Maybe I don't know very much about this subject but if you don't mind I
would like to comment...
I think the juice was fermented. And I don't think Christ "encouraged"
drunkeness. But there have been many times in history when you drank
what was available to drink whatever it was. And they had storage
problems, no refrigeration to keep things fresh, etc. so that you
drank it the way you got it and were happy.
You don't have to get drunk per se, just have a glass of wine. True, you
can go off the deep end with it, but I don't think that was the original
intention, either.
Okay, I'm done, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
:-6
Wine or Grape Juice?
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Wine or Grape Juice?
My church uses grape juice.
But I think it is fairly certain Jesus and the disciples used fermented wine. The first miracle ar Cana was not grape juice He made in those jars-but the best wine in the house. Remember, they drank wine mixed with water back then, it was common practice.
But I think it is fairly certain Jesus and the disciples used fermented wine. The first miracle ar Cana was not grape juice He made in those jars-but the best wine in the house. Remember, they drank wine mixed with water back then, it was common practice.
Wine or Grape Juice?
It seems to me that common sense would dictate that the wine of the Bibical era was fermented. Rome, the Greeks and others all speak of fermentation, drunkeness etc. Why would early day Christians be any different? Besides, to those that know drink, it takes a fair amount of wine to get drunk. If I drink one botttle of wine with my meal my blood alcohol level for driving purposes is within legal limits. It's been tested to confirm this.
Wine or Grape Juice?
[quote=Far Rider]Ya'll bring up some good points...
There are warnings in scripture not to drink alcohol, and not to drink to excess.
Isn't the above statement contradictory? If scripture says not to drink alcohol, why even worry about if you drink to excess.
There are warnings in scripture not to drink alcohol, and not to drink to excess.
Isn't the above statement contradictory? If scripture says not to drink alcohol, why even worry about if you drink to excess.
Wine or Grape Juice?
Wonderful question to ponder, FAR.
Our church uses wine. We could use grape juice, but don't. Children are welcome at the table.
I believe the wine was truly wine, fermented wine. Jesus performed a miracle and he did not do it half way. Half way would be grape juice and it was recognized as being the best wine which was served last, not first.
Read the text I found on the net -- especially the text in blue. It presents some interesting thoughts on this miracle.
Turning the Water into Wine
By: Hampton Keathley IV , Th.M.
I. OBSERVATION
A. Passage Selected: John 2:1-11
This miracle is only recorded in John.
B. Progression Stated: Biographical
We can track this miracle biographically by following the conversations between Jesus and others involved in the miracle account.
C. Presentation Summarized:
1. The context
Chronological context - There are four separate references to “day†in the context 1:19, 29, 35, 43 and 2:1 Some suggest that this is the third day after the 4th day. Thus this is the seventh day. John’s book also ends with a record of seven days. Perhaps these are “book ends†to the book. From Jerusalem up to Galilee was about a two or three day journey. So perhaps this is just a reference to the third day since Jesus was in Jerusalem.
Conceptual context - John has just presented Jesus as the creator in John 1:3. Now we will see him creating in chapter two. I think this is the most important contextual clue to consider.
2. The conversations
a. Between Mary and Jesus (1-5)
The wine gave out. That would have been a social embarrassment in that culture - or any culture for that matter. What is Mary doing hosting this wedding ceremony? She is from Nazareth. This is happening in Cana (20 miles away). Chances are this is a relative’s wedding. She goes to Jesus and tells him the wine is out. Why does she approach Jesus? He hasn’t performed any miracles yet. Because He hadn’t performed any miracles yet, some say that Mary didn’t expect Him to perform one here, but you must remember that she knew who He was. He was a perfect son. She knew He was the Messiah. Perhaps she had heard about His baptism and the Voice coming out of heaven. Perhaps she thought it was time for Him to go public with His identity. Perhaps she is just going to him, expecting him to bail her out of her social predicament or give her advice as some suggest, but I think she might have even expected something supernatural - a miracle. I think that because of what Jesus says.
Jesus says, “Woman, what do I have to do with you?†Literally, “Woman, what to you and to me.†This sounds a little rude to us. This is a Semitism which is either a hostile answer or an intentional disengagement. Another way to translate it might be “Why do you involve me?†or “What do you want with me?†By addressing his mother as “Woman†he is distancing himself from her. He uses the same term of address in John 19:26 when he is hanging on the cross and about to leave her. I think in John 19: he is indicating that his earthly existence is over and with it, the mother-son relationship. Why does He say that here? Because, with the Baptism by John, His ministry has begun, and with it His responsibility to the Father and accomplishment of His mission has now taken even more of a priority than before.
His response is that His time has not yet come. This introduces the theme of “the hour†in the gospel of John. The hour is the hour of his passion. When he gives the bread to Judas, he says his hour has come. So, when He says here that His hour has not yet come, He is saying the time when he would be glorified has not yet come. It is this statement by Jesus (who knows what people are thinking) that makes me think this is what His mother is expectingâ€that He get with it and show everyone who He is.
Why does he balk at her question and then go ahead and perform the miracle? What Jesus is saying is, “Nobody writes in my daytimer.†Mary was trying to dictate when Jesus was to start manifesting Himself as the Son of God. This doesn’t mean He can’t help her. He is just pointing out that she doesn’t control when He reveals Himself. Later in John His brothers tell Him to go up to Jerusalem and manifest Himself at the feast. He tells them it is not his time and then later goes to the feast in His own way - not to manifest himself as the Christ. Both of these events make it look like Jesus says one thing and does another, but when you understand this concept, it clears up the confusion.
After saying all this, it is in fact time for Jesus to begin manifesting that He is God and so He does a miracle.
b. Between Jesus and the servants (6-8)
Nearby stood six stone ceremonial water jars. Water pots could not be ceremonially clean unless hewn out of stone. These pots held between 30 and 40 gallons.
He tells the servants to draw water and fill the jars. This is the miracle proper (vs. 6-8).
He told them to put water in the pots first and then draw it out. He does this so that they would know that there was nothing in the pots beforehand. There was not a can of juice concentrate or a freeze dried package of wine in the bottom which became wine when the water was added. It removed all doubt that this was miraculous.
If you were to fill a ceremonial pot with just any old water, what would happen to the pot? It would become unclean and unfit for ceremonial use from then on. We will come back to this.
Did Jesus touch the water? Did he speak magic words over the water? One of the things we will see as we study the miracles is that there is no standardized way that Jesus performs miracles. There is very little “hype†in his miracles. People who claim to perform miracles usually surround the event with much “hype.†In all of His miracles there is almost a disengagement from the miracle event so that we can focus on the meaning. I think that is important to remember when we later discuss the current charismatic, signs and wonders movement. One of the questions to ask is “Where is their focus?â€
c. Between the headwaiter and the bridegroom (9-11)
The bridegroom would have been responsible for providing the wine for the celebration. The headwaiter points out that usually people serve the good wine first and bring out the bad wine after everyone is a little too tipsy to tell the difference. vs 10 can literally be translated “usually you bring out the lower quality wine after everyone has become drunk...â€
This miracle debunks one common teaching in certain Christian circles. Some try to teach that everyone in that culture drank diluted wine. Therefore, any wine or beer that we would drink today is much stronger than the wine of Jesus’ day and therefore sinful. However, it was common for people to get drunk on the wine of that day. The headwaiter said so, and Paul wouldn’t counsel against being drunk with wine in Ephesians if that was true.
II. INTERPRETATION
John says in vs 11 that this was the beginning of Jesus’ signs. Indicating that this miracle had significance or meaning. What was the purpose or significance? There are several:
A. The purpose in the context.
In my research on this miracle I checked out the web site that contains many of Ray Stedman’s sermons. He wrote the following:
In his very helpful book Miracles, C.S. Lewis has pointed out that every miracle of Jesus is simply a kind of short-circuiting of a natural process; a doing instantly something which in general takes a longer period of time. Lewis says, “Each miracle writes for us in small letters something that God has already written, or will write, in letters almost too large to be noticed, across the whole canvas of nature.†That is what Jesus is doing: he is overleaping the elements of time, of growth, gathering, crushing and fermenting. He takes water---an inorganic, non-living, commonplace substance---and without a word, without a gesture, without any laying on of hands, in utter simplicity, the water becomes wine, an organic liquid, a product of fermentation, belonging to the realm of life. Thus he demonstrated his marvelous ability to master the processes of nature.
C.S. Lewis and Ray Stedman are usually very good, but here I have to disagree. If you filled a pot with water and put it on your front porch, it could sit there for a 1000 years and never turn into wine. Not only is this impossible, it misses the point of the miracle. In John 1:3, John said, “All things came into being by Him...†Now John is recording a miracle in which Jesus demonstrates that He is the creator. He creates wine. He doesn’t speed up the natural process.
So, the purpose in the context is that this is a miracle of creativity.
B. The Significance to the Jewish Audience
Why would the production of wine be important to a Jewish audience? There are many passages in the OT that predicted that when the Messiah came there would be an abundance of wine. cf. Amos 9:12-15. Wine is a symbol of the presence of the Messiah. The opening sign of the ministry of Jesus is the production of wine that proclaimed that the Messiah was present and ready to establish the kingdom.“You saved the best for last†may be an allusion similar to Hebrew 1. “Heb 1:1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son ...â€
Jesus is commanding servants to act in defiling ways with Jewish water pots to accomplish His purposes. Is that important? Yes, Jesus is demonstrating that He is superior to the rituals and traditions of the Pharisees. He will do this several times throughout His ministry.
Jesus demonstrates himself to be the Creator and Messiah. He revealed his glory (John 1:14).
C. The Significance to the Disciples
This also confirmed the faith of the disciples. It says so in vs 11.
III. APPLICATIONS
From the conversation between Mary and Jesus we learn that Jesus is greater than Mary.
Mary submitted to Christ and so should I.
We also see that we shouldn’t demand that God meet our schedule or desires. He will do what He wants when He wants.
Jesus sanctioned the institution of marriage by his presence at the wedding and reception. Jesus is not interested in monasticism, asceticism.
Jesus made the wedding celebration even more enjoyable by providing the wine. Therefore, God is interested in our joy as well as our needs.
The disciples believed, therefore, the right response to seeing the glorious person and work of Christ is to believe. Notice that even the first miracle has the purpose of building faith. Jesus starts off by pointing out that it is not the hour and then performs a miracle anyway. This miracle was glorious, but it was not the hour of glory. All the miracles build up to the what is most important - the most glorious work of Christ - His death - which is the basis of genuine saving faith.
The servants saw the same miracle (from a closer vantage point than anyone else), but there is no record of their faith. Principle: Many see the works of God and do not respond in faith. This point is missed by the followers of the Vineyard Movement who teach that if people could just see miracles, then they would believe. It makes you wonder if they have read this miracle.
Let’s go back to the creation theme. Jesus created wine with apparent age. This has significance for the creation/evolution debate. Evolutionists say that the earth has to be millions of years old because of the empirical evidence. But ask yourself the question. If God made a tree on Monday and you cut it down on Tuesday, ho w many rings would it have? If God created the world, why couldn’t He create it with apparent age? If you take God out of the equation, the world looks old. But if God did it 10,000 years ago, and created everything with age, then the empirical evidence for the age of the earth is not a conflict with scripture. There is no empirical evidence for transition of life forms. Consequently, scientists have opted for abrupt appearance as the explanation for the origin of life on earth. What better explanation of abrupt appearance than the creation account in Genesis?
Our church uses wine. We could use grape juice, but don't. Children are welcome at the table.
I believe the wine was truly wine, fermented wine. Jesus performed a miracle and he did not do it half way. Half way would be grape juice and it was recognized as being the best wine which was served last, not first.
Read the text I found on the net -- especially the text in blue. It presents some interesting thoughts on this miracle.
Turning the Water into Wine
By: Hampton Keathley IV , Th.M.
I. OBSERVATION
A. Passage Selected: John 2:1-11
This miracle is only recorded in John.
B. Progression Stated: Biographical
We can track this miracle biographically by following the conversations between Jesus and others involved in the miracle account.
C. Presentation Summarized:
1. The context
Chronological context - There are four separate references to “day†in the context 1:19, 29, 35, 43 and 2:1 Some suggest that this is the third day after the 4th day. Thus this is the seventh day. John’s book also ends with a record of seven days. Perhaps these are “book ends†to the book. From Jerusalem up to Galilee was about a two or three day journey. So perhaps this is just a reference to the third day since Jesus was in Jerusalem.
Conceptual context - John has just presented Jesus as the creator in John 1:3. Now we will see him creating in chapter two. I think this is the most important contextual clue to consider.
2. The conversations
a. Between Mary and Jesus (1-5)
The wine gave out. That would have been a social embarrassment in that culture - or any culture for that matter. What is Mary doing hosting this wedding ceremony? She is from Nazareth. This is happening in Cana (20 miles away). Chances are this is a relative’s wedding. She goes to Jesus and tells him the wine is out. Why does she approach Jesus? He hasn’t performed any miracles yet. Because He hadn’t performed any miracles yet, some say that Mary didn’t expect Him to perform one here, but you must remember that she knew who He was. He was a perfect son. She knew He was the Messiah. Perhaps she had heard about His baptism and the Voice coming out of heaven. Perhaps she thought it was time for Him to go public with His identity. Perhaps she is just going to him, expecting him to bail her out of her social predicament or give her advice as some suggest, but I think she might have even expected something supernatural - a miracle. I think that because of what Jesus says.
Jesus says, “Woman, what do I have to do with you?†Literally, “Woman, what to you and to me.†This sounds a little rude to us. This is a Semitism which is either a hostile answer or an intentional disengagement. Another way to translate it might be “Why do you involve me?†or “What do you want with me?†By addressing his mother as “Woman†he is distancing himself from her. He uses the same term of address in John 19:26 when he is hanging on the cross and about to leave her. I think in John 19: he is indicating that his earthly existence is over and with it, the mother-son relationship. Why does He say that here? Because, with the Baptism by John, His ministry has begun, and with it His responsibility to the Father and accomplishment of His mission has now taken even more of a priority than before.
His response is that His time has not yet come. This introduces the theme of “the hour†in the gospel of John. The hour is the hour of his passion. When he gives the bread to Judas, he says his hour has come. So, when He says here that His hour has not yet come, He is saying the time when he would be glorified has not yet come. It is this statement by Jesus (who knows what people are thinking) that makes me think this is what His mother is expectingâ€that He get with it and show everyone who He is.
Why does he balk at her question and then go ahead and perform the miracle? What Jesus is saying is, “Nobody writes in my daytimer.†Mary was trying to dictate when Jesus was to start manifesting Himself as the Son of God. This doesn’t mean He can’t help her. He is just pointing out that she doesn’t control when He reveals Himself. Later in John His brothers tell Him to go up to Jerusalem and manifest Himself at the feast. He tells them it is not his time and then later goes to the feast in His own way - not to manifest himself as the Christ. Both of these events make it look like Jesus says one thing and does another, but when you understand this concept, it clears up the confusion.
After saying all this, it is in fact time for Jesus to begin manifesting that He is God and so He does a miracle.
b. Between Jesus and the servants (6-8)
Nearby stood six stone ceremonial water jars. Water pots could not be ceremonially clean unless hewn out of stone. These pots held between 30 and 40 gallons.
He tells the servants to draw water and fill the jars. This is the miracle proper (vs. 6-8).
He told them to put water in the pots first and then draw it out. He does this so that they would know that there was nothing in the pots beforehand. There was not a can of juice concentrate or a freeze dried package of wine in the bottom which became wine when the water was added. It removed all doubt that this was miraculous.
If you were to fill a ceremonial pot with just any old water, what would happen to the pot? It would become unclean and unfit for ceremonial use from then on. We will come back to this.
Did Jesus touch the water? Did he speak magic words over the water? One of the things we will see as we study the miracles is that there is no standardized way that Jesus performs miracles. There is very little “hype†in his miracles. People who claim to perform miracles usually surround the event with much “hype.†In all of His miracles there is almost a disengagement from the miracle event so that we can focus on the meaning. I think that is important to remember when we later discuss the current charismatic, signs and wonders movement. One of the questions to ask is “Where is their focus?â€
c. Between the headwaiter and the bridegroom (9-11)
The bridegroom would have been responsible for providing the wine for the celebration. The headwaiter points out that usually people serve the good wine first and bring out the bad wine after everyone is a little too tipsy to tell the difference. vs 10 can literally be translated “usually you bring out the lower quality wine after everyone has become drunk...â€
This miracle debunks one common teaching in certain Christian circles. Some try to teach that everyone in that culture drank diluted wine. Therefore, any wine or beer that we would drink today is much stronger than the wine of Jesus’ day and therefore sinful. However, it was common for people to get drunk on the wine of that day. The headwaiter said so, and Paul wouldn’t counsel against being drunk with wine in Ephesians if that was true.
II. INTERPRETATION
John says in vs 11 that this was the beginning of Jesus’ signs. Indicating that this miracle had significance or meaning. What was the purpose or significance? There are several:
A. The purpose in the context.
In my research on this miracle I checked out the web site that contains many of Ray Stedman’s sermons. He wrote the following:
In his very helpful book Miracles, C.S. Lewis has pointed out that every miracle of Jesus is simply a kind of short-circuiting of a natural process; a doing instantly something which in general takes a longer period of time. Lewis says, “Each miracle writes for us in small letters something that God has already written, or will write, in letters almost too large to be noticed, across the whole canvas of nature.†That is what Jesus is doing: he is overleaping the elements of time, of growth, gathering, crushing and fermenting. He takes water---an inorganic, non-living, commonplace substance---and without a word, without a gesture, without any laying on of hands, in utter simplicity, the water becomes wine, an organic liquid, a product of fermentation, belonging to the realm of life. Thus he demonstrated his marvelous ability to master the processes of nature.
C.S. Lewis and Ray Stedman are usually very good, but here I have to disagree. If you filled a pot with water and put it on your front porch, it could sit there for a 1000 years and never turn into wine. Not only is this impossible, it misses the point of the miracle. In John 1:3, John said, “All things came into being by Him...†Now John is recording a miracle in which Jesus demonstrates that He is the creator. He creates wine. He doesn’t speed up the natural process.
So, the purpose in the context is that this is a miracle of creativity.
B. The Significance to the Jewish Audience
Why would the production of wine be important to a Jewish audience? There are many passages in the OT that predicted that when the Messiah came there would be an abundance of wine. cf. Amos 9:12-15. Wine is a symbol of the presence of the Messiah. The opening sign of the ministry of Jesus is the production of wine that proclaimed that the Messiah was present and ready to establish the kingdom.“You saved the best for last†may be an allusion similar to Hebrew 1. “Heb 1:1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son ...â€
Jesus is commanding servants to act in defiling ways with Jewish water pots to accomplish His purposes. Is that important? Yes, Jesus is demonstrating that He is superior to the rituals and traditions of the Pharisees. He will do this several times throughout His ministry.
Jesus demonstrates himself to be the Creator and Messiah. He revealed his glory (John 1:14).
C. The Significance to the Disciples
This also confirmed the faith of the disciples. It says so in vs 11.
III. APPLICATIONS
From the conversation between Mary and Jesus we learn that Jesus is greater than Mary.
Mary submitted to Christ and so should I.
We also see that we shouldn’t demand that God meet our schedule or desires. He will do what He wants when He wants.
Jesus sanctioned the institution of marriage by his presence at the wedding and reception. Jesus is not interested in monasticism, asceticism.
Jesus made the wedding celebration even more enjoyable by providing the wine. Therefore, God is interested in our joy as well as our needs.
The disciples believed, therefore, the right response to seeing the glorious person and work of Christ is to believe. Notice that even the first miracle has the purpose of building faith. Jesus starts off by pointing out that it is not the hour and then performs a miracle anyway. This miracle was glorious, but it was not the hour of glory. All the miracles build up to the what is most important - the most glorious work of Christ - His death - which is the basis of genuine saving faith.
The servants saw the same miracle (from a closer vantage point than anyone else), but there is no record of their faith. Principle: Many see the works of God and do not respond in faith. This point is missed by the followers of the Vineyard Movement who teach that if people could just see miracles, then they would believe. It makes you wonder if they have read this miracle.
Let’s go back to the creation theme. Jesus created wine with apparent age. This has significance for the creation/evolution debate. Evolutionists say that the earth has to be millions of years old because of the empirical evidence. But ask yourself the question. If God made a tree on Monday and you cut it down on Tuesday, ho w many rings would it have? If God created the world, why couldn’t He create it with apparent age? If you take God out of the equation, the world looks old. But if God did it 10,000 years ago, and created everything with age, then the empirical evidence for the age of the earth is not a conflict with scripture. There is no empirical evidence for transition of life forms. Consequently, scientists have opted for abrupt appearance as the explanation for the origin of life on earth. What better explanation of abrupt appearance than the creation account in Genesis?
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: [QUOTE=Lon]
ahaha yes sorry, I meant that there are specific reasons listed to drink alcohol and not to drink to excess.....
I didnt type my thought out, sorry.
For instance, Paul tells timothy to take wine for his stomach trouble. And a warning in proverbs to avoid "strong drink"... and a warning that Leaders in the church shuodl always be "soberminded"....
I hope that clears it up.
These are not commands to not drink. This is a warning to be prudent in your behavior with 'strong drink' so as to act in your own and the church's best interests.
ahaha yes sorry, I meant that there are specific reasons listed to drink alcohol and not to drink to excess.....
I didnt type my thought out, sorry.
For instance, Paul tells timothy to take wine for his stomach trouble. And a warning in proverbs to avoid "strong drink"... and a warning that Leaders in the church shuodl always be "soberminded"....
I hope that clears it up.
These are not commands to not drink. This is a warning to be prudent in your behavior with 'strong drink' so as to act in your own and the church's best interests.
-
DesignerGal
- Posts: 2554
- Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:20 am
Wine or Grape Juice?
If I may put my two cents in (and please, this is MY opinion only):
First off, I dont think God cares either way if you drink alcohol or not so long as you act responsibly. Its like cursing (with the exception of taking his name in vain), its a word, it doesnt mean anything...
Second, I think somewhere along the way people started drinking too much and killing eachother or behaving in a way that was hurtful to his fellow man, so the church found a way to tell them that alcohol was evil. I personally blame the Southern Baptists for passing on this belief that alcohol was the Devil's Juice. I was raised Southern Baptist so I know from experience, Im not just pointing fingers. And there may be Baptist Churches out there that arent as fanatical as mine was, I am just speaking as a person who never felt right in a Baptist Church.
Third, I am an Episopalian now and we drink real wine and so do the children. Its usually nasty table wine anyway with like a 1% alcohol content.
Now, my question is, do you use real bread or wafers?
First off, I dont think God cares either way if you drink alcohol or not so long as you act responsibly. Its like cursing (with the exception of taking his name in vain), its a word, it doesnt mean anything...
Second, I think somewhere along the way people started drinking too much and killing eachother or behaving in a way that was hurtful to his fellow man, so the church found a way to tell them that alcohol was evil. I personally blame the Southern Baptists for passing on this belief that alcohol was the Devil's Juice. I was raised Southern Baptist so I know from experience, Im not just pointing fingers. And there may be Baptist Churches out there that arent as fanatical as mine was, I am just speaking as a person who never felt right in a Baptist Church.
Third, I am an Episopalian now and we drink real wine and so do the children. Its usually nasty table wine anyway with like a 1% alcohol content.
Now, my question is, do you use real bread or wafers?
HBIC
Wine or Grape Juice?
In the early Church there appears to have been a rift between the followers of John The Baptist - who were into asceticism, and the followers of Jesus - who seem to have enjoyed a little wine in good company, considered it a blessing from God even. As others have stated, wine was once a healthy alternative to unclean water, as was beer in northern Europe and England. My European family gave wine in small diluted amounts to me and my sister when we were small, whenever the whole family had wine - which was a normal part of many meals. And so did my Anglican and Catholic churches. It was never really considered an issue at all. And I think that may be one of the basic differences between American and Australian cultures. Drunkenness is another matter entirely. And is as socially unacceptable here as there.
"Life is too short to ski with ugly men"
Wine or Grape Juice?
DesignerGal wrote: I am an Episopalian now and we drink real wine and so do the children. Its usually nasty table wine anyway with like a 1% alcohol content.
Now, my question is, do you use real bread or wafers?
At our church we have a very strong wine. to be honest, it actually tastes like mead. It's very nice! hehe However, I think most kids give it a miss as its too strong for them. My kids certainly don't like it. However, even for the ones who do taste it, what harm can there be in a sip?
We also use wafers. Children who are about to take their First Holy Communion practise with bread beforehand, otherwise its always wafers.
So why do the darn things always stick to the roof of your mouth? :rolleyes:
Now, my question is, do you use real bread or wafers?
At our church we have a very strong wine. to be honest, it actually tastes like mead. It's very nice! hehe However, I think most kids give it a miss as its too strong for them. My kids certainly don't like it. However, even for the ones who do taste it, what harm can there be in a sip?
We also use wafers. Children who are about to take their First Holy Communion practise with bread beforehand, otherwise its always wafers.
So why do the darn things always stick to the roof of your mouth? :rolleyes:
Wine or Grape Juice?
I personally don't really consider wine to be all that strong of a beverage, really... I believe too, that one must consider that it was rather difficult keeping non-fermented grape juice in the hot desert sun... but to keep it simple... as it's meant symbolically... grape juice is just fine if you ask me. It's typically grape juice although, I can remember at least one occasion where the minors were seperated from the over 21 members...
Signature text removed at the request of a member.
Participate in The unOfficial Forum Garden Scavenger Hunt 2009!
Wine or Grape Juice?
There's a lot of Catholic churches here where the priest gets the wine and the congregation just the wafer. The origin of that would be interesting . In the Oz version of the Episcopalian church, you get Communion in both kinds. And bread more often than wafer, unless the church is 'high' meaning almost Catholic.
Moment of surreality.
I'm replying to this post, while tuned into Tom Lehrer's "Masochism Tango". I gotta go get some fresh air.
Moment of surreality.
I'm replying to this post, while tuned into Tom Lehrer's "Masochism Tango". I gotta go get some fresh air.
"Life is too short to ski with ugly men"
Wine or Grape Juice?
The fact that Biblical descriptions of wine are nearly always of the fermented beverage is usually obvious from the context. 'Every man puts forth at first the good wine, and WHEN ALL HAVE DRUNK FREELY [which is to say, when everybody is a little smashed], that which is poorer. But thou hast kept the good wine until now.'
'Wine' which is not fermented is not wine. The Biblical writers and translators knew the difference. I am not an expert on Judaism, but I do not know of any tradition among Jews. past or present, to use grape juice rather than fermented wine for ceremonial purposes. Personally, I do not like most Jewish wines such as those produced by Manischewitz as they are much too sweet for my taste; nonetheless, to claim that good Christians should not be allowed to enjoy a glass of fine wine (apart from communion), which is part of God's bounty, is in my humble opinion quite outrageous.
In addition to being delicious, good wine, enjoyed in moderation of course, is quite healthy and helpful to the digestive and cardio-pulmonary systems.
Cheers, everyone!
Now, with regard to the bread, according to Catholic rubrics, the important thing is that it be made from wheat and unleavened. That it has the form of a wafer is not required but merely customary; presumably any generic matzoh from the supermarket could be used with complete validity. The wine must be fermented and from grapes.
The Episcopal Church is a bit more lenient in regard to the bread and I have received communion in Episcopal Churches in the form of hosts (wafers) and also as ordinary whole-grain leavened bread.
Catholics consider the wine optional for the congrgation as they regard Jesus' divinity as being mystically present in both forms. Conversely, someone allergic to wheat, even a child, can take communion as wine. Only a small drop is required.
'Wine' which is not fermented is not wine. The Biblical writers and translators knew the difference. I am not an expert on Judaism, but I do not know of any tradition among Jews. past or present, to use grape juice rather than fermented wine for ceremonial purposes. Personally, I do not like most Jewish wines such as those produced by Manischewitz as they are much too sweet for my taste; nonetheless, to claim that good Christians should not be allowed to enjoy a glass of fine wine (apart from communion), which is part of God's bounty, is in my humble opinion quite outrageous.
In addition to being delicious, good wine, enjoyed in moderation of course, is quite healthy and helpful to the digestive and cardio-pulmonary systems.
Cheers, everyone!
Now, with regard to the bread, according to Catholic rubrics, the important thing is that it be made from wheat and unleavened. That it has the form of a wafer is not required but merely customary; presumably any generic matzoh from the supermarket could be used with complete validity. The wine must be fermented and from grapes.
The Episcopal Church is a bit more lenient in regard to the bread and I have received communion in Episcopal Churches in the form of hosts (wafers) and also as ordinary whole-grain leavened bread.
Catholics consider the wine optional for the congrgation as they regard Jesus' divinity as being mystically present in both forms. Conversely, someone allergic to wheat, even a child, can take communion as wine. Only a small drop is required.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Wine or Grape Juice?
Brownen, that reminded me of my sister, who cannot eat wheat ever since she was a child. She used to ask my father everytime they served communion, if it mattered if she ate the bread or not-he told he the wine-or grape juice really-was good enough for her.
Wine or Grape Juice?
You all seem to be missing the point. Jesus never did anything off the cuff. There was a reason for each and every one of the miracles. By turning water into wine, Jesus was, in fact saying: "If I can do this to water, how much more can I do to you, if only you'll let me." It doesn't matter a hoot whether it's wine, water, or Ribena. A Church used by a Christian colleague dissaprove of wine, so they get over it by using the fruit of the vine - grape juice. The operative words here are: "Do this in rememberence of me." Holy Communion is a VERY personal act of rememberance - a real one to one. Similarly, in the Methodist Church we actually use a bread roll. During the second world war, those in pow camps had to make do with water and a few grains of rice. It is the COMMUNION that matters, not what is used.
In HIM I place my trust.
Wine or Grape Juice?
Now that's the real answer... Onya Frederick!!!
"Life is too short to ski with ugly men"
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far - ya gotta forgive me one more little post.. grin... Of course this is not really what your thread is about - or is it?
Did God make food????? Did Jesus eat food? Did the people at the feast become gluttonous pigs, stuffing themselves silly.
People misuse God's good gifts. Misuse food, you get obesity. Misuse sex and you get debauchery. Misuse wine, you get drunkenness. Misuse water you drown.
Did God make food????? Did Jesus eat food? Did the people at the feast become gluttonous pigs, stuffing themselves silly.
People misuse God's good gifts. Misuse food, you get obesity. Misuse sex and you get debauchery. Misuse wine, you get drunkenness. Misuse water you drown.
"Life is too short to ski with ugly men"
Wine or Grape Juice?
From "New Bible Dictionary" p1254: "Furthermore, while there are examples of the grapes being pressed into a cup and presumably used at once (Gn. 40:11), it is significant that the term 'wine' is never applied to the resultant juice.
The term 'new wine' does not indicate wine which has not fermented, for in fact the process of fermentation sets in ver rapidly, and unfermented wine could ot be available many months after the harvest (Acts 2:13)"
From my own studies, at university, in translation, three professors confirmed this as well. It would appear that Jesus was in the habit of drinking fermented wine."
Anyway that is another interpretation. AussiePam has put it well. Overeating can be just as harmful as over drinking.
We use wine in the Anglican Church as do the Roman Catholics. Bronwen is correct in her comments on our use of bread. Some use unleaven bread and some use leaven bread. Like the Roman Catholics we believe in the Real Presence of our Lord in the eucharist.
The sin is in misuse not the use just as the sin is in over" " and not consumption in moderation.
Those who are alcoholics ususally take only the bread and avoid the wine.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The term 'new wine' does not indicate wine which has not fermented, for in fact the process of fermentation sets in ver rapidly, and unfermented wine could ot be available many months after the harvest (Acts 2:13)"
From my own studies, at university, in translation, three professors confirmed this as well. It would appear that Jesus was in the habit of drinking fermented wine."
Anyway that is another interpretation. AussiePam has put it well. Overeating can be just as harmful as over drinking.
We use wine in the Anglican Church as do the Roman Catholics. Bronwen is correct in her comments on our use of bread. Some use unleaven bread and some use leaven bread. Like the Roman Catholics we believe in the Real Presence of our Lord in the eucharist.
The sin is in misuse not the use just as the sin is in over" " and not consumption in moderation.
Those who are alcoholics ususally take only the bread and avoid the wine.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: 1. I love this! great discussion! Thanks everyone! Sojo! Excellent article.
2. "New" wine, when used in the bible was considered the finest wine anyone can obtain. New wine was made very quickly. New wine was made when the grapes were thrown into the vat, the weight of the grapes crushing down on top of the bottom grapes would press out the ripest grape juice and allow it to leak out and it was collected, and drank on the spot, very little of it was collected, and if it was it was for ceremony or high ranking officials. It would be called "Good" wine I believe...He took water and turned it into "wine" (not just any wine but GOOD wine)....So, What did he create? I say he made the purist ripest grape juice.
3. Jesus is God the Creator, and it is true he does not do things half way, and he certainly has power over creation. He took water and turned it into "wine" (not just any wine but GOOD wine)....So, What did he create? I say he made the purist ripest grape juice.
4a. Fermentation is a process that changes the wine, breaking it down into a form that CAN be used in a negative way.
4b. ...AND is a hindrance to normal body function. In fact alcohol needs to be processed out of the body by the liver, its a toxin in any form or any amount....
5. You could get a thousand times more benifit from a single grape, than you can from a gallon of grape juice in fermented wine!
6. The fermentation process is a process that creates something thats BAD for you.
7. Now, we also see that the custom of the time was to get drunk at ceramonies... and we see the governor of the feast come to the manager of the servants and say whats going on? why are you serving this now? The warning of being well drunk...is not that "oh no you brought out wine with a bigger alcohol content" hes saying... "what are you doing,, they are gonna be upset, you have GOOD wine! (unfernmented pure and the best grape juice!)
8. OK, as I stated before I have a very hard time believing Jesus made fermented wine knowing the times and that men were gonna get blasted at the party, knowing the feast had gone on for several days... he would not have contriubuted to sin by making fermented wine.
9. Now, I know ya'll er sayin Im nuts, and I probably am. But does it stop and make ya think even a little bit about the character of God?
10. Would he contirbute to sin by making more booze, and not only more booze, but the best booze to get ya drunk????? I dont think so... Do you?
11. I also have one more point, Jesus also was there, do you think he dranks fermented Wine? Ahahahahaha I dont think so!
12. I really appreciate everyone that posted here, Thank you!1. I agree.
2. FR, I don't mean this to be at all confrontational or hostile, but I perceive that your judgment may have been clouded here by membership in a Church that, like the so-called 'creationists', starts with the conclusion and ignores all of the evidence to the contrary, rather then the other way around. In this case, tho', the conclusion or starting point is that alcoholic drink is evil and therefore Jesus could never have touched it. I don't think that view can be supported, either from the Bible or from reason.
First of all, you are misusing the term 'new wine'. New wine is pretty much the opposite of how you describe it. New wine has a much higher alcohol content than aged ('good') wine, typically in the range of 16-30%.
Every year in Bavaria and Austria the Heurige festivals are held (Heurige means, literally, 'this year'). People come from miles around and get bombed out of their collective minds on the new wine. This is perfectly good wine, but wine that for one reason or another does not meet the winery's standards for bottling, so it is sold off for Heurige. The wine that is suited for bottling is then aged in wooden casks, where much of the alcohol evaporates. This leaves space in the casks which is filled with more wine from the same batch. By the time the wine is ready for bottling it has an alcohol content of about 11-13%.
Good wine (not Heurige wine) is a gift from God, tho' the experts at the wineries help Him a great deal with their expertise. To me personally, a 4- to 5-year-old Cabernet is about as good as it gets, but it's a subjective judgment.
Grape juice is not 'new wine', grape juice is grape juice, and is nearly always made from completely different strains of grapes than wine. So Jesus performed here, in effect, two miracles in one. He not only changed the liquid from water to wine, but GOOD (that is, aged) wine at that.
3. When you refer to Jesus as 'God the creator', you cut yourself off from most of Christianity. Catholics, Orthodox, and MOST Protestants believe in a Triune God, the Father/Creator, the Son/Redeemer, and the Holy Spirit/Sanctifier. What is your support for Jesus as Creator? Once again, I'm not trying to attack your Church here, I'm just curious. Would you care to name the denomination?
4, 5 & 6. I agree with 4a but disagree with the rest, as would, I think, most of the medical profession. For older people like myself, one or two drinks a day can be quite healthy. Here again, I think you are starting with the conclusion.
7. Well, the custom, the INTENT in any case, was to celebrate the wedding, not to get drunk. But once again, you are incorrect in your vinology. Wine with a high alcohol content is new wine, not good wine.
8. Same comment. Where is the sin, the evil here? They are celebrating a marriage.
9. I don't say or think that about you at all.
10. Good wine is not 'booze', but here again, a renowned religious order, the Christian Brothers, manufacture some of the world's best brandy, which is also good for the bod when enjoyed in moderation. Your characterization of alcoholic drink as sinful is unwarranted and, frankly, unbiblical.
11. Yes, I do, in moderation.
12. You're welcome.
Now where did I put that corkscrew?
2. "New" wine, when used in the bible was considered the finest wine anyone can obtain. New wine was made very quickly. New wine was made when the grapes were thrown into the vat, the weight of the grapes crushing down on top of the bottom grapes would press out the ripest grape juice and allow it to leak out and it was collected, and drank on the spot, very little of it was collected, and if it was it was for ceremony or high ranking officials. It would be called "Good" wine I believe...He took water and turned it into "wine" (not just any wine but GOOD wine)....So, What did he create? I say he made the purist ripest grape juice.
3. Jesus is God the Creator, and it is true he does not do things half way, and he certainly has power over creation. He took water and turned it into "wine" (not just any wine but GOOD wine)....So, What did he create? I say he made the purist ripest grape juice.
4a. Fermentation is a process that changes the wine, breaking it down into a form that CAN be used in a negative way.
4b. ...AND is a hindrance to normal body function. In fact alcohol needs to be processed out of the body by the liver, its a toxin in any form or any amount....
5. You could get a thousand times more benifit from a single grape, than you can from a gallon of grape juice in fermented wine!
6. The fermentation process is a process that creates something thats BAD for you.
7. Now, we also see that the custom of the time was to get drunk at ceramonies... and we see the governor of the feast come to the manager of the servants and say whats going on? why are you serving this now? The warning of being well drunk...is not that "oh no you brought out wine with a bigger alcohol content" hes saying... "what are you doing,, they are gonna be upset, you have GOOD wine! (unfernmented pure and the best grape juice!)
8. OK, as I stated before I have a very hard time believing Jesus made fermented wine knowing the times and that men were gonna get blasted at the party, knowing the feast had gone on for several days... he would not have contriubuted to sin by making fermented wine.
9. Now, I know ya'll er sayin Im nuts, and I probably am. But does it stop and make ya think even a little bit about the character of God?
10. Would he contirbute to sin by making more booze, and not only more booze, but the best booze to get ya drunk????? I dont think so... Do you?
11. I also have one more point, Jesus also was there, do you think he dranks fermented Wine? Ahahahahaha I dont think so!
12. I really appreciate everyone that posted here, Thank you!1. I agree.
2. FR, I don't mean this to be at all confrontational or hostile, but I perceive that your judgment may have been clouded here by membership in a Church that, like the so-called 'creationists', starts with the conclusion and ignores all of the evidence to the contrary, rather then the other way around. In this case, tho', the conclusion or starting point is that alcoholic drink is evil and therefore Jesus could never have touched it. I don't think that view can be supported, either from the Bible or from reason.
First of all, you are misusing the term 'new wine'. New wine is pretty much the opposite of how you describe it. New wine has a much higher alcohol content than aged ('good') wine, typically in the range of 16-30%.
Every year in Bavaria and Austria the Heurige festivals are held (Heurige means, literally, 'this year'). People come from miles around and get bombed out of their collective minds on the new wine. This is perfectly good wine, but wine that for one reason or another does not meet the winery's standards for bottling, so it is sold off for Heurige. The wine that is suited for bottling is then aged in wooden casks, where much of the alcohol evaporates. This leaves space in the casks which is filled with more wine from the same batch. By the time the wine is ready for bottling it has an alcohol content of about 11-13%.
Good wine (not Heurige wine) is a gift from God, tho' the experts at the wineries help Him a great deal with their expertise. To me personally, a 4- to 5-year-old Cabernet is about as good as it gets, but it's a subjective judgment.
Grape juice is not 'new wine', grape juice is grape juice, and is nearly always made from completely different strains of grapes than wine. So Jesus performed here, in effect, two miracles in one. He not only changed the liquid from water to wine, but GOOD (that is, aged) wine at that.
3. When you refer to Jesus as 'God the creator', you cut yourself off from most of Christianity. Catholics, Orthodox, and MOST Protestants believe in a Triune God, the Father/Creator, the Son/Redeemer, and the Holy Spirit/Sanctifier. What is your support for Jesus as Creator? Once again, I'm not trying to attack your Church here, I'm just curious. Would you care to name the denomination?
4, 5 & 6. I agree with 4a but disagree with the rest, as would, I think, most of the medical profession. For older people like myself, one or two drinks a day can be quite healthy. Here again, I think you are starting with the conclusion.
7. Well, the custom, the INTENT in any case, was to celebrate the wedding, not to get drunk. But once again, you are incorrect in your vinology. Wine with a high alcohol content is new wine, not good wine.
8. Same comment. Where is the sin, the evil here? They are celebrating a marriage.
9. I don't say or think that about you at all.
10. Good wine is not 'booze', but here again, a renowned religious order, the Christian Brothers, manufacture some of the world's best brandy, which is also good for the bod when enjoyed in moderation. Your characterization of alcoholic drink as sinful is unwarranted and, frankly, unbiblical.
11. Yes, I do, in moderation.
12. You're welcome.
Now where did I put that corkscrew?
Wine or Grape Juice?
FarRider:-6
What I posted comes from both a dictionary and two Bible translators. Oinos=fermented wine and trux = grape juice or unfermented wine. Now if you wish to believe something else then go for it.
That drinking any alcoholic beverage is a sin is nonsense.
Read again what I posted. They did not have refrigeration so it was impossible to have unfermented wine beyond 2 months after the harvest. It couldn't be done.
I am in complete agreement with Bronwen in her post. The medical profession does not advise people to start drinking but has admitted that moderate use of the alcoholic beverage is in fact good for the body and the digestion.
According to Liddel and Scott in their "Greek-English Lexicon" oinos is "the fermented juice of apples, pears, etc." I notice they also had barley-wine which is a kind of beer and a palm wine and oinos ampelivos which is fermented grape wine. In 1 Tim. 5:23 we read that we should drink a little wine because it is good for the stomach and your ailments.
At any rate I am not arguing with anyone here. Other then my view of wine and sin the rest is from scholarship.
Shalom
Ted:-6
What I posted comes from both a dictionary and two Bible translators. Oinos=fermented wine and trux = grape juice or unfermented wine. Now if you wish to believe something else then go for it.
That drinking any alcoholic beverage is a sin is nonsense.
Read again what I posted. They did not have refrigeration so it was impossible to have unfermented wine beyond 2 months after the harvest. It couldn't be done.
I am in complete agreement with Bronwen in her post. The medical profession does not advise people to start drinking but has admitted that moderate use of the alcoholic beverage is in fact good for the body and the digestion.
According to Liddel and Scott in their "Greek-English Lexicon" oinos is "the fermented juice of apples, pears, etc." I notice they also had barley-wine which is a kind of beer and a palm wine and oinos ampelivos which is fermented grape wine. In 1 Tim. 5:23 we read that we should drink a little wine because it is good for the stomach and your ailments.
At any rate I am not arguing with anyone here. Other then my view of wine and sin the rest is from scholarship.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
Wine or Grape Juice?
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
Wine or Grape Juice?
Our church uses blackcurrant juice...why...it's cheaper than grape juice or wine..:-6
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: 1. I will dig out my reference material on "new Wine when I get home tonight and post what I have.
2. I use the term creator in the sense that as the three in one all were present at creation, Jesus demonstrated his power of the created world as well, if you look at his miracles, he calmed the seas with a spoken word just to mention one.
3. Lets see, Genesis uses a plural form of God, the only others with that name waould have been the Son or HolySpirit.
4. Your tellin me that plain grapes are not as good for you as wine with alcohol??? I bet your wrong and if thats what the medical profession is teachin...were in trouble, Oh, never mind I think thats why they "practice" medicine.:wah: General rule of thumb in healthy nutrition is that "fresh is best". I think thats pretty undisputed amongst nutritionists. But if you can find a study that advocates Alcohol OVER grapes than I'll consider that worthy of a very close look!
5. alcohol is not a toxin to the body? you dont agree with that one either?
6. Is drunkeness advocated in scripture anywhere? They were "well drunk"...
7. Renowned doesnt mean "right". I did characterize it that way didnt I. Bronwen, might you possibly be coming from your own conclusion?
8. You like to drink, so youve justified it in your own mind and found extra biblical "evidence to support your sin"?
9. I did tell you I have drunk and been drunk right?
Before responding, I'd like to pose a riddle. I've give the answer at the end. Riddle: 'What is the difference between an Irish wedding and an Irish wake?'
1. I am fairly sure that it will be (a) pretty much as you have already stated and (b) showing a strong sectarian bias, more 'starting with the conclusion'. Now, if you can post something which supports your position that has absolutely no religious agenda, please do so.
2. I agree with all of that, but, based on your previous posts, I have one question, again, just curiousity. Does your Church baptize in the name of the Trinity or in the name of Jesus Christ alone?
3. You are correct, Genesis 1 uses the plural noun 'Elohim'. I think, though, that very few Bible scholars see this as a reference to the Christian Trinity.
4. No, I'm telling you that they are both good for you in different ways. Grape juice, the 100% stuff, not grape 'drink' or 'cocktail' is very good for the heart. Wine, in moderation, is good for digestion, heart, lungs, pretty much the whole bod, especially, as I said before, for old timers like myself.
5. It depends on what you mean by 'toxin'. The body processes toxins in different ways. Can you give examples of health problems casue by moderate (1 or 2 drinks a day) use of wine or other alcoholic beverages, again from a source with no religious agenda?
6. Absolutely not, nor is too much alcohol healthy for the body, and I do not dispute that CHRONIC drunkenness is quite displeasing to God. Note in Genesis (9:20-29), however, that when Noah was tending his vineyards and underestimated the alcoholic content of his wine and drank too much, God was displeased only that his son made fun of him. That was clearly a violation of the commandment to honor one's parents. I see no indication in that passage of Noah having committed any sin at all, and note that he was clearly engaged in making wine, not grape juice.
7. The Christian Brothers, all of whom devote their entire adult lives to God's service, are among the foremost educators in the world, and their brandy is world famous as well. I'd say that they are doing something right.
8. Well, FR, you have no right to accuse me of sin. I have already said that I enjoy the taste of really good wine, but any wine will suffice for medicinal purposes. We are talking about two different things, neither of them sinful. If your Church regards them as such, that is their prerogative, but don't extend that to apply to me. There is no Biblical support for any kind of sin, but also no Biblical prohibition of wine drinking. But you are certainly entitled to your beliefs, I'm not trying to talk you out of them or convert you.
9. Yes, you did tell me that. I have never been drunk, not once. So? But then I've rarely drunk what is usually referred to as 'hard liquor'. Most wine is not very intoxicating, and brandy is best enjoyed in small amounts.
Answer to riddle: 'There's one less drunk at the wake.'
2. I use the term creator in the sense that as the three in one all were present at creation, Jesus demonstrated his power of the created world as well, if you look at his miracles, he calmed the seas with a spoken word just to mention one.
3. Lets see, Genesis uses a plural form of God, the only others with that name waould have been the Son or HolySpirit.
4. Your tellin me that plain grapes are not as good for you as wine with alcohol??? I bet your wrong and if thats what the medical profession is teachin...were in trouble, Oh, never mind I think thats why they "practice" medicine.:wah: General rule of thumb in healthy nutrition is that "fresh is best". I think thats pretty undisputed amongst nutritionists. But if you can find a study that advocates Alcohol OVER grapes than I'll consider that worthy of a very close look!
5. alcohol is not a toxin to the body? you dont agree with that one either?
6. Is drunkeness advocated in scripture anywhere? They were "well drunk"...
7. Renowned doesnt mean "right". I did characterize it that way didnt I. Bronwen, might you possibly be coming from your own conclusion?
8. You like to drink, so youve justified it in your own mind and found extra biblical "evidence to support your sin"?
9. I did tell you I have drunk and been drunk right?
Before responding, I'd like to pose a riddle. I've give the answer at the end. Riddle: 'What is the difference between an Irish wedding and an Irish wake?'
1. I am fairly sure that it will be (a) pretty much as you have already stated and (b) showing a strong sectarian bias, more 'starting with the conclusion'. Now, if you can post something which supports your position that has absolutely no religious agenda, please do so.
2. I agree with all of that, but, based on your previous posts, I have one question, again, just curiousity. Does your Church baptize in the name of the Trinity or in the name of Jesus Christ alone?
3. You are correct, Genesis 1 uses the plural noun 'Elohim'. I think, though, that very few Bible scholars see this as a reference to the Christian Trinity.
4. No, I'm telling you that they are both good for you in different ways. Grape juice, the 100% stuff, not grape 'drink' or 'cocktail' is very good for the heart. Wine, in moderation, is good for digestion, heart, lungs, pretty much the whole bod, especially, as I said before, for old timers like myself.
5. It depends on what you mean by 'toxin'. The body processes toxins in different ways. Can you give examples of health problems casue by moderate (1 or 2 drinks a day) use of wine or other alcoholic beverages, again from a source with no religious agenda?
6. Absolutely not, nor is too much alcohol healthy for the body, and I do not dispute that CHRONIC drunkenness is quite displeasing to God. Note in Genesis (9:20-29), however, that when Noah was tending his vineyards and underestimated the alcoholic content of his wine and drank too much, God was displeased only that his son made fun of him. That was clearly a violation of the commandment to honor one's parents. I see no indication in that passage of Noah having committed any sin at all, and note that he was clearly engaged in making wine, not grape juice.
7. The Christian Brothers, all of whom devote their entire adult lives to God's service, are among the foremost educators in the world, and their brandy is world famous as well. I'd say that they are doing something right.
8. Well, FR, you have no right to accuse me of sin. I have already said that I enjoy the taste of really good wine, but any wine will suffice for medicinal purposes. We are talking about two different things, neither of them sinful. If your Church regards them as such, that is their prerogative, but don't extend that to apply to me. There is no Biblical support for any kind of sin, but also no Biblical prohibition of wine drinking. But you are certainly entitled to your beliefs, I'm not trying to talk you out of them or convert you.
9. Yes, you did tell me that. I have never been drunk, not once. So? But then I've rarely drunk what is usually referred to as 'hard liquor'. Most wine is not very intoxicating, and brandy is best enjoyed in small amounts.
Answer to riddle: 'There's one less drunk at the wake.'
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: I didnt bring it up to dispute wether its morally right to drink. I'm interested in why you think or why you assumed it was fermented.
because most cultures drank wine or "small beer" in preference to water - using the alcohol as an anti-biotic?
With the lack of adiquate sanitation it made sense
because most cultures drank wine or "small beer" in preference to water - using the alcohol as an anti-biotic?
With the lack of adiquate sanitation it made sense
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote:
OK, as I stated before I have a very hard time believing Jesus made fermented wine knowing the times and that men were gonna get blasted at the party, knowing the feast had gone on for several days... he would not have contriubuted to sin by making fermented wine.
.......
Would he contirbute to sin by making more booze, and not only more booze, but the best booze to get ya drunk????? I dont think so... Do you?
I also have one more point, Jesus also was there, do you think he dranks fermented Wine? Ahahahahaha I dont think so!
A nicely reasoned argument but one that assumes that Jesus would have seen the drinking of alcohol as, of itself, sinful and that he did not, himself, drink it.
I'd suggest that the first is unproven and the second highly unlikely.
but then, many people know the Bible text far better than I
OK, as I stated before I have a very hard time believing Jesus made fermented wine knowing the times and that men were gonna get blasted at the party, knowing the feast had gone on for several days... he would not have contriubuted to sin by making fermented wine.
.......
Would he contirbute to sin by making more booze, and not only more booze, but the best booze to get ya drunk????? I dont think so... Do you?
I also have one more point, Jesus also was there, do you think he dranks fermented Wine? Ahahahahaha I dont think so!
A nicely reasoned argument but one that assumes that Jesus would have seen the drinking of alcohol as, of itself, sinful and that he did not, himself, drink it.
I'd suggest that the first is unproven and the second highly unlikely.
but then, many people know the Bible text far better than I
Wine or Grape Juice?
Bronwen:-6
Here, here!
Shalom
Ted:-6
Here, here!
Shalom
Ted:-6
Wine or Grape Juice?
FarRider:-6
I've been doing a lot of thinking and research about this. I do stand by what I have written.
However, I like you, sometimes get caught up in the moment. I should not have used the term "nonsense" and do apologize. I've got to learn to use less offending language and will endeavour to do so.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I've been doing a lot of thinking and research about this. I do stand by what I have written.
However, I like you, sometimes get caught up in the moment. I should not have used the term "nonsense" and do apologize. I've got to learn to use less offending language and will endeavour to do so.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: 1. The verse you referenced is very interesting to me. Gen 9:21. That happens to be the first occurance of the word, in hebrew for wine (yayin) a word the greeks transliterated in "onois" same strongs number. Which I find interesting in itself. In that verse the context clearly indicates fermentation, and drinking to excess, drunkeness.
2. I would consider this a negative passage for the use of wine, or the proof that it can be drank in moderation.
3. There is no evidnce in scripture that Noah every drank again.
4. In fact this is the only "sin" Noah has recorded about him.
5. To me that speaks volumes of warning not to even try fermented wine.
6. But what I find very interesting is that you say Noah had no sin in that passage? That ony his son sinned? How is it that he had no sin? He willingly drank a substance that left him out of control of his actions. 1. Going back to the original language is hardly necessary. It was obviously very potent wine from the context.
2. Huh? You've lost me here. Can you rephrase that? Are you saying that wine CAN or CANNOT be drunk in moderation? If the former, what's the point of the entire discussion? If the latter, you are out of touch with reality.
3. LOL! That's like saying he never farted because the Bible doesn't mention it!
4. Well, FR, you are folding, bending, spindling and mutilating the Holy Bible to fit your own agenda. There isn't the slightest indication that he sinned here.
5. So don't try it. As I said before, I'm not trying to influence your own standards of behaviour, I'm only trying to point out that the Bible doesn't support you.
6. He was a vintner, FR. He produced wine. According to Genesis, the Lord considered him the most righteous man on the face of the earth. He underestimated the potency of his new wine, passed out, woke up and went on with his life. Implying that he stopped producing wine because of the incident is completely unsupportable, and frankly, rather silly.
2. I would consider this a negative passage for the use of wine, or the proof that it can be drank in moderation.
3. There is no evidnce in scripture that Noah every drank again.
4. In fact this is the only "sin" Noah has recorded about him.
5. To me that speaks volumes of warning not to even try fermented wine.
6. But what I find very interesting is that you say Noah had no sin in that passage? That ony his son sinned? How is it that he had no sin? He willingly drank a substance that left him out of control of his actions. 1. Going back to the original language is hardly necessary. It was obviously very potent wine from the context.
2. Huh? You've lost me here. Can you rephrase that? Are you saying that wine CAN or CANNOT be drunk in moderation? If the former, what's the point of the entire discussion? If the latter, you are out of touch with reality.
3. LOL! That's like saying he never farted because the Bible doesn't mention it!
4. Well, FR, you are folding, bending, spindling and mutilating the Holy Bible to fit your own agenda. There isn't the slightest indication that he sinned here.
5. So don't try it. As I said before, I'm not trying to influence your own standards of behaviour, I'm only trying to point out that the Bible doesn't support you.
6. He was a vintner, FR. He produced wine. According to Genesis, the Lord considered him the most righteous man on the face of the earth. He underestimated the potency of his new wine, passed out, woke up and went on with his life. Implying that he stopped producing wine because of the incident is completely unsupportable, and frankly, rather silly.
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: 1. My specific point here is that Noah, got drunk off his rear end and left himself open to sin.
2. Had he not drunk to excess, or drunk fermented wine at all there would'nt have been any sin.
3. My line of reasoning is this, God laid down the law to the patriarchs, they new the law well before it was written by moses.
4. Noah [k]new for him drunkeness was a sin. He allowed it to happen. This is Noahs only recorded "fall"....
5. You are correct in stating that Noah was a righteous man. But that does not mean perfect in the sense that he never sinned. It means perfect in the sense of being mature. Noah offered up sacrifices, if he was perfect he'd not have to do that.
6. I think it does, if you have a strongs concordance look the word up yourself. The word needs the context to define it.
7. Noah was drunk, passedout drunk, thats a sin and he knew it.
8. A righteous man learns from his mistakes right, can we assume that. Maybe he didnt make anymore FERMENTED wine!?????Well, FR, my 'rule of thumb' for discussions like this is, when they become repetitious it's probably time to just agree to disagree and let it drop. We may be reaching that point here.
1. I am not sure what sort of sins one can commit while unconscious.
2. The Bible doesn't indicate that there WAS any sin. Once again, you are letting your indoctrination get in the way of your reason.
3. What? A law against drinking wine? Where do you find that?
4. Where does it say that?
5. Well, no doubt many who perished in the Biblical flood were mature. God's criteria for sparing Noah and his family went far beyond maturity.
6. Look up what word?
7. Where does it say that? Do you find anything later about him making amends or asking God for forgiveness?
8. There is no other kind.
You seem to interpret the story as indicating that Noah knowingly and intentionally intoxicated himself. I see nothing in the story that indicates that, regardless of which translation you consult. He was, according to the account, the very first winemaker, who had to learn about wine from experience. Presumably he figured out that, for best results, wine needs to be aged before being consumed.
By the way, just so there's no misunderstanding, I doubt very much that any of this actually happened. One thing for sure: there was certainly no worldwide flood within the last 6-7000 years. Like most of Genesis, the story seems to be an allegory or parable, meant to prove a point, the point being, respect your parents or you will be held to account by both the parent and the Lord.
2. Had he not drunk to excess, or drunk fermented wine at all there would'nt have been any sin.
3. My line of reasoning is this, God laid down the law to the patriarchs, they new the law well before it was written by moses.
4. Noah [k]new for him drunkeness was a sin. He allowed it to happen. This is Noahs only recorded "fall"....
5. You are correct in stating that Noah was a righteous man. But that does not mean perfect in the sense that he never sinned. It means perfect in the sense of being mature. Noah offered up sacrifices, if he was perfect he'd not have to do that.
6. I think it does, if you have a strongs concordance look the word up yourself. The word needs the context to define it.
7. Noah was drunk, passedout drunk, thats a sin and he knew it.
8. A righteous man learns from his mistakes right, can we assume that. Maybe he didnt make anymore FERMENTED wine!?????Well, FR, my 'rule of thumb' for discussions like this is, when they become repetitious it's probably time to just agree to disagree and let it drop. We may be reaching that point here.
1. I am not sure what sort of sins one can commit while unconscious.
2. The Bible doesn't indicate that there WAS any sin. Once again, you are letting your indoctrination get in the way of your reason.
3. What? A law against drinking wine? Where do you find that?
4. Where does it say that?
5. Well, no doubt many who perished in the Biblical flood were mature. God's criteria for sparing Noah and his family went far beyond maturity.
6. Look up what word?
7. Where does it say that? Do you find anything later about him making amends or asking God for forgiveness?
8. There is no other kind.
You seem to interpret the story as indicating that Noah knowingly and intentionally intoxicated himself. I see nothing in the story that indicates that, regardless of which translation you consult. He was, according to the account, the very first winemaker, who had to learn about wine from experience. Presumably he figured out that, for best results, wine needs to be aged before being consumed.
By the way, just so there's no misunderstanding, I doubt very much that any of this actually happened. One thing for sure: there was certainly no worldwide flood within the last 6-7000 years. Like most of Genesis, the story seems to be an allegory or parable, meant to prove a point, the point being, respect your parents or you will be held to account by both the parent and the Lord.
Wine or Grape Juice?
Far Rider wrote: 1. yeah we're there.
2. Noah got fall down, passed out, unconscious, drunk out of his livin mind.... and your saying that he did not sin?
3. he drank himself into oblivion! thats sin.1. Agreed, especially since you haven't answered any of my challenges to give Biblical support to your position.
2. I am saying that (a)neither of us has a right to make such a judgment - as Christians, we are to be concerned with our own sins, not those of others, and (b) the story, as related in Genesis, does not indicate that.
3. See 2. Does it say that, as a result of his intoxication, he beat his wife, abused his children, blasphemed, or made a public spectacle of himself in any way? What if, instead of becoming a vintner, he had become a beekeeper and gotten stung? Would that have been a sin too?
2. Noah got fall down, passed out, unconscious, drunk out of his livin mind.... and your saying that he did not sin?
3. he drank himself into oblivion! thats sin.1. Agreed, especially since you haven't answered any of my challenges to give Biblical support to your position.
2. I am saying that (a)neither of us has a right to make such a judgment - as Christians, we are to be concerned with our own sins, not those of others, and (b) the story, as related in Genesis, does not indicate that.
3. See 2. Does it say that, as a result of his intoxication, he beat his wife, abused his children, blasphemed, or made a public spectacle of himself in any way? What if, instead of becoming a vintner, he had become a beekeeper and gotten stung? Would that have been a sin too?
Wine or Grape Juice?
FarRider:-6
Bacchiocchi certainly is not inagreement with other scholars. He overlooks the fact that one cannot in the middle east keep grape juice from fermenting beyond 2 months. Obviously he doesn't know middle eastern history or climatic conditions. He starts out with the conclusion and then tries to reach it. That is putting the cart before the horse. However, he is as entitled to his opinion as many other scholars are. I don't agree with him.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Bacchiocchi certainly is not inagreement with other scholars. He overlooks the fact that one cannot in the middle east keep grape juice from fermenting beyond 2 months. Obviously he doesn't know middle eastern history or climatic conditions. He starts out with the conclusion and then tries to reach it. That is putting the cart before the horse. However, he is as entitled to his opinion as many other scholars are. I don't agree with him.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Wine or Grape Juice?
FarRider:-6
The following is from the "Israel Museum" in Jerusalem. This is from the Jewish folks themselves; the horses mouth so to speak.
"Since antiquity, wine and beer have been valued for their power to help transcend everyday existence, becoming major components in religious ceremonies and secular celebrations. "
The Catholic encyclopedia also confirms this as does Rabbi Gurkow.
Anywy you can certainly believe as you do. I have no problem with that.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The following is from the "Israel Museum" in Jerusalem. This is from the Jewish folks themselves; the horses mouth so to speak.
"Since antiquity, wine and beer have been valued for their power to help transcend everyday existence, becoming major components in religious ceremonies and secular celebrations. "
The Catholic encyclopedia also confirms this as does Rabbi Gurkow.
Anywy you can certainly believe as you do. I have no problem with that.
Shalom
Ted:-6