Lord's Supper - Wine or Grape Juice?

[Bible Highlighter]

Interesting. BTW, Angel of the Lord with a capital "A" refers to Jesus in the Old Testament theophanies. Here it just says "an angel of the Lord."

Yes, I agree. In this case in the New Testament, I believe the "angel of the Lord" that rolled the stone away was simply an angel. But in the OT, this was a reference to Christ. I created a thread on Christ's appearances in the Old Testament here:

Jesus is the Messenger of the Lord in the Old Testament.

Granted, Christ is not a created angelic being. I believe Christ simply took on the empty soul-less shell of a body of angels (kind of like an angel suit) so as to house his glory as God. For people cannot look upon the face of God and live. Anyways, Jesus is the second person of the Godhead or the Trinity (Who is the Eternal God). The link (above) provides Scriptural references to Christ's appearances in the Old Testament.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I just read this and wanted to see what you thought.

Matthew 27:
62 On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, 63 saying, “Sir, we remember, while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise.’ 64 Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead.’ So the last deception will be worse than the first.”

65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go your way, make it as secure as you know how.” 66 So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard.

Don't you find it strange that if this was the Sabbath they would be doing manual labor making the tomb secure? They couldn't even hire to have it done.

I was looking at Matthew 27:62-64 earlier today (and I was thinking the same thing).

 

[1stcenturylady]

I was looking at Matthew 27:62-64 earlier today (and I was thinking the same thing).

I never noticed it before and I've read it a number of times, of course, over the years. Why call it the day after the preparation day? Why not call it the Sabbath if that was what it was. But, just curious. Would they really be legal to do that on the Feast of Unleavened Bread either? Could they work on a feast day? I'm not sure. They sure did break a lot of commandments!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I never noticed it before and I've read it a number of times, of course, over the years. Why call it the day after the preparation day? Why not call it the Sabbath if that was what it was. But, just curious. Would they really be legal to do that on the Feast of Unleavened Bread either? Could they work on a feast day? I'm not sure. They sure did break a lot of commandments!

I believe the Jews had kept the wrong day. They were a day behind Jesus.
Jesus kept the Passover at the right time the night before (with a New Covenant Passover involving His disciples) and the Jew's traditions had got it wrong.
The Jews were preparing for the Passover the next day at the wrong time when the official Passover already took place. The Jews called it the "Preparation Day." on the day Christ was crucified and they were preparing to sacrifice the Lambs. But they were a day behind Jesus (Who kept the Passover at the right time).

I do not believe the 15th is the first day of unleavened bread.
I believe the 14th was the first day of unleavened bread.

First, nowhere does Leviticus 23:4-6 actually use the words "first" or the "first day" of unleavened bread. It merely says it is the (or "a") feast of unleavened bread.

Second, Matthew 26:17 calls the first day of unleavened bread as the Passover. Luke 22:1 says,
"Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover." Unleavened bread was to be eaten on the Passover Day, which began at the evening of the 14th (Gentile Tuesday night, Jewish 4th Day of the Week).

"Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses:" (Exodus 12:15).

The first day is the Passover and it is a holy convocation (like a Sabbath).

"In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even." (Exodus 12:18).



Anyways, getting back to the Jews keeping the wrong day:
The next day for them would have been the 14th Passover (Which was not a Sabbath).
However, in reality, those Jews who followed Jesus knew better and knew that it was really the 15th (Which was a High Sabbath).

 

[1stcenturylady]

I believe the Jews had kept the wrong day. They were a day behind Jesus.
Jesus kept the Passover at the right time the night before (with a New Covenant Passover involving His disciples) and the Jew's traditions had got it wrong.
The Jews were preparing for the Passover the next day at the wrong time when the official Passover already took place. The Jews called it the "Preparation Day." on the day Christ was crucified and they were preparing to sacrifice the Lambs. But they were a day behind Jesus (Who kept the Passover at the right time).

I do not believe the 15th is the first day of unleavened bread.
I believe the 14th was the first day of unleavened bread.

First, nowhere does Leviticus 23:4-6 actually use the words "first" or the "first day" of unleavened bread. It merely says it is the (or "a") feast of unleavened bread.

Second, Matthew 26:17 calls the first day of unleavened bread as the Passover. Luke 22:1 says,
"Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover." Unleavened bread was to be eaten on the Passover Day, which began at the evening of the 14th (Gentile Tuesday night, Jewish 4th Day of the Week).

"Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses:" (Exodus 12:15).

The first day is the Passover and it is a holy convocation (like a Sabbath).

"In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even." (Exodus 12:18).



Anyways, getting back to the Jews keeping the wrong day:
The next day for them would have been the 14th Passover (Which was not a Sabbath).
However, in reality, those Jews who followed Jesus knew better and knew that it was really the 15th (Which was a High Sabbath).

I don't believe they got it wrong. The Passover meal would have been at the beginning of the 14th, the evening of our 13th. The 14th would have been the preparation day for the actual festival that started on the 15th and lasted a number of days. Either 7 or 8. And the feast of first fruits would be the day after the first Sabbath after Passover. But, personally, I find it strange that they call the Passover day as being a preparation day. I may be wrong.

I was under the impression that the Resurrection was on the 17th. But that would only be true if you are right and he rose at 3pm on the 17th. One thing interesting is that Matthew 28:1 in the original says the sabbaths/plural.

28 And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,

I think I've read it translated a little differently as well, but also using the plural of sabbaths. I think it is interesting seeing as some say there are no sabbaths but the weekly Sabbath. But any feast that requires preparation because no work, servial or otherwise, can be done is a sabbath.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I believe the Jews had kept the wrong day. They were a day behind Jesus.
Jesus kept the Passover at the right time the night before (with a New Covenant Passover involving His disciples) and the Jew's traditions had got it wrong.
The Jews were preparing for the Passover the next day at the wrong time when the official Passover already took place. The Jews called it the "Preparation Day." on the day Christ was crucified and they were preparing to sacrifice the Lambs. But they were a day behind Jesus (Who kept the Passover at the right time).

I do not believe the 15th is the first day of unleavened bread.
I believe the 14th was the first day of unleavened bread.

First, nowhere does Leviticus 23:4-6 actually use the words "first" or the "first day" of unleavened bread. It merely says it is the (or "a") feast of unleavened bread.

Second, Matthew 26:17 calls the first day of unleavened bread as the Passover. Luke 22:1 says,
"Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover." Unleavened bread was to be eaten on the Passover Day, which began at the evening of the 14th (Gentile Tuesday night, Jewish 4th Day of the Week).

"Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses:" (Exodus 12:15).

The first day is the Passover and it is a holy convocation (like a Sabbath).

"In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even." (Exodus 12:18).



Anyways, getting back to the Jews keeping the wrong day:
The next day for them would have been the 14th Passover (Which was not a Sabbath).
However, in reality, those Jews who followed Jesus knew better and knew that it was really the 15th (Which was a High Sabbath).

The first day of unleavened bread is the 15th, but because Passover is just the day before, they combine them, making the Passover the "first" day.

Good night, my friend.

 

[1stcenturylady]

"These were regular Roman soldiers. A watch consisted of 4 soldiers which was changed every four hours. They would die if their prisoner escaped. These soldiers were not from the temple guard. Like the group that came to imprison Jesus."
Roman Soldiers guard the Tomb, Matthew 27:62-66 | Bibleview

It was the Roman soldiers for in Matt 28 they went and reported to the priests.

Mat 28:11 Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
Mat 28:12 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
Mat 28:13 Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.

They still PAID them, those naughty Pharisees! They preach the law, but don't obey it.

 

[mmksparbud]

They still PAID them, those naughty Pharisees! They preach the law, but don't obey it.

Yes--but they paid them on resurrection day!! after Sabbath! Technically, they could say they did not break it---naughty---they were evil and corrupt and very sneaky.

 

[Antig]

Were you? That is why history is there. Jesus did not indulge in strong drink--it was not permitted--strong drink was full strength wine--did you not read the whole post, or just skip over? Having drunk even 3 oz of watered down wine, you were not even supposed to pray. For a priest, they could drink no wine at all when going into the sanctuary. When we go to God in prayer--we are not to have wine. Jesus could not have prayed at the Passover if He had drunk. It does not say He prayed at the wedding. The best "wine" was considered freshly pressed from the grapes, as opposed to full strength wine that had to be watered down.

Joh 2:6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.

Firkin: Used only in John 2:6 ; the Attic amphora, equivalent to the Hebrew bath (q.v.), a measure for liquids containing about 8 7/8 gallons.

Each container contained nearly 27 gallons as they were filled to the brim, probably 9 gallons. There were 6 of them----that's 54 gallons. By today's standard one bottle of wine is around 27 oz. That's 4.74 bottles of wine per gallon. 128 oz per gallon--1152 oz per container--6912 oz total----or the equivalent of 256 bottles of wine at most.

The Catholics have it as 20-30 gal. per container, but everything I find says 9 gal.


Rev_1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

I suggest you do more research.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Jesus says,
"For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40).

Three days and three nights.

That is what He says.

I don't know about you, but if I tell people three days and three nights that is 72 hours. There are 24 hours in a day today just as there were 24 hours within a day back then. You can't change that, my friend.

For if a car dealership told you that they were going to give you a free car three days and three nights from the time they hit the stop watch in front of you (and you could not be late by 5 minutes or you could lose receiving the car), there is no doubt in my mind you would be there 72 hours from that point and not at another time. Jesus meant what He said. 3 days and 3 nights (72 hours).

You are not listening again, in Judaism ANY part of a day is counted as the whole of it. Synecdoche. By the way, He said 3 DAYS and 3 Nights, not 3 NIGHTS and 3 days...since you want to be snippy about it...your count starts with a night...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I just read this and wanted to see what you thought.

Matthew 27:
62 On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, 63 saying, “Sir, we remember, while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise.’ 64 Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead.’ So the last deception will be worse than the first.”

65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go your way, make it as secure as you know how.” 66 So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard.

Don't you find it strange that if this was the Sabbath they would be doing manual labor making the tomb secure? They couldn't even hire to have it done.

No Jew sealed the tomb. They were Roman soldiers. It was sealed with a Roman seal.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

While I do believe the KJV is inspired and perfect, I believe Modern Translations are more clearer on what Luke 24:21 says.

James Murdock Translation says, “And lo, three days [have passed], since all these things occurred.”

Read the original Greek...you are wrong

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Interesting. BTW, Angel of the Lord with a capital "A" refers to Jesus in the Old Testament theophanies. Here it just says "an angel of the Lord."

It is not interesting, it is wrong...scripturally. We KNOW He rose on the 1st day of the week (Sunday), not on Shabbat at 3 PM. He rose anytime AFTER sunset (which would be Sunday). ALL Scripture says this.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

IOne thing interesting is that Matthew 28:1 in the original says the sabbaths/plural.

28 And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths, came Mary the Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre,

I think I've read it translated a little differently as well, but also using the plural of sabbaths. I think it is interesting seeing as some say there are no sabbaths but the weekly Sabbath. But any feast that requires preparation because no work, servial or otherwise, can be done is a sabbath.

Where does it say that? It is not in the original Greek text...

 

[truefiction1]

It is old Jewish standards that are the basis for Christianity. If one wants to do as Jesus did, then we should do as He did. I realize 2000 years of tradition takes precedence in some churches, but that is not what I am personally interested in. It was not possible for a Jewish priest to enter into the sanctuary having drank the diluted wine. It meant death. The High Priest would have been instantly struck down. A lay person was not even to pray having drank wine--if he did it was considered an abomination and he would have to pray again later after the affects wore off.

It was not possible for Jew to be uncircumcised either, yet we're not Jews: we're Christians, so Baptism is what we are concerned with. Circumcision for us serves only as a metaphor prefiguring Baptism. It was not possible for Jew to eat pig meat. We're not Jews: we're Christians. We don't need to be circumcised and we are permitted to eat pig meat. We could even eat meat that was part of an offering to idols. Was it lawful for Jewish high priests to do that? There are many ancient Jewish standards spelled out in Leviticus that we are not obligated to perform. Many elements of Jewish temple worship do remain in the Orthodox Christian Liturgy even today. But we are Christians nonetheless, and many elements of the Jewish religious practices were ignored by the early Church and remain so today.

Just FYI, the Orthodox Christian priestly practice is to mix water with Communion wine during the Liturgy of Preparation, before Liturgy even begins. But this custom is related to the testimony given in the Gospel of John that when Jesus' side was pierced with the spear, immediately blood and water flowed out. Also, immediately before Communion is given, the celebrants pour very hot water into the chalice containing the bread and wine. This not only dilutes the wine, but gives it warmth reminiscent of the "warmth of Faith that is full of the Holy Spirit". So it would seem that in Orthodox Liturgical practice, the wine is diluted with water.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

We could even eat meat that was part of an offering to idols.

Acts 15:28-29 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication

 

[truefiction1]

The Israelites would buy fully fermented wine and store it that way, but when they drank wine, they diluted it with water. This diluted wine still had alcoholic content to make man's heart glad but it was not enough to intoxicate like undiluted fermented wines. Barbarians (Gentiles) usually drank undiluted fermented wine. They still do. In fact, Scripture warns against drinking this kind of wine.

21 Warnings That Speak Against The Alcoholic Beverage Itself.
(That is not specifically or exclusively talking about drunkenness)

Passages For the Old Testament Saint:

(Before the Cross: The OT Saint did not have a liberty in Christ to drink intoxicating beverages)
(Just as they did not have a liberty in Christ to eat unclean animals)

1) Deuteronomy 29:5-6
- God gave no grape juice to Israel nor did they have intoxicating drink in the wilderness.
(The reason for this action was taken so as to show how they knew God).

2) Deuteronomy 32:33
- Enemy's wine is like the poison of serpents vs. Israelite's pure blood of the grape (verse 14).

3) 1 Samuel 1:14-15
- Accused, Hannah said she drank no wine.

4) Proverbs 4:17
- Alcoholic drink is called the wine of violence.

5) Proverbs 20:1
- Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging.

6) Proverbs 23:31
- God instructs not to look at intoxicating drinks.

7) Proverbs 23:32
- Alcoholic drinks bite like a serpent, sting like an adder.

8) Proverbs 23:35
- Alcohol makes the drinker insensitive to pain so he does not perceive it as a warning.
(It also says Alcohol is habit forming).

9) Proverbs 31:4-5
- Kings, Princes, and others who rule and judge must not drink alcohol. Alcohol perverts good judgment.

10) Ecclesiastes 2:3
- The king tried everything, including intoxicating drink, to see if it satisfied. It did not.
(c.f. Ecclesiastes 12:8)

11) Ecclesiastes 10:17
- A land is blessed when its leaders do not drink.

12) Isaiah 5:22
- There is a woe unto them who mix strong drinks.

13) Jeremiah 35:2-14
- The Rechabites drank no grape juice or intoxicating wine and were blessed.

14) Daniel 1:5-17
- Daniel refused the king’s intoxicating wine and was blessed for it along with his abstaining friends.

15) Hosea 4:11
- Intoxicating wine seduces the heart.


Passages For the New Testament Saint:

(After the Cross: NT Saints (Not All) have a liberty in Christ to drink alcohol soberly & privately)
(Just as they have a liberty in Christ to eat unclean animals)
(Those whose conscience condemns them in drinking are not to drink)
(Those who are leaders in the church are not to drink alcohol)


16) Romans 14:21
- Do not do anything (Including drinking intoxicating beverages) to make your brother to stumble.

17) 1 Timothy 3:2-3
- Bishops (elders) are to be temperate, sober, and not near any wine.

18) 1 Timothy 3:8
- Deacons are to be worthy of respect and not drinkers.

19) 1 Timothy 3:11
- Deacons’ wives are to be temperate and sober.

20) Titus 1:7-8
- A bishop is not to be given to wine.

21) Titus 2:2-3
- The older men and older women of the church are to be temperate and not addicted to wine.

Such warnings would not exist if wine was totally cool and good for us. Technically today's type wines are a poison and not a food. That is why most wines do not have a nutrition label on them. If you put a coin in rubbing alcohol it is going to clean the coin. If you put meat in rubbing alcohol it is going to dry out the meat. The thing is that the alcohol does not know when it is in the body or outside the body. It is going to destroy and dry things out. That is what alcohol does.

The wine received in Communion is REALLY, TRULY the blood of Christ. It is not harmful to either the body or soul of the recipient unless they receive it without "discerning the body and blood of Christ". Your concern with the alcoholic content of wine in Communion might be due to such a lack of discernment on your part. Do you believe that the "sanctified" contents of the chalice of which Orthodox Christians partake during Liturgy is indeed Christ's flesh and indeed His blood?

FYI, in Orthodox Communion only very small amounts are consumed by the faithful, no more than one time per day (less than half a teaspoon usually). Also, wine in small amounts is not bad for us. In small quantities it is actually good for us in its nutritional value.

 

[truefiction1]

Acts 15:28-29 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication

You know the context in which I said this, and how the Christian principle taught in 1 Corinthians 8 is being brought in to bear on this discussion about whether it's okay to use wine in Communion. Perhaps you assume that I don't know the Scripture? Also, if we apply this Scripture quote of yours to our own Sacrament of Communion, we would have to abandon the Sacrament, which is what these heretical believers are saying we should do. Is this what you think we ought to do, seeing your Scripture quote also forbids us to drink any blood?

 

[truefiction1]

Duplicate post.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

You know the context in which I said this, and how the Christian principle taught in 1 Corinthians 8:8 is being applied here. Perhaps you assume that I don't know the Scripture? Also, if we apply this Scripture quote of yours to our own Sacrament of Communion, we would have to abandon the Sacrament, which is what these heretical believers are saying we should do. Is this what you think we ought to do, seeing your Scripture quote also forbids us to drink any blood?

What does that have anything to do with Communion? These are all part of the Noahide laws for gentiles.
Do not murder, don't eat a live animal, do not participate in sexual sins, etc...