Communion wine

[Edial]

I feel so weird being on the "liberal" side of an arguement..usually I'm the conservative "fundie"!

 

[BreadAlone]

You don't even know what you have posted previously. You're talking in circles and making you comments seem ridiculous. Who the heck is even saying that we should use a certain type of wine? Only you and I don't know who you are arguing against since we havn't even mentioned it.

Yes people have. Everyone is saying it MUST be grape wine, otherwise it isn't communion. I'm merely saying it can be any wine.

 

[BreadAlone]

Okay. So. Just because there was GRAPE wine in the cup and Jesus said "take...THIS..." that He didn't specify.

What in gravy are they teaching in your schools? Because that sounds like a direct command. THIS is THIS.

You'd have liked it better if Jesus spoon fed you and said "hey Take this GRAPE WINE in this cup because it's gonna be poured out for you as my blood, Bread Alone".

Because He didn't have to do that. It's all there in black and white (and red if you have one of those Bibles.) This means This. It was grape wine. We know because of context. You don't have to like it but you don't make the policies. Jesus does and that is what HE said.

Kae

So Paul commanded that women not speak in the churches, or wear earings. Do we follow those? No. Why not? Because they weren't for our time, they have a deeper meaning.

It was merely grape wine because that's the only kind of wine they had. Christ knew that Gentiles hundreds of years later would be reading this, and if he wanted specific wine, I think he would have specified.

I'll say again, I would and do use only grape wine. But I'm not going to write it up as mandatory.

I think we're putting too much focus on what we do and not enough on God.

 

[DaRev]

Yes people have. Everyone is saying it MUST be grape wine, otherwise it isn't communion. I'm merely saying it can be any wine.

But the basis of your argument goes against what the Bible text actually says. You are basically making up your own rule. You have no authority to do that. You are not God.

Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper with grape wine. That's what He used. That's what He commanded. That is what should be used. The use of anything else does not at all guarantee that the blood of Christ is present since that is not what He used in His supper when He instituted it.

 

[RadMan]

Yes people have. Everyone is saying it MUST be grape wine, otherwise it isn't communion. I'm merely saying it can be any wine.

No you didn't, you first said that it didn't have to be wine and then you conceded it was wine and not grape wine. You don't even remember what you posted.

All this knowledge available for you here on this forum and you act like it doesn't even exist.

 

[BreadAlone]

No you didn't, you first said that it didn't have to be wine and then you conceded it was wine and not grape wine. You don't even remember what you posted.

All this knowledge available for you here on this forum and you act like it doesn't even exist.

Please show me where I said it didn't have to be wine (unless you're talking about where I said I think it'd be alright for alcholics and people with allergies to use grape juice.)

 

[RadMan]

Please show me where I said it didn't have to be wine (unless you're talking about where I said I think it'd be alright for alcholics and people with allergies to use grape juice.)

Yea right. ANd you also didn't say the the Bible didn't say "fruit of the vine" either. WHat else are you going to say the BIble didn't say? GOt any other zingers.

 

[BreadAlone]

Yea right. ANd you also didn't say the the Bible didn't say "fruit of the vine" either. WHat else are you going to say the BIble didn't say? GOt any other zingers.

The Bible didn't say "fruit of the vine" in relation to a command of what the Lord's Supper has to be. It was a comment Jesus made after the Sacrament was first instituted in regards to him drinking wine no more before the end of days.

 

[WildStrawberry]

So Paul commanded that women not speak in the churches, or wear earings. Do we follow those? No. Why not? Because they weren't for our time, they have a deeper meaning.

Actually, regarding the women speaking in church...we DO do that in a manner of speaking. We don't allow women to be Pastors or Elders or the like...correct? And you're a WELS guy...your synod is even more strict saying that women aren't allowed to vote.

As for the earrings, those were a sign of slavery back in Biblical times.

It was merely grape wine because that's the only kind of wine they had. Christ knew that Gentiles hundreds of years later would be reading this, and if he wanted specific wine, I think he would have specified..

Honey, mankind has been fermenting everything they can get their hands on since the begining of time. The Jews of that time would have had wines made of everything from pomegranates to honey to figs and dates. None of those are fruits of the vine. The only fruit I know of that is made into wine and is grown on a vine is the grape. **

Look it up. Ask around. Seek and find. You'll get there.

Kae

ETA ** unless you count the tomato...which is a fruit but...I can't imagine tomato wine. And I LOVE tomatoes. *G*

 

[DaRev]

So Paul commanded that women not speak in the churches, or wear earings. Do we follow those? No. Why not? Because they weren't for our time, they have a deeper meaning.

It was merely grape wine because that's the only kind of wine they had. Christ knew that Gentiles hundreds of years later would be reading this, and if he wanted specific wine, I think he would have specified.

I'll say again, I would and do use only grape wine. But I'm not going to write it up as mandatory.

I think we're putting too much focus on what we do and not enough on God.

You sound more and more like someone from the ELCA with every post you make.

Like I said before, you have LOTS to learn my young friend.

 

[Tetzel]

There was a woman in our Congregation who was an chemotherapy and other medication so that her Dr. insisted that "no alcohol whatsoever could be consumed. We prepared an individual cup for her which contained one drop of wine in water. This was acceptable to her Dr, and she was able to receive both kinds in the sacrament.

Mark

Good solution

 

[DaRev]

Good solution

True.

 

[RadMan]

Yep the first century church mentioned mixing water with the wine.

 

[BreadAlone]

I guess believing that one can have the Sacrament regardless of the flavor of wine makes one ELCA these days..

 

[RadMan]

BreadALone grape juice is not wine and as someone mentioned there isn't probably anything in that time frame that would be considered a "fruit of the vine" except grapes. Everthing else grew on tress or bushes

DO you remember that Bible verse that says "Faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the Word of God"? You wouldn't have so many questions if you just did that. It increases faith and not questions.

 

[WildStrawberry]

I guess believing that one can have the Sacrament regardless of the flavor of wine makes one ELCA these days..

It does when you insist on tossing out Scripture.

Tell me, BA, WHY would Jesus start talking about not drinking of the fruit of the vine again until reaching the Kingdom of God if what was in the cup was something other than the fruit of the vine?

Just answer that. I don't want a run around, I don't want you to equivocate, I want you to answer the question in a straightforward manner.

Just in case you missed it, the question is:

Why would Jesus talk about not drinking the fruit of the wine again in the Kingdom of Heaven if what was in the cup that he said "take and drink, This is my blood"about, was other than grape wine. (grape being understood as "fruit of the vine")

Kae

 

[BreadAlone]

BreadALone grape juice is not wine and as someone mentioned there isn't probably anything in that time frame that would be considered a "fruit of the vine" except grapes. Everthing else grew on tress or bushes

DO you remember that Bible verse that says "Faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the Word of God"? You wouldn't have so many questions if you just did that. It increases faith and not questions.

I honestly don't believe that the Scripture's are commanding a certain flavor of wine. And until the Holy Spirit convinces me otherwise, I won't believe it, either.

Regardless, I have more important things to worry about than whether or not people can use different wine flavors, as our church does and will continue to use grape wine.

 

[BreadAlone]

It does when you insist on tossing out Scripture.

Tell me, BA, WHY would Jesus start talking about not drinking of the fruit of the vine again until reaching the Kingdom of God if what was in the cup was something other than the fruit of the vine?

Just answer that. I don't want a run around, I don't want you to equivocate, I want you to answer the question in a straightforward manner.

Just in case you missed it, the question is:

Why would Jesus talk about not drinking the fruit of the wine again in the Kingdom of Heaven if what was in the cup that he said "take and drink, This is my blood"about, was other than grape wine. (grape being understood as "fruit of the vine")

Kae

But I KNOW it was grape wine. What I'm saying is I don't CARE if it was. He didn't say it HAD to be for every single worship service that would every be conducted in his name.

Do I think we should use grape wine? MOST DEFINATELY!

Am I going to insist that everyone does? NO!

Because I believe that the Scriptures don't mandate we must. I think we're getting too caught up in human regulations and not enough in the Word and Promises of God.

 

[RadMan]

I honestly don't believe that the Scripture's are commanding a certain flavor of wine. And until the Holy Spirit convinces me otherwise, I won't believe it, either.

Regardless, I have more important things to worry about than whether or not people can use different wine flavors, as our church does and will continue to use grape wine.

That is "reformed" thinking. We not only read and except what we read but we also have the knowledge of the early theologians. Reformed thinking says that they will only believe what their mind tells them and nothing else. How do you know it's the Holy Spirit leading you and not your mind?

 

[BreadAlone]

That is "reformed" thinking. We not only read and except what we read but we also have the knowledge of the early theologians. Reformed thinking says that they will only believe what their mind tells them and nothing else. How do you know it's the Holy Spirit leading you and not your mind?

I highly respect the opinions of the early church theologians. However, even they were wrong sometimes.