Featured Communion: does it matter if ......

And the wedding has ZERO to do with the element in the Lord’s supper.
Was the Element used at the Lord’s supper EVER idenified as wine ?
My post on oinos explains why.....but you avoided that.

And the Wine at the wedding is a topic for another thread.....You can’t even prove that wine was alcoholic.

 

And you should recgonize :
1. It is wrong to add a word to the Word of God .
2. The Element is NEVER refferred to as Wine.
3. The wedding has ZERO to do with the Lord’s supper.
4. I offered to apologize if you could show in scripture your theory was true.

 

If one can understand the fact that: 1-.Christ made NEW wine at the wedding feast.(not new grape juice) 2-the teaching of the new covenant is included in the teaching of the wedding feast. (I gave you and abundance of evidence) 3-Since the Lord's supper is an ordinance of the NEW covenant as the teachings of the kingdom as the body of Christ, we can only conclude that wine HAD to be the element of the supper. NEW wine must be put into NEW bottles, those in the NEW covenant are the NEW vessels into which the NEW wine/NEW doctrine/NEW UNDERSTANDING of the kingdom of God and His righteousness is being placed. Since communion is an ordinance of the NEW covenant and the teachings of the wedding feast includes not only NEW wine as an ordinance of the new covenant, but also the prophesy of the new covenant and its contrast to the old covenant, how can they possibly be a different topic? The glory that excelleth, as used in my original post is the teaching that a NEW covenant was being brought forth. Can you understand that?

 

Something you can’t prove.

 

NONE of my posts are unrelated on this topic. It is only because you cannot understand the new covenant that you cannot understand that EVERYTHING in both the old and new testament points to Christ and the work of HIS hands, the body of Christ.

 

Your conclusion has NO scriptural basis.

Let’s say Christ Didn’t identify the Element of the Supper......you could have a little leeway.....BUT he clearly identified it with a phrase that In NO way can mean Alcohol .

 

Christ Clearly identified the Element of the Supper.....with a very precise phrase.....That does NOT allow for the conclusion of alcoholic wine.

 

The facts and evidence that Christ made new wine at the wedding, is not that I can't prove it (which I have abundantly done) but that above all, you cannot see, understand, and especially refuse to BELIEVE it.

 

Yeah You are just over my head...............in your baseless opinions that cause you to add to the word of God.

And you REJECT the very words of Christ.......he says fruit of the vine..........YOU say alcohol.

 

You ask me to prove that wine was the fruit of the vine. Given the scripture that I have given to you, prove to me that is is not.

 

Did Christ say new grape juice must be put into new bottles?

 

Keep adding to God’s word ( I have seen peole do that in an attempt to prove their opinion ) and keep rejecting Christs very words :

Matthew 26:29
29 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.

Christ says NON-Alcoholic.........You say ALcoholic. SAD

 

The topic is communion.......remember ?

 

Here you go I already proved it wasn’t Alcohol.

Communion: does it matter if ......

 

DId Christ say new grape juice must be put into new bottles?

 

Remember every thing points to Christ and the work of his hands in performing the will of the Father.. The new covenant is a cogent, coherent teaching. This cannot be true if the doctrines therein are unrelated topics.

 

I love you Bro. Forever Unsettled. That is why I refuse to bow down to your teachings.

 

You changed my user name so Don’t start that LOVE you Brother crap...yeah we are not Bros.

I don’t expect you to bow to me......mercy you add to God’s word and Reject Christ’s very words.

 

That was an accident and not intentional and would never have known unless you had told me.. I apologize.