Wine vs. Grapejuice @ Communion

[gb93433]

It is not I who is ignorant of Scripture concerning alcohol. God says "Look thou not..." That is exactly what He means. We are to have nothing to do with it.

So Jesus never drank wine and never turned water into wine?

 

[standingfirminChrist]

So Jesus never drank wine and never turned water into wine?

1. Scripture never says Jesus drank wine. It just says He came eating and drinking, and that He drank 'this fruit of the vine'.

2. Christ's Holiness along with Scripture refutes the accusations that He made an alcoholic wine or that He drank it.

 

[gb93433]

1. Scripture never says Jesus drank wine. It just says He came eating and drinking, and that He drank 'this fruit of the vine'.

2. Christ's Holiness along with Scripture refutes the accusations that He made an alcoholic wine or that He drank it.

You are wrong. Scripture called it wine and you call it colored sugar water?

Did you forget to address post #183?

 

[standingfirminChrist]

You are wrong. Scripture called it wine and you call it colored sugar water?

Did you forget to address post #183?

Show me Scripture where that wine is identified as alcoholic in content. Just the fact that Christ came to seek and save the lost, not help them down the road to hell is enough evidence that He did not turn the water into an alcoholic beverage.

Nor did He drink an alcoholic beverage or He would be disobeying Scripture and thereby sinning.

Had He given alcohol to man, or drank it Himself, He would not have been the spotless and sinless sacrifice needed to die for man.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

When one reads the accusation, "These men are full of new wine," one has to reflect on the following questions:

1. Why was the Greek word gleukos (new wine) used?

2. If the drinking of intoxicating beverages was so good and acceptable to believers in Bible times, why was it not simply stated in the text that "these men are drunk?"

The Greek word gleukos derives its meaning from the Greek word Glukus, meaning sweet. During fermentation process, the sugar in grape juice is turned to alcohol, so a very sweet juice was one that was natural, or unfermented.

If the wine that the Apostles did drink were alcoholic, it would not have been called gleukos. The sugar would have been converted to alcohol. It would not have been sweet. When grape juice turns to alcohol, the sweetness is gone.

Those accusing the Apostles were cynically accusing them of being drunk on grape juice! Peter's statement that they could not be drunk seeing as it was but the third hour of the day was designed to show the foolishness of the accusation. It was not admitting that new wine was alcoholic in content.

Peter denied the accusations beyond doubt, for not even drinkers got drunk that time of day.

For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. (1 Thessalonians 5:7)

 

[gb93433]

When one reads the accusation, "These men are full of new wine," one has to reflect on the following questions:

1. Why was the Greek word gleukos (new wine) used?

Because it was just that--new wine. As opposed to old wine.

2. If the drinking of intoxicating beverages was so good and acceptable to believers in Bible times, why was it not simply stated in the text that "these men are drunk?"

It was common to drink wine in those days. If you understood the condition of the water then you would know why. In fact Paul told Timothy to drink some wine. Do you think that was colored sugar water?

The Greek word gleukos derives its meaning from the Greek word Glukus, meaning sweet. During fermentation process, the sugar in grape juice is turned to alcohol, so a very sweet juice was one that was natural, or unfermented.

How can a drink have alcohol and be unfermented?

If the wine that the Apostles did drink were alcoholic, it would not have been called gleukos. The sugar would have been converted to alcohol. It would not have been sweet. When grape juice turns to alcohol, the sweetness is gone.

Not true at all. A preacher of about two centuries ago tried to sell a bill of goods to ignorant Christians. Amazing how such nonsense has never convinced the Christians in areas of the world which produce wine. I have been to many states and find many drunks in areas where it is heavily preached against and the least in areas where wine is produced. My parents grew grapes and we do not even like the stuff. I have seen others come over and look at the wine. As kids we were never intrigued by it. It was there much like bottles of water would be.

I find it interesting that the Amish today produce wine for themselves. Most of them have a small patch of grapes for their own use.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

When one reads the accusation, "These men are full of new wine," one has to reflect on the following questions:

1. Why was the Greek word gleukos (new wine) used?

Because it was just that--new wine. As opposed to old wine.



It was common to drink wine in those days. If you understood the condition of the water then you would know why. In fact Paul told Timothy to drink some wine. Do you think that was colored sugar water?



How can a drink have alcohol and be unfermented?



Not true at all. What a way to follow some preacher of two centuires ago to try and sell a bill of goods on ignorant Christians. Amazing how such nonsense has never convinced the Christians in areas of the world which produce wine.

I find it interesting that the Amish today produce wine for themselves. Most of them have a small patch of grapes for their own use.

The wine Timothy was told to drink was unfermented wine. Alcohol would have harmed more than helped an already inflamed stomach. The same ingredient found in the wines of today that doctors say is beneficial to one's health can be found in ordinary grape juice as well. There is no need to drink alcohol for any ailments. Any doctor that lies to a patient and tells him alcohol is good for him or her needs his medical license revoked.

A preacher two centuries ago?? You've got to be kidding. Peter lived in the first century AD. It was he who refuted the false accusations of the men in that room. Paul also lived in the first century AD. It was he who penned the truth that people did not get drunk during the day. He would have known.

It was Jesus who gave the Apostles unfermented wine and instructed them to drink it and as oft as they did drink to remember Him. He gave them the pure blood of the grape... unfermented wine to represent His purifying blood.

As to the Amish, if they are making alcoholic beverages, they are disobeying God's command to abstain from it.

 

[annsni]

The wine Timothy was told to drink was unfermented wine. Alcohol would have harmed more than helped an already inflamed stomach. The same ingredient found in the wines of today that doctors say is beneficial to one's health can be found in ordinary grape juice as well. There is no need to drink alcohol for any ailments. Any doctor that lies to a patient and tells him alcohol is good for him or her needs his medical license revoked.

From WebMD:

"Those who imbibe a few weekly glasses have a slightly lower risk of carrying a germ that causes stomach ulcers.

The germ is a common bacterium: Helicobacter pylori or H. pylori for short. It can cause stomach ulcers, although not everybody who carries the bug gets an ulcer. First infections usually happen in childhood, but new infections can happen at any age. H. pylori can be a long-lasting infection. Sometimes people get over it without treatment, but antibiotic therapy is the only reliable way to cure an infection.

Now it looks as though wine and beer may help some people rid themselves of the bug. Liam J. Murray, MD, Queens University of Belfast, U.K., and colleagues tested 10,537 people for H. pylori infection. They also asked them how much alcohol and coffee they drank and how much they smoked.

"[The] results indicate that consumption of moderate amounts of alcohol in the form of wine, beer, lager, or cider may protect against H. pylori infection," the researchers report in The American Journal of Gastroenterology."

Murray's team found that it took at least three glasses of wine per week to get the H. pylori protection. Those who drank three to six weekly glasses of wine had 11% fewer H. pylori infections. Drinking more than six glasses per week decreased infections by another 6%.

Drinking one or two half-pints of beer also dropped H. pylori infections by 11%. Three to six weekly half-pints dropped risk by another 6% -- but those who drank more beer than this didn't see any protection at all.

Those who preferred hard liquor were out of luck. They saw no protection. That, Murray and colleagues suggest, is because wine and beer increase secretion of stomach acids and speed the emptying of the stomach. Distilled spirits have no such effect.

The researchers note that wine and beer are rich in compounds with antibacterial activity. Thus the H. pylori protection linked to wine and beer may have nothing to do with their alcohol content.

Unlike earlier studies, Murray's team found that neither smoking nor coffee drinking had any effect on H. pylori infection.

The South and West Regional Research and Development Directorate and GlaxoSmithKline UK funded this study. "


From the DailyMail:

New research shows that red wine can combat potentially-fatal food poisoning bugs.

E coli, Salmonella and Listeria are all susceptible to the effects of red wine, and Helicobacter pylori, a stomach ulcer-causing bug which is spread through food and drink, is particularly vulnerable.

The study, carried out at the University of Missouri in the US, showed that Cabernet, Zinfandel and Merlot are particularly effective in fighting food-borne bugs.

White wine, however, has no effect.

The researchers told a Chicago conference that their findings added to mounting evidence about the health benefits of a glass or two of red wine.

Dr Azlin Mustapha, a food scientist, said: "Our study is a little different than those previously reported.

"Those studies promote moderate red wine consumption for cardiovascular diseases.

"We went a step further and asked: If red wine is already good for cardiovascular diseases, what about food-borne pathogens?

"If you get a food-borne illness and drink red wine, will that help decrease the symptoms a little bit?

"This study showed the pathogens were inhibited by red wine."

She said that although the alcohol in wine may act against the bacteria, other factors such as acidity may have an effect.

The chemical resveratrol, which is found in grape skins - which are removed when making white wine - is also thought to have an important role.

However,wine-lovers are warned not to overdo it.

Dr Mustapha said: "I wouldn't go out and keep drinking red wine to the maximum but the recommended consumption of wine is one glass of wine for women, and two glasses for men per day."

Other recent research has shown that a glass or two of alcohol a day can extend life expectancy by almost four years.

Wine was particularly beneficial, with just half a glass a day being enough to slash the risk of death from heart disease.

It is thought that the alcohol's health benefits come from its ability to prevent blood clots from forming and raise levels of HDL cholesterol - 'good cholesterol' which protects against hardening of the blood vessels.

Red wine is packed with polyphenols, naturally-occurring compounds which are thought to hinder the build up of dangerous fatty deposits in the arteries.

Previous research has credited red wine with reducing the risk of developing cancer and staving off gum disease.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

The researchers note that wine and beer are rich in compounds with antibacterial activity. Thus the H. pylori protection linked to wine and beer may have nothing to do with their alcohol content.

Of course the protection has nothing to do with the alcohol content. The protection is in other ingredients in the wine and beer. But these same protecting ingredients can be found in the unfermented grape juice and in other food products that are less dangerous than the poison called alcohol.

As to the DailyMall article, I would not trust it at all. The Word of God demands abstinence from alcohol in Proverbs 23:31. Are we to obey God? or man?

Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.

The world can make things pleasing to the eye that are truly ugly in God's sight. With a little subtil suggestions, the destructive and deceitful nature of alcohol are made to appear as benefits to health.

God says it will bite like a serpent and sting like an adder. Yet man thinks he can circumvent the command not to have anything to do with it in order to improve his health.

What would it profit a man to gain his wealth and lose his soul?

 

[Joe]

Of course the protection has nothing to do with the alcohol content.

Untrue. The alcohol content is WHY alcohol is a natural antiseptic therefore rich in compounds with antibacterial activity. If we were forced to wash our dark colored clothes in grape juice or alcohol, which would actually kill the bacteria?

The protection is in other ingredients in the wine and beer. But these same protecting ingredients can be found in the unfermented grape juice and in other food products that are less dangerous than the poison called alcohol.

You are off subject here, this doesn't apply. But yes, there are similar protecting agents found in both drinks, so the alcohol is not necessarily needed.

Here's an article
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/alternative/03/31/wine.heart.wmd/

The world can make things pleasing to the eye that are truly ugly in God's sight. With a little subtil suggestions, the destructive and deceitful nature of alcohol are made to appear as benefits to health.

Alcohol was created by God to use for medicinal purposes. Alcohol is a natural antiseptic, which is why Timothy was told to drink some for his stomach ailements which were probably related to bacteria

God says it will bite like a serpent and sting like an adder.

Yes, we need something strong to kill bacteria.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Comparing washing clothes in alcohol to putting it in ones body is apples and oranges. God commands not to have anything to do with ingesting it.

Alcohol was not created by God. Alcohol is a result of the fall of man and the curse brought upon the earth.

Alcohol is a result of decay.

When God said wine bites like a serpent and stings like an adder He was speaking of it stinging man... not bacteria.

 

[rbell]

Alcohol was not created by God. Alcohol is a result of the fall of man and the curse brought upon the earth.

Alcohol is a result of decay.

Oh, my goodness, what an ignorant comment.

Study up a bit on chemistry before making yourself look bad. As a chemistry major (originally going into chemical engineering), you made me laugh...then shake my head.

I've stayed out of this thread....but your comment is so factually wrong, I had to point it out.

 

[Palatka51]

"Sipping Saints" by David R. Wilkerson, the author of "The Cross and the Switchblade." Please read all of it before you disregard it's message.raying:

 

[webdog]

Alcohol is a result of decay.

SFIC, if you can't even get the process of how alcohol is formed...why should anyone take you seriously?

When I (a living organism) eat a candy bar (sugar) am I "decaying" (and not my teeth )?

 

[Dale-c]

Alcohol was not created by God.

You never cease to amaze me!

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

I suppose alcohol was not one of those "all things"?

 

[EdSutton]

Why?

Ed

Now I know why! My own question has been answered, after 20+ pages.! :thumbs:

So there can be 230 of these non-provocative posts, so far, by those "not interested in a debate on this subject" who will all 'play nice' so that a Moderator doesn't have to step in and delete sections and issue multiple pre-emptive warnings for posters.
Yup! I sho' do see it clearly, now!

Ed

 

[Linda64]

SFIC, if you can't even get the process of how alcohol is formed...why should anyone take you seriously?

When I (a living organism) eat a candy bar (sugar) am I "decaying" (and not my teeth )?

SFIC is correct...Alcohol is the result of fermentation. Fermented fruit is DEAD fruit..fruit that has DECAYED.

I didn't know that candy bars were fermented. Sugar is a preservative....yeast is an agent that breaks down sugars.

 

[Dale-c]

SFIC is correct...

SFIC said that alcohol was not created by God and you say he is correct?
Just who was this rogue creator then?

 

[Palatka51]

Now I know why! My own question has been answered, after 20+ pages.! :thumbs:

So there can be 230 of these non-provocative posts, so far, by those "not interested in a debate on this subject" who will all 'play nice' so that a Moderator doesn't have to step in and delete sections and issue multiple pre-emptive warnings for posters.
Yup! I sho' do see it clearly, now!

Ed

My, what a bugger you are?!

 

[webdog]

SFIC is correct...Alcohol is the result of fermentation. Fermented fruit is DEAD fruit..fruit that has DECAYED.

I didn't know that candy bars were fermented. Sugar is a preservative....yeast is an agent that breaks down sugars.

**Insult removed**

Fermentation has nothing to do with fruit being dead or alive.