Wine?

The government does not enforce any strict regulations on alchohol consumed under parent supervision in the church or at home, though on the books I think it is still illegul. But the general rule of thumb is to not invade the rights of the home.

But that is not the point. What the government of the United States says is legal has nothing to do with what the Bible says concerning alchohol. The Bible does NOT SAY we MUST drink alchohol, so everyone should repect the law of the land. The Bible says nothing about driving my car to work. If the government outlaws, I will stop driving. I will not then try to prove the Bible therefor codemns it.

To answer your quesion, we are all Baptists here and Most of us see communion as a symbolic act comeserating the death and ressurection of our God. Since we do not see the actual elements as the actual Body of the Lord Jesus Christ, it does us no harm to use grape juice in place of wine (or a different wine that whatever Jesus was using) or water for that matter.

I think for all practical purposes we should use grapejuice for three reasons

1)we wouldn't have to even question the law for those under 21
2)for people who struggle with alchohol abuse

and the most important one

3) alchohol tastes disgusting, espeically wine, and everytime I drink it at a Church who uses it for communion I am so distracted by how it doesn't go down that it defeats the purpose.

The last one of course is personal and is not really meant for discussion or debate.

 

Of course Jesus drank wine. He was a rabbi and therefore would have participated in the Sabbath ritual of Kiddush. The Kiddush meal signified the beginning of the Sabbath and a blessing was (and still is) recited over a cup of wine during the meal. All of this was done to comply with the Fourth Commandment: Sanctify the Sabbath and keep it holy.

 

HomeBound made the following specious argument:

Deu 11:14 That I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil.

So I guess fermented wine is taken straight from the fields?

I suppose you're also going to argue that they harvested oil directly from the trees, instead of olives.

Wine and oil are the finished products. As I said in another thread (and you ignored), it is a legitimate use of the words to refer to them in this way.

 

HomeBound said:

For Psalm 104:14-15, I believe the context in talking about the natural things like grass, herb, and oil. Since wine is not a natural process the wine it is talking about here is unfermented.

By your own reasoning, I guess you wish the bread in this verse (conveniently omitted by you) would just go away too.

Also, oil is not the product of a "natural process," either - unless you happen to think presses grow on trees too.

Nothing like a little special pleading to keep your worldview protected from the truth, is there?

 

Obviously, just as there are two meanings for wine in the Bible, there are two meanings for bread in the Bible -- bread we bake, and breadfruit which you pick from a tree.

Obviously, there are two meanings for "oil", too. In this case, the word "oil" is probably a prophetic foreshadow of the future when we rely on oil for energy. So this word which actually refers to crude oil (texas tea, as they say in the Beverly Hillbillies song), which gushes out of the ground as oil naturally, without having to be pressed.

 

I grew up in an Independent Fundamental Baptist church. We made our own wine. It contained alcohol (some of it quite a bit I might add). All professing believers took part in the Lord's Supper no matter what their age.

 

People believe whatever they have preassumed to be the correct interpretation regardless of the evidence to the contrary;arguing with them is worthless so let them remain ignorant.The wine in the OT and the NT was REAL wine that could get you drunk if you drink to much.It was not grape juice...period;however you can delute yourself and believe what you will.

 

Translation: "How sad people don't accept their local newspaper as their final authority, and instead believe the Word of God."

 

Sorry, my sarcasim was rude. I would remove it but I can't seem to edit it. I submit that we have different intrepetations on what "wine" is in the Bible, and since it is not an issue for me (I don't really drink) I will let it go from here. (I usually don't touch these threads with a ten foot pole).

 

I wouldn't worry about it too much.

HomeBound does not let the Bible interfere with his opinion about wine.

He has emphatically stated many times that he will "never believe" that Jesus drank alcoholic wine even though the gospels are very clear that He did.

Since HomeBound has decided that no evidence (including his King James Bible) will convince him, he might as well get find justification for his views from a newspaper.

Not trying to be harsh, but realistic. I've actually agreed with HomeBound a time or two. It's just on this subject he has determined that evidence is irrelevant.

 

The Bible describes wine as a blessing. The Bible describes abuse of wine as destructive. The Bible describes sex as a blessing. The Bible describes abuse of sex (adultery, fornication, etc.) as destructive. The Bible describes food as a blessing. The Bible describes abuse of food (gluttony) as destructive.

You've convinced yourself that that God would not honor alcoholic wine because some people abuse it. Are you willing to say that because some people abuse them, God does not honor food or sex, too?

 

Homebound, you cite verses that show wine in a negative context, then you assume that it is alcoholic. In order to do that, you have to have a "proof text" verse that shows that wine (alcoholic wine) is sinful. If you can find a verse that says that, then you can apply it to the rest of scripture, and then you might be able to work out a dual meaning for Yayin.

I hope everyone realizes that you can't argue that just the word "wine" has 2 meanings, because essentially it does, as translated in whatever English version you use. Unfortuneatly, the KJV writers and other's have translated the different Hebrew and Greek words that refer to the grape or product of the grape, as "wine." That was a sad mistake which has cause alot of confusion on this issue. The main argument is over the word Yayin. That word is used in many different contexts. Some think that since the contexts and use of the word supposedly contradict each other, then they must mean something else. If the passages are studied though, it is easy to see that the negative contexts always refer to abuse of wine, not wine itself.

So, those who are prohibitionists, I would challenge you to find a verse that says alcohol is sinful. Once you do that, we'll go from there.

 

God commanded that believers drink alcohol, viz., wine: And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

My number-one substance abuse problem most of my life has been food. How sad it is that some believe that food is from God.

Beyond the fact that unfermented grape juice was never used for the Lord's Supper throughout all of history until less than 150 years ago... let's pay attention to Romans 14, people! Believers who refuse to drink have no right to condemn those who do, and believers who do drink are not to flaunt that in front of those who don't.

Tauf, teetotaler

 

Is taking anything that is mind altering wrong, outside of medical reasons?

My opinion and experience is a resounding "YES"!

Every time you lower standards, the next step is even lower.

 

Well, you've just excluded chocolate, Coca-Cola, tea and coffee ... just for starters.

 

You are dead-on right.