Did Jesus Drink Alcoholic Beverages?

I actually just blogged this...

http://webdog.baptistblog.org/post/24/493

 

i think it was fermented wine Jesus drank. I don't know if the other questions are worth answering.

 

The Bible never says Jesus was "deceived" by wine.

Yes.

I don't know what you mean by "altered", but all of His word are to be trusted. Do you think Jesus' mind was "altered" when He fasted? A lack of food "alters" the mind.

 

Why did Paul tell Timothy to drink wine for his stomach problems? Wine, if consumed with self control is not harmful or sinful, as it is from God. When I take the Lord's Supper, at our church we use fermented wine. By drinking alcoholic wine while taking the Lord's Supper, am I sinning? I just don't see what the point of this is...

 

Proverbs 20:1 (HCSB) Wine is a mocker, beer is a brawler, and whoever staggers because of them is not wise.

Whether you like "deceived" or "staggers" better, this verse is clearly talking about drunkeness.

 

Proverbs 20:1 (NKJV)
Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is LED ASTRAY by it is not wise.


One can drink wine and not be led astray.

 

His mind was certainly "altered" as he slept, or he was not human. And definitely 40 days of fasting would alter any human being's mind, also.

Now a question for you--
Proverbs 31:5-6 -- Give strong drink to him who is perishing, And wine to him whose life is bitter. Let him drink and forget his poverty And remember his trouble no more.

Do you obey this passage and give wine to someone whose life is bitter, and strong drink to one perishing, or do you disobey this passage?

 

I just want to point out that an altered state of consciousness is not the same as being high or drunk. It's extremely different. I've had both experiences. Both are bad but they are different.

An altered state is a hypnotic state, usually a mild trance than can be induced via eastern forms of meditation, guided visualization, and regular hypnosis.

Being drunk is totally different and involves chemical changes in the body.

Like I said, both are bad.

 

Yes Jesus drank fermented wine.

 

If you look on the outside of a grape you will see a white powder. This powder is yeast or leaven. As soon as you crush a grape the yeast mixes with the suger in the juice and the process of fermentation begins. Now you have approx. 4 or 5 days before the alochol content becomes enough to notice. Now when the grape juice ferments to around %14 give or take a percent the alcohol content kills the yeast or leven. This is why wine will only naturaly ferment to around %14.

So what is my point. Fresh grape juice contains yeast or leven wine does not.

My question to you is during the passover feast did Jesus and the deciples drink fermented wine or did they drink fresh grape juice containing leaven?

 

Webdog

I just read your blog. Seems we have the same argument. Good job on the blog I bookmarked it for future reading.

 

Drinking a glass of wine does not alter your mind. You dont drink a glass of wine and then start spouting off untruths. Gekko did you use mouthwash this morning. Your mouthwash contains as much or more alcohol then wine. Oh my how do we know your mind is not altered right now. Ever ate food containing vanilla extract? You get the point.

By the way people around the world drink wine with meals on an everyday basis with no problem or big deal. You can go to countrys where people drink wine on their lunch breaks then return to work with no big deal. Drinking a glass of wine does not make you drunk. You are letting the culture you live in affect the way you think about this subject. Try to be more objective.

 

Gekko

I am not trying to be insulting. Please dont take it that way. And I am not trying to get you to drink wine, good for you if you never. What I am trying to do is get you to look at the other side of an argument objectively. I sometimes use humor to make a point, as with the mouthwash comment.

Now as for your question;

No, and let me explain. We are given things by God that are OK, not a sin to use. But mis-useing the same items given to us by God is a sin. We are responsable for our mis-use of what God gives us not God. Let me give you some examples.

No matter if Jesus made a fermented drink or not God made the process of fermentation. Is He responsable for drunks. God made all plants on the earth including marajuana. Marajuana can be used for hemp ropes (not a sin) or it can be smoked (a sin). Is God responsable for pot heads. And Jesus made fishes and loves and passed them out to the people in abundence. Is Jesus guilty of tempting somebody to overeat (glutony). Of course not.

Now for my question I asked:

My appologys for coming off as "up in arms" I mean to have nothing but an interesting discussion where our views are chalenged.

 

Nearly everyone drank wine back then becauseit was the one beverage which would not be contaminated by microbes. Milk could cause brucellosis. Water was often contaminated.

You might be filling up your water bottle in a clear blue stream not knowing that several sheep or goats with diarrhea were drinking from the same water a few miles upstream. It is for this reason that people drank wine back then.

Nowadays things are different. We have safe pasteurized drinks of every sort so we do not need to drink wine!

This issue is an example of poor exegesis and bad witness. Why are Christians willing to go back to the biblical texts and make interpretations which are clearly wrong (like wine not really meaning wine) in order to justify their personal opinions?

 

I absolutly agree. But is is not a sin to drink wine with out becoming intoxicated.

I also wonder why people go to great length to try to make scripture fit their traditions. Even if you conceade that wine is not a sin, that does not mean you now have to drink it.

I also agree it is a bad witness to twist scripture like this. Imagin telling a jewish person that wine is a sin. They would think you lost your mind. Why would they believe another word you said.

 

References to Alcohol in the Bible

Of course tee-totalers will say that all the positive references are to non-alcoholic wine while all the negative references are to alcoholic wine. On what exegetical basis? I believe it is by eisegeting their own cultural pre-understandings of alcohol into the culture of the text. But I could be wrong.