure of the brain's response to sound.

Smith's team measured BAEPs in 38 men -- 19 were head and neck tumor patients who were heavy drinkers, and 19 were plastic surgery patients who were moderate drinkers.

The men were asked to fill out a questionnaire on how much they drank and smoked. They also had blood and hearing tests before their BAEPs were measured.

While the researchers didn't administer subsequent hearing tests, they did find it took, on average, 2 to 4 milliseconds longer than normal for the brain to process sounds for all 38 men.
Kathleen C. M. Campbell, director of audiology research at Southern Illinois University, says it's not known what specific hearing difficulties these drinkers would notice.

However, she suspects they would have difficulty accurately hearing people who were speaking quickly. They might also have problems distinguishing one voice or sound from another in a setting where there was a lot of background noise, such as a party or sporting event.

Smith says, "Chronic alcohol consumption leads to defects of the central auditory brainstem, which cause delay in neurotransmission time." This finding "can be explained by the loss of white matter in the brain and delay in neurotransmission through the loss of neurotransmitters," she adds.

But because the damage to the auditory nerves adds up, even moderate drinkers can end up with as much nerve damage and hearing loss as heavy drinkers, Smith says.

Smith notes this type of hearing loss can also result from exposure to solvents such as toluol and benzene, and diseases such as multiple sclerosis or cerebellar angle tumors.

The importance of the new study is that "even an amount of alcohol consumption which is normally accepted by society can lead to a negative effect on the central auditory system," Smith says.
Dr. Jeffrey Harris, a professor and chief of otolaryngology at the University of California, San Diego, says "this is a very interesting article and adds additional credence to the accepted concept that alcohol is toxic to the central nervous system."

However, he adds, the patients with head and neck tumors may have caused the study's findings to be skewed because "treatments with radiotherapy and chemotherapy may have resulted in irreversible changes to the BAEPs."

"Nevertheless, it is well recognized that balance is greatly affected by long-term consumption of alcohol as well. So it would be expected that BAEPs would similarly have the same sensitivity to alcohol, even though it is in another site in the brain," Harris says.
-----




From: "Caddeo"
To: "Kerry Sword" , [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Response to your response of Aug 07 2007

Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:43:32 -0400

Dear Brother Kerry,

I am pleased you still call me brother. I want to do something more positive because I love you too much to say certain wrong things. I do not also because I do not want to sin.

We have been close friend since 1993, for 14 years. We have personally discussed a lot about many things, exchanged phone calls and E-mail for so long, and I do not remember one time that you told me, “Silvio I do not understand you” and now suddenly you have problems about my writing.

Yes, English is not my first language. I have studied eight languages and in Montréal usually I work in three languages, in addition to the ancient Greek and Jewish that I use regularly for my studies. Probably you have underestimated me because I speak with the accent, but I do not think with the accent and my mind is very clear and I still hope that you understand me.

It is strange that I have never received the letter from the congregation in Kiev. I asked to receive a better copy that I could read, but I had no reply. Has there been a second thought about the content? It is evident that your attitude is pushing against me certain church leaders in Kiev, preachers, translators, teachers and students of the Bible school; all those who are receiving a salary through you.

I am trying go through the big amount of information you send me and it is sad to hear how many people die drinking and driving, but there is a new statistic in which appears that there are now more people who die because they use the cellular while driving; several country are making new laws to forbid that . Presently, nobody is preaching against the cellular because also many preachers are using one while they are driving the car. I hope that someone will not forbid the use of the cellular also when people are using it during their regular meal at home. There is also certain very bad news about obesity. In America obesity and cellular phones are killing a lot more people than alcohol. Anyway, my religion is not the one of the statistics; I try to follow just Jesus.

In your first letter, you have misquoted me saying that I approve social drinking. Fortunately, I had a document to prove that you are wrong, something that many have read before and so you could not insist on it. I have never, never, never accepted social drinking. I still do not know why you have made up that story against me. Please explain it to me.

You made a wrong accusation in my regard and you have not apologised yet. I am still waiting you do your Christian duty in regard of your brother (Lk 17:3). Fortunately I am here to defend my writings, which you have misquoted. I wish that also the Apostle Paul could be here to defend his writings from your misinterpretations.

Recently you were so happy to hear about the possibility that I could come in Kiev, maybe next year; you were so anxious to see again an old friend. You know that my heart is still now in Ukraine; I deeply love Ukrainian people. Sometimes, you told me on the phone, “Silvio when will you come home?” Everyone in the brotherhood knew how close we were, and now suddenly because you have discovered from an article, that I accept that the believers can drink a glass of wine during the regular meal, for you I have become the worst man in the world, a dangerous heretic, and you are discrediting me even internationally. What a pity! I do not think that Jesus would approve that!

I am not afraid for what you can do to me, of course. Many years ago, I was not afraid of the reaction of the Catholic priests, in 1958, when I left the Catholic Church and preached strongly against the Catholic traditions at the point that I was under investigation by the Italian police. Can you imagine if I am afraid of you now? Acting in this way, you can just hurt yourself and the missionary work in Ukraine.

That your wrong attitude remind me what Paul wrote to the brothers in Galatia, “I plead you, brothers, come like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong. As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the Gospel to you. Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcome me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. What has happened to all you joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?” (Ga 4:13-16). That is exactly what is happening today among us, isn’t?

Still now, I do not approve that you have involved so many people in this dispute because it takes a long time and a lot of patience to solve it and, meanwhile, certain weak members could be lost. I can approve that the elders could have been involved, but not other younger brothers. I was not looking for so much honour and now you are making me very famous. It was not what I was looking for because I love you, but that is the result of your reaction.

It is not good for you to involve so many brothers. I can imagine that all brothers and sisters in Kiev now know that Silvio and Kerry, the two close friends, are fighting against each other. What a pitiful witness! I do not approve what you are doing because I am not planning to destroy the work in Kiev and neither the work in Montréal. You should realize that using the brothers in Kiev against me, it is a way to destroy your missionary work. It takes many years to develop a new work and it is enough to make certain wrong steps to destroy everything.

I am always against personal confrontations or public debates among brothers; they hurt weak members and they have never made the church grow. We can have instead an enlarged Bible class through internet or a research committee with some brothers from different countries, with the purpose to study a particular issue. It could be wonderful to realize something like that, however, also in this case, you should be very careful because there is always the risk that some brothers from the European Union, especially Italians, Spaniards, Frenchmen, Germans and Greeks, would become upset to hear what you think about those who drink wine, and they would quote many Biblical commentaries and dictionaries to prove that you are wrong.

You said that you disagree with my interpretation of Mt 18:15-17, about the need to discuss personally with a brother about his sin before of going to other brothers. You wrote, “For example, I know the Pope teaches error because of what I have read and heard on the television. Do you maintain that I need to go to him personally before speaking out against him publicly? Have you done such with the Pope or Billy Graham, Max Lucado, Rubel Shelly, etc? The idea is ludicrous”.

Dear Kerry again you are missing a very important point; I am not dealing personally with those people; they are strangers to me. It happens that I never worked with them and never worshipped God with them. They never invited me, never hugged me and never ate with me. I never tried to convert other people with them, I never baptized someone with them and I never slept in their house. I hope that now you see the difference and you do not find anymore my statement ludicrous.

In the beginning of the letter you call me brother and after you act as if I was a pagan; why this contradiction? (Ja 3:11-12). Considering that you call me brother and until few days ago we were co-workers (we have been for many years), you have violated a very important aspect of the Gospel and I expect that you apologize. You should do it for yourself and for the work in Kiev.

I do not know how you can apply the Christian discipline with the members in Kiev if you are violating this very important principle from Jesus’ teaching (Mt 18:15-17).

Dear Kerry, it is not because you have sent to me so much information, 22 pages of quotations, that you have confused me. You are not right about wine, but even though you would be right, still you should not escape from your principal responsibility of apologizing to your brother in two doctrinal points: The first one, it is because you have made up something that is not true against me. We should not lie to each other (Mt 5:37. Co 3:9). The second one, it is because you have not addressed first to your brother whom you thought he was sinning. You have tried instead to discredit him with many other brothers and so you have made the problem bigger than what it should have been (Mt 18:15-17).

The only way to solve a problem is to go step by step, always following the example of Jesus. These two points I have mentioned are doctrinal and you cannot ignore them (Co 3:9. Mt 18:15-17). Therefore, it is not just a question of opinion as in the case of the moderate consumption wine during a regular meal. On the wine we will discuss later and I have a lot to say to prove that you are quoting partisan books and very questionable statistics, but first we should follow the model of the sound words or the pattern of sound teaching (2 Ti 1:13) that we get from Jesus to keep the communion and to solve the problems (Mt 5:37. Lk 17:3).


Silvio Caddeo


I included the attachment, the Crusade against wine chapter 7


From: "Caddeo" View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert

To: "Kerry Sword" , [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Response to Yurii

Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:45:28 -0400


I have finally received the long letter from the Kiev Church; it is written in Russian by Brother Yurii Shkirienko, but it is not clear if he speaks only for himself or for all the congregation of Kiev. Anyway, this is my answer.

Dear Brother Yurii,

It has been nice to receive a letter from you. I have to answer to you in English because I have not been using the Russian language for long time. However, I can tell you that when in my screen the Cyrillic characters of your letter have appeared, I felt a lump in my throat.

Last time I was in Kiev you asked me to speak to the congregation and after you invited me in your house. You have a beautiful family and it was really nice to spend some time with you, eating and chatting about many beautiful things.

You know how much I love the work in Ukraine and also your culture and literature. Alexander Pushkin is my favourite poet and the Ukrainian Nikolai Gogol is my favourite writer. When I went to preach the Gospel in Odessa, I could not miss to visit also the house of Pushkin; reading one of his manuscripts, it was a beautiful experience. When I was preaching the Gospel in Zaparozhie, I saw certain people who reminded me those depicted by Gogol. It is good to have ears to listen and to have eyes to see what is happening around us.

I wish now, in this very moment, that I could be good as those famous Russian writers in explaining you my feeling about the subject of wine; I want to find the way to solve this big misunderstanding. I do not care at all about wine, I stayed years without touching a drop of wine, but I cannot accept that certain brothers are considered drunkards just because, according to their culture, they drink a glass of wine during their regular meal. In Montréal, in the States and also in Italy, there are elders of the church who drink wine and are nice believers. Should we consider all of them drunkards? Of course not! I would not be the one who will judge them, when we all will appear to be judged by the Lord (Mt 7:1-3).

We should not judge those brothers on the basis of what they eat and drink (Co 2:16). We should neither on the basis that alcohol produces many car accidents because not all become drunk and not all drive after they have drunk. We should not also because now in North America there are more accidents in the roads by people who are driving speaking on the cellular phone, or who exceed the speed limits than people who are driving under the effects of the alcohol.

It is not true that in the Bible the word “wine” is a generic term that means also grape juice as certain Puritan love to say. That is a false and not biblical statement; it has been invented by the Puritans, who usually are obsessed because they consider alcohol dangerous. Not one respectable Bible dictionary reports that the wine could refer also to the grape juice. I present here four very good dictionaries, the most famous in the world, where the bread is always bread and the wine is always wine.

A Hebrew English Lexicon of the Old Testament, William Gesenius, Oxford, 1968.
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, W. Bauer, the University of Chicago Press, 1957.
A Greek-English Lexicon, Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, Oxford University Press, 1968.
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Ed. Gerhard Kittel, Grand Rapid, Eerdman’s, 1978.

I wish you could have those dictionaries in Russian language because they have helped me very much, especially when I was a student of Hebrew and Greek languages.

Some people spend a lot of money to buy certain big dictionaries that are not useful, they just take a lot of space in the library, but they cannot help the believers because they are very partisans. It is like that because many twist the Holy Scriptures (2 Pe 3:15-16) or make up their own Bible and their own dictionaries to justify their wrong doctrines.

The Catholics, the Jehovah’ Witnesses, the Adventist and also certain ultra conservative brothers in America, who are nice people, do that because they are more attached to their Puritan traditions than to the Word of God. Those commentaries and dictionaries could maybe work well in some places of the American Bible Belt in the South of the States, where most people are living in dry towns and are all teetotal by tradition, but not in Canada and in Europe.

In order to avoid wasting money, before of buying a new dictionary, every kind of dictionary or commentary, to know if the author is really honest and trustful, you should always check the meaning of certain key words, as “water, milk, bread and wine”. If the author tries to confuse you about those basic key words, you should not trust him in other important issues, which involve also your faith or at least you should be very careful before of badly judging other brothers.

Those four qualified dictionaries mentioned above, have not written by my close friends to justify a particular group or church, but by many scholars moved just by pure linguistic and scientific interests. Because they go beyond all religious barriers and all human prejudices, they are used in the best universities in the world.

It has been good for me to discover that the Jesus’ teaching does not need a particular commentary or a particular dictionary to be supported, but it corresponds to the universal logic (Mt 11:25). There nothing more simple than the Christian faith; why certain people complicate it? A church is true only if it could be supported just with the Gospel without other artificial justifications or useless linguistic lucubrations. When a “christian” commentary goes beyond what it is written to “explain” what it is not written in the Gospel, we should be very careful! Therefore, let the bread be bread, and the wine be wine, as it is written in the Bible in order to make it easier to solve many other misunderstandings that divide us.

Dear Yurii, reading your long letter, the arguments you presented, the passages you quoted, it appears clear for me that you are a nice believer who love the Lord, but who has not received my articles about the Crusade against the wine and I send you some of them.

Bring my greetings to your family and to all Brothers and Sister in Christ in Kiev.

In His Name Silvio




August 19, 2007

Dear Mr. Caddeo

It appears evident to the body of believers meeting in Kiev that after recent correspondence with you some matters of clarification have become necessary.

First of all, in regards to recent correspondence with Kerry Sword and Yuri Shkrinko, we need to clarify that these men were asked to write to you on behalf of the leadership of the congregation based upon discussions which took place at Raisy Okipnoy 9 on July 29, 2007. After several of the men read articles that you had sent out over the internet, this was brought up for discussion during our regular business meeting. It was reported to us at that time that you could be possibly planning a trip to Ukraine in the near future. Because of this and the seriousness of your teachings on alcoholic beverages, it was decided unanimously to appoint someone to write to you. Two men were chosen, as mentioned, because we did not want you to conclude; (which you apparently already have), that the Ukrainian brethren’s thoughts about this subject were only based upon the ideas or opinions of American missionaries.

You appear to want to make this into a personal battle between you and the correspondents where you portray yourself as an innocent brother which is unjustly being attacked and persecuted. You have questioned the motives of sincere and sound brethren and have yourself insulted and attacked their integrity. The correspondence sent to you was not a personal attack based upon some evil motives; as you have indicated, but based upon the love and concern of the entire church in Kiev for your spiritual well-being and for those you may influence through your teachings. One brother in particular, that you baptized, wanted you to know that he is “Very, very shocked and saddened by your teaching.”

After reading and discussing the results of the correspondence between you and our two appointed brothers, we are left wondering if you even read what was sent to you. If it was read, it appears, at best, that you were very selective about what you chose to answer as you totally ignored many important points and left many important questions unanswered. A copy of brother Yuri’s response to you in English will be attached below this letter in case you had difficulties with the Russian language. It will be impossible for us to resolve any differences among us if you continue to ignore our requests for clarification about what you believe and teach.

Brother, you have made some very serious charges against us and other faithful Christians. For example, in your correspondence dated Aug 07, 2007, you wrote the following to brother Kerry Sword, “It is evident that your attitude is pushing against me certain church leaders in Kiev, preachers, translators, teachers and students of the Bible school; all those who are receiving a salary through you.” This was a shocking statement for us to read coming from a preacher in the Lord’s church. What you have suggested is that our American brother has extorted and bribed Christians in Ukraine into believing a “lie” concerning Christians and alcoholic beverages. Additionally, it is implied that Christians in Ukraine are nothing more than mere “hirelings” that can be bought with a price to believe anything that anyone wants to teach. Brother Kerry Sword has never done such and nothing could be further from the truth. You have spoken evil against the church in Ukraine and have committed a grievous error.

You additionally charge brother Sword with sin in not following Matthew 18 and coming to you in private before taking this to others. First of all, as indicated above, brother Sword and brother Shkirenko, were asked to write these letters and did not do this apart from the decision made in the business meeting of July 29, 2007. Secondly, the context of Matthew 18 is concerning a Christian brother sinning against another brother. For the Lord said, “Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee…” (Matthew 18:15). Your teachings that Christians can drink alcoholic beverages and be acceptable to the Lord was sent out over the internet and therefore was done publicly. We therefore have addressed this publicly and have requested that your mailing list for all those that have read your articles on wine be sent to us that others may also see an opposing point of view. Is there some reason that you have thus far refused to do this?

You blame brother Sword for accusing you of that which you say you do not teach, i.e. “social drinking.” Your definition of a “glass of wine at dinner,” as already shown to you in the correspondence of August 6, 2007, can and is defined by many as “social drinking.” You can redefine words to say whatever you want to, but it does not change what you are advocating.

Furthermore, we see clearly that you have charged faithful churches in America with teaching erroneous doctrines from the denominational Puritans. The implications of this are broad. The Apostle Paul wrote in Romans 16:17-18 “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” That being the case, we find it puzzling why you have not marked those that you believed to be teaching error. To the contrary, you have been in fellowship with such brethren and have even received support from them. Is not your job as a preacher to hold fast the faithful word and “by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers” (Titus 1:9)? Your inconsistency in this is glaring. Do you really believe that congregations throughout America that teach that it is wrong for Christians anywhere to partake in alcoholic beverages are teaching error from denominations? Please answer this.

Regardless of the materials sent to you, you still insist that the word “wine” in the Bible always means “alcoholic wine” and can never be understood as anything else (i.e. non-alcoholic wine). We ask you directly and sincerely to answer the following question for us in connection with this?

• Can you please affirm your belief that the following verses are indeed to be understood as “alcoholic wine”: Numbers 6:4; Judges 9:13; Numbers 18:12-13; Nehemiah 10:37; Joel 1:10; Isaiah 65:8; Jeremiah 40:10; Isaiah 62:8-9; Amos 9:13; Isaiah 16:10; Joel 2:24; Genesis 49:11; Deuteronomy 32:14; Matthew 9:17; Mark 2:22; Luke 5:37, 38, Revelation 19:15).

• Can you also confirm that the writers of antiquity also exclusively used the Hebrew and Greek term for “wine” as meaning “alcoholic.”

• Can you please confirm that it is also acceptable for a Christian to smoke pot, sniff glue, inject heroin, use tobacco and other such like substances as long as it is done in moderation and not to excess.

• Can you please confirm your belief that alcohol has no association with ungodliness.

• Can you please confirm your belief that Jesus gave those who had already "drunk well" (as you say - “alcoholic wine”) more alcoholic wine.

• Can you please confirm your belief that the subjects of sobriety, holiness, purity and temperance have no bearing on the question of whether or not a Christian should drink alcoholic beverages.

Brother, we want to encourage you to quit trying to interpret the Bible to justify the use of alcoholic beverages. To do such is to promote alcohol and the liquor industry. Before we became Christians we were of the world and acted like the world, but now we must know: “For the time already past is sufficient for you to have carried out the desire of the Gentiles, having pursued a course of sensuality, lust, drunkenness, carousals, drinking parties and abominable idolaters” (I Peter 4:3, NASB).

Sincerely in the love of the truth,




From: "Caddeo" View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert

To: "AMEIPHQ"
Subject: Teetotal 4 & 5

Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:18:54 -0400

Dear Brothers in Christ,

Some of you have asked with to receive the 4th and 5th chapters; some have lost them and others have never received them, but I was working on them intensively to revise some parts because they are crucial parts to understand also the other articles which will follow soon.

I very happy that finally I can present you those two charters of the “Teetotal Crusade”, in the attachment, that are part of the new revised edition of the previous series.

I have worked a lot to uniform the content, to introduce new important historical references and other biblical passages. I am sure that many will enjoy reading them.

In the beginning, some were quite surprised and some were protesting for the content of my articles, but slowly everything seems going smoother, except for few brothers in Kiev, Ukraine, but I think that it is just a question of time. God willing, they will open their mind when they will have read all the 15 articles.


In His Name,

Silvio Caddeo


From: "Caddeo" View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert

To: "Kiev Church of Christ" , [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Kiev Church answer to Silvio Aug 19 2007

Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 21:49:24 -0400


To the congregation in Kiev

Dear brothers in Kiev,

I am presently busy with the work of the church here in Laval. I have to do certain things and I cannot answer immediately to all of your questions, but I will do in few days.

Meanwhile I send you the chapters 9, 10 and 11 of the "Crusade against wine", so you can already get from them certain clarifications.

In His Name Silvio

Dear brothers



I send you on attachment my answer to the letter of the Brother Yurii about
the moderate consumption of wine and other important clarifications.



In the attachment are included also the chapters 12th and 13th of "The
Crusade against wine" for those who have not read it yet.



Second Reply to Yurii

Dear brother Yurii, I want you know that I have been deeply touched by your letter and the words you have written about me are very nice even though you look over worried about my faith on the issue of the wine consumption. Because you have sincerely opened your heart to me, I will answer you first, and I do it reporting here the beginning of your letter:

“Dear brother Silvio, many people in our congregation in Kiev know and respect you. We appreciate the work you have done for the cause of Christ when you were here in Ukraine. For many members of our congregation, you are looked upon as a spiritually mature brother; that has been in Christ for many years. You were among some of the first missionaries who came to Ukraine in order to teach the Gospel. It was a big surprise for me to hear that you teach that it is acceptable for a Christian to drink alcoholic beverages.

At first I thought that it was just a mistake and that I misunderstood what was said about your belief. From the articles, however, I learned myself your position that you write in support of alcohol. I write you this letter because I don’t want to be indifferent. I am not indifferent towards what will happen with your soul. Love will be shown if we warn brothers about sin or error. Every Christian belongs to Christ’s family and he is His follower, a follower of Christ’s teachings. All of us have to understand our responsibility before God and before those people to whom we preach. Dear brother Silvio, you now do not preach the truth and you need to reconsider your views. I ask you to think about the fact that even non-Christians protest against social drinking because the use of alcohol in this way brings a lot of grief”.

Dear brother Yurii, I am happy that you recognize that I have been among the first missionaries who came in Ukraine to preach the Gospel; that many members in Kiev had a great esteem of me and I will always ready to listen attentively to you because you are really a man of God. Attributing to me all those good qualities, you should also know that the teetotal ultra conservative missionaries who lead the work in Kiev have excluded me, for all those years, from the preaching in the assembly and from the teaching in the Bible School. They did not because I was not qualified or less qualified than them were, but just because of my origin. They had always the suspicion that, as Canadian originally from Italy, I was drinking wine, and they excluded me from the teaching even though I was not drinking at all. That is the reason why I have spent most of my time preaching in the other cities of Ukraine, where I was always welcomed by the Ukrainian brothers.

The issue here is not just me; unfortunately, those teetotal ultra conservative missionaries do not want brothers from Canada or from other European countries collaborate with them in Kiev and because of that you do not have contacts with your brothers from other countries.

In the beginning I was not happy that someone has given you my articles that was supposed to be for the missionaries to be discussed among us, as Paul did when he went to Jerusalem to discuss first with the church leaders (Ga 2:1-2), but now that other brothers in Kiev have been involved, we should go ahead because God can take the good also from the bad (Ro 8:28).

To understand certain things or the sense of the freedom that we have in Jesus (Jn 8:32. 2 Co 3:17), it has been for me a long intellectual and psychological process; I did it investigating deeply the Holy Scriptures and passing through much discrimination and now I am happy that I can share what I understood with you.
1
NOAH AND ABSALOM
The teetotal missionaries use the story about Noah, the patriarch who became drunk because of the wine and was seen in his nakedness (Ge 9:20-22). That episode has been over exploited not only to prevent alcoholism, but also to prohibit the moderate consumption of wine. In this way many believers have been unjustly harassed just because in their culture is customary to sip a little wine during their regular meal. That is really not according to the Bible teachings and we cannot accept it.
That way of interpret the Holy Scripture is fundamentally wrong; it is not based on the Holy Scripture and it is an insult to the human intelligence. The Bible condemns drunkenness not the wine. If we always approach the Bible with this kind of mentality, then we should forbid also to ride an horse or a mule because it is written that Absalom “was riding his mule, and as the mule went under the thick branches of a large oak, Absalom’s head got caught in the tree; he was left hanging in midair, while the mule he was riding kept on going” (2 Sa 18:9).

THE FIRST SIN WAS COMMITTED WITHOUT ALCOHOL
In the Garden of Eden (Ge 2:8), Adam and Eve committed the first sin and because of their mistake the sin has come on all of us and we all have to die (Ge 2:17. Ro 5:12), but it was not because they tasted some wine. The sin of Adam and Even has been the vanity, the ambition to be like God. Most of people today do not want to be like God; they always try to be number one in the world, but it is always the same sin that certain people usually commit without becoming drunk.

JEALOUSY COULD BE WORSE THAN DRUNKENNESS
Since the beginning of the humanity, jealousy or envy has been a very serious problem that has involved many people. For example, Cain killed his brother Abel not because he was drunk, but because he was jealous that God favoured him (Ge 4:2-8). Joseph was sold as a slave by his brothers not because they were drunk of wine, but because they were jealous that he was the favourite in the family (Ge 37:11). Saul tried many times to kill David not because he was a drunkard, but because he was jealous of his success in the battles (1 Sa 18:7-9, 29. 19:10-11).

NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN THE DECALOGUE
Jealousy or envy sometimes could be a lot worse than drunkenness. That might explain why in the Ten Commandments, it was not forbidden to drink not even to become drunk. The problem of alcoholism that usually is an obsession for many ultra conservative believers is not even mentioned in the Decalogue. On the contrary, in the Decalogue there is the interdiction to lie and to desire or to covet everything that belongs to the neighbours (Ex 20:16-17). Trying to be Christians we are following the Gospel not the Decalogue, of course, otherwise Jesus would have died in vain for us (Ga 3:23-27. Co 2:14-15); unfortunately, even in the true church still now certain leaders preach more strongly against drunkenness than against lies and jealously or envy, and that is questionable.

NOT UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL
In the Bible there are many other examples of bad things done by men without any consumption of wine. For example, Nadab and Abihu modified the worship and they have been punished by the Lord (Le 10:1-3), but they did it not because of the wine.
2
Korah, Dathan, Abiram and On were four leaders who revolted against Moses and have been punished by God (Nu 16:1-49), but they did not sin because they were drunk.
Amnon, son of David, committed an infamy in Israel raping his step sister Tamar (2 Sa 13:14), but the wine has nothing to do with it.
Judas betrayed Jesus (Lk 22:48) and after he hanged himself (Mt 27:5), but it was no because he was under the influence al alcohol.

A TWISTED DREAM
Certain believers dream about a world without alcohol, where everything is o.k., but the reality is often quite different. For example, we missionaries suffer often about stomach pains because of the contamination of water and that explains why Paul suggested to Timothy to drink also wine (1 Ti 5:23).
The “Christian” crusaders who are presently occupying Iraq do not drink any alcohol and neither do the Muslim terrorists, but still they are killing each other and many innocent people who are caught in the middle of the fire perish every day.

The Muslims do not drink any alcoholic, it is specifically forbidden by the Koran, the holy book of their religion, but considering the limited number of cars they have, the Muslim countries have among the highest percentage of car accidents and fatalities on the road in the world. Therefore it is a myth that the alcohol is the cause of all problems which affect the humanity.

We do have to preach against alcoholism, but without forgetting that there are other problems, often worse than alcoholism.

THEY ARE JUST SYMBOLS
It is true that the maddening wine of the adulteries is synonymous of corruption of Babylon or of the apostasy of those who used the religion to get more power and to control the world (Re 14:8. 18:3), but I do not drink maddening wine, only neat wine; I have been faithful to my wife for all my life and I am a committed pacifist against any war.

It is true that God gives to Babylon the cup filled with the wine of fury of wrath (Re 16:19), but to me the Lord has given the opportunity drink the wine in peace because I do not have big ambitions and I do not control people, I neither rule over those who have been given to me in the congregation where I preach because I leave them to have different opinions than me (1 Pe 5:3). I always avoid of doing what Diotrephes was doing (3 Jn 9-11).

If it is true that in the Bible, in some cases, wine has been taken as symbolism to describe the Babylon fall, but it is also true that God destroy the ancient world through the water. Therefore, should we not baptize converted believers into the water and should we not drink it?

Jesus put in guard his disciples against the yeast of the Pharisees (Mt 16:6); should we just eat only unleavened bred? Are we called to be the unleavened bread believers? During our regular meal should we eat only flat-unleavened bread as Muslims usually do? Certain people should stop making those absurd conclusions.
3
CERTAIN PASSAGES AGAINST THE WOMEN
Reading some passage in the Bible out of their context, we should be very careful before jumping fast into certain wrong conclusions. For example, there are also certain passages against the women, as this one, “While I was still searching but not finding - I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all” (Ec 7:28).

What do you conclude from this passage that today there are not virtuous women or that your wife does not deserve respect? Of course that there are many virtuous women and that your wife is a faithful wife!
For the same reason not all people who drink wine are drunkards or act as Noah did in front to his children; we should never generalize especially when we do not know the customs of other cultures. We should be careful especially before judging our brothers badly, otherwise we will be judged with the same rigour (Mt 7:1-3).

KEEPING THE VISION OF THE WHOLE
It is true that in the Holy Scriptures there are many passages against the drunkenness and I have never justified people who get drunk. However, all those passages have nothing to do with the moderate consumption of wine during the meal, as an aliment or food that is part of a meal in many cultures of the world. In order to understand correctly the Word of God, we should always keep the vision of the whole, of all the divine revelation as it is presented in the New Testament; otherwise we run the risk to become confused and to fall into a cult.

NOBODY SHOWS US THE MINERS’ PICTURES
It is certain sad for us to hear how many people are dying because of alcoholism and also to see some pictures of brothers in Kiev who died because of drunkenness, but nobody shows to us the pictures of all miners who die young in Ukraine because of their hard work. Do you know that in certain places of Ukraine, especially in the mine areas, the expectation of life is still now about 52 years? Considering the extreme situation, it is understandable that certain people without faith become depressed and drink too much.

I AM NOT CHANGED
Dear brother I want assure you that I have not changed, I have just understood better certain points and I thought that it has come the moment to be less diplomatic and more clear about the issue of wine not as an alcoholic beverage in social drinking, but as food to help to digest during the regular meal.
There is a time when we should be very careful to not scandalize those brothers who are still weak in the faith or who belong to another culture (Ro 14:14-15) and there is the time when we should wake up them with solid food, otherwise they always remain babies in Christ (1 Co 3:3. He 5:12-13). However, we should do it as Paul did when he went in Jerusalem, speaking first privately with the church leaders without making too much noise (Ga 2:1.2).

A PURITAN TRADITION REINFORCED BY ALCOHOLISM
After doing long researches in the field, I have come to the conclusion that the obsession against alcohol of many teetotal ultra conservative believers is from the British Puritan tradition and it has been
4
reinforced later by the problem of alcoholism. Apparently, the problem of alcoholism is bigger today than in the past because the society is more competitive and people have more free time.
Anyway, I share completely your concern about the danger of alcoholism and I am often preaching against it, as I am doing also against prejudices, nationalism, paternalism, egoism, immorality, profanity, violence and every kind of excess (1 Pe 4:3-6), but we should do all that without changing or forcing the Word of God.

AS THE ORIGIN OF PAPACY
I want to present as an example the origin of papacy that started in Italy in the medieval time, apparently for good reasons. Because there were a lot of divisions among the believers in Europe, even wars and many people were dying, the Catholic priests have created the papacy to solve all problems. The intention of the priests could have been good, but to support their attempt to unite all Christians they have twisted the Bible and harassed those who disagreed with them. Doing that, the priests have created a lot more problems than they thought to solve.

The same thing is happening among us about the obsession against the use of wine. Because there are many alcoholic people in America, many are drinking and driving, and so many accidents are happening on the roads, certain church leaders have decided to forbid completely for the believers the consumption of all alcoholics. To support that drastic decision, they have forgotten or twisted many passages of the Bible. They have even harassed those who have the custom to drink a little glass of wine during their regular meal.

I share their concern for the many deadly accidents produced by alcoholism, but we are not allowed to change or to twist the word of God to prevent a problem. If we change the Bible every time we are scared of certain things, we would have no more the Word of God. If we believe that the Bible has been inspired by the Holy Spirit, with should preach it as it has been written. We should never force it or twist it to solve a problem. Every time people do that, they run the risk to produce bigger problems. Therefore, let the water be water, the bread be bread and the wine be wine.

CONSULTING 60 TRANSLATIONS
I have consulted 60 different translations of the Bible in many languages, also many dictionaries and commentaries that I have in my house, and I went again to consult other books in the local Bible book store in down town Montréal, and in all of those books is written that Jesus at the banquet of Cana made wine, excellent wine. In none of them, it is written that Jesus made grape juice. Therefore, nobody has the right to change or to force the Gospel to support the human decision to forbid indiscriminately the use of all alcoholics.

It is true that Jesus partook at his Last Supper with the fruit of vine, but it was at Passover, and in the first century the only fruit of vine available in spring was wine.

THREE KINDS OF FRUIT OF VINE AND JUST ONE OF WINE
Because of the natural law established by God at the moment of the creation, at the time of Jesus there could have been three kinds of fruits of vine, according to the season or the time, and there was just one kind of wine, the one with alcohol.
5
Trying to explain the entire process, we can say that the fruit of the vine at the moment of the pressing is the must or the grape juice, without alcohol that lasts only three days. In the fourth day, the must starts slowly to become new wine because the sugar turns naturally into alcohol. About six months later, the new wine is already old wine, but it process of aging still continues with the time.

Summarising, we can say that in September, at the time of the pressing, the fruit of the vine is without alcohol only for three days; after the fruit of the vine becomes slowly new wine; later in spring, for Passover, the fruit of the vine is already olds wine. At the time of Jesus, in spring the fruit of wine could be just old wine, with alcohol.

I have grown among must, new wine and old wine. I know exactly how those things work and nobody can push me to deny what is true and it is written in all manuals about wine. I cannot lie to support the strange theories of the ultra conservative believers just to please them.

LOOKING FOR A FAIR SOLUTION
It is every day more evident for me that there some misunderstandings among us, even among sincere believers, about the consumption of wine. We have to find a solution in which nobody would feel harassed by his brothers. One reason for these misunderstandings among us, it is that we belong to two or three different cultures, but for me there is a basic biblical principle that should be respected (Co 2:16) and we have to affront it as Paul was used to do (1 Co 9:19-23).

Coming from the wine culture, I do not permit anymore to other people to make to feel ashamed of what I have inherited from my parents, who were nice people and have never been drunk.

A QUESTION OF CHRISTIAN ORTHODOXY
I have already said that personally it is not about wine that I care, but it is a question of Christian orthodoxy. I am standing up against that obsession to defend all Christians in many countries who are systematically discriminated or considered drunkard by certain teetotal missionaries just because they include some wine during their regular meals.

Jesus taught that the old wine is better than the new (Mt 5:39) and I believe in it. Nobody can judge or reproach be because I believe to what Jesus taught. At the same time, I am very tolerant in regard of other opinions. If someone refuses me because of that, it means that he does not deserve to be my brother.

A CONFRONTATION OF CULTURES
Apparently what is normal in some cultures, as French, Italian, Greek, and Jewish, it becomes a tragedy for another cultures, where people are not used to drink wine, but the love that we have for Christ should help us to go beyond these differences of diets. We should do it without impose to other brothers our culture. There is not unity without respecting the culture of our brothers, but only cultural assimilation or ethnocentrism and those people who practice are committing a sin.

THE COMPARISON WITH THE KVAS
To explain better to you this principle, I try now to get deep in the Ukrainian culture taking as example the consumption of kvas or the beer from the fermented bread that is typical of Slavic countries, that is
6
very popular in Ukraine. The Kvas could have between 1 %!o(MISSING)r 1.9 %!o(MISSING)f alcohol. Usually kvas has 1.5 %!o(MISSING)f alcohol and in some rare cases the kvas is stronger than 2 %! (MISSING)If I belong to the wine culture, you belong to the kvas culture and you should be very attentive to what I am now telling you.

I have not written those articles which have scandalized you for the Ukrainian missionary work, but looking at the work in general. If I had written those article for the Ukrainian brothers, instead of speaking about “The crusade against wine”, probably I would have spoken about “The crusade against kvas”.

Some of you in Kiev are scandalized because I approve the moderate consumption of wine, first because among you wine is very expensive, usually you cannot afford it, and because in Ukrainian people usually drink Kvas.

Do you know that three glasses of Ukrainian kvas, the beer from fermented bread, contain the same amount of alcohol as a glass of beer or as a half glass of wine? Maybe your have never thought about it, but it is true. Therefore, following your way of thinking, you should be put also the kvas in the category of the forbidden alcoholics.

From what I know all Ukrainian people drink kvas, and usually also the brothers do. I never heard any of you preaching against the consumption of kvas, but always against wine. One reason is because among you wine is expensive, usually the wine for sell in Kiev is not a local production, but it comes from other places. The other reason could be because you are not used to drink wine, because people in the north of Ukrainians are more used to drink kvas and vodka.

Anyway, in every city I went in Ukraine, I have always seen people and also brothers, especially translators and preachers, drinking kvas that is for sale along the streets and squares. Even some members of your congregation in Kiev were used to drink kvas in front of me, while we were together walking along Kreshaty Boulevard. I did not drink it, but I have not stop them of doing it because I thought it was their right, because Paul wrote, “Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat and drink…” (Co 2:16).

If you disfellowship those who accept wine or beer, you should disfellowship all Ukrainians who drink kvas. It means also most of your Ukrainian brothers, but it would be a mistake. Certain extremist interpretations of the Gospel are in reality an escape from reason and with them we will never have success in the missionary work.

FACING THE BIG CHALLENGE
Few people know that the production of wine is now strongly increasing in Ukraine, but only in the south of the country, as Odessa, Nikolajev, Maripol, Sdanov and especially in the Crimea area. Therefore, the dietary habit of Ukrainian people will change very soon also in Kiev area. I am happy to see that Ukrainians are discovering their European roots, but the church in Ukraine should be ready to face the big challenge, otherwise it will never grow or mature spiritually.

DEFINING WHAT IS SOCIAL DRINKING
The point now is to find out what we should mean for social drinking or not. I want try to explain it with two examples.
7
If I am on the Kreshaty boulevard in Kiev and I see 20 people in front a Kvas booth drinking kvas and chatting among them, for me that is social drinking and maybe it is not for you.
If you go in a restaurant and you see a person who he is slowly sipping a glass of wine while he is eating, for you that is an example of social drinking and it is not for me.

We have here to very different point of view, isn’t? We could wonder who is right and who is wrong? Should we consult the opinion of many manuals? What the Gospel say about that? Nothing! So, we should speak when the Bible speaks and be silent when the Bible is silent. We should condemn only the excesses (1 Pe 4:3-4).

IT COULD BE A QUESTION OF QUANTITY
At this point probably you would argue, “I never saw someone drunk because of three glasses of kavas”. You are right! And I never saw someone drunk just for a glass of beer or for a half glass of wine or for a little Italian glass of wine. So, you agree with me that when we speak about an aliment it could be just a question of quantity and of moderation.

A VERY SUBJECTIVE TRUTH FROM SOME STATISTICS
Unfortunately, many believers today do not study deeply the Bible to find out the truth; they only read and rely on the commentaries in which it is written exactly what they want to, and they follow just the statistics. Some ultra conservative believers always quote the statistics, only the ones that they like, and follow them as certain begot people follow the astrology.

FACING EXTREMISMS
In every place I go to preach, I find some extremists and it is not always easy to correct certain old stereotypes or the reactions of certain angry brothers who has been hurt. For example, reacting to certain American missionaries who in the past tried to impose the grape juice everywhere, some Italian brothers used to say, “Those who partake the Lord’s Supper with artificial wine, they have also an artificial spirituality and usually are legalist and very aggressive”. I completely disagree with that statement, of course because we are not allowed to judge people for what they eat and drink, but that should be reciprocal.

DRINKING WINE WITH JOYFUL HEART
There was not soft drink in the ancient Israel and moderately drinking wine was considered as a blessing from the Lord, “Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for it is now that God favour what you do” (Ec 9:7). In some banquets, I have seen many times people to toast or to cheer while they were drinking neat wine because they had a joyful heart, but I have never seen in a banquet people drinking grape juice with a joyful heart, not in my house and in my culture.

A SIGN OF MISFORTUNE
I was told that in the past when there was not soft drink, the good believers were used to cut the wine with the water. There are many little stories or twisted stories about that ancient wine that was always
8
cut with water; unfortunately many quote those stories in their writings, but apparently nobody has verified them except me. The reality is quite different.

For example, when the Israelites sinned and became very poor, they could not afford anymore to drink pure wine as it was supposed to, so they had to mix it with water because there was not enough wine for all. However, that shortage of neat wine was not considered as a blessing by the prophet, but as an omen or a punishment from God, “Your silver has become dross, your choice wine is diluted with water” (Is 1:22). I always praise the Lord that my silver has not become dross (still has a value) and that my wine is still neat, without water. I wish that many who can not afford it could taste as good it is.
THE WRONG COMPARISON WITH CIGARETTES

It is fundamentally wrong to make a comparison of drinking wine with smoking cigarettes as certain ultra fundamentalists do. They say: “If it is acceptable to drink a glass of wine, why not a cigarette or two or three?” To that speculation we can answer that the smoking of the cigarettes is not conceived like an aliment, but instead it inhales poison in the body. Smoking cigarettes a person dies because inhalation of the carbon monoxide deposits the tar in the lung. The smokers usually die for the lung cancer and many other serious diseases.

I am always been against smoking because it is against to our human nature and we cannot get any advantage from it. Therefore, in the case of smoking it is not a question of quantity and of moderation. We can make this consideration also because we have been created without a chimney. If it was supposed that we smoke, the Lord would have provided in our body a chimney. There is no biblical passage to justifies the habit of smoking cigarettes and no doctor recommends it for our health.
I am also against to use of morphine and heroin because we have not been created with a permanent hole in the veins and with a syringe to inject those narcotics. There are no biblical passages justifying that. It has never been part of a meal in any culture. However, morphine and heroin could be good in case of surgery to alleviate the pains (1 Ti 4:4-5. Ro 8:28).

CONCLUSION
Dear brother Yurii, you have always been very sweet with me and I have always had a great esteem of you and of you family. It is evident for me that a nice person like you, who still respects me, cannot be the author of the bad Letter I have received from the congregation in Kiev. I am sorry, but it is not your style. You are too nice and you have too much respect for me to write that kind of letter. I do not believe that you really wrote it even though you would call me to tell me so.

After I long study and meditation, I have come to the conclusion that the obsession against the wine of certain teetotal missionaries is like a cancer for the missionary work and it should be stopped. I wish I could do it without hurting everybody, especially not nice brothers like you.
I include as attachment the chapters 12th and 13th of the Crusade against wine, so you can better understand why I have come to that conclusion.

In His Name

Silvio Caddeo

9




From: "Caddeo" View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert

To: "Artem Bondarenko" , "Kiev Church of Christ" , "Artem Bondarenko" , "Nickoli Goodkovich" , "Yuri & Helen Shkirenko" , "Timothy Makarchuk" , "Daniel Zamoyski" , "Charles Musisi" , "Kingsley Opara" , "Igor Chernishenko" , "Serghei Garkusha" , "Valia Onofryichuck" , "Damron Chuck - Elders" , "Clemons Gene" , "BILL FARRIS" , "Anatoly Shcrabin" , "Alexander Zotov" , "Sword Kerry & Karla"

Subject: Dear Brother Kerry

Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 22:36:26 -0400
3) Reply Kerry.pdf (108KB); 15) Crusade against wine XV.pdf (89KB)


Dear Kerry,

I enclose my answer to your letters which include also some answers for the questions asked in the letter from the church.

I enclose also the 15th chapter of "The Crusade" which explain several arguments concerning the danger of adding human traditions to the Bible teachings.

May the Lord help all of us to understand that we all work for His Church, even though, in some issues that are not doctrine, we can have a different opinion and still be brothers in Christ.

Your Silvio



Sept. 3, 2007

Dear brother Kerry

I am still waiting and praying to receive a brotherly answer from you. Meanwhile, I am going slowly through the two long letters you send me and I am realizing that certain of your statements needed really to be corrected.

I have been for long time in Kiev, I have many friends in there; one of your principal collaborators has been first my collaborator in Pustavarica and in Skevira; he was my translator before becoming your collaborator. Because you have said certain wrong things about me, at this point I feel that it is my duty to presenting to them my version of certain facts.

WHO HAS NOT ALREADY MADE UP HIS MIND?
You wrote, “It is also for the above reason that I do not desire a long drawn-out discussion on the topic. Such debating will not be fruitful, in my opinion, for one that has already made up his mind. Nevertheless, I have heard these types of arguments before and will make this effort out of a spirit of love for you and a concern for your soul”.

I am very happy to hear that your are concerned about by soul as I am of your, of course, but you should recognize that also you have already made up your mind. Apparently, you did it without analysing the other possibilities because otherwise you wouldn’t have reacted in this way. I am still ready to accept you but you are not ready to accept me. So, who among us is more open about the dialogue? It should be the one who has a more flexible mind.

ABOUT MY INFLUENCE
You wrote, “Let me say first of all that there are no hidden motives or “show off” (as you accuse me of for writing to you) other than my deep concern for your soul and those that you will influence.”
I want to clarify since the beginning that you should not be concerned about my influence on the brothers in Kiev. I am not writing those articles for them, but for the teetotal puritan missionaries like you. From that aspect, the Ukrainians are like the Italians; they do not need that someone tells them that they can drink moderately. From the Bible they already know that they can drink without committing a sin (Ec 9:7. Ss 5:1. Co 2:16. 1 Ti 5:23). They drink also because they learned it from their parents; it is part of their national cultural identity; you do not have the right to push them to change just to adjust to the puritan american way over an issue that IS NOT a biblical teaching. It is true that some of them sometimes become drunk, but they do not do other mistakes that often we do in North America.

The problem is not that I am dividing the congregation in Kiev; it is you who has decided to be separated from them. You are slowly separating yourself from the Ukrainians always trying to impose on all of them your Puritan obsession against all alcoholics. You should instead work instil the respect for moderation, acceptation, tolerance, comprehension or the common cohabitation between brothers with different opinions. As long as there is not a real doctrinal issue at stake, you should be more open to listen to your brothers who are older than you are and have more experience than you have. You should do that because it is your duty and because there is no real unity in Christ in the uniformity on worldly issues.
1
TRYING TO THE JUSTIFY YOURSELF
Trying to justify yourself because you have not first communicate with me as you should have done, according to Mt 18:15-17, you wrote, “You mention your phone call to me and asked why I did not mention anything at that time. In fact I did want to discuss this with you, but you yourself honestly know that we could not hear each other. You were using Skype and the connection was not clear. You know very well that I had to say in a loud voice several times, “I cannot hear you!” How would it then be possible to discuss this most serious topic over the telephone at that time? Our conversation itself lasted no more than literally one minute. Why do you write this? Is it to make me appear to be dishonest in the eyes of others that will read this?”

You use again the word “dishonest”. That word is very frequent in your vocabulary, isn’t? You use it with all those who disagree with you. It seams that you cannot make a complete statement without using that word. Do you really know what it means?

It is true that when I called you, we did not speak long, but you have been nice and you asked again, as usually, if I was planning to come in Ukraine. From the way you spoke, I did not have any impression that you were upset with me. I could not have imagined that you were writing that kind of letter to me and sending them to other people.

If you really wanted to speak me first, as it was your duty according to the Gospel, you could have asked me to call you again with the regular phone, as usually I have done before. We could have spoken both using Skype and so the voice would have been clearer. You could have sent to me a personal message by E-mail, but you didn’t. You could have asked me to sends you again all my articles, as I did in the past, to read them attentively, but you did not.

WHEN IT IS YOUR TURN YOU ARE WEAK
I present this not because I am afraid of what your actions can do to me, in a sense what you have done to me has been a big boost for the cause that I am defending. We know that God can make the good also from the bad, as it is written, “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him” (Ro 8:28).

Dear brother, without realising you have made a very important service to sensitize even more people against impositions that are not biblical, but I am still concerned about your soul. I am always concerned when a brother has violated a principle of the Gospel and refuses to repent.

TO PLAY FAIR
You proposed to me to exchange our E-mail addresses to show how open you are, but you have sent to me only the addresses of some Ukrainian brothers who depend from you and three American brothers who are already in contact with me. Therefore, there are still many of your E-mail addresses that you have kept for yourself who probably will never know what is really going on.

Considering all those who have visited you from the States, who have collaborated with you in 15 years or who are sending the money for the work in Kiev, you should have an E-mail list over a 100. It is evident that your have kept all names of that list for yourself or they will hear only what you decide that they should know about this debates.
2
It was supposed that this subject should have remained and discussed only among missionaries and church leaders before going to many other young brothers in Christ, especially to those who cannot read well English. Anyway, if you really want to play with me, you should play fairly or to act above board, without keeping covered cards.

TOO MANY BAD WORDS
It seams that you were upset when you wrote the following statement, “Or perhaps you are accusing me of “bitterness, rage, anger, brawling, slander, and malice”? What is your point?

I did not use all those bad words against you and they never passed on my mind. Because they are not edifying words, maybe, I should not even copy or reporting them in my letter (Ep 5:12), but I do not see other ways to explain what the situation is. Please do not be so dramatic. The point is that until now nobody in Kiev dared to contradict you and now suddenly you are exploding just because I disagree with you and you react as your entire world is coming down, but it is not the case. I just want you become more tolerant with brothers who have different understanding of some passages; that will help the congregation in Kiev to grow and become more mature.

ANOTHER PERSONAL ATTACK
I find strange also the follow statement, “Your aggression in your letter is clearly evident. You are not the loving spiritual brother that gently leads the “weaker” brothers into the light as you pretend”.
Dear brother I announce you that I pretend nothing. I have worked hard for long time, writing all those articles without getting any salary and without looking for any salary. I did it to explain better what the Bible really teaches about the wine. It is evident from this strong statement that you feel threatened by me and I do not know why.

TREATING BROTHERS AS EQUALS
One day we argued about something I disagreed with you and after to show that you respected me, you told me, “Among all missionaries who have come in Ukraine, none of us have succeed like you in being loved by Ukrainian brothers”. It was then a fair statement and I do not if I really deserve it.
Maybe Ukrainians love me because my mother was from Slavic origin and when I was young in Italy I had the dream to come in Ukraine by motorcycle. I feel culturally and psychologically part of Ukrainian people and I have always treated the Ukrainian brothers as equal believers.

I DO NOT WANT TO HURT ANYBODY
Anyway, I assure you that it was not my intention to hurt you. I have just tried to explain my point of view about the moderate consumption of wine and what are the problems related to the obsession against the wine. Because of that wrong attitude Paul wrote, “Do not let anyone judge you by what you east and drink…” (Co 2:16).

Dear brother, I think you have a big problem to accept differences in the church. At this point, it appears evident to me that you would move exactly the same bad accusations to each one of your Ukraine collaborators if they had the guts to tell you what they really think, in their heart, about the moderate consumption of wine or beer or kvas.
3
For those who do not know, the Kvas is a beverage from fermented bread, a kind of beer typical of the Slavic people, especially in Ukraine, that has between 1 and 1,9 %!o(MISSING)f alcohol. Certain kinds of kvas are even stronger in alcohol.

WHERE THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS STARTED
About one of my early visits in Kiev, you wrote, “We were specifically covering the topic of alcohol and the brethren asked you specifically and directly if it would be wrong for a Christian to drink. I remember distinctly that your answer was that “It would be wrong for a Christian to drink.” How do I remember so clearly? Because there were some of the brethren here that had great concerns over your position in this, knowing that some Christians in Italy drink wine. It was the very reason that prompted the question. I remember feeling relieved over your answer and defending your soundness on several occasions afterwards”.

Dear brother, if you were specifically covering the topic of alcohol and some strange questions were asked by the men, it means that you had already to deal with the issue. It was not because I have started the problem, if eventually it was a real problem.

THE OBSESSION AGAINST ALCOHOL
I have to say that you were very often speaking against alcohol and against all those who drink any kind of alcoholics and also those who drink wine. That attitude really made me to feel uncomfortable. In some cases, I had the impression that you were obsessed about the danger of alcohol, and I understood that because of your stormy past.

However, sometimes, I felt that you were going far beyond to what it is supposed to be right, but very few had the courage to contradict you. Being guest in your apartment, I always tried to avoid any kind of conflict. I admit that I have been very diplomatic with you, always avoiding to dispute about certain issues that for you were taboo. Maybe I have been too much remissive in your regard also when you were wrong, but you cannot accuse me of having a bad character or that I have wrongly interfered in your work.

CLARIFYING YOUR VERSION
I have to contradict your version of the story because after many years you confuse different things. In that occasion, I was not questioned about wine, but about “Cognac”. A Ukrainian brother asked me, “Is it true Silvio that a glass of cognac a day is good for heath?” The British have the saying, “An apple a day keeps the doctor away”. Some Europeans, as Italians, Greeks, Macedonians, Frenchmen, Spaniards and others, think that “A glass of wine a day keeps the doctor away”. Evidently, the Ukrainian brothers used the word “Cognac”. The Cognac is very strong, almost like Whisky and Vodka, and so I said, “No it does not help your health”. In this case you were pleased or felt relieved.

However, after another Ukrainians brother asked me, if the Italian brothers drink wine and I said “yes, some do and some do not”. I spoke in this way because there is always someone who is abstemious also in Italy for different reasons and at that time I was not drinking, but not because I think that it was wrong. I was just doing my best not to scandalizing those who are weak in this field. Notwithstanding my attempt to avoid the conflict, you did not like the answer. You did not like it even though you knew in advance that Italians usually drink wine.
4
THE MIRACLE OF CANA
I was questioned again, “Do you think that the wine of the miracle of Jesus in Cana had alcohol or not”.
The one who asked me that question was really a smart person and asking that he really put me in the corner, but the question was right. Because we are not a cult, it is supposed that smart brothers ask that kind of questions.

I was quite embarrassed not for the question but just because I was guest in your house and I knew what kind of answer you were excepting from me, but according to my conscience I felt obliged to tell the truth, and I replied, “It was wine with alcohol”. It was in this case, that you became angry and accused me to be dishonest.

I haven’t lost the control as you did, I remained calm because it was my duty and also because I was guest in your house.

At that very moment, I reminded you that I have been faithful to the Lord since my conversion in 1958, that in my life I had just one woman and I have never been drunk. I asked if you could say the same. You recognised that you could not say the same. Everyone knew already that in the past you left the church; that you became an alcoholic and had different women. You did it when in Italy I was persecuted by the Catholic priests because I was preaching the Gospel.

After, maybe you realized that you have been wrong in losing the patience with me, and so you tried to save the appearance. You did also because you knew how much those young Ukrainians respect me. Unfortunately, you did not apologise, but you said, “Maybe, Silvio has spoken in this way because he does not know well many commentaries say and he has not seen yet the result of many studies about the problems produced by alcoholism.

I did not like you explication because in this way you present me as I was a stupid or less qualified than you are in the field, but I did not react because I was your guest and I did not want to produce more problems, but you took advantage on me because of the situation.

In reality, I have already known what the Gospel teaches about wine from some very good experts in the field and also I was quite well informed about the subject of alcoholism, when your mother was still breast-feeding you.

I WAS NOT DRINKING
When I was coming in Ukraine I was not drinking because I was afraid of scandalizing the teetotal missionaries, not the Ukrainians because they are like the Italians. After the fall of the Berlin, I was so interested to save the souls in the east countries that I ignored my rights to drink (Co 2:16); I did even though I was preaching in Ukraine, where people are used to drink alcoholics as in Italy.

I DID NOT STOP THOSE DRINKING KVAS
When I was walking in the street of Kiev, especially in the Kreshaty Boulevard, it has happened often that the Ukrainian friends, who were walking with me, were used to stop at the booth where there was a booth selling Kvas, the fermented beer from bread. They bought a glass or two of kvas because they were very thirsty, I have never drunk it, but I have never prevented them of doing so because it is part of their costume. Their parents and their grand parents where used to drink it. All Ukrainians are used to
5
drink that beer from fermented bread for many centuries; they are very proud of their kvas and why should have I stop them to drink it?

CONDEMNING ALL THE EXCESSES
When a teetotal missionary go in Ukraine, he should not try to impose his culture and his many prejudices against everything that contains alcohol, but instead he should try to live as Ukrainians usually do, as Paul did in his time (1 Co 9:19-23).

Notwithstanding that contradiction, I did all my best to avoid conflicts with the teetotal missionaries; I did for the Gospel and also because I knew that they could have found the way to prevent me to come in Ukraine. You shouldn’t have expected from me that I had done more. I couldn’t lie and go to the hell just to please you (Co 3:9).

YOU ALREADY KNEW EVERYTHING
I remark that you states, “Because there were some of the brethren here that had great concerns over your position in this knowing that some Christians in Italy drink wine”.

Dear brother, from your statement it is clear that you already knew everything about the situation in Italy. Isn’t? Not just about the church in Italy, but also in France, in Spain, in Greece and in Canada.
But you wanted, in some ways that the Ukrainian brothers ignored it. That is a typical example of ultra conservative frankness that has nothing to do with the Christian orthodoxy.

Maybe, you have not realized yet, but then you were expecting that I said exactly the contrary of what you already knew. It means that what you were expecting from me, in that very moment, it was really too much. I do not believe in white lies. I refused to lie because I do not want go to hell just to please you. You cannot harass your co-worker to support your point of view; that is a kind of psychological rape.
Probably you did it without realizing, but you did it. That is really bad! Notwithstanding that mistake, I am still trying to forgive you because I do not have the right to judge what there really was in you mind and in your heart, at that very moment; only God and you know it.

I am deeply convinced that the Gospel is from God for our salvation, but I think that there is always something devilish in a kind of theology or Christian orthodoxy where it is necessary that someone lies to support or protect other members.

THE SOLUTION OF AN OLD PUZZLE
Let me to look again at your previous statement because in it you have admitted a very important point that has pushed me to write, the Crusade against wine. We have already seen that you wrote, “Because there were some of the brethren here that had great concerns over your position in this knowing that some Christians in Italy drink wine”.

Dear brother, it is evident that those who were concerned about my presence were not the Ukrainians brothers, but some teetotal missionaries, who were financially supporting you and I did not want to break with them because they were supporting you.
6
You do not have idea how much I appreciate that statement because with it, finally, I have a written proof for what I was suspected for long time, that certain of your American colleagues in Kiev were dead scared by my presence, and so they were doing their best to keep me far from the Ukrainian brothers who had a great admiration of me. Those teetotal missionaries were acting in this unorthodox way because they were presupposing that Canadians are all liberals and Italians are all drunkards.
Therefore, my presence in Kiev was perceived by them as a double threat for their missionary work or for their teetotal Christian orthodoxy.

It was because of that obsession that some of them have been impolite with me; they did even though I was not drinking at all, not even a glass of kvas. It happened in a moment in which I was doing my best to serve the Lord, to remain in communion with them, to work together in peace to reach other people, but for some of them I did everything in vain.

This is a typical example of certain prejudices and of summary judgement by certain ultra conservative believers, who do not know the Gospel enough (Ga 3:27-29. Ja 2:1,9). In America, there are now many members of the church, who drink, but not just kvas or wine, but also hard core alcohol. Furthermore, there are a lot more people who drink strong alcoholics and who become drunk in America than in Italy. However, certain close minded Puritan believers have the tendency to generalize especially about foreigners. Therefore, as believer from Canada, originally from Italy, I was seen immediately by them as a threat for the work in Kiev. What a pity for them.

ONLY QUESTIONED ABOUT THE MAFIA
It is symptomatic that nobody of those teetotal missionaries asked me if I was drinking, but everything was decided secretly, behind my back and without consulting the Ukrainian brothers. Few days after I arrived in Kiev for the first time, there was a meeting of missionaries, where we could have frankly spoken about it. I was invited first but after something happened between them because few minutes before the meeting I was politely asked not to come. Later, when you came back you told me, “My colleagues did not want you in the meeting because they said that the Canadians are all liberals”.
Is it the christian way to discriminate a preacher or any other brother only on the basis of his country of origin?


After the fall of the Berlin wall, I decided to go in Ukraine not to mix with the Americans but with the Ukrainians. I had not asked to come to the meeting of missionaries in Kiev, but frankly speaking it hurt to be excluded after having been invited. You first you made me feel one of you and after you made me to feel as the little black brother that cannot seat near the pure whites. I was excluded without a reason, just on the basis certain old prejudices or because of the presumption that only those who are born in the States are the depositaries of the biblical truth.

Is that the kind of collaboration and unity of which Jesus proposed and prayed for his disciples before of being arrested and crucified? (Jn 17:20-21). We are dealing here with a very doctrinal issue. This is a typical example of discrimination in my regard and paternalism in regard of the Ukrainian brothers, who should have been informed of what was going on.

Evidently, those ultra conservative brothers didn’t dare to speak to me frankly about the work of the Lord, but some of them instead asked me smiling about the Mafia in Italy, as if I was a member of the mob. Some of them kept far from me as if I was contagious; they did even though I was not drinking a drop of wine or kvas. Therefore, later on, I wondered why should I have not drunk a glass of good wine
7
during the meal, as I was taught by my parents and as it is my Christian right (Co 2:17). I did because it is completely biblical (Ec 9:7. 1 Ti 5:23) and also because I realized that this is the only way to wake up certain brothers who have a lot of prejudices in regard of foreigner believers.

A BIG DISILLUSION
I have left the Catholic Church in 1958 thinking to leave the fanaticism forever, but after many years I have found it again among certain of my brothers in Christ, especially among certain teetotal missionaries in Ukraine. I confess you that it has been a terrible experience for me. It will be also for you brother, when you will open your eyes.

A CANCER FOR THE MISSIONARY WORK
I have been always against any kind of extremism because Jesus put in guard us from it; certain people could even kill thinking to serve the Lord (Jn 16:1-2). After having gone through certain dramatic experiences, especially in Ukraine, I have come to the conclusion that the obsession against the wine is a cancer for the missionary work. It should be removed as soon as possible, otherwise we will be always divided and many souls abroad will be lost forever.

FOLLOWING THE MODEL
From what I can remember, Jesus never worried because some of disciples were drinking wine, but he made a lot of wine for all in Cana to give them the chance to drink enough (Jn 2:6-11). Paul never harassed a brother because he was drinking wine or because he did not put enough water in his wine, as certain assume they were doing. I say that even though there is not any example in the Bible that believers where mixing wine and water. We should not go beyond to what it is written (1 Co 4:6).
Paul just reproached the brother in Corinth because they ate too much and drank too much becoming drunk (1 Co 11:20-29). Paul reproached them not just because they became drunk, but also because they ate too much; he did not condone the extra eating as usually many think, but he condemned both of them, excess of eating and excess of drinking.

There is not one example in which Paul refused the collaboration from a worker because he was coming from Corinth or from other congregations, where the members were used to drink wine or to drink wine with not enough water.

It is out of question that there were no soft drinks in the New Testament time as we have today; people usually were less fat; there were fewer heart attacks and less cases of diabetes. At that time, there was no distinction between wet and dry churches or from wet and dry missionaries; they were more ready to accept each other. Therefore, today nobody should think that a dry missionary or a soft drink missionary deserves to be trusted more than the all the others who eat or drink during the meals according to their cultures.

That explains why never Paul proclaimed his preference for co-workers who were from congregations which were partaking the Lord’s Supper only with grape juice. He did not because it was against his Jewish custom; nothing like that is written in the Holy Scriptures. He did not also because at that that time, it was not possible to have grape juice all year long, but just for few days. We know that three days after the harvest and the pressing to sugar in the mark starts already to turn itself into alcohol and it becomes slowly new wine.
8
The idea that in the first century there was grape juice all year long do not have biblical basis, it is a teetotal Puritan pure fabrication. Please stop to make up problems that do not exist or to make of certain problems bigger of what they really are.

BECOMING CHRISTIANS FIRST
When we speak about the need to restore a church according the model of the New Testament, it should include also certain principles, as faith, trust, respect, communion, collaboration, openness, fairness, equity. It implies zero tolerance for prejudices, ethnocentrism, racism, discrimination, paternalism, favouritism and imposition. In few words, before going abroad to preach the Gospel, certain puritan missionaries should become Christians first.

In our missionary work we should be an example for all, otherwise all our zeal is for nothing. Without realizing, we can become like Pharisees (Mt 23:15-16). If we do not respect certain basic principles of the Gospel, some members will leave the church and certain new contacts will become angry against us, as it is written, “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (Ro 2:24). In few words, we can make exactly the same mistakes that the Jews have made before; we can because the Devil is always actives.

VERY STRONG WORDS FROM A BELIEVER
Referring to my articles about the crusade, you wrote, “How very shocking for me to now find out that you indeed teach the exact opposite. Logically, either you have changed your position since November 1995 or you lied to the brethren that were gathered at my apartment. Which one is it? Should we add the sin of lying, deception and situational ethics to your problem of error?”
I have already said that it has been times that I was not drinking at all, not even kvas, and I was always avoiding useless disputes about the issue of wine with the teetotal missionaries. I didn’t also because, as Paul wrote, “For the Kingdom of God is not matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Ro 14:17).

Even though it was not my intention, I have to speak extensively about the obsession against the wine because there are a lot of prejudices about it and behind it. Considering that I have lived for many years in the two continents, I have already studied the languages of the Bible and I have being touched personally, therefore, I am probably the best qualified missionary to write about the subject.
I have decided to start this long work because I realized and I have experienced personally that some teetotal brothers have the mission to harass their brothers who drink, even though they drink moderately. For them, that kind of crusade against wine has become a very important issue of the Christian orthodoxy, more important than love, peace, equity, fairness, acceptance, forgiveness, tolerance, communion and brotherhood.

Certain ultra conservative missionaries are still now preventing that the believers in Ukraine know what the brothers in other countries think about wine and other important issues. For that reason, those teetotal missionaries are still now doing their best in preventing that the brothers, from Canada and the European countries, come in Ukraine.

Dear brother, when you baptize a believer in Christ, you do not own him, but it is supposed that you make him free (Jn 8:32). You can be jealous of him, in the sense that Paul was (2 Co 11:1-15), but that
9
as nothing to do with the moderate consumption of wine. You cannot establish the diet for the members of the church, that tendency is typical of a cult.

STANDING UP TO REMOVE THE CANCER
I the past I was very remissive in regard of those teetotal missionaries who were obsessed against all those who drink, also against to those who drink moderately. For long times, I always restrained my feelings because I was convinced that with the time certain Puritan traditions would have been overcome and the believers of all countries would be finally united in Christ and would have collaborate all together to reach other souls.

I was hoping like that for more than 45 years, when finally I realized that I was wrong. It became evident fore me that the obsession against the consumption of wine is like a disease, a kind of a cancer for our missionary work, and it will not go away alone.

It is clear in my mind now, that certain ultra conservative brothers will never change their mind until someone stands up against them quoting the Gospel. We should do that even though we run the risk to lose our reputation. I am taking my responsibility following what Paul said in Co 2:16 and I hope that you will do the same one day.

THE UKRAINIAN BROTHER SHOULD NOT FEEL GUILTY
Responding to a specific question, I said that the wine of the miracle of Jesus in Cana had alcohol. I did only because I was asked to, and now I do not want that the young Ukrainian brother who asked me the question feels guilty. The beauty of the Christian faith is that we are free to ask question. There is nothing better than a sincere brother who has the courage to ask question, who wants to know more and I am ready to do everything, even to alienate from me my best friend.

ANOTHER REASON YOU SHOULD APOLOGIZE
Dear brother Kerry, you already accused me to be dishonest, in your apartment, responding to a specific question, and you were terrible wrong. I do not intend to discuss now about the wine of Cana; I have already treated extensively that issue in the Crusade against wine and I will get into it again in a next study apart. What I want to do now, is to remind you that none of us was present at that wedding in Cana and none of us has tasted that wine, and so none of us should become mad about it. It should be just a question of free research on the etymological meaning of the words used in the text.
You could disagree with me about that issue, but no believer has the right to become angry and to accuse his brother to be dishonest on that issue. There is not any teaching in the Gospel to support that kind of reaction.

The way you report what happen that day in November 1995 is not correct; evidently, you do not remember well. Maybe the reason of our misunderstanding is that for you wine, cognac and whisky are the same things, but they are not! Cognac has a lot more alcohol that a normal wine, almost like the whisky. You see, I am trying to justify you, but you immediately jump to some wrong conclusions assuming that I am not sincere, “or you lied to the brethren that were gathered at my apartment. Which one is it? Should we add the sin of lying, deception and situational ethics to your problem of error?”
10
I am not angry with you and I do not see falsity in you, but just inconsistency. Unfortunately, you do that mistake again by writing those insinuations against me. What a pity! Unfortunately, it is not the first time that you do that, I have already heard you speaking about falsity or dishonesty about your brothers who disagree with you; you are doing that even with me that I have been your friend for long time.
AN IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE OF THE GOSPEL

Dear brother, maybe you are not realizing what you are doing, but again you have violated an important principle of the Gospel, because Jesus said, “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to the judgement. Again, if someone says to his brother RACA (or stupid) will answer for it before the Sanhedrin and if he calls him FOOL (or false) will be in danger of the hell fire. Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you; leave your donation there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother: then come and offer your gift” (Mt 5:22-24).

Considering how it is clear the Gospel about this aspect, this is not a question of opinion, but it is a doctrine. Apparently, you are not really conservator as you proclaim to be on some biblical doctrines, but you are ultra conservator just against moderate consumption of wine, of which nothing is said in the Gospel.

THE RESPECT FOR THE AGE
Beside the previous errors you did, I have to remind you also that you have not respected my age. You should regard what the Bible teaches about the respect that the young or younger should have in regard of those who are older:

In the Old Testament, the children were raised and educated in the deep respect of the older people. That principle was even part of the Law of Moses. “Stand up in the presence of the aged person, show respect for the elderly and revere your God. I am the Lord” (Le 19:32).

In the Old Testament there was a great respect for those who were old and had more experience. “Gray hair is a crown of splendour; he is attained by a righteous life” (Pr 16:31).
There is the same principle in Peter, when he wrote, “Young men, in the same way be submissive to those who are older” (1 Pe 5:5).

When I was young I was told by my father: “When and older person speaks, you should always listen to him with attention”. Still today, that I am 70 years old, I always listen attentively especially those who are older than I am and have more experience than I have.

The respect for the old people is not just typical of Italy, but it is universal, well rooted in all cultures, also among the famous Russian and Ukrainian writers. I like to quote an African saying that impressed me the most, “Every time an old person dies, it is en entire library that burns out”.

That principle should apply especially for those like me who has come out from the Catholicism, who went through to the clergy persecution, and have persevered for fifty years in the true church.
11
Unfortunately, there are in the church some young men who are ready to listen to old brothers only if they think like them and not if the old brothers have a different opinion from their. That way to conceive the respect for older and more experienced brothers is not according to the Gospel.

AGAIN IN YOUR APARTMENT
In the same article, you wrote, “Oddly enough, since your articles supporting the consumption of alcoholic beverages have appeared here, one brother here has come forward and stated that while we were in America and you were traveling through Kiev and using our facilities, that you tried to convince him in my own apartment that it was perfectly acceptable for Christians to drink. It was difficult for me to believe my ears after hosting you for so many times to know that you would come to my home and undermine the teaching that we have been involved in here since 1992”.

Let me clarify immediately this point, about that young brother, who replaced you. We were talking about marriage and different customs and family names.

I told him that there are no family names in the Bible, that the first family names started by the Roman noble families, and that the family names as we conceive today have been invented in medieval time. Therefore, we should not use the Bible to change the culture of people.

As the young man heard that for me it is acceptable for a married woman to keep her maiden name as we do in Québec, in France, Spain, in Italy and also in Ukraine, that for me it is a question of personal choice, he accused me immediately to be a liberal. The problem is always the same, when someone refuses the Puritan British traditions is always a liberal, a danger for the faith and the salvation of the entire humanity. About the question of the names, I have already written a long article and I do not intend to go deeper here.

He was very young, it looked to me that he was still wet in his back because of his recent baptism and for the age I could have been his grandfather. I was really shocked to hear that he, instead of listening to me carefully; he accused me as he was an expert in the field. In that very moment, I had impression to be dealing with one of those young people from the Boston movement, who have hurt so much the work in Montréal and made many members and also my children to escape from the church.

I was wondering what kind of training you were giving to this young man, pushing him against to his national culture. I tried to correct him, as I would have done with my grandchild. It was in this context that the question of drinking wine came up. However, you should remember that Ukraine is also part of the European continent; for people who belong to the European culture it is quite normal to speak about wine or beer or kvas.

Anyway, I am sure that I have not said to the young that “it is perfect acceptable” to drink as you attribute to me, but eventually I said that “it is not wrong to drink (Co 2:17) as long as it is does not become an abuse (1 Pe 4:3-4)”. Usually I explain that; I speak of moderation also because at the time of Jesus, after a banquet, people were used to go home slowly on a car pulled by a donkey, while now after a banquet people are used to drive a car even at high speed in the interstate.

The situation could be different today and we should be more careful, but we are not authorized the change or to twist the Holy Scriptures.

THE WINE IN THE SANCTUARY
12
You refer to your apartment as something “holy” that I have contaminated speaking about wine, but there was wine also in the tabernacle (Ex 29:40) and it was a fermented beverage (Nu 28:7).
In the Hebrew language as in English, the wine is always fermented, but a beverage could be alcoholic or not. In fact, referring to the drinking offering in the tabernacle, it is interesting that the text speaks about “wine” and not about fermented wine (Ex 29:40), while in the parallel passage it speaks about fermented beverage (Nu 28:7), that it is supposed to be synonymous of wine. It is like that because “wine” is always fermented, and it would have been a pleonasm to add also the word “fermented”.

A CLEAR INCITEMENT TO DRINK IN YOUR LIBRARY
I do not see a big problem in speaking about wine in your home because I noticed that in the library of your living room there were already few copies of a book, in English and Russian, in which there were some explicit sensual references and some incitements to drink wine. I present here just few parts of that book that you cannot deny of having.

“Let him (the bridegroom) kiss me (the bride) with the kisses of his mouth - for your love is more delightful than the wine. Pleasing is the fragrance of your perfumes; your name is as perfume poured out. No wonder the maidens love you! Take me away with you - let us hurry! Let the king (the bridegroom was like a king) bring me into his chambers. We rejoice and delight in you; we will praise your love more than wine” (SS 1:1-4).

“You have stolen my heart, my sister, my bride; your have stolen my heart with one glance of your eyes, with one jewel of your necklace. How delightful is your love, my sister, my bride! How much more pleasing is your love than wine, and the fragrance of your perfume and the spice!” (SS 4:9-10).

“I have come into my garden, my sister, my bride; I have gathered my myrrh with my spice. I have eaten my honeycomb and my honey; I have drunk my wine and my milk. (From those invited at the banquet) Eat, O friends, and drink; drink your fill, O lovers” (SS 5:1).

“I said, I will climb the palm tree; I will take hold of its fruits. May your breasts be like the clusters of the vine, the fragrance of your breath like apples, and your mouth like the best wine. May the wine go straight to my lover, flowing gently over lips and teeth. I belong to my lover, and his desire is for me. Come, my lover, let us go to the countryside, let us spend the night in the villages. Let us go early to the vineyards to see if the vines have budded, if their blossoms have opened, and if the pomegranates are in bloom - there I will give you my love” (SS 7:8-12).

“May your fountain be blessed, and may your rejoice in the wife of your youth. Loving doe, a graceful deer - may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be captivate by her love” (Pr 5:19-20).
“Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for it is now that God favours what you do” (Ec 9:7).

Those passages, in which there are some explicit sensual references and some incitements to drink wine, have not been taken from a profane book, of course, but from the Bible that is the same as those that your have in your library, many copies of it.

YOU SHOULD HAVE A VERY SPECIAL DICTIONARY
13
In my house I have at least forty dictionaries, in eight languages, some of them are about Hebrew and Greek of the Bible or Biblical dictionaries, beside I have six Encyclopaedias in four languages, English, French, Italian and Russian, and in no one of them it is written that the term “wine” could refer to a beverage without alcohol.

I do not know where you find that wine could be without alcohol. It should be a very special dictionary to support that strange theory; a dictionary that is produced by a very special church; a kind of dictionary that is not for sale in most bookstores in North America and in the rest of the world.

AS THE EXAMPLE OF BAPTISM
At the time of Jesus there were many kinds of baptisms among other religious groups: immersions, ablutions, aspersions, infusions or showers. There were many rites for the cleaning and washing which were performed often for different purposes and with different meanings, but we do not care about them, because according to the Gospel there is just one Christian Baptism (Ep 4:4) with a particular purpose (At 2:37-38).

We should apply the same principle at other words of the Bible in order that nobody among us gets confused and the church is not divided. For the same reason, we should not care if certain ascetic groups were used to boil the wine to eliminate the alcohol or to mix the water with the wine; that is not written in the Holy Scriptures, and we should not change or twist certain passages of the Bible about the wine to follow those people; we follow just Jesus as it is written in the Gospel. Therefore, let the bread be always bread and the wine be always wine.

NOBODY BECAME ALCOHOLIC
Anyway, I want to remind you that in your house, we just spoke about wine, we did not drink it. We neither became drunk after outside your house. Nobody became alcoholic after that meeting or lost his faith because of what I said.

I am wondering what would have been your reaction, if I had said to that young man the same words that Paul wrote to another young preacher, “Stop of drinking only water (or exclusively water) and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses” (1 Ti 5:23).

I heard often about doctors who suggested to their patients to drink a glass or a half glass of wine during their regular meal to improve their health, but I have never heard about a doctor who has asked to his patients to drink a glass or an half glass of grape juice to improve their health.
You should not be scandalized too much if I spoke about wine in your living room because you know in that place something far worse than that happened.

WHEN YOU THREW THE BIBLE ON THE FLOOR
In the same living room, a previous time I visited you, one evening you were discussing with a sister, who was then the girlfriend of a Ukrainian preacher. You were arguing about many things, presenting the example of the churches in America, and she replied, “Not only Americans believe in God but also the Ukrainians believe even though they do not come to our church”.
14
When you heard that statement, you became angry against the sister, and said, “If it is like that we can through the Bible away” and screaming, to show your disappointment, you threw your Bible in the other side of your living room that dropped on the floor.

That day, I felt that what you did was really wrong, but I did not react because I was guest in your apartment and because I knew that sometimes you have a very difficult character. Being guest in your home, I could not react every time you did a mistake. However, it is not supposed that a missionary react in this way using the Holy Scriptures. I am assuming that you did it just to explain better your aversion to that statement of the sister, but that was not the right way to behave; I know personally some missionaries who have lost their support for a lot less. After that accident, the sister left the church, and I have not seen her anymore.

If there is something that has really profaned your “holy” living room it has been when you have thrown your Bible to the floor. Dear brother, sometimes you look so strict and dogmatic about certain marginal things and then you throw the Holy Scriptures on the floor to demonstrate your disagreement to a sister who might have said a wrong statement, but should have been corrected with love. Yours have been quite a liberal behaviour, isn’t? Frankly speaking, I never saw or heard of a “liberal” preacher to have such a lack of respect for the Bible. You need also to learn how improve with politeness and kindness, especially with those who disagree with you even when they are wrong.

IT IS ALWAYS A QUESTION OF TRUST AND OF FAITH
Dear brother, in the missionary field it is always a question of trust and of faith because we are doing the work of God; it is not our work, but His work, and He will always provide what it is necessary if we deserve it. Therefore, when there are some problems we should not overreact. We know by experience that to succeed in the missionary work, we should always run certain risks.

If you would be really sure of what you are doing and preaching, as you pretend to be, then why now this strong reaction against my articles? No one of my many readers did it before. Why just you, one of my close friend? Now I am too mixed up. Can you please explain me the reason? I refuse to guess any hypothesis because I do not want to do something bad to you.

I am still wondering why the brothers in Kiev should have not known what I think in that the matter. Is that the way that you have chosen to educate them and to make them to grow spiritually? I assure you that following that method, they cannot become mature believers in Christ. How can they trust you knowing that absolutely you do not want that they know what their brothers in other countries think? It is evident that here the problem is not just the wine, but there is a lot more behind it.

Paul never tried to hide in his letters what other brothers were thinking; he corrected them openly, but only when it was really necessary. He never argued about question of opinions and he asked to his collaborators to stay far from certain useless disputes (1 Ti 1:4. 6:4. 2 T 2:23.5. Ti 3:9-10). Paul has never been scandalized because a brother spoke about wine, why should you? After all, our Heavenly Father is presented as a Vinedresser (Jn 15:1).

To host foreigners from other countries is a privilege (Mt 25:35); it is a duty for the church leaders (1 Ti 3:2), and certain without realising gave hospitality to angels (He 13:2). Therefore, we should be very careful in the way we treat a guest.
15
I am coming from a culture where the guest is holy. Therefore, I am of the idea that if someone hosts a brother in his home, it is not supposed that he controls also his mind or his feelings. Usually I am very cautious, discreet and polite before speaking, especially in the house of another brother, but nobody can prevent me to say what I think. He should not especially after a very young member, still wet in his back, called me liberal.

In my life, I have never prevented others to express their opinions in many issues and nobody should expect to censure me. If one day you will visit me, as I have already invited you, I guarantee that you will be free to speak against the wine with all my friends, even in the congregation in Laval, where I am preaching now. I am sure that some will disagree with you and maybe some will debate the issue with you, but I will strongly recommend them to respect you and to remain in communion with you.

NOT FROM A SLAVERY TO ANOTHER SLAVERY
About fifty years ago I left the Catholic Church to become free, as Jesus promised to us (Jn 8:32), and
I always preach the freedom that we have in Christ; where there is the spirit of the Lord there is freedom not only from the law, but also from every human tradition (2 Co 3:17. Mk 7:6.9)). Therefore, I do not accept that someone, following the Puritan theology, tries to muzzle me. If among us we cannot speak even about wine, how can we speak about more important problems? If we are lost and panic about such small issue, how can we face firmly together to the real problems which affect the humanity, as immorality, vulgarity, exploitation, violence, aggressively and invasion of another country as is happening today with Iraq?

BECAUSE CANADIANS ARE NOT INTERVENTISTS
One day you told me, “Some American missionaries do not like Canadians because you are not enough interventists”. Evidently, they were referring about to refusal of Canadian Government to be involved in the invasion of Iraq. What surprise me the most is that you smiled about that, but it was not funny for me to hear that in your living room.

It is not supposed that we believers are aggressive; we are commanded by the Lord to be meek and humble as Jesus was (Mt 11:29). It is supposed that we believers love not only those who are like us, but also our enemies (Mt 5:38-48. 1 Co 4:9-13. Ro 12:9-21). I want you know that aggressiveness is a sin; therefore, for me that is not just a question of opinion, but it is a doctrinal issue, a very serious matter.

Instead of being scandalized because I spoke about wine in your home, you should have seriously reproached those teetotal missionaries hosted in your home who spoke in this way, but instead you just smiled about it or maybe you have even laughed. It is evident, that we are poles apart. Therefore, where is going all your orthodoxy? Why you are so strict about alcohol and so remissive about impoliteness, imposition, aggressiveness and the war?

NOT EVEN A DROP OF ALCOHOL
Anyway, I assure you brother that I have never drunk a drop of alcohol in Kiev, and I have never encouraged anyone to drink. The very rare times I have spoken about wine in Ukraine, it has been only to correct certain extremisms and I consider that it is my duty to do so. Rethinking about my past in Kiev, I regret now that I have not spoken about wine enough as I should have done. I am ready to
16
accept the teetotal brothers as they are, but as long as they accept me and let me to speak because both we should be free and none should act as Diotrephes did (3 Jn 9-10).

GUEST IN YOUR HOUSE
I recognize that you received me well when I came in Kiev in 1993 and it was useful for me. The first week I was in another apartment and after you asked me to move in your home. The second time I came, I was guest in the apartment of a Ukrainian sister and you asked me to move in your home. There were other places I could have gone; other brothers were ready to guest me, but usually you wanted to have me in your apartment because you were interested to speak with me and I was too. In this way, we have helped each other. Notwithstanding certain problems, I enjoyed to stay with you. I did also because I thought to be useful to you and I had also some very nice friends in your congregation.

I am sorry that now you repeat too many times in your letters that you hosted me; I do no like that you throw to my face that I was in you home. You remember what Jesus said? (Mt 6:1-4).
I remind you that if you hosted me it does not mean that now you own me, but you should be instead thankful for my contribution for your work in Kiev. It is evident, that if I would not have been being useful to your work, you would not have invited me for so many years.

Anyway, I am a free person who is still studying every day in the Holy Scripture to make progress in the knowledge because the Bible is an inexhaustible mine. If you repeat often that you hosted me, you should say also that I always brought something from Canada and I always left something. What I left you usually was the same amount of money that it would have cost to me to sleep in the nearby hotel. Therefore, please brother, do not go anymore on that subject. We have been called to speak about more noble things.

DEFINITION OF WINE
You wrote to me a very complicate and confusing statement, “Oinos”' is indeed a “generic term” which includes both intoxicating wine and non-intoxicating wine. You asked for a verse to demonstrate what I wrote, but you choose to ignore the one that I already provided for you. This was demonstrated conclusively in the parable of the wineskins. In Matthew 9:17 (and parallel records - Mark 2; Luke 5) we read of ''new wine'' (neos oinos) being put in new wine skins as the wise thing to do. The loss of the wine was the thing to be avoided. What is put in the wine skin must be unfermented wine, or else the whole story loses its point. If the wine is already fermented then there is no danger of losing the wine due to its expansion while fermenting. If it is unfermented (which it has to be) then we see ''oinos'' being used of unfermented wine”.

For a long time, I do not have the habit to consult many Bible commentaries; usually the Bible explains itself with the parallels passages. After having spent most of my life studying the Bible, to do my job I just need a good Hebrew and Greek lexicon to check few words. However, in this particular case I have become curious and I have consulted all the many Bible commentaries of my personal library, but no one of them gives that kind of interpretation. I assure you that I felt really relieved because I can say that I am not the only one who disagrees with your interpretation.

Trying to analyze you strange comment, I have to say first that the distinction you do between intoxicate and non-intoxicating wine does not appear in the Bible. It is a Puritan distinction that has become very popular in the current language in America, but it has nothing to do with the Bible.
17
I checked the word “intoxicated” in many concordances of the Bible in English, French and Italian languages. I checked also in the Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Bible that is based on the King James Version.

The only version of the Bible that reported the term “intoxicated” in regard of wine is the New King James, but that word does not appear in the original Hebrew and Greek text. I have already extensively written about it in The Teetotal Crusade and I am not repeating all the study here again.

MISQUOTING REVELATION
It is true that about the beast of the Revelation is written, “A second angel followed and said, Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great, which made all nations to drink the wine of wrath of her fornication” (Re 14:8; 17:2; 18:3). Others translate the fierce wine of her adulteries or the maddening wine of her intrigues. Or the wine of the God’s anger because of her immoral plots

We know that in the Bible, sometimes the same word could be used for different meanings, and we can prove it. For example the yeast could represent the bad attitude of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 16:6) and at the same time the positive effects of the Kingdom of God (Mt 13:33). It is normal that the wine has been taken as an example because it was the most common beverage of the time, used also by Jesus. Also in the medieval time, when a king or prince wanted to eliminate his political opponent, it was in the wine that usually the poison was put.

However, I do not see any relation of this symbolism with the meek believer, who is following the Gospel, who is always faithful to his wife and is drinking a glass of wine during his regular meal. Looking at the context, it is clear that this passage has to do with the religious power, with those who want to dominate the world using God or who want to manipulate their brothers not letting them to contact the brothers from other places or countries as Diotrephes did (3 Jn 9-10).

COMMENT ON MT 9:17
I lived in the middle of the Mediterranean wine culture, about the same area where Jesus was living, and in my life I never heard that the new wine has more alcohol than the old wine or that the old wine has less alcohol of the new wine. Your statement appears to me really unacceptable; it goes against every scientific principle. I asked the opinion about it to friends who are expert in the field and they started to laugh.

I do not know where you got that confusing comment on the example of the wineskins in Mt 9:17, and parallel passages. In the Bible, the fruit of the wine has three names, which represent three different stages in the process of fermentation: “must, new wine and wine”. In the first one or in the must, there is no alcohol or almost nothing of alcoholic. In the second or in the new wine or little wine or the almost wine or Vinello, there is low level of alcohol, and it will remain low for about three months, and after the fermentation still continues until the wine reaches maturation.

Because in Montréal I am living among many experts about wine or excellent winemakers who usually make the wine in their basement, I asked again to a brother, who knows better than me that profession, and I got this specification:

The must starts to ferment about three days after the pressing, but usually it is still called “must”. The must remain in the vat with the marc to ferment for two weeks, and after it is called “new wine”, but the
18
process of fermentation of the new wine continue without marc in a closed strong cask or a barrel. If it is a fine quality wine it is kept in the cask for a year to be aged and after it is put in the bottle or it is bottled. If it is not a low quality wine, it is kept in the cask only for 6 months and after it is put into the bottle, but there is always the high risk that some bottles could explode because the process of fermentation is still in course.

The fermentation process is not something instantaneous or static, as you presented in your comment to Mt 9:17, but it is something that last for long time, that continues even when it is called old wine, but not with the same intensity.

In few words, the wine is not an amorphous drink as Coca Cola, but it is alive, and it continues to change through the time also after he has become old. The only way to stop that process is to boil it, but few days after it would go bad or awry and it should be thrown away. The Appert system, invented in 1795 by a Frenchman, was not known in that time. No serious scholar has ever spoken about old wine of the first century as unfermented wine as you do. It would be a miracle to make it and Jesus did exactly the contrary; He made the good wine from water, and so He pleased even the master of the table (Jn 2:9-10).

ABOUT WHAT POINT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
There is no historical and scientific basis to support your statement, “What is put in the wine skin must be unfermented wine, or else the whole story loses its point. If the wine is already fermented then there is no danger of losing the wine due to its expansion while fermenting. If it is unfermented (which it has to be) then we see ''oinos'' being used for unfermented wine”.

I am wondering, why are you complicating a so simple parable? Please tell me of what point are you talking about? The new wine is still in process of changing, even though there is already some alcohol, and so it should not be put in the wineskin until it becomes old, but it does not mean that the old wine does not change or that it does not have alcohol. It still in process of changing, but the wineskin is elastic enough to tolerate that little expansion of the old wine.

If the new wine has more alcohol of the old wine, Paul should have not written, “Do not get drunk on wine” (Ep 5:18), but he should have written, “Do not get drunk on new wine”. Paul should have not written about the old women that they should not be “addicted to much wine” (Ti 2:3), but that they should not be added to much new wine”, and so on…

We have seen that the word “yeast” is used in the Bible in different ways and I have proved it, but you have still to prove that in the Bible the words “old wine” means unfermented wine. That is only mythology.

In the last letter I wrote that I wish that Paul would be here to defend his writings from your misinterpretations. In the same way, now I wish that also Jesus could be here personally, as a man, to defend his examples from your misinterpretations.

DENYING THE GREENHOUSE EFFECTS
Dear brother, you are not new to make certain wrong scientific statements. For example, about eight year ago, you have excluded completely the possibility of the negative consequences of the greenhouse effect in the climate and in the environment. I was surprised to hear that strange statement, but you told
19
me that one brother in America, who is an expert in that field, who is working with a big petrol company, told you that the problem of the greenhouse effect does not exist, that it has been just made up by the journalists. It happens now that all experts, except those tied to the petrol companies, are finally recognizing that there is a serious problem about greenhouse effects and so that that expert brother was really wrong and you too.

It implies that we should not listen only to teetotal brothers; we should not read just their books or only the Puritan books. Sometimes also our brothers could be wrong because they are not inspired. We have the moral duty of take the information from different sources and to be very careful before taking a side when there are different positions. In some particular cases, we should be humble enough to say: I do not know, I want to verify better, but we can still brothers respecting each other.

I do not know where you got that kind of comment about Mt 9:17, but it is evident that in the States certain brothers write and print many books not because they are smarter than we are, but just because they have plenty of money. When I think that certain books are still used as text in some “Bible” Schools and some “Christian” universities, I have the goose skin. In those ultra conservative institutes, it would be 10 times better to use as text only the Holy Scriptures. It is evident that about that subject also we are at two poles apart.

THE BIBLE ALONE SAVES US
When I was Catholic I was told by priests that I could not interpret the Bible on my own, that I have to follow interpretation of the Pope, because he is infallible. At that time, I was wondering why God has given the Holy Scriptures in the way that his children need the Pope to understand it. When I was 21 year old I met some members of the true church who told me, “We should speak when the Bible speaks and be silent when the Bible is silent”. I was told also, “We do not need other things because the Bible alone can save us”. I was very happy to hear that, because with the Gospel it was possible for me to get out from the slavery of the Catholic tradition.

Unfortunately, the sound I am hearing now is quite different; some are keeping in telling me that I cannot understand the Bible alone, that I have to follow the interpretations of the teetotal brothers in the States. That I have to quote their books to be a good preacher, otherwise my presence is not welcome. Well, I have not come out from the slavery of the Catholicism to get into the slavery of the teetotal brothers. I am a nostalgic person, one of the few who still believes that the Bible’s teachings alone can saves us.

CONFUSED IN TOO MANY THINGS
Dear Kerry, it is very difficult to argue with you because you confuse Cognac with wine, a glass of wine during, the regular meal, with social drinking. You see in the healthy neat wine a source of intoxication and you think that the wine is a dead product as the Coca Cola. You think that the new wine has more alcohol than the old wine; you are obsessed about the danger of alcohol and deny the danger of the greenhouse effects. For me it is evident, that you are going beyond to what it is written (1 Co 4:6) and your way of thinking is an escape from reason.

YOU CONFUSE MODERATION WITH THE DEVIL
You make a statement that proves that you see the Devil in everything that does not correspond to the teetotal Puritan tradition, “Yes, it is widely believed, even among Christians, that moderation in drinking
20
is a sufficient precaution against the dangers in alcohol. But we must not believe the flattering lies of Satan”.

With you statement, “Yes, it is widely believed, even among Christians, that moderation in drinking is a sufficient precaution against the dangers in alcohol”, you admit that I am not the only believer to think in this way. I am among the majority not only in Europe and in Canada, but also in the States. I know even elders who drink like me, some do not drink but they think that it is not a sin, so do not try to present me as the one rebel who refuse to listen to the all scholars.

If moderation is not a sufficient precaution against the danger of alcohol, but just the flattering lies of Satan, as you say, then you should speak in the same way about those in Ukraine who drink kvas because it is a beer from fermented bread. From what I know, all Ukrainians drink it and also some members of your congregation in Kiev.

If you say that about those who drink wine or kvas, then what you should say about those who drink too much coffee and become hyper nervous or to those who eat too much food and have become very obese; those who re running the risk to have an heart attack and to develop the diabetes.
The real protection against the flattering lies of Satan is to do everything for the glory of God, “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Co 10:31), “for everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgivings, because is consecrated by the word of God and prayer” (1Ti 4:4).

In His Name,

Silvio Caddeo

P.S. Dear brother Kerry, you have asked to me some important questions quoting the Encyclopedia Britannica, but unfortunately I got a problem using the same text, maybe it was a virus. Because of that, the corrector in my computer was no more functioning; there was no way of making it to work it in the pages I have already written. There was also the risk that the problem could have spread to other documents. To solve the problem I have reinstalled the Word program but without success. Therefore, I had to cancel some pages and I have to retype them. Fortunately, I have solved the problem, but I have lost a lot of time on it.

Because the subject is very interesting I will answer in the second part of the letter that will follow soon.
21





September 7, 2007
Dear Silvio,

After reading your twenty-one page response, I have prayerfully concluded that there is no further point in corresponding with you. What could have possibly been an honest exchange of thoughts on a particular biblical subject has now become useless in view of the fact that you have now resorted to baseless personal attacks against me, the brethren in Ukraine, and in America. Perhaps you have become the strongest argument against a Christian drinking alcohol as it obviously clouds the mind and causes people to lose touch with the truth.

To be frank, it was shocking for me to read your very harsh words against me. It was very discouraging and disheartening as well. As I read your letter, 2 Timothy 3:12-13 came to mind: “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.” Nevertheless, I take heart in what is further stated in verse 14, “But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them.”

Logically, it would be better if you knew something about a person before accusing him of error. Just for the record and for the sake of anyone that may read this that does not know me personally, I have NEVER “left the church”. I NEVER “became an alcoholic” and have NEVER “Had different women” as you have written. Perhaps you thought you would destroy my marriage to Karla by making such accusations or cause brethren to stop supporting our work here, or undermine the confidence that the brethren here in Kiev have towards me? You claim that these things happened when you were in “Italy” and being “persecuted by the Catholic priests.” As memory serves, that was during the 60s. Perhaps you forgot or do not know my age for I was only a child then, unmarried and not yet a Christian! I do not know your reasons for writing such things. However, for these words you will give an account on the Day of Judgment (Matthew 12:36). My thoughts towards you are the same that Paul had towards Alexander in 2 Timothy 4:14-15 “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

I want to encourage everyone that reads this to openly and honestly investigate Silvio’s claims. It will not be that difficult in as much as I have only been a member of four congregations since becoming a Christian on August 10, 1986. I will attach addresses so that anyone can write and verify my history in those congregations. If there is any doubt, certainly an honest investigation will show Silvio’s claims to be false. Please note the following information:

1. South Anchorage church of Christ Baptized August 10, 1986 by Bill Clary
Active member for 4 years August 1986 - July 1988; August 1990 - September 1992

Clary, Bill & Marie [e-mail] (Former Preacher)

Laux, Andy & Pearl [e-mail] (Present and current elder)

2. Karns church of Christ (while a student of the East Tennessee School of Preaching and Missions)
Active member for two years July 1988 - July 1990

Karns [e-mail] (congregational address)

Edwin, Jones [e-mail] (elder/Preacher/Instructor)

David Pharr [e-mail] (Former Director of ETSOPM/Preacher/Instructor;
currently working with the Charlotte Avenue church of Christ)


3. Centre church of Christ (A.K.A. Garmatna church of Christ)
Active member for four years September 1992 - May 1996

Shcrabin, Anatoly & Sveta [e-mail] (Preacher)

Zotov, Alexander [e-mail] (Preacher)

Campbell, Roger [e-mail] (Preacher/Missionary; former co-worker in Kiev
from August 1993 - June 1999)

4. Left Bank church of Chirst (A.K.A. Darnitza or Kiev church of Christ)
Active member for the past 11 years May 1996 - to present

Garkusha, Serghei [e-mail] (Preacher/Translator; founding member of the Left Bank
congregation and active member to present date)

Bondarenko, Artem [e-mail] (Preacher/Translator; member of the Centre
church of Christ since 1992 and active member at the Left Bank since 1996 to present date).

Shkirenko, Yuri [e-mail] (Preacher; co-worker in Kiev from July 2002 to present date)

5. Addition information may be obtained from those that have overseen our work in the past and
present:


Compton, Richard [e-mail] (elder at the Pennville church of Christ)

Lewis, Jim & Freda [e-mail] (Former elder/preacher at Pennville church of Christ;
currently working with the Greenslake Road church of Christ in Chattanooga, Tennessee)


It’s ironic that you accuse me of adultery with “different women.” Everyone that knows me and my wife Karla personally know that we have always sincerely loved each other and have NEVER been unfaithful to one another. We were “high school sweethearts” and both virgins when we met. I have never known another woman, nor Karla another man. However, I welcome anyone that desires to write to Karla directly if they have any questions concerning these things. You can reach her at her own mailbox at [e-mail]. This very month we will celebrate 26 years of beautiful marriage.

The rest of your accusations of me being a raging mad manipulative missionary that was a former alcoholic are pure fabrications from a darken mind and a hardened heart. All the same, it is not only me that you have accused of sin, but all of the American brethren that stand against the consumption of alcoholic beverages for reasons other than that which may be used medicinally. You have accused them of teaching denominational Puritan ideas that are not a part of the Bible. You have also accused the sound Ukrainian brethren of accepting money in order to teach what the American Missionaries want to hear and hypocritically believing and practicing otherwise. You also accuse our Ukrainian brethren of not having the “guts” to tell me “what they really think.” You have insulted sound brethren here and in America. You have insulted me and insulted my wife with your accusations.

The Devil is also described as an “accuser” (Revelation 12:10). The Apostle Paul’s warning to Timothy and the church was certainly not in vain for it is written,

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth (2 Timothy 3:1-7).

Brother, you have placed yourself in the category of Hymenaeus and Alexander and without repentance you cannot be saved. Please understand, I hold no ill will towards you. I still hope and pray for you to turn from your sins before you leave this world or before causing anyone else to stumble by your teachings.

Throughout Kiev on the cover of many newspapers is the sad report of the death of Luciano Pavarotti. He is one of your own countrymen that was known and loved throughout the world and will be greatly missed by those that appreciated his gift. Yet, to my understanding, he was not a Christian and died unprepared to meet God. He no longer has the opportunity to change his mind and his life, but you still do. I sincerely pray for your change of heart before your fate in eternity is sealed.

Unless I observe the fruits of your repentance this will be my last correspondence with you. However, before I close, let me leave you with the words of the Spirit in Romans 13:11-14

And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.

My hope and prayers for you in the Lord,

Kerry L. Sword



"Caddeo"
To: "Artem Bondarenko" , "Kiev Church of Christ" , "Artem Bondarenko" , "Nickoli Goodkovich" , "Yuri & Helen Shkirenko" , "Timothy Makarchuk" , "Daniel Zamoyski" , "Charles Musisi" , "Kingsley Opara" , "Igor Chernishenko" , "Serghei Garkusha" , "Valia Onofryichuck" , "Damron Chuck - Elders" , "Clemons Gene" , "BILL FARRIS" , "Anatoly Shcrabin" , "Alexander Zotov" , "Sword Kerry & Karla"
Subject: Dear Kerry

Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 23:42:06 -0400

Dear Brother Kerry,

I am sorry to read that you, have misunderstood my letter and have jumped again to a wrong conclusion.

I never, never, never, never, never, never, said that that you have betrayed you wife. I know how much you love and respect Karla and it never crossed my mind anything wrong between you two; therefore, please do not raise anymore that issue.

I have never, never, never, never, never, questioned your wife, and I want to add that I have always found her as an exemplary christian wife, a big support for you missionary effort. I do not know how she can do having always so many people in the apartment most of the time.

According to what you have written, you have been baptized in 1986, and that since then you have been faithful to the church of the Lord. Nothing to say about that and I never heard someone who has doubt about it and neither have I. Nobody can say that I have said something against you in the fifteen years we know you and have collaborate for the Kingdom of our common Lord for His Church.

However, from 1986 to 2007 there are only 21 years and you are a lot older than that. In my letter, I have just reported what you told me, that you have been raised in the church by a Christian family, that for some time you left the church and came back in 1986, that you got baptized and had been faithful since. I think there is nothing to be ashamed in admitting that; what could be shameful is to deny it.

If you have been baptized in 1986, I instead I have been baptized in 1958, it means 27 years before your conversion, and I was living in a very hostile environment. I have just presented the example that when you were living your own independent life I was already suffering for Christ. I mentioned that example of my experience because you have to learn to respect those who are older than you are in age and in the faith.

What I reproached to you is that for you the scholars or doctors as they are called in the Bible (Ac 13:1. 1 Co 12:28. Ep 4:11) seamed to be only the brothers in the States who teach in the teetotal Bible institutes, and those who have been educated abroad are just arrogant persons, who do not accept the opinion of the doctors in America. I am sorry, but I believe that is a wrong attitude and it is not biblical. How could it be true considering that America is not even mentioned in the Bible?

I have never questioned your honesty as you have done instead in my case. If your elders would ask me if there would be someone to take your place in Kiev, I would say that you are a qualified and trustful person, that I do not know anyone who could adequately replace you and your wife. I say that because I love you and because I have a big respect for both of you and I know what you can do for the Lord in Kiev. I say that even though I think that you Kerry have to change of attitude.

It was bad for me to see you so angry and threw the Bible on the floor just because you did not agree with a sister. You have to learn to control yourself and be more flexible with your brothers about question of opinions. To drink wine is a question of personal decision and many good and faithful brothers I know in Canada, in the States, in Italy, in France, in Greece and in Ukraine are open about it. What I am asking is not to judge good Brothers of different cultures, who will never get drunk, but can have a glass of red wine during the meal to help the digestion.

We have been preaching in Ukraine for about 15 years and after 15 years of “sensational successes”, we are having now altogether in Ukraine no more members than 13 years ago. Could it be the reason that we are preaching too much Moses and not enough Jesus? Are we trying to establish in Ukraine a Church that is not enough Ukrainian? The persecution against those who drink moderately wine should stop because it has become the cancer of our missionary work.

I did not like that instead of opening a direct dialogue with me you have involved so many people. If I were an American brother I am sure that you wouldn’t have done it. Eventually you could have involved just the two or three elders who know me personally. You should realize that in this way you are just digging a ditch for you, as it written, “If a man digs a pit, he will fall into it” (Pr 26:27).

In my articles I have always avoided to use names because I want to correct certain mistakes on the missionary work without hurting people, but you have obliged me to use names and to be more specific, and so the consequences are not good, but I believe that God can always take the good also from the bad (Ro 8:28).

I love you Kerry

I include in the attachment the story of my conversion.

In His Name

Silvio
Attachments


Files:



Brief_trip_back_in_the_past.pdf (219k)
Scan and Save to Computer

Introduction_a_brief_trip_back.pdf (88k)
Scan and Save to Computer



September 11, 2007




Dear Brethren,

I am sending out Silvio’s last response to me concerning my letter to him dated September 9, 2007. Here he denies ever accusing me of infidelity. Read the quote below and judge for yourselves whether or not he made the accusation.

At that very moment, I reminded you that I have been faithful to the Lord since my conversion in 1958, that in my life I had just one woman and I have never been drunk. I asked if you could say the same. You recognised that you could not say the same. Everyone knew already that in the past you left the church; that you became an alcoholic and had different women. You did it when in Italy I was persecuted by the Catholic priests because I was preaching the Gospel.


In his latest response, he continues with his absurd accusations. And again, just for the record, I was not as he states, “raised in the church by a Christian family, that for some time you left the church and came back in 1986” as he now maintains. I never told him such a thing. My parents never taught us anything about God and were not faithful members of the Lord’s church. They lived their lives as if God was non-existent. Therefore, they never took us to the Lord’s church, much less a denomination.

I see no sign of repentance from Silvio for his accusations towards me or the others that he has accused in his writings. I therefore will not answer his latest letter. As far as I’m concerned, he has lied and will continue to lie, so what would be the point? He still has yet to answer the signed letter from the congregation here in Kiev dated August 19, 2007.


If you have any comments or suggestions that you’d like to make, I’d be happy to hear them.


Sincerely in the Lord,

Kerry

---

 

Photos

Silvio Caddeo
Silvio Caddeo

Silvio in Kiev November of 1995
November 1995
In the Sword's Apartment in Kiev

Vladimir Dennisov
Vladimir Dennisov
Aug 14, 1944 - 2006

Kiev Bible School Groups 2-3
Kiev Bible School Groups 2-3 1993-1995

Vitali Lisnyak
Vitali Lisnyak:
Jun 09, 1936 – Jan 01, 2000

Vitali & Helen
Kiev Bible School Groups 9-10

Victor Ivanovich Layhk
Victor Ivanovich Layhk
Dec 25, 1956 - Jun 19, 2007

Yana & Tatyana Layhk
Yana & Tatyana Layhk
Daughter and Widow of Victor