Communion wine

[ThePilgrim]

All I can say at this point is that we do indeed know from the context of the Scriptures what Jesus used in the institution of His supper as He commanded. But be it far from me or anyone else to dictate what God could or would do by His own grace and mercy.

Right, I understood that from your earlier post. I don't doubt that you believe that God *could* have been present and even *might* have been present.

What I'm asking, in Lutheran terms is, did they have Christ's promise He *was* present, or if He was present, was His presence some form of special grace?

Do you believe that when they celebrated the Eucharist with leavened bread (and by extension when we, the EO, still celebrate it as such, never having changed with the West), that they had and we have Christ's promise?

Grace and peace,
John

 

[DaRev]

Right, I understood that from your earlier post. I don't doubt that you believe that God *could* have been present and even *might* have been present.

What I'm asking, in Lutheran terms is, did they have Christ's promise He *was* present, or if He was present, was His presence some form of special grace?

Do you believe that when they celebrated the Eucharist with leavened bread (and by extension when we, the EO, still celebrate it as such, never having changed with the West), that they had and we have Christ's promise?

Grace and peace,
John

All I can say at this point is that we do indeed know from the context of the Scriptures what Jesus used in the institution of His supper as He commanded. But be it far from me or anyone else to dictate what God could or would do by His own grace and mercy.

 

[ThePilgrim]

*confused*

Okay... That's just repeating that God can do whatever He wants. I agree with that and I understand that you believe that. Of course God can do what He wants in His grace and mercy. I'm asking about where He promises to act. Lutheranism is all about trusting the promises of God, right?

To ask directly: Where and when is there God's promise that He will act? Under what conditions? Note: I'm not asking when God will or won't act. That's up to Him. But from a Lutheran perspective, under what conditions can we be *sure* that God will act, because we can be *sure* that we have His promise?

It's a valid question. It's not a trick or a trap. I'm honestly interested in a Lutheran perspective on this.

Grace and peace,
John

 

[RadMan]

*confused*

Okay... That's just repeating that God can do whatever He wants. I agree with that and I understand that you believe that. Of course God can do what He wants in His grace and mercy. I'm asking about where He promises to act. Lutheranism is all about trusting the promises of God, right?

To ask directly: Where and when is there God's promise that He will act? Under what conditions? Note: I'm not asking when God will or won't act. That's up to Him. But from a Lutheran perspective, under what conditions can we be *sure* that God will act, because we can be *sure* that we have His promise?

It's a valid question. It's not a trick or a trap. I'm honestly interested in a Lutheran perspective on this.

Grace and peace,
John

"Act" on what and "promise" what?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I thnk DaRev is basically saying that he cannot say what God would do. Just like when someone dies who isn't baptized, we don't say yes or no as to whether they are saved, because we rely on God's mercy.

It isn't wrong to say "I don't know what God will do" every now and then. We're not supposed to know everything.

 

[ThePilgrim]

I thnk DaRev is basically saying that he cannot say what God would do. Just like when someone dies who isn't baptized, we don't say yes or no as to whether they are saved, because we rely on God's mercy.

It isn't wrong to say "I don't know what God will do" every now and then. We're not supposed to know everything.

Right. If you read my posts, you'll see that I understand that. I'm not asking him what God *would* or *did* do. I understand that God can do whatever He wishes. What he's answering isn't what I'm asking.

Lutherans are very big on saying that we can trust the promises of God and that we should only do what we have God's promise for. So what I'm asking is this:

Realizing that God *could* do whatever He wanted and *might* have been present in the Eucharist for the first 900 years of Christianity, and that thus I'm not asking about what He did...

Did they, when they were using leavened bread for those 900 years, have God's *promise* that He was present? Or if He was present, would it have had to been as a special grace, outside of promise?

Grace and peace,
John

 

[BabyLutheran]

Sorry to interrupt the thread, but my pastor just emailed me back. We do use Manischewitz, just as DaRev and others suspected.

OK, back to the debate.

 

[RadMan]

Sorry to interrupt the thread, but my pastor just emailed me back. We do use Manischewitz, just as DaRev and others suspected.

OK, back to the debate.

How ironic that we use a good Jewish wine

 

[RadMan]

Lutherans are very big on saying that we can trust the promises of God and that we should only do what we have God's promise for.

I'm not sure on where you are coming with just this comment. Why would you say we are "big" on God's promises. Every denom is big on promises. I don't ever remembering that we are any "bigger" than anyone else. We don't have bible classes that teach the 300-400+ promises. Sounds more like what the reformed stress becasue they feel they have the right to get them.

 

[BabyLutheran]

How ironic that we use a good Jewish wine

I always thought it was cheap wine! I have never bought it though, so I am probably wrong as usual

 

[DaRev]

I always thought it was cheap wine! I have never bought it though, so I am probably wrong as usual

It's Kosher, which has to do with how it's produced.

 

[BabyLutheran]

It's Kosher, which has to do with how it's produced.

And that has what to do with the price? lol

j/k, don't take me too seriously, it's tax season and I am a delirious CPA

 

[PreachersWife2004]

We buy our Manischewitz at the local grocery store. It's not expensive at all. And it's often on sale.

 

[Edial]

How is talking about not drinking of the FRUIT OF THE VINE directly after PARTAKING the fruit of the vine....out of context?

Honestly?

I'm amazed by this. I'm going to quote from the Princess Bride and say "you keep saying this. I do not think it means what you think it means"

Kae

Princess Bride said that? Very good.

 

[Edial]

Fruit of the vine, however, doesn't just mean wine. It is also grape juice. Of course, as I have stated, I believe firmly that it was wine that was being used in the Last Supper. I believe it is good and right to use wine. But I don't think that using grape juice is beyond the sacrament because grape juice is fruit of the vine

Of course.

And again, fruit of the vine is not always wine. So the command to drink grape WINE is not present.

That's correct.

Fruit of the vine isn't fermented grape juice. It simply is grape juice.

The word of God specifically mentions bread and fruit of the vine.

Absolutely.

I use wine - fruit of the vine.
Others use grape juice - same fruit of the vine.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Edial]

You posted this just to get my gall, didn't you?

 

[BabyLutheran]

cantaloupes grow on vines too. Can we use cantaloupe juice? lol

How about fruit of the loom?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

cantaloupes grow on vines too. Can we use cantaloupe juice? lol

How about fruit of the loom?

But cantaloupes are not, nor have they ever been, referred to as "fruit of the vine".

Fruit of the loom is a very good brand of underwear. Very resilient.

 

[Edial]

The point being made wasn't if there was water in wine. The point is weather it was wine at all. If you read my previous post on the observance in the 1-2 century Martyr mentions that the water and wine were mixed. Not that it is necessary to do it that way. It's just that wine was used. Not grape juice.

Who knows why they mixed water with wine. As BL metioned before, the mixture is still wine.

Water was used probably because they were afraid of Paul's admonition that people were getting drunk during the communion feast with full mean and all.

The closer we are to the times of any event the more we try imitating it.

Yet times change.

Yet the words were written for all times.

And the word says - fruit of the vine.
(We know that this vine is a grape vine because they drank wine. Wine comes from grape vine).

However, the fruit of the grape vine is also grapes.

In Heaven we also will drink the "fruit of the vine".

And there it will be neither grape wine nor grape juice as we know it, ... but a certain fruit of the vine that grows in Heaven.

In my opinion, based on the word alone, the Communion is very much effective as long as that what we drink is a fruit of the grape vine.

Whether I personally drink grape wine or grape juice is another matter.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Edial]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I like you more and more everyday!

Oh no ...