Poll: Real Wine in Communion

Before Welch's and prohibition came along most Baptist churches served wine for communion and a common cup was used.

Some churches had spitoons also. Many had pew rents as well.

In many countries today Baptist churches still serve wine. Some of the missionaries from the US get quite a surprise for the first time.

 

You have proof of this, of course. Links please. </font>[/QUOTE]Thomas Bramwell Welch

The article clearly indicates that Welch was seeking an alternative to wine for communion.

If you don't accept this as "proof", please identify what evidence would meet your criteria for "proof".

 

Real wine is too expensive anyway, at least a kind of any decent quality.
In the end it doesn't matter. Some missionaries out in the remote places have been known to use grape kool-aid. Just so it fulfills the metaphor of reminding us of Christ's blood - red or dark purple.

 

I found this tidbit on a local (Nashville) church website in the history section...

"In 1915, First Baptist Nashville began to use individual communion cups instead of the traditional common cup. Since 1933, the church has used grape juice instead of wine in the Lord's Supper."

At least those are some dates to compare with.

 

I also found the article here to have quite a bit of information...

http://www.layman.org/layman/news/2005-news/no-juice-at-the-first-communion.htm

 

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist :

"The general Baptist embracing of the Temperance movement, prohibition, and teetotalism in the U.S. led to the practice of using non-alcoholic grape juice for the cup, but some Baptists do use wine."

From http://www.hpcministry.org/PDF/WineinCommunion.pdf (which is a worthwhile read in general):

"the change to grape juice in the communion cup is a fairly recent phenomenon. For over 1800 years, the issue of wine in communion has never been debated – in any branch of the Church. While the Church debated just about every other point of communion, the one thing that was never debated was the element to be used. While the Roman Catholics held to transubstantiation, and the Lutherans to consubstantiation, the Zwinglians to a memorialist view, and the Reformed to the spiritual presence of Christ, the one thing they all had in common was the use of bread and wine. The substitution of grape juice for wine had its origins not in the Bible, but in influences of American culture with the demands of the temperance movement in the mid-nineteenth century The temperance movement was, at first, an American phenomenon, primarily occurring between 1826 and 1860, designed to curb the consumption of alcoholic beverages. The American Temperance Society was formed in Boston in 1826, and seven of the sixteen founders were clergyman. They promoted a total abstinence position. Their intention was good. They desired to curb the abuse of alcohol and the drunkenness around them. However, their methodologies were wrong and would soon prove not to have the effect they desired. This temperance movement sparked campaigns to prohibit the sale of alcohol, but , in 1857, this was declared unconstitutional. This is a classic example of taking an abuse of something good, and forming a wrong application in handling the problem."

There's so much more, just hit google.

 

while I know that wine is completely biblical, because of the problem of alcoholism in all parts of the world today, I am quite in favor of not presenting the smell or the taste of wine to an alcoholic who is now a Christian. It's not fair to them. Alcoholism becomes, if it does not start out that way, a physical addiction. I used to work in a long term hospital and so we had a lot of alcoholics. In talking to them I found out that those who were seriously attempting recovery would not even walk past a bar if it was summer, because if the doors were open they could smell the booze and it would make things ever so much worse for them.

So I don't mind, for the sake of our weaker brothers and sisters, using grape juice in Communion. But to say wine is unbiblical is...well....unbiblical!

 

LadyEagle, the facts are still there, regardless (unless you are implying that Presbyterians are liars). I'll look again for something specifically Baptist, but I'm sure you can use google just as easily as I can.

How about you find some evidence that shows Baptists using grape juice before the 1800s?

 

Although real wine is completely biblical, it's obviously a stumbling block for many, so I have no problem with serving grape juice.

 

IF alcoholic wine was allowed for communion, that would mean that the the priest or preacher would be forbidden to partake of the Lord's Supper.

 

standingfirminChrist, how do you figure that???

 

natters,

Leviticus 10:9 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: [it shall be] a statute for ever throughout your generations:

 

standingfirminChrist, you really should consider context. In the same passage is "Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die" (verse 6), "ye shall not go out from the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die" (verse 7), "Take the meat offering that remaineth of the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and eat it without leaven beside the altar" (verse 12), etc.

If Lev 10:9 means church-age priests and pastors cannot drink wine for communion, then 10:6 means they can't have their head uncovered "lest they die". I see from your pic that you are in violation of verse 6.

 

How does this perpetual standard for the Aaronic priesthood apply to a pastor in a New Testament church?

Would you apply all of the Aaronic standards to New Testament pastors?

 

Another verse to show the pastor would not be allowed to partake of the Lord's Supper can be found in the qualifications of a Bishop.

One of those verses plainly states 'not given to wine'.

If he partook of wine at the communion, would he not be given to wine?

 

Do you think all of the Aaronic standards apply?

I don't think we can make a case that "given to wine" can mean never using wine at all. Timothy was told to take a little wine for his stomachs sake.

By this logic a deacon could use wine in the Lord's Table because his only requirement regarding wine is that he not be given to "much" wine.