His Blood Spoke My Name said:
Maybe in the past by certain churches, yes. But by God, no. His Word is clear to the fact that we are not to partake of alcoholic beverage.
So according to your posts on this thread the previous one now closed, is absolutely everyone who portook of this feremented communion cup in hell or going there?
Might I add that at the Last Supper, the Bible says Jesus took the cup and gave thanks for it. But He streses that the contents of the cup are the 'fruit of the vine.' He does not say it is wine as many claim it was.
What do you mean "
stresses...'fruit of the vine?'" What did he say to 'stress' that? That shows your bias in reading scripture. Besides, when Jesus did say "wine,"
then he meant the kind with some [ranging from very small to small] alcoholic content? And furthermore, which of those 2 different kinds (and it's
your dichotomy) is it that he hasn't drank since that night and won't til "new in the Kindgom of Heaven?"
Jesus used the word 'wine' in many illustrations he gave in the gospels, would He not have called the substance in the cup 'wine' if it were? instead of 'fruit of the vine.' No, the only place He used the phrase 'fruit of the vine' was at what we recognize as the Last Supper.
Alrilght, you are proving my point. The "new wine in old windskins" parable refers to "wine," not 'fruit of the vine.' No one wishes for new wine after drinking old, for the old is good (Luke 5:39) referes to "wine," not 'fruit of the vine.' And what Jesus made at the wedding at Cana (John 2) was "wine," not 'fruit of the vine,' because "the only place He used the phrase 'fruit of the vine' was at what we recognize as the Last Supper." Okay.