Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Are Christians That Drink Wine Not Saved?


The Glory Land

Recommended Posts

  • Members

From "Wine in the Bible and the Scriptural Case for Total Abstinence" by Leighton G. campbell -- page 143


The difference between the new bottles and the old consisted not in the relative proportion of their strength; but arose solely from the fact that the new bottles had in them no fermentable matter.

Let us consider this. If new wine was poured into old bottles the particles of yeast on the old wineskins would cause the wine to ferment thus bursting the wineskins, "A little leaven (fermen- tation) leaveneth the whole lump." (Galatians 5:9) The aim therefore was to keep the wine sweet and unfermented hence the new bottles. This goes perfectly with Christ's parable, because His teaching had to remain -uncorrupted (unfermented). Dr. William Patton explains the following:

The new bottles, or skins, being clean and perfectly free from all ferment, were essential for preserving the fresh unfermented juice, not that their strength might resist the force of fermentation, but, being clean and free from fermenting matter, and closely tied and sealed, so as to exclude the air, the wine would be preserved in the same state in which it was when put into the skins.
He goes on to add:

Columella, who lived in the days of the Apostles, in his recipe for keeping the wine "always sweet," expressly directs that the newest must, be put in a "new amphora," or jar.

This agrees with Parson's explanation, which states:

The vessel they required was not one that could bear fermentation without breaking, but one which would effectually preserve the wines from fermenting; and, therefore, the text alludes to the custom of preserving wines from fermentation, which both Pliny and Columella inform us was common at that very period when the Saviour uttered these words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 393
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Hab 2:15  Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!
 

This is Old Testament,so some may say "It doesn't count".  "Nakedness" is shame, and doesn't always have to be running around with nothing on.

 

As for the study of wine in Strong's, I did the same thing Bro Steve did, and found the same surprising results.  There were many "types" of wine, including pure grape juice, (the "root" of wine.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

KOB is Anglibaptist and reads the MVs too.

 

KOB, did you know that it wasn't until the last fifty years that wines came to mean just fermented grape juice?  Even hundreds of years after 1611, Funk and Wagnalls still referred to wine as grape juice but had both definitions.  It depends on the context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

From "Wine in the Bible and the Scriptural Case for Total Abstinence" by Leighton G. campbell -- pp. 143,144...

Jesus could not have been likening His teaching of the Kingdom of grace to eventual fermentation, since this is fundamentally a decay process. Christ's teaching must remain uncorrupted or uncontaminated. If Christ's teaching was put into old bottles (legalistic tradition) it would eventually ferment, that is, be perverted, thus causing utter confusion.
We have seen that Jesus in no way condones the use of intox- icating wine but rather the opposite. He presents new wine in a figurative sense to show the virtue of grace, in contrast to old wine, which represented the hopelessness of legalistic tradition. Like the new wine He speaks of in His parable, His teaching must not be changed (ferment), but must remain in its original form. Note Christ's words, But new wine must be put into new bottles; and BOTH ARE PRESERVED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

KOB is Anglibaptist and reads the MVs too.

 

KOB, did you know that it wasn't until the last fifty years that wines came to mean just fermented grape juice?  Even hundreds of years after 1611, Funk and Wagnalls still referred to wine as grape juice but had both definitions.  It depends on the context.

What is an "Anglibaptist"? I don't think I've ever heard of that before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When I did my exhaustive study on Wine and Alcohol in the Bible, I came across a couple of different Bible dictionaries that confirmed what you say here.  Most Bible dictionaries, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, and others say that they had no way to prevent the grape juice from fermenting.  This is not true.  They did.  They would reduce the juice down into a "must", and they could preserve it in a cold pond, or in their cellars.  They did not preserve it as "juice."  That is why they mixed it with water.  It is very similar to our frozen concentrated juices, only theirs was not frozen - just kept cold or cool.  

I found this in Smith's Bible Dictionary and Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary.  Therefore those ancient peoples DID know how to preserve their juices without it fermenting.  Since the RCC insists on alcohol in their "mass" of course they will encourage and promote the idea that "nobody knew how to prevent fermentation back then."   Well, they are wrong - and so is every one who repeats their babbling nonsense.

 

And its amazing at how many will let the RCC influence them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Jesus did not turn water into fermented wine nor did He drink it at the Last Supper or serve it to His disciples.

The same word for wine in John 2:3 is used in Romans 14:21

 

Jhn 2:3

And when they wanted wine, G3631 the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. G3631

 

Rom 14:21

It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, G3631 nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

...and lets not forget

 

Eph 5:18

And be not drunk with wine, G3631 wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;

 

I guess what alot are saying is there is a problem with the KJV because they didn't have the word "juice" in 1611 ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Jesus did not turn water into fermented wine nor did He drink it at the Last Supper or serve it to His disciples.

John 2:9-10

9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

 

I have never heard anyone doing this with grape juice?  Were they drinking "Great Value" brand and then someone gave them "Welches" and the govenor of the feast was so excited to get Welches?

 

When you are drunk, you will drink anything and the taste won't matter much because your senses are dulled.  Spend a little more on "good wine" and let the guests get drunk on that and then when you serve the bad stuff, they won't care nor will they judge you for giving bad stuff because all they can remember is the stuff they drank first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When I did my exhaustive study on Wine and Alcohol in the Bible, I came across a couple of different Bible dictionaries that confirmed what you say here.  Most Bible dictionaries, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, and others say that they had no way to prevent the grape juice from fermenting.  This is not true.  They did.  They would reduce the juice down into a "must", and they could preserve it in a cold pond, or in their cellars.  They did not preserve it as "juice."  That is why they mixed it with water.  It is very similar to our frozen concentrated juices, only theirs was not frozen - just kept cold or cool.  

I found this in Smith's Bible Dictionary and Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary.  Therefore those ancient peoples DID know how to preserve their juices without it fermenting.  Since the RCC insists on alcohol in their "mass" of course they will encourage and promote the idea that "nobody knew how to prevent fermentation back then."   Well, they are wrong - and so is every one who repeats their babbling nonsense.

maybe you would want to do an exhaustive study on the word "contradiction." 

 

How does someone have the belief "the KJV is the literal Word of God for english speaking people" and then come up with the thought, "wine is not wine, it is juice!" 

 

No wonder most the lost world thinks Christians are a bunch of hypocritical knuckleheads.  We spend hours and hours trying to justify wine being juice and then try to tell other "Christians" they are using the wrong Bible if they are not using the KJV because it's perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why Rob are you applying modern definitions to a word that remained essentially unchanged until about sixty years ago?  How can you rightly divide the Scriptures if you don't know what the words mean and cannot see the contexts?

 

Here's some reading material:

 

Page 20 here:

 

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/10dectbc.pdf

 

Page 5 on this one (you might like the front page article too):

 

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/11febtbc.pdf

 

Finally, Page 3 here:

 

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/96martbc.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Just Checking those mines that are here.... :)

Like it has been said, if they are Christians, they are saved.

 

Christians do dumb things, like drinking, but it doesn't mean they are not saved.  A Christians should desire to live as close to the cross and they can, but so many seem to see how close they can get to the world without actually being part of the world.  This is very dangerous and shows the immaturity of some Christians. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why Rob are you applying modern definitions to a word that remained essentially unchanged until about sixty years ago?  How can you rightly divide the Scriptures if you don't know what the words mean and cannot see the contexts?

 

Here's some reading material:

 

Page 20 here:

 

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/10dectbc.pdf

 

Page 5 on this one (you might like the front page article too):

 

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/11febtbc.pdf

 

Finally, Page 3 here:

 

http://www.baptistchallenge.org/challenge/96martbc.pdf

What word remained unchanged until the 50's?  This Bertha Rachael Palmer has spent enough time on researching wine, but I still think it is bunk and a waste of time.

 

God has said enough on the subject of drinking when He said, "be not drunk with wine" because we are to be "filled with the Spirit."  It doesn't matter whether a sip of wine would be enough to make a person drunk or not.  A mature Christian should not be looking at what is a proper amount or too much because that is the wrong part of that verse to focus on.  A mature Christian should focus on being filled with the Spirit and if there is even the slighest possibility that a drink can cause a Christian not to be filled, they should run away from it as fast as they can.  A mature Christian does not want to flirt with disater at all. 

 

A mature Christian would not be looking for a reason to drink.

An immature Christian might look to justify continuing to enjoy a small amount of wine, but Eph 5:18 will let them know this shows immaturity.

A lost person might want your belief on whether it is ok to drink, but we should not be talking about such things with a lost person that needs the Gospel instead of a history lesson on whether wine is wine or juice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I believe that all Wines are fermented, now and in the bible. Christians that enjoy having a glass of Wine, not to get drunk, are still Christians. Now having a cup of Wine, and trying to share the gospel don’t mix. Remember that there are brother in Christ in Chile, and other countries that have Wine with their dinners. So if you set a Wine glass before me, I will join you my friend, cheers. :coffee: coffee works too."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

John 2:9-10

9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

 

I have never heard anyone doing this with grape juice?  Were they drinking "Great Value" brand and then someone gave them "Welches" and the govenor of the feast was so excited to get Welches?

 

When you are drunk, you will drink anything and the taste won't matter much because your senses are dulled.  Spend a little more on "good wine" and let the guests get drunk on that and then when you serve the bad stuff, they won't care nor will they judge you for giving bad stuff because all they can remember is the stuff they drank first. 

So what you're saying is that Jesus was at a party with a bunch of drunk folks and he gave them MORE alcohol, to let them get even drunker?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I am amazed at the verbal acrobatics people go through to say that wine, as used in the Bible is really grape juice.  It is completely unnecessary to go to such extremes to say that Jesus turned water into grape juice, when the BIble clearly says he turned it into wine.  Furthermore, believers in Jesus' day did drink wine.  Many of them did.  If not, why was it necessary when one took a Nazerite vow, that part of that vow was to abstain from wine?  That was a very special vow, and clearly, drinking wine was accepted as part of life.

 

Now, I am not saying that there are not good reasons to abstain.  Sure there are.  Alcohol can cause destruction when misused and abused.  I understand the argument (though I do not agree) that drinking may cause another person to stumble.  In understand and respect that argument.  However, to say that Jesus did not drink wine is contrary to all evidence in the Bible.  He was accused of being a drunkard.  If he did not drink wine at all, how could this accusation be made?  

 

Now, getting drunk is absolutely wrong.  But having a glass of wine or beer or enjoying a couple drinks with friends?  Nothing wrong at all.  You can do these interpretive acrobatics to arrive at that conclusion, but it is contrary to what is clearly taught in the Scripture.  If you want to talk about whether a Christian should abstain or not, based upon making others stumble, or because it can cause destruction, then we can have a good honest discussion about alcohol.  But saying all use of alcohol is forbidden in the Bible is just a way some try to control others.  That is simply not true.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...