Wine

ClementofRome said:

Because it is not a sin to drink alcoholic wine. Please show me the scripture that says so. It is a sin to fall into drunkeness or abuse of the wine.

Click to expand...

Proverbs 20:1
Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler; whoever is led astray by them is not wise.

Proverbs 23:31
Do not gaze at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when it goes down smoothly!

Luke 1:15
for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth. [ Or from his mother's womb]

So why would Jesus take wine?

Luke 7:33
For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’

John the Baptist was told not to drink wine, then why would Jesus be allowed to drink it?

elman said:

It was alcoholic. The rule not to drink is from men and not God.

Click to expand...

In point of fact, I believe it was women who sponsored that rule, and changed the definition of temperance from "moderation" to "prohibition" (Think Carrie Nation, et al)

That is not to say that the women who led the prohibition movement did not have some valid beefs, or that they didn't have a pertinent message, since the women of that time were often the victims of drunks.

A drunk is someone who is intemperate. He/She has not partaken moderately, but excessively. This is what scripture teaches against. The Bible says, and science agrees that a little wine is good for you.

stray bullet said:

Well, I see no reason to assume He made grape juice, given that the culture He was in would have been used to wine.

To answer your question, it simply depends on how much yeast was in there and what kind it was. I have no idea on how quickly wine ferments if exposed to jars containing yeast.

To answer your question, if you add yeast to a bucket of juice, you can see noticeable fermentation in a matter of a few hours and convert the bulk of the sugars to alcohol within 24 hours.

Regardless, I think He made wine because the bible says so, as does tradition.

Click to expand...

You stated that if you simply let grape juice outside it will ferment. However, in that case, if the 'wine' was freshly pressed grape juice, it wouldn't have had time to ferment once it reached the mouths of the guests and the head of the party.

Also, see Genesis 40:9-11 (Holman Christian Standard Bible [2004]):

"So the chief cupbearer told his dream to Joseph: "In my dream there was a vine in front of me. On the vine were three branches. As soon as it budded, its blossoms came out and its clusters ripened into grapes. Pharaoh's cup was in my hand, and I took the grapes, squeezed them into Pharoah's cup, and placed the cup in Pharoah's hand."

What did Pharoah drink? Grape juice. What happened to the cupbearer? He was restored to his position in Pharoah's house. In my opinion, it is saying that the best 'wine' is that which is freshly pressed grape juice. He didn't give Pharaoh fermented grape juice. Don't you agree? Also see my answer to Tetzel and the link.

BjBarnett said:

the wine Jesus drank was alcoholic. The proof for this is in all the times where he and his disciples were accused of being drunk. the only way they could of thought they were drunk is if they were drinking alcoholic wine.

Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree.

Let's look at the passage Matthew 11:18-19 (Holman Christian Standard Bible [2004]):

"For John did not come eating or drinking and they say 'He has a demon!' The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' Yet wisdom is vindicated by her deeds."

The obvious implication of this analogy is that neither one is true. John was not possessed by a demon, and Jesus was not a glutton or a drunkard and therefore could not have been a drinker of alcoholic wine.

Acts 2:13-15
But others said, scoffing, "They have had too much new wine."
Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice, and proclaimed to them, "You who are Jews, indeed all of you staying in Jerusalem. Let this be known to you, and listen to my words.
These people are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o'clock in the morning.

now if the wine didnt have alcohol in it then why would they think they were drunk from drinking to much wine? if it wasnt alcoholic then it wouldnt matter how much they had drank. im aware they are not drunk here btw because the bible teaches not to be drunkards but it doesnt say you cant drink any alcohol at all. but this verse shows that the wine had alcohol in it because they accuse them of drinking to much wine and then Peter says that they are not drunk which shows you could get drunk off the wine.

You are only a drunkard if you get drunk or inebriated. Believe it or not, it is possible to drink alchol without getting drunk. If a person who drinks alcohol is a drunkard, then that must mean that anyone who eats food is a glutton. Since Jesus ate food, does that mean that He was a glutton (or anyone else who eats food for that matter)? It's using either to excess that makes one a drunkard or a glutton.

Jesus did not make FRESHLY PRESSED grape juice.
(He did not make grapes, that were then pressed by the servants.)

Cliff2 said:

luke7:33
For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’

John the Baptist was told not to drink wine, then why would Jesus be allowed to drink it?

Click to expand...

If you are going to quote scripture please let the author finish his thought

Luke 7:33-34
33 "For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon!'
34 "The Son of Man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man, and a drunkard, a friend of tax-gatherers and sinners!'
(NAS)

lets see here hmmm, JOHN DIDN'T EAT BREAD OR DRINK WINE, JESUS CAME EATING AND DRINKING AND THEY CALLED HIM A GLUTTON AND A DRUNKARD what do you think he was drinking? Just curious.
he also ate no bread, boy am I in trouble I just took communion. so by your logic we can assume that bread is sinful.

KennySe said:

Jesus did not make FRESHLY PRESSED grape juice.
(He did not make grapes, that were then pressed by the servants.)

Click to expand...

I think you know what I meant: FRESH GRAPE JUICE.

stray bullet said:

Hi
I am afraid to say this one is goes right against logic. If you filter the fermentables, that is, the sugars, out of juice, you end up with water. It is just silly, there is no reason to make grape juice just to squeeze out water from it and remove the sugars.

Secondly, I'd love to see how they managed to filter out sugars from the juice given the technology at the time.

Click to expand...

Easton's Bible Dictionary on Wine agrees with the research:

In addition to wine the Hebrews also made use of what they called debash , which was obtained by boiling down must (grape juice) to one-half or one-third of its original bulk. In Genesis 43:11 this word is rendered "honey." It was a kind of syrup, and is called by the Arabs at the present day dibs. This word occurs in the phrase "a land flowing with milk and honey" (debash), Exodus 3:8,17; 13:5; 33:3; Leviticus 20:24; Numbers 13:: 27. (See HONEY .)


Just add water to the syrup and there you go....

Christ Aficionado said:

I think you know what I meant: FRESH GRAPE JUICE.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know what you meant, and I disagree.

Jesus made wine.

That is what every English translation of the Bible that I have ever read says. "wine".

If you have a different Bible, or if the greeks interpret their greek into English as "unfermented grape juice", let me know.

KennySe said:

Yes, I know what you meant, and I disagree.

Jesus made wine.

That is what every English translation of the Bible that I have ever read says. "wine".

If you have a different Bible, or if the greeks interpret their greek into English as "unfermented grape juice", let me know.

Click to expand...

Here is the link again:
http://www.biblicalperspectives.com...he_bible/2.html

KennySe said:

Yes, I know what you meant, and I disagree.

Jesus made wine.

That is what every English translation of the Bible that I have ever read says. "wine".

If you have a different Bible, or if the greeks interpret their greek into English as "unfermented grape juice", let me know.

Click to expand...

Look at the link and you will see.

http://www.biblicalperspectives.com...he_bible/2.html

BjBarnett said:

Acts 2:13-15
But others said, scoffing, "They have had too much new wine."
Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice, and proclaimed to them, "You who are Jews, indeed all of you staying in Jerusalem. Let this be known to you, and listen to my words.
These people are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o'clock in the morning.

now if the wine didnt have alcohol in it then why would they think they were drunk from drinking to much wine? if it wasnt alcoholic then it wouldnt matter how much they had drank. im aware they are not drunk here btw because the bible teaches not to be drunkards but it doesnt say you cant drink any alcohol at all. but this verse shows that the wine had alcohol in it because they accuse them of drinking to much wine and then Peter says that they are not drunk which shows you could get drunk off the wine.

Click to expand...

I'm sure there were different kinds of wines back then just like there are today. According to the New Peoples Testament the "new wine" mentioned in this verse is: "New wine. More exactly, sweet wine, a wine made by soaking raisins, pressing out and fermenting the juice, which was very intoxicating."

As I've mentioned in my previous posts, the research indicates that the word 'wine' in the New Testament can mean either fermented or unfermented grape juice.

"Yes, I read the article, fellas. It was not very convincing, specifically in regard to the points made by BJBarnett and wild01.

BjBarnett said:

Acts 2:13-15
But others said, scoffing, "They have had too much new wine."
Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice, and proclaimed to them, "You who are Jews, indeed all of you staying in Jerusalem. Let this be known to you, and listen to my words.
These people are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o'clock in the morning.

now if the wine didnt have alcohol in it then why would they think they were drunk from drinking to much wine? if it wasnt alcoholic then it wouldnt matter how much they had drank. im aware they are not drunk here btw because the bible teaches not to be drunkards but it doesnt say you cant drink any alcohol at all. but this verse shows that the wine had alcohol in it because they accuse them of drinking to much wine and then Peter says that they are not drunk which shows you could get drunk off the wine.

Christ Aficionado said:

I'm sure there were different kinds of wines back then just like there are today. According to the New Peoples Testament the "new wine" mentioned in this verse is: "New wine. More exactly, sweet wine, a wine made by soaking raisins, pressing out and fermenting the juice, which was very intoxicating."

As I've mentioned in my previous posts, the research indicates that the word 'wine' in the New Testament can mean either fermented or unfermented grape juice.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Stop dancing and answer his question.
" now if the wine didnt have alcohol in it then why would they think they were drunk from drinking to much wine? "

And here is wild01's question.

wild01 said:

]Luke 7:33-34
33 "For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, 'He has a demon!'
34 "The Son of Man has come eating and drinking; and you say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man, and a drunkard, a friend of tax-gatherers and sinners!'
(NAS)

lets see here hmmm, JOHN DIDN'T EAT BREAD OR DRINK WINE, JESUS CAME EATING AND DRINKING AND THEY CALLED HIM A GLUTTON AND A DRUNKARD what do you think he was drinking?

Click to expand...

KennySe said:

"Yes, I read the article, fellas. It was not very convincing, specifically in regard to the points made by BJBarnett and wild01.



Stop dancing and answer his question.
" now if the wine didnt have alcohol in it then why would they think they were drunk from drinking to much wine? "

And here is wild01's question.

Click to expand...

Kenny,

No one is dancing around the questions. I answered both of those questions already.

Luke 5:37-38
37 "And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the new wine will burst the skins, and it will be spilled out, and the skins will be ruined.
38 "But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins.
(NAS)


this scripture makes it very obvious that when Jesus refered to wine he was refering to fermented grape juice. the reason that you cannot put new wine in old wine skins is because when wine ferments it stretches the skin with gasses, if you try to reuse an old wineskin it won't strech, this was at the time common knowlege, so it made sense to use it as an analogy. the word used here to mean wine is the same word used when Jesus turned water to wine. not only that but why would he use a sinful practice to represent the new covenant to us??

remember, not once does the bible say that drinking wine is sinful it says drunkenness is sinful. and as for John the baptist, he took a nazerite vow, so did Samson, part of that vow was that they would never drink, another part was that theywould now cut their hair, if this proves drinking to be sinful it also proves haircuts to be sinful.

instructions on nazarite vow

Num 6:1-21
1 Again the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,
2 "Speak to the sons of Israel, and say to them, 'When a man or woman makes a special vow, the vow of a Nazirite, to dedicate himself to the LORD,
3 he shall abstain from wine and strong drink; he shall drink no vinegar, whether made from wine or strong drink, neither shall he drink any grape juice, nor eat fresh or dried grapes.
4 'All the days of his separation he shall not eat anything that is produced by the grape vine, from {the} seeds even to {the} skin.
5 'All the days of his vow of separation no razor shall pass over his head. He shall be holy until the days are fulfilled for which he separated himself to the LORD; he shall let the locks of hair on his head grow long.
6 'All the days of his separation to the LORD he shall not go near to a dead person.
7 'He shall not make himself unclean for his father or for his mother, for his brother or for his sister, when they die, because his separation to God is on his head.
8 'All the days of his separation he is holy to the LORD.
9 'But if a man dies very suddenly beside him and he defiles his dedicated head {of hair,} then he shall shave his head on the day when he becomes clean; he shall shave it on the seventh day.
10 'Then on the eighth day he shall bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the priest, to the doorway of the tent of meeting.
11 'And the priest shall offer one for a sin offering and {the} other for a burnt offering, and make atonement for him concerning his sin because of the {dead} person. And that same day he shall consecrate his head,
12 and shall dedicate to the LORD his days as a Nazirite, and shall bring a male lamb a year old for a guilt offering; but the former days shall be void because his separation was defiled.
13 'Now this is the law of the Nazirite when the days of his separation are fulfilled, he shall bring the offering to the doorway of the tent of meeting.
14 'And he shall present his offering to the LORD: one male lamb a year old without defect for a burnt offering and one ewe-lamb a year old without defect for a sin offering and one ram without defect for a peace offering,
15 and a basket of unleavened cakes of fine flour mixed with oil and unleavened wafers spread with oil, along with their grain offering and their libations.
16 'Then the priest shall present {them} before the LORD and shall offer his sin offering and his burnt offering.
17 'He shall also offer the ram for a sacrifice of peace offerings to the LORD, together with the basket of unleavened cakes; the priest shall likewise offer its grain offering and its libation.
18 'The Nazirite shall then shave his dedicated head {of hair} at the doorway of the tent of meeting, and take the dedicated hair of his head and put {it} on the fire which is under the sacrifice of peace offerings.
19 'And the priest shall take the ram's shoulder {when it has been} boiled, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put {them} on the hands of the Nazirite after he has shaved his dedicated {hair}
20 'Then the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the LORD. It is holy for the priest, together with the breast offered by waving and the thigh offered by lifting up; and afterward the Nazirite may drink wine. '
21 "This is the law of the Nazirite who vows his offering to the LORD according to his separation, in addition to what {else} he can afford; according to his vow which he takes, so he shall do according to the law of his separation."
(NAS)

please note that after the vow is fulfilled the person who took it is allowed to drink wine. vs 20 this is the word of God, would God ever tell someone to sin?? also please note verse 3 this is differentiating between wine and juice.
so 20 is obviously not refering to juice.

is it a sin to drink wine, no
is it a sin to get drunk, always.
is it a sin to not drink, no
is it wrong to say that some thing that God never said was a sin, in a sin??????
is it blastphemous to say that something that God told us to do is a sin?????


Deut 14:25-26
25 then you shall exchange {it} for money, and bind the money in your hand and go to the place which the LORD your God chooses.
26 "And you may spend the money for whatever your heart desires, for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household.
(NAS)

God does not change, He doesn't say something is not a sin in one breath and turn around and say it is in the next. He especially doesn't order us to sin. He never tells us it is ok to sin. But He does tell us it is ok to drink wine, and other strong drink.

Never mind.