Wine vs. Grape Juice

[abysmul]

So, out of this:


The Lord’s Supper

23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.
27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number [s]sleep. 31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world.
33 So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will arrange when I come.


We take away this:

"...do this in remembrance of Me..." but only if you have this exact type of wine and bread...








edit to add: I guess all of those countless Christians over the centuries that had no access to wine are just out of luck then.

 

[Tangible]

I have some experience on the ground in a place where neither wheat nor grapes will grow, in West Africa. I know that today, and probably for the past century, bread ingredients and wine were imported from Europe, not only for Communion but also for the tables of Western expatriates.

I've also read that the first Christians in this region were converted from coastal peoples, and so even back into the 1600-1700s these areas would have had at least occasional supplies from Europe.

Up-country, there would indeed have been great difficulty in obtaining wheat flour and grape wine. I don't know what early missionaries would have done in this situation. One can imagine that it would be very easy to substitute the abundant local equivalents of bread and wine - rice and palm wine - but I've never heard of any church doing this, including Protestants who have no qualms about substituting processed grape juice for wine.

Would a Eucharist using rice and palm wine be valid from a sacramental point of view? The answer is, we don't know. We do know that Jesus instituted Holy Communion using wheat bread and grape wine, and that his Word produced in and with these elements his own body and blood for us Christians to eat and drink for the forgiveness of sins. That much is crystal clear from Holy Scripture.

The reason we use the same elements is for the sake of certainty. Introducing foreign elements into the Sacrament introduces doubt and uncertainty. That is the last thing we should ever purposely do.

Now, for those who have a memorial only view of communion, I can see why it would make no difference what elements are used as long as they closely resemble bread and wine - bread and grape juice, doughnuts and koolaid, doritos and pepsi. It's all just a symbol anyway.

What is difficult to understand is that most symbol-only Christians don't really care what elements are used for communion, but are very picky about the mode of equally symbolic baptism - immersion only.

What if someone wanted to baptize someone in something similar to, but not the same as water? Would a baptism in milk or jello or oil be valid? Or, for a more real-life example, if you believe that baptism is only valid by full immersion, then would baptism by pouring or sprinkling be valid?

 

[Albion]

So, out of this:


The Lord’s Supper

23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.

We take away this:

"...do this in remembrance of Me..." but only if you have this exact type of wine and bread...

We do? I also take away all the parts I've highlighted in blue for you...and I didn't notice that the others here dismissed them either.

edit to add: I guess all of those countless Christians over the centuries that had no access to wine are just out of luck then.

What "countless Christians" and what do you mean "out of luck?"

 

[abysmul]

Today alone there are countless Christians in parts of the world with barely enough food to survive (and frequently in areas where starvation is not uncommon) let alone access to wine (many who face imprisonment and/or torture and execution for their faith in Christ).

 

[MoreCoffee]

So, out of this:

The Lord’s Supper

23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.
27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. 30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number [s]sleep. 31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world.
33 So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will arrange when I come.

We take away this:

"...do this in remembrance of Me.." but only if you have this exact type of wine and bread...



edit to add: I guess all of those countless Christians over the centuries that had no access to wine are just out of luck then.[/color][/color]

No, having no wine was not a problem. One can take communion in one kind. And having unleavened bread is not difficult.

 

[Tangible]

Holy Communion is Gospel, not Law. It is not necessary for salvation but it is one of the means God uses to give us his gifts.

 

[Albion]

Today alone there are countless Christians in parts of the world with barely enough food to survive (and frequently in areas where starvation is not uncommon) let alone access to wine (many who face imprisonment and/or torture and execution for their faith in Christ).

Yes, and as for my question to you about "out of luck?" You seem to be under the impression that all of the Gospel is useless, salvation unattainable, and God foiled--if one does not receive Holy Communion on some schedule. To that error, Tangible gave a good answer IMO.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Today alone there are countless Christians in parts of the world with barely enough food to survive (and frequently in areas where starvation is not uncommon) let alone access to wine (many who face imprisonment and/or torture and execution for their faith in Christ).

There certainly are some facing persecution and death. No doubt of that. A number of Catholic nuns & priests as well as members of their parishes have died as martyrs in the past few years (and in all the years and centuries before that for the past two thousand years) yet they have not lost faith or grace because they did not have unleavened bread and wine for communion. In fact it is amazing how the bread and wine managed to be found when needed; God does wonderful things even when his people suffer persecutions.

 

[Lion King]

edit to add: I guess all of those countless Christians over the centuries that had no access to wine are just out of luck then.

Contrary to popular belief, the LORD's Supper does not bestow eternal life. It's not some kind of "ambrosia" that grants the gift of immortality upon anyone who eats it as erroneously preached by some churches who take the passages of John out of context.

The true purpose of the LORD's Supper is to remember the ultimate sacrifice that our LORD paid for us on the cross.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

*snip*
Can you please provide the "older" translation to Numbers 6:1-4?


Jesus drank of the "fruit of the vine" at the Last Supper.
In other words, He drank juice from grapes- which makes perfect sense, since the juice from the grapes is said to represent blood in both the Old and New Testament.

Interesting.
The vine and grapes, along with winepress, are also mentioned in Reve 14:18

John 15:1
I AM the true Vine/ampeloV <288> and the Father of Me the Farmer/gewrgoV <1092> is.

http://www.bible.ca/pre-destruction70AD-george-holford-1805AD.htm

Reve 14:18 And another messenger came out of the altar having authority upon the fire, and he sounds a great voice, to the one having the sharp/keen sickle, saying: "Send! of thee the sickle, the sharp/keen and pick! the clusters of the Vine/ampelou of the land, that ripe the grapes of her.
19 And the messenger cast the sickle of him into the land, and picks the Vine/ampelon of the land.
And he did cast into the winepress of the fury of the great God.
[Isaiah 5/Joel 3:13/Matt 13]

Marvin Gaye - I Heard It Through The Grapevine - YouTube

.

 

[Albion]

Contrary to popular belief, the LORD's Supper does not bestow eternal life.

If it's that "popular" you should be able to point some of those folks out to us, because I don't know anyone who thinks that salvation is guaranteed by the reception of Holy Communion.

It's not some kind of "ambrosia" that grants the gift of immortality upon anyone who eats it as erroneously preached by some churches who take the passages of John out of context.

OK, if you can't name individuals, name the churches that you imagine are teaching such an idea.

 

[SwordFall]

Can you please provide the "older" translation to Numbers 6:1-4?

Can you provide Scriptural evidence to back up your claims that the grape juice mentioned in Scripture was actually wine?


Thank you.



Jesus drank of the "fruit of the vine" at the Last Supper. In other words, He drank juice from grapes- which makes perfect sense, since the juice from the grapes is said to represent blood in both the Old and New Testament.

Do you even realize how much of a waste it would have been for people to be drinking grape juice?
You act like one could simply go to the grocery store and get a bottle of Welch's.

Grapes were in high demand and were by extension expensive. This is because of the very intention of being made into wine.

People didn't drink 'grape juice' then, and neither did they for centuries later until we invented water on tap. People drunk wine, and in the medieval era, started drinking mead and whatnot.

That was what people drank, plain and simple. It was clean, and had a long shelf life. As for wine, grapes only harvest once a year- how exactly is one drinking grape juice 6 months after the fact.

People did not drink grape juice. That's historically ridiculous

Your belief that they were sipping on grape juice is completely and utterly fabricated. Made up by this era's Christian oddballs.
You are the one with the burden of proof, and your kidding yourself if you think you have actually provided any.

 

[abysmul]

Contrary to popular belief, the LORD's Supper does not bestow eternal life. It's not some kind of "ambrosia" that grants the gift of immortality upon anyone who eats it as erroneously preached by some churches who take the passages of John out of context.

The true purpose of the LORD's Supper is to remember the ultimate sacrifice that our LORD paid for us on the cross.

I agree.

 

[Albion]

I agree.

...which causes me to wonder why you were so concerned or upset at the possibility of some Christian not being able, for lack of wine, to commune? If it's nothing but a memorial to you, why not simply draw a picture of bread and wine and pretend you went to Holy Communion?

 

[abysmul]

...which causes me to wonder why you were so concerned or upset at the possibility of some Christian not being able, for lack of wine, to commune? If it's nothing but a memorial to you, why not simply draw a picture of bread and wine and pretend you went to Holy Communion?

I'm not upset, I'm interested in how others view and understand the Lord's supper. I find it not only interesting but educational to not only study the Bible, but to study others' understandings on many Biblical topics. My relationship with Christ and my understanding of the contents of the Bible has changed and grown over years of study, prayer, and interacting with other Christians. Occasionally I really do not grasp certain views/interpretations of certain scripture and practices, I simply am baffled and so I ask questions and try to understand.

 

[Lion King]

If it's that "popular" you should be able to point some of those folks out to us, because I don't know anyone who thinks that salvation is guaranteed by the reception of Holy Communion.


OK, if you can't name individuals, name the churches that you imagine are teaching such an idea.

Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed." John 6:53-55


Numerous churches today teach that the above passage is referring to the LORD's Supper. They claim that only those who partake in the LORD's Supper have life in them.

Makes sense why most of these churches also have a very strict communion.

 

[Albion]

I'm not upset, I'm interested in how others view and understand the Lord's supper.

Very well. However, you and at least one other poster seemed to want to press the point that there is something wrong with our view. All those mistaken points being made about Communion conferring salvation and being 'out of luck' if one can't commune with bread and wine for some reason....

Anyway, have we now covered all that we should have?

 

[Lion King]

Do you even realize how much of a waste it would have been for people to be drinking grape juice?
You act like one could simply go to the grocery store and get a bottle of Welch's.

Grapes were in high demand and were by extension expensive. This is because of the very intention of being made into wine.

People didn't drink 'grape juice' then, and neither did they for centuries later until we invented water on tap. People drunk wine, and in the medieval era, started drinking mead and whatnot.

That was what people drank, plain and simple. It was clean, and had a long shelf life. As for wine, grapes only harvest once a year- how exactly is one drinking grape juice 6 months after the fact.

People did not drink grape juice. That's historically ridiculous

Your belief that they were sipping on grape juice is completely and utterly fabricated. Made up by this era's Christian oddballs.
You are the one with the burden of proof, and your kidding yourself if you think you have actually provided any.

You do understand that grape juice is of the fruit of the vine right?

Wine (fermented grape juice) = fruit of the vine
Unfermented grape juice = fruit of the vine.

Now, where is your evidence that the Scriptures says we are only to use wine at the LORD's Supper?

 

[Albion]

Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed." John 6:53-55


Numerous churches today teach that the above passage is referring to the LORD's Supper. They claim that only those who partake in the LORD's Supper have life in them.

A FEW churches only take that POV. But in addition, I think that you've mistaken the idea of the grace received through this (or any other) sacrament for being some kind of guarantee of salvation. It's not. It is not thought that the part in which we read "has eternal life" is some Quid Pro Quo.

 

[RDKirk]

ow, for those who have a memorial only view of communion, I can see why it would make no difference what elements are used as long as they closely resemble bread and wine - bread and grape juice, doughnuts and koolaid, doritos and pepsi. It's all just a symbol anyway.

Just to let you know, that's a rather offensive comment. Protestants are not that wide-open even on things we consider symbolic.

What is difficult to understand is that most symbol-only Christians don't really care what elements are used for communion, but are very picky about the mode of equally symbolic baptism - immersion only.

That is a fair comment, and I alluded to it a number of posts ago. From the Protestant point of view of Catholic communion doctrine, the Protestant doctrinal derivation of immersion baptism has the same foundational validity as (from the Protestant point of view, remember) the Catholic doctrine of the Euchrist.

From a Protestant point of view, we're living in a glass house in that particular respect.