Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

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

Which wine is the good wine?


Recommended Posts

  • Members


In Bible times, the pure juice of the grape was also called wine. Scientest today will tell you that there is an ingredient found in grape juice that is beneficial to one's heart and health. That ingredient is called reservatrol. While reservatrol is retained in the modern wines, the modern wines also contain toxins that are harmful to vital organs. That is why alcoholic beverages are known as intoxicants. They are toxic to the body. Drinking alcohol for one's health is like drinking a sugar free pepsi while eating a jar of Kraft Marshmallow Kreme.

Since wines in Bible times were both alcoholic and non alcoholic, I would venture to say that the wine that maketh glad the heart was nothing more than the pure blood of the grape.

The wine that Jesus made could not have been alcoholic or He would have been adding to men's drunkenness.... disqualifying Him as the sinless sacrifice needed to die for mankind.



I was taught this growing up but have since learned it is not true. Wine is wine and juice is juice. Juice never got anyone drunk. Wine is also beneficial to ones health, in moderation, as it contains many antioxidents other other healthy compounds. This is becoming one of my biggest beefs with the IFB. Why can't we just accept the Bible for what it says. Why do we have to twist and bend it to make it say what we want it to say. Jews and Christians have interpretted wine as "wine" through the ages. This whole idea of about "grape juice" is relative new and was basically unheard of prior to the great awakening in the U.S.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



I was taught this growing up but have since learned it is not true. Wine is wine and juice is juice. Juice never got anyone drunk. Wine is also beneficial to ones health, in moderation, as it contains many antioxidents other other healthy compounds. This is becoming one of my biggest beefs with the IFB. Why can't we just accept the Bible for what it says. Why do we have to twist and bend it to make it say what we want it to say. Jews and Christians have interpretted wine as "wine" through the ages. This whole idea of about "grape juice" is relative new and was basically unheard of prior to the great awakening in the U.S.

The IFB do accept the Bible for what it says. Context shows not all wine in the Bible was alcoholic.

For instance, here we see wine that is not alcoholic:

Isaiah 16:10 And gladness is taken away, and joy out of the plentiful field; and in the vineyards there shall be no singing, neither shall there be shouting: the treaders shall tread out no wine in their presses; I have made their vintage shouting to cease.

Notice that Isaiah said that wine no longer will be tread out in the wine presses?

NEWS FLASH!!! Alcohol is not a product of treading the juice out of grapes... it is a product of decay; yeasts killing the sugar in the wine over a period of time. Isaiah reveals that wine (yayin) that is not alcoholic was in the grapes and in the presses.

Context reveals which wine is fermented and which is not. The fact that wine is a mocker and a deceiver proves that Christ would not have made, gave, or drank an alcoholic wine. Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


The IFB do accept the Bible for what it says. Context shows not all wine in the Bible was alcoholic.


On what do you base this assertion? If wine isn't wine, then why host notice its quality at the wedding (why would he be impressed by good grape juice compared to bad wine? He even mentions the trend, which still exists today, of serving the good booze first, the switching to the bad after everyone has become intoxicated) and why did Paul urge that it only be consumed to treat stomach ailments (why would he care how much grape juice people drank)?

I agree 100% that drunkeness is not only unwise, but a sin. But to say that all wine/alcohol is sinfull in and of itself does not match up with the teachigs of scripture nor the actions of Christ. All other arguments are vain and will require an answer. Again, I urge you: look to the luna!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



On what do you base this assertion? If wine isn't wine, then why host notice its quality at the wedding (why would he be impressed by good grape juice compared to bad wine? He even mentions the trend, which still exists today, of serving the good booze first, the switching to the bad after everyone has become intoxicated) and why did Paul urge that it only be consumed to treat stomach ailments (why would he care how much grape juice people drank)?

I agree 100% that drunkeness is not only unwise, but a sin. But to say that all wine/alcohol is sinfull in and of itself does not match up with the teachigs of scripture nor the actions of Christ. All other arguments are vain and will require an answer. Again, I urge you: look to the luna!

I have no interest in looking to the luna. I urge you to look to Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



On what do you base this assertion? If wine isn't wine, then why host notice its quality at the wedding (why would he be impressed by good grape juice compared to bad wine? He even mentions the trend, which still exists today, of serving the good booze first, the switching to the bad after everyone has become intoxicated) and why did Paul urge that it only be consumed to treat stomach ailments (why would he care how much grape juice people drank)?

I agree 100% that drunkeness is not only unwise, but a sin. But to say that all wine/alcohol is sinfull in and of itself does not match up with the teachigs of scripture nor the actions of Christ. All other arguments are vain and will require an answer. Again, I urge you: look to the luna!


So you are saying that Jesus took a group of people who were already intoxicated (another word for drunkeness), for they had already went through all the intoxicating wine, and made them more intoxicating wine to get them even more sinfully drunk???? You admit both that they would already be intoxicated and that being drunk is a sin!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In dealing with this passage, one must realize that Lemuel is not a saved man. Salvation is through faith and trust in Christ and His finished work at Calvary and His ultimate resurrection from the dead. That is what brings Salvation to all men. (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)

That said, Lemuel's mother was giving him permission to give fermented drink to one who was condemned. (We see this practice being used at the crucifixion when the soldier offered Jesus wine mixed with gall,... which Jesus refused)

But Christians are not to give that which makes men drunkards to anyone. We are ambassadors of Christ, not emissaries of satan.


Many thanks for this explanation. So would it be right to say that this psalm is not relevant to a discussion about sin, because it is only a record of what a lost person's mother was telling them--i.e. what relevance do Lemuel's mother's views have to anything?

All the best

Carl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


Many thanks for this explanation. So would it be right to say that this psalm is not relevant to a discussion about sin, because it is only a record of what a lost person's mother was telling them--i.e. what relevance do Lemuel's mother's views have to anything?

All the best

Carl

First, this was not a psalm... it was a proverb.
Second, instructions in Proverbs are words for the wise and the foolish alike. The wise will hear and understand those words, the foolish will reject those words.
Third, the Proverbs are given by inspiration of God. He did not just give them to us for us to just say, 'That is not for me to worry about.'

Proverbs 1:5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:

Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Proverbs 1:10 My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First, this was not a psalm... it was a proverb.
Second, instructions in Proverbs are words for the wise and the foolish alike. The wise will hear and understand those words, the foolish will reject those words.
Third, the Proverbs are given by inspiration of God. He did not just give them to us for us to just say, 'That is not for me to worry about.'

Proverbs 1:5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:

Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Proverbs 1:10 My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.


Ok then, let's recap:

1. You've given this summary about what is going on in those two verses of the proverb: "Lemuel's mother was giving him permission to give fermented drink to one who was condemned."
2. You've pointed out that even though Lemuel wasn't saved, the record of Lemuel's mother doing this is part of God's word and was given to us for a reason.

So then, what is the teaching here for us in that verse? What do we need to learn from the fact that Lemuel's mother gave Lemuel permission to give fermented wine to people who are perishing?

Not trying to lead you on here: I'm interested in the treatment of this verse because it is often ignored.

Ta

Carl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


Ok then, let's recap:

1. You've given this summary about what is going on in those two verses of the proverb: "Lemuel's mother was giving him permission to give fermented drink to one who was condemned."
2. You've pointed out that even though Lemuel wasn't saved, the record of Lemuel's mother doing this is part of God's word and was given to us for a reason.

So then, what is the teaching here for us in that verse? What do we need to learn from the fact that Lemuel's mother gave Lemuel permission to give fermented wine to people who are perishing?

Not trying to lead you on here: I'm interested in the treatment of this verse because it is often ignored.

Ta

Carl

The lesson is... God's people are kings (1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6) and God doesn't want us drinking that which has the ability to cloud our judgment. Let the unsaved give the unsaved their alcohol. In other words... let the dead bury their dead. Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can see how some believe it is not wise to partake in alcohol at all. I also see how the Bible can be read to allow consumption in moderation. Both are reasonable positions. This should not be a divisive issue. I can say, though, that it takes incredible linguistic gymnastics to say definitively that the Bible prohibits all consumption. The Bible says drunkensess is a sin. I respect those who are teetoatlers for moral reasons. I also respect those that drink in moderation. What I cannot respect is saying this is an issue that should divide believers. We are brothers and sisters in Christ, and the Bilble can be interpreted reasonably both ways, so it should be an issue left to the individual, and we should respect one another's differences.

A couple of points to show that the Bible is not clear that total abstention is necessary:

Gen. 14:18 "And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God." WHen giving a blessing, he offered bread and wine. These were staples of the day and were offered as a gift and given along with a blessing from God. Wine use is permissible. Total abstention is not taught.

Lev. 10:9 "Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations" Here is an interesting passage. It specifically forbids the priests not to drink wine or strong drink when they go into the tabernacle to perform works of ministry. Why instruct them not to drink wine prior to going into the tabernacle to perform the rituals if total abstention was required? It is understood here that wine and strong drink in moderation was used, even by the priests. Otherwise, there is no need to instruct them to abstain prior to performing their priestly duties. It does not say wine is necessary, but recognizes that drinking wine was a part of culture and a part of their daily life.

Numbers 6:3 "He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried." Another interesting, passage. This was part of the Nazarite's oath, not to drink wine and strong drink. Why is this unique to Nazarites? Why, if total abstention is necessary, does the Bible not say this applies to all people? Again, this shows that consumption in moderation was part of life, and that a Nazarite should not consume as part of a special oath. What does this show? Taking a speical oath not to drink alcohol is great if God has called one to do so, as he did the Nazarites, but it is not necessary if that special call is not on one's life.

Deut. 14:26 "And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household." In this, drinking wine was part of a celebration for what God has done and provided. This verse mentions both yayin and shekar, and clearly permits its use -- whatever it is -- within a celebratory religious context. Again use is permitted.

In 2 Sam. 13:28, Absalom suggests killing Amnon once he is "merry" with yayin -- once it has been consumed to the point his mood is altered. Someone brings yayin to David and his men in 2 Sam. 16:1-2, along with bread, for the sake of sustenance. Here David and his men take wine, which is permitted and good. However, with Amnon, he became intoxicated which is not good.

Gen. 27:25, 28 "And he said, Bring it near to me, and I will eat of my son's venison, that my soul may bless thee. And he brought it near to him, and he did eat: and he brought him wine, and he drank....Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine." In giving his son Jacob a blessing, he Isaac drank wine, and wished that God would provide plenty of corn and wine.

Eph. 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit....this does not prohibit consumption of alcohol, but prohibits drunkeness. If total abstension was expected, it would have read, do not drink wine or strong drink, but drink of the Spirit.

Romans 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. This one is interested as well. Some say that merely drinking wine will cause others to stumble. That totally takes this passage out of context. THe context is that some meat and wine were offered to idols and gods as sacrifices, then sold in the market place. Eating and drinking that wine and meat would have caused some people to fall back into worshiping false gods because they came out of that pagan environment. It would cause them to stumble by failing to worship Christ, but instead be drawn back in to worshiping idols. It was not sinful to eat that meat or drink that wine because those mature in faith know those idols are not real. However, some have come from pagan backgrounds and eating and drinking that which had been sacrificed to idols would bring back the feelings and desire to participate in pagan worship. This has nothing to do with drunkeness.

To sum up, the Bible IS NOT clear that total abstension is necessary. If each of you would be honest with yourselves, you would even see that it is permissible. I am honest enough to see that those who vow to abstain when called by God are admirable. However, I do not believe God calls all to abstain from alcohol. It is no different than food or anything else in creation...God has created for man's responsible and good use. Like anything else, it can be perverted and used for evil purposes. Food can cause one to become a glutton. The desire for sex can be perverted and cause one to fall into adultry. Alcohol can cause one to partake in excess and become drunk. God does not require we abstain from food, sex, or alcohol, but that all of those things be used as he designed. God calls some to be celibate, as Paul notes. However, most are to be married and enjoy sex within marriage. God calls some to abstain from alcohol. That is good and admirable, but he does not expect all to abstain.

Did he create wine at Cana? I believe he did, though I don't have definitive proof of it. The culture would have served wine at a wedding. Some say people would have been intoxicated. That is not necessarily the case. Wedding feasts typically lasted over several days. WIne would be served at the feasts occuring over that several day period. I would venture to guess that becoming publicly drunk was unacceptable in those days, especially at a wedding feast. Now, all of this is speculation, as is many of your assertions that he served grape juice. If he served grape juice, why doesn't the Bible say that? If the Word of God is infalliable, then why is wine included in it?

To sum up, this is an issue that should not be divisive. The Bible, if you are honest with yourself and do not go through incredible linguistic gymnastics and mental exercises, clearly does not prohibit all consumption of alcohol. It clearly condemns drunkeness. Beyond that, this should not be an issue that divides, but each believer should do according to what God calls him or her to do.

As for me, I have never felt the call to abstain entirely, so I will continue to enjoy wine and other drink in moderation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Context shows whether the wine is alcoholic in content or not. When God approves of it, it is not alcoholic. When God disapproves, it is alcoholic.

God is not double-minded. He is not going to say in one verse that alcohol is ok to drink and then in another that it is not. If He says in one verse that wine is not to be drank, then He is speaking of alcohol. If He says wine is to be drank, He is not speaking of alcohol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...