Did Jesus turn the water into wine, or grape juice

[standingfirminChrist]

My posts, along with scripture prove that it was not alcoholic wine that Jesus produced at the Wedding feast. They also prove that the 'fruit of the vine' at the Lord's Supper could not have been fermented.

In both cases, if Christ had produced alcoholic wine for the wedding guests, or for the disciples to drink, He would not be the spotless, sinnless Son of God.

 

[DeeJay]

I guess, if you ignore the facts. If you look at the fact that fresh grape juice contains leaven then your posts prove the opposite.

But you have your preconceaved notions and you can not learn.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

I learn from the Bible. And I believe I have learned well.

 

[rjprince]

SFIC,

Sorry about incorrectly linking Leighton with SDA. Found an article in an SDA publication (Messenger, Journal of the SDA in UK and Ireland, Vol 110 #22, Oct 7, 2005) that had him doing a book signing at an SDA institution and drew the wrong conclusion.

 

[preachinjesus]

this is an interesting thread to read...

best done with a pint!

so I raise my flask to you all

 

[rjprince]

As far as I am concerned, PJ, you toast alone! (AND certainly no double meaning intended!)

 

[ASLANSPAL]

The best wine ever made

Jesus made it at the wedding of Cana and the connoisseurs of the day, said it was the best.

Has anyone ever heard of grape juice connosuiers???

[Snipped]

Common sense says Jesus made the best wine of all time that day.

Wow! you never hear in historic times or modern times " that is the best grape juice I have ever
drank" because it did not happen and never did.

If you own a jar or bottle of Cana circa B.C. wine it is worth millions.

It is encouraging in the poll that this old fundy
argument is finally being put to rest...so celebrate and have a glass of chardanay "in moderation of course".

[ April 01, 2006, 03:00 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Actually, very few fundies make that argument. Most fundies, like myself, believe scripture, Jesus made some pretty fine wine. He also appears to have consumed spoiled wine, at least once, in scripture. So try to not lump all fundies into being wrong, about this.

 

[rjprince]

What is most amazing to me about this whole debate is the near total inconsistency among some conservatives regarding this subject. We argue for a consistent literal grammatical historical contextual hermeneutic in most regards, but when this issue offends our own sub-cultural sense of what is right and what is wrong we do all kinds of contortions to make the Bible say something other than what it plainly says! It is like the sign over the old blacksmith shop, “All Kinds of Fancy Twistings and Turnings Done Here”!!!

Wine is wine, unless it is in a favorable context. Drunk means drunk, unless it is talking about the wine that Jesus made. Wine is wine, unless Paul tells Timothy to drink some, then it is some kind of specially processed grape juice (even though there is no evidence that such a process existed among the Jews or Gentiles of the early church!).

Yep. We believe the Bible all right, especially when we can make it say what we want it to say, even if that is something other than what it says. How can I make such a bold statement as that? Because, Father forgive, I have done it, too.

May God give us all a firm commitment to take the text as it stands and let God worry about the rest. If we would just understand that when we correct the text, we are asserting our authority above His. May God grant us all more grace...

 

[mioque]

Originally posted by rjprince:
Mio,

Centuries of church thought can never be lightly dismissed, but the Word must always be the final authority. In some cases, church tradition must be rejected, but never without a great deal of study and discussion with others who provide wise counsel. If you are rejecting a idea that many have held for centuries, you had better not do it alone! That is almost always a sure prescription for heresy.

I've got no problem whatsoever with ignoring centuries of churchtradition.
If I had, I would probably be joining these guys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Catholic_Church

What I have a problem with is the notion that many folks have, that they belong to that one group of people who can interprete the Bible in a perfectly objective way.
You can't, you have a slightly twisted perspective on the meaning of the Bible because you are a product of your culture.
Everybody has!

So if a specific bit of theology only shows up within a tightly constrained setting. I get very suspicious.

And by the way, Luther's mrs. (a former nun) brewed beer to make ends meet.
She was good at it as well apparently.

 

[rjprince]

Originally posted by mioque:
What I have a problem with is the notion that many folks have, that they belong to that one group of people who can interprete the Bible in a perfectly objective way.
You can't, you have a slightly twisted perspective on the meaning of the Bible because you are a product of your culture.
Everybody has!

Maybe you can't, but I can. I am totally objective and never wrong, as my posts certainly must demonstrate to any one with brains!

Sorry. Sometimes I just can not help myself. My kids have concluded that no one else can, either. I think my sugar level must be out of balance this morning!

 

[rjprince]

way out of balance... It can't be all of me? Can it?

 

[Phillip]

From the look of him, I would have to believe that you are absolutely correct.

 

[gtbuzzarp]

I've been following this off and on, please excuse any repeated points as I haven't read every thread but....
I am curious how all this "unfermented wine" stayed unfermented back then???

Let's look at some scripture and see just how much sense this all makes:
Titus 1:7
For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain,

Now let's replace wine with grape juice.

Titus 1:7
For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to grape juice, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain,

Let's try that again:

Ephesians 5:18
And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit,

Inserting grape juice for wine.

Ephesians 5:18
And do not get drunk with grape juice, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit,

One more time...

1 Timothy 3
2An overseer, then, must be above reproach,the husband of one wife,temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

3 not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money.

Replacing wine with grape juice

1 Timothy 3
2An overseer, then, must be above reproach,the husband of one wife,temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

3 not addicted to grape juice or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money.

Now let's look at Jesus vs John the Baptist

Luke 1:15 (speaking of John the Baptist)"For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb.

Luke 7
33"For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, 'He has a demon!'

34"The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!


These verses make no sense if any of them are speaking of unfermented wine. Addicted to grape juice? Why not say addicted to <<insert beverage of choice>>, why single that out (if it is unfermented)? It only makes sense if it is alcoholic.

And why would Jesus make the distintion between John, who did not drink alcohol, and Himself? Why would they call Him a drunkard if He didn't have fermented beverages?

Those who feel called not to drink, don't do it. If you do, then you are sinning. And those of you who do drink, don't do it around people who it would cause to stumble (like a recovering alcoholic). I don't drink, but my wife does. But she grew up in a country that didn't have Prohibition in its past.

I attended a church of a very prominent Baptist preacher in another state. In 1999 he made the comment "I don't drink but I have nothing against those who do." Then in 2002 he made the comment that "A Christian has no business drinking alcohol."

Which one is it? Surely someone who has been in the ministry for over 30 years does not change their mind over the course of 3 years, do they?

 

[rjprince]

so far 88% agree with me. I must be right!

JK. It does not really matter if 99 percent agree, or disagree. The only determining factor is "What does the Bible say?"

 

[rjprince]

gtbuz,

Give the pastor a little bit of slack. Did you talk to him about it? Sometimes we get carried away and say things, yes, even from the pulpit, that we should not have said.

"In the multitude of words, there wanteth not sin..."

 

[AF Guy N Paradise]

You know what always gets me?

People say it is ok for one drink...

One drink puts many people over the legal drinking limit and could cause a DWI. Would it make that person a drunkard even if they felt no alcohol affects?

I know nobody would approve someone driving while drunk, but I see thousands at sporting events, restaurants, etc that drink at least one drink and then drive home. They could very well be charged as being legally drunk.

I was recently hit by a drunk driver and I am still feeling the affects. She was I think nearly three times the legal limit. The same person that had one drink over dinner and hit me could also be at or very close to the legal limit. Both committed the same crimes.

 

[Phillip]

I don't think there is ANY doubt that the wine in Biblical times was definitely alcoholic.

I do think that if a Christian wishes to drink should consider if it will have an effect on their testimony in today's world. Most non-Christians think of Christians as being straight-laced and that includes drinking (and sometimes even smoking). So, IMHO I don't have a problem with drinking in moderation, but I do have a problem with hanging around clubs, going to liquor stores and having neighbors see my trash-can full of beer bottles.

The bottom line is that each person needs to make up their own mind whether or not this has an effect on their Christianity and their witness. Would Jesus drink in today's society? I don't know, my guess is that He probably would not.

In Biblical times alcohol kept the grape-juice from spoiling and was even considered to have killed some of the parasites that existed in the water supplies.

Wasn't it Paul that mentioned to a person he wrote a letter to (Timothy, was it?) that he should have a little wine for his stomach's sake? This indicates that it was definitely not grape juice because juice alone with all of the fruit sugar is not settling for the stomach, but alcoholic wine would provide several medicinal qualities in small quantities.

But, then again, do we tell someone it is okay to drink if we know they have had a problem with alcohol? I wouldn't think so.

Basically I'm trying to summerize my opinion of this 7 page thread. Bottom line, its alcoholic wine in the Bible, second issue: Do we drink today? Depends on the person and their situation. If someone wishes to have a glass of wine at night before going to bed or with their evening meal, I certainly will not judge him or her. If I see them drunk, that would be another story. Do I drink? No, but that is my personal opinion and option.

 

[webdog]

One drink puts many people over the legal drinking limit and could cause a DWI. Would it make that person a drunkard even if they felt no alcohol affects?

Your equating drunk driving with drinking, which is not the same. I'm on a medication right now for pain. It impairs my driving. Taking the medication is not sin, but getting behind the wheel would be. Same thing with one drink.

I know nobody would approve someone driving while drunk, but I see thousands at sporting events, restaurants, etc that drink at least one drink and then drive home. They could very well be charged as being legally drunk.

Ironically, these same people commit gluttony while at these places, and nothing is said. Is the food being consumed sin? You can't have things both ways.
BTW I'm sorry about what happened to you and I hope you have a full recovery. The woman was drunk which was a sin, and drove, which was a sin, but I don't believe that alcohol was the sin behind the incident...the choice of the woman was.

 

[Hope of Glory]

A lady at our church got a DUI because she was on medication and drove. I don't think it was a sin, per se, but she should have read the fine print.