Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Should I tell my wife to stop taking communion then?
It's legalism when people start saying that it is wrong to receive grape juice or leavened bread instead of wine and unleavened bread.
I once attended a youth rally where they used grape juice instead of wine. Buying wine for 1500 people was not cost effective and would've drained the budget of the youth rally. That communion was no different than the communion I took last week with my husband.
It's not legalism. It's keeping the Sacrament as instituted by Christ. It's not about us, it's about Him.
We can thank Dr. Welch for the pasteurization of grape juice, and the subsequent marketing of such to churches under the name "Dr. Welch's Unfermented Wine." He was a Methodist, and a prohibitionist.
Pastor Welch was also the inventor of the individual shot glasses that our congregations have been plagued with ever since.
But saying "fruit of the vine" can only be translated as wine is incorrect. Just because wine was the only way they had to preserve grapes doesn't necessarily mean that they were drinking wine. You can't possibly tell me that a communion with grape juice is any less than a communion with wine.
To say that those people who can't have alcohol for whatever reason should just refrain from communion is not fair. Communion was instituted for everyone, not just those who can tolerate alcohol.
We don't know for sure that it was wine they drank that night. Yes, we can reasonably assume it was given the times. But it could've been grape juice too.
We do know it was wine. "Oinon" means wine.
I think I'm making a mountain out of a molehill.
We don't know for sure that it was wine they drank that night. Yes, we can reasonably assume it was given the times. But it could've been grape juice too.
If we are going to be literal and say that it was indeed wine and that we should be taking wine, then we can hardly tell someone to take only the body, can we? Jesus used both, so we should use both.
I have seen the dipping method, and I know a couple of women with alcohol allergies who can take communion in this fashion without having a reaction.
I realize that communion is not necessary for salvation, but I know how I feel just missing a single communion service. I can't begin to imagine how it might feel to have to abstain completely from it
At any rate...didn't mean to make such a big deal out of it.
Oh we don't use it, Scott. I've just seen it used for people who couldn't tolerate the alcohol.
Not sure how I would feel about it being used as a regular method. When I was dating a Catholic, that's how they did their communion at one of the churches we attended. Course, at the other one only the priest got the wine!!
Hubby was saying earlier that the translation for oinon was "Fruit of the vine", which is commonly known as wine. But I do wonder, how different might their wine have been from ours? Not that it matters, of course. Just some rambling thoughts.
My only thing here is that I don't think we can say communion with grape juice is any less than communion with wine. To me it's like saying that a non-immersion baptism is wrong because Jesus was immersed (was he actually? that seems to be the argument used by most people). Jesus went into a river to be baptized - shouldn't we all go "down to the river" then? Do you see the point I'm making? I'm trying not to muddy it up, but I am on cold medicine so who knows?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?