I can make no knowledgeable comment on what would be an acceptable, better, or best Japanese translation. (Still, if your primary other choice is sake, your decision seems quite reasonable to me!) Nevertheless, I would find it hard to believe that something like "liquid from grapes" would normally be understood as "wine" by English speakers. To me, in English "wine" seems like the general reasonable choice. (We do have "fruit of the vine," but, of course, that is not a translation of oinos.)You are missing the point. I do not translate with "grape juice" (グレープジュース), I translate "liquid from grapes"(葡萄の果樹) That is an ambiguous rendering that gives the reader the authority to interpret, rather than interpreting for him. That's a good deal better than, say, the Motoyaku, which translated sometimes as sake (酒, highly alcoholic rice wine).
Yes, think you are right that οινον νεον in these contexts would have initially been unfermented, but it was wine in prospect in that was what it was intended to be. I was thinking of the other occurrences without the modifier "new" and I still believe all of them would be alcoholic (of course, with the understanding that John 2 is still the open question of our discussion).As for all the wine in the NT being alcoholic, not true. You have "new wine" (oinos) occurring 4 times in a context that shows it must be unfermented.
As I said earlier, I have no intention of defending that person's view (unless I change my mind, which God has the right to do, I consider the NT uses of methuo always intending intoxication/drunkenness). I gave that link as someone who holds a different view, and I might should have looked harder to find a better representative! Nevertheless, I think if you wade through all his references (if you have any desire to) you will find methuo in some of them. I will probably eventually get around to looking at this in the LXX, but not now.Um, these are not methuo but methusko.
Yes, and I meant to make no claim otherwise. Just considering that what happened to the abundance of wine miraculously created by Jesus is an open question, and I'm not sure there is evidence of one outcome more than another -- other than that some of it would have been consumed at the wedding feast since they were out of wine. (That Jesus can and did create more than could be consumed by the people present is proven in the miracles of the fish and loaves.)Um, your last sentence is reading into the text.
Yes, I don't doubt that practice (diluting wine with water). I believe Patton wrote about that in his book, but it's been years since I read it.Another point that I'd like to do more research on is that the oinos was often diluted. In 3 Maccabees 5:2 in the LXX for example, Hannibal fed his elephants "unmixed wine" (oino pleoni akrato) to hype them up to execute Jews. So if you dilute 3% "wine" then it is even less like the modern stuff.
Here is a link with some good references to the ancient practice of mixing water with wine: Wine & Strong Drink in the Bible, Part 3 – Salem Bible Church
Last edited: