Jesus turned water into unfermented wine and not fermented wine.
- Thread starter Jason0047
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
It's only ridiculous in your mind because you can't see a Wedding without alcohol. You have been indoctrinated by your culture that does not line up with what the OT Scriptures actually say about intoxicating beverages. How do you just ignore all the warnings in Scripture on alcohol? How do you ignore the morality of the situation? Do you believe there is such a thing as right and wrong? Do you believe in setting a good example?
Remember that all the warnings are about too much alcohol, not alcohol itself.
The difference is similar to a warning about gluttony.
Even the word for "strong drink" is dealing with excess.
No one, after tasting of the Holy Spirit(new wine in allegory) would say that the Law is better.
The parable deals with a separate topic entirely.
I don't even know why I respond.
This error is really not important enough for me to waste my time with.
The difference is similar to a warning about gluttony.
Even the word for "strong drink" is dealing with excess.
No one, after tasting of the Holy Spirit(new wine in allegory) would say that the Law is better.
The parable deals with a separate topic entirely.
I don't even know why I respond.
This error is really not important enough for me to waste my time with.
Not true.
1) Deuteronomy 29:5-6 - God gave no grape juice to Israel nor did they have intoxicating drink in the wilderness.
2) Deuteronomy 32:33 - Enemy's wine is like the poison of serpents vs. Israelite's pure blood of the grape (verse 14).
3) 1 Samuel 1:14-15 - Accused, Hannah said she drank no wine.
4) Proverbs 4:17 - Alcoholic drink is called the wine of violence.
5) Proverbs 20:1 - Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging.
6) Proverbs 23:31 - God instructs not to look at intoxicating drinks.
7) Proverbs 23:32 - Alcoholic drinks bite like a serpent, sting like an adder.
8) Proverbs 23:35 - Alcohol makes the drinker insensitive to pain so he does not perceive it as a warning. Alcohol is habit forming.
9) Proverb 31:4-5 - Kings, Princes, and others who rule and judge must not drink alcohol. Alcohol perverts good judgment.
10) Ecclesiastes 2:3 - The king tried everything, including intoxicating drink, to see if it satisfied. It did not. (Ecclesiastes 12:8)
11) Ecclesiastes 10:17 - A land is blessed when its leaders do not drink.
12) Isaiah 5:22 - There is a woe unto them who mix strong drinks.
13) Jeremiah 35:2-14 - The Rechabites drank no grape juice or intoxicating wine and were blessed.
14) Daniel 1:5-17 - Daniel refused the king’s intoxicating wine and was blessed for it along with his abstaining friends.
15) Hosea 4:11 - Intoxicating wine seduces the heart.
16) Romans 14:21 - Do not do anything (Including drinking intoxicating beverages) to make your brother to stumble.
17) 1 Timothy 3:2-3 - Bishops (elders) are to be temperate, sober, and not near any wine.
18) 1 Timothy 3:8 - Deacons are to be worthy of respect and not drinkers.
19) 1 Timothy 3:11 - Deacons’ wives are to be temperate and sober.
20) Titus 1:7-8 - A bishop is not to be given to wine.
21) Titus 2:2-3 - The older men and older women of the church are to be temperate and not addicted to wine.
No, strong drink does not equate with drinking in excess. What verse even suggests this?
Source:
75 Bible References on Drinking Alcohol
(Note: While I may agree with this portion of the article, that does not mean I believe the same way as the author of this webssite on the topic of alcohol).
21 WARNINGS
Against Alcoholic Beverages.
1) Deuteronomy 29:5-6 - God gave no grape juice to Israel nor did they have intoxicating drink in the wilderness.
2) Deuteronomy 32:33 - Enemy's wine is like the poison of serpents vs. Israelite's pure blood of the grape (verse 14).
3) 1 Samuel 1:14-15 - Accused, Hannah said she drank no wine.
4) Proverbs 4:17 - Alcoholic drink is called the wine of violence.
5) Proverbs 20:1 - Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging.
6) Proverbs 23:31 - God instructs not to look at intoxicating drinks.
7) Proverbs 23:32 - Alcoholic drinks bite like a serpent, sting like an adder.
8) Proverbs 23:35 - Alcohol makes the drinker insensitive to pain so he does not perceive it as a warning. Alcohol is habit forming.
9) Proverb 31:4-5 - Kings, Princes, and others who rule and judge must not drink alcohol. Alcohol perverts good judgment.
10) Ecclesiastes 2:3 - The king tried everything, including intoxicating drink, to see if it satisfied. It did not. (Ecclesiastes 12:8)
11) Ecclesiastes 10:17 - A land is blessed when its leaders do not drink.
12) Isaiah 5:22 - There is a woe unto them who mix strong drinks.
13) Jeremiah 35:2-14 - The Rechabites drank no grape juice or intoxicating wine and were blessed.
14) Daniel 1:5-17 - Daniel refused the king’s intoxicating wine and was blessed for it along with his abstaining friends.
15) Hosea 4:11 - Intoxicating wine seduces the heart.
16) Romans 14:21 - Do not do anything (Including drinking intoxicating beverages) to make your brother to stumble.
17) 1 Timothy 3:2-3 - Bishops (elders) are to be temperate, sober, and not near any wine.
18) 1 Timothy 3:8 - Deacons are to be worthy of respect and not drinkers.
19) 1 Timothy 3:11 - Deacons’ wives are to be temperate and sober.
20) Titus 1:7-8 - A bishop is not to be given to wine.
21) Titus 2:2-3 - The older men and older women of the church are to be temperate and not addicted to wine.
No, strong drink does not equate with drinking in excess. What verse even suggests this?
Source:
75 Bible References on Drinking Alcohol
(Note: While I may agree with this portion of the article, that does not mean I believe the same way as the author of this webssite on the topic of alcohol).
1 Timothy 5:23
No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.
or if you like, the King James:
1 Timothy 5:23Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.
No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.
or if you like, the King James:
1 Timothy 5:23Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.
Please. Let's not be childish. I have already shown you many others (including actual official sources) believe this. I can just as easily call you a Catholic because you believe in the Trinity. However, I would not do that because it would be unloving and un-Christ like. Yes, the doctrine of the Trinity is true, but please do not speak all manner of evil against me. That doesn't help to prove your case one iota. In fact, it actually works against you. Stick to Scripture. Be a good Berean and show us whether or not these things be so. For if you don't stick to Scripture, there is no real debate. For God's Word is our real and final authority.
Please tell me in which part I said was wrong, and I would be happy to apologize. But before you jump the gun, I asked the question on whether or not you believed there was a sense of right and wrong and in setting a good example in context to the topic of this thread. Do you believe it is moral and good for Jesus to either:
(a) Contribute in intoxicating a group of individuals who are already drunk?
(b) Create an intoxicating beverage so as to get folks to be on the edge of being drunk?
(c) Create an intoxicating beverage so as to be written down so that alcoholics could then read about it and get a "Green Light" approval to drink and or to party, whereby they could then drink themselves to death?
(a) Contribute in intoxicating a group of individuals who are already drunk?
(b) Create an intoxicating beverage so as to get folks to be on the edge of being drunk?
(c) Create an intoxicating beverage so as to be written down so that alcoholics could then read about it and get a "Green Light" approval to drink and or to party, whereby they could then drink themselves to death?
Yes, I have been aware of this verse for quite some time. Although, most NT believers (not all) have a liberty in Christ to drink intoxicating beverages (A liberty that did not exist before the cross for the OT saint), you will note that this verse is not a public approval to drink socially. Paul says to use a LITTLE wine for the infirmities of his stomach. It is not a "Green Light" for anyone to drink socially in this passage. It is for medicinal purposes. See, a lot of times the water they drank was not pure, and some folks did not have the tolerance to drink it, and it would give them stomach problems. Drinking a LITTLE alcohol would help them. So the recommendation here in this case is medical; Not social.
Last edited:
C
(Psalm 104:14, 15) 14 He is making green grass sprout for the beasts, And vegetation for the service of mankind, To cause food to go forth from the earth, 15 And wine that makes the heart of mortal man rejoice, To make the face shine with oil, And bread that sustains the very heart of mortal man.
Wine like many other productions of God is a blessing not a curse. Sexual relationships in a God-ordained marriage is a blessing!! Fornication and unlawful use of the genitals are gross sins. Gifts of God used in harmony with God's purpose are a blessing!!!
Wine like many other productions of God is a blessing not a curse. Sexual relationships in a God-ordained marriage is a blessing!! Fornication and unlawful use of the genitals are gross sins. Gifts of God used in harmony with God's purpose are a blessing!!!
That is a terrible interpretation, and extremely flawed logic. I suggest you watch the video on fermentation process.
The reason you do not put the new stuff in the old skins is that the old skins will not stretch any more, especially if they are very old, put a new batch into an old skin and the skin will burst, which is also parallel to the other part of the illustration where mending old clothes with new cloth will result in the garment ripping when the patch shrinks.
The reason you do not put the new stuff in the old skins is that the old skins will not stretch any more, especially if they are very old, put a new batch into an old skin and the skin will burst, which is also parallel to the other part of the illustration where mending old clothes with new cloth will result in the garment ripping when the patch shrinks.
Jason0047, you are merely projecting your "I'm on the high road me and you're not" mentality.
SolidGround, in my opinion, said nothing remotely resembling that SolidGround is ignoring warnings in Scripture on alcohol or is ignoring the morality of the situation. I don't think anyone else has either.
Quote specifically something that SolidGround or somebody else has said that proves your conclusion.
Otherwise, you are bearing false witness, in my opinion.
SolidGround, in my opinion, said nothing remotely resembling that SolidGround is ignoring warnings in Scripture on alcohol or is ignoring the morality of the situation. I don't think anyone else has either.
Quote specifically something that SolidGround or somebody else has said that proves your conclusion.
Otherwise, you are bearing false witness, in my opinion.
From Leighton G Campbell's book, "Wine in the Bible and the Scriptural Case for Total Abstinence":
[FONT="]THE PARABLE OF THE WINE AND WINESKINS[/FONT]
This parable is recorded in Matthew 9:16, Mark 2:22, and Luke 5:37-39, but we will deal with the passage which gives us the most information. The passage is from Luke and reads: And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better. (Luke 5:37-39) The primary lesson that Jesus was teaching was that legalism and grace could not be mixed. The Pharisees had to change their system completely to receive His message. J. Dwight Pentecost explains: The parables clearly indicate that Christ did not come to reform an old worn out system but to introduce some*thing new...Rather, what He was introducing had to be
[FONT="]
[/FONT] entirely separated from the old. The incident closed with Christ's words that if men would taste His wine, that is, if they would accept what He was offering them, they would not want the old. However, the Pharisees, having tasted the old, were satisfied with it; they had no desire for what He was offering them. Some scholars have sought to explain the analogy of the new wine and old bottles, by suggesting that old bottles would lose their elasticity and would not contain the wine once it had fer*mented. New bottles being elastic would expand enough to contain the gas bubble process of fermentation. Hence narrowing the interpretation of the parable solely to the practice of keeping and drinking fermented wine; but we will see quite clearly from the context of the parable, that this was not the sense in which Christ was applying it. To automatically take this view is a rather narrow-minded approach, because sweet unfermented wine was also kept in wineskins. This also does injustice to the parable, as we will see. In actual fact, the context of the parable provides a strong argu*ment for the preservation and use of unfermented wine. It is obvious from the parable that the new wine contained in the bottles was unfermented, for if the wine had already fer*mented no significant change in the wine could have taken place to cause the bottles to burst. If the intention was to have fer*mented wine, then the wine would have been allowed to ferment significantly enough before sealing the bottles. Thus eliminating the problem of bursting the skins. Therefore in the light of the text, the intention must have been to keep the new wine (unfermented grape juice) in the bot*tles from fermenting, thus ensuring that the bottles would not burst. Concerning this, The Rev. B. Parsons states: The art required was to keep the new wine from ferment*ing, not to keep the bottles from bursting. This brings us to the point of explaining the dilemma of the old bottles. Parsons explains the following:
[FONT="]
[/FONT] The difference between the new bottles and the old con*sisted 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 fer*menting 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 fer*mentation 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. Jesus could not have been likening His teaching of the Kingdom of grace to eventual fermentation, since this is funda-
[FONT="]
[/FONT] mentally 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.
[FONT="]THE PARABLE OF THE WINE AND WINESKINS[/FONT]
This parable is recorded in Matthew 9:16, Mark 2:22, and Luke 5:37-39, but we will deal with the passage which gives us the most information. The passage is from Luke and reads: And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better. (Luke 5:37-39) The primary lesson that Jesus was teaching was that legalism and grace could not be mixed. The Pharisees had to change their system completely to receive His message. J. Dwight Pentecost explains: The parables clearly indicate that Christ did not come to reform an old worn out system but to introduce some*thing new...Rather, what He was introducing had to be
[FONT="]
[/FONT] entirely separated from the old. The incident closed with Christ's words that if men would taste His wine, that is, if they would accept what He was offering them, they would not want the old. However, the Pharisees, having tasted the old, were satisfied with it; they had no desire for what He was offering them. Some scholars have sought to explain the analogy of the new wine and old bottles, by suggesting that old bottles would lose their elasticity and would not contain the wine once it had fer*mented. New bottles being elastic would expand enough to contain the gas bubble process of fermentation. Hence narrowing the interpretation of the parable solely to the practice of keeping and drinking fermented wine; but we will see quite clearly from the context of the parable, that this was not the sense in which Christ was applying it. To automatically take this view is a rather narrow-minded approach, because sweet unfermented wine was also kept in wineskins. This also does injustice to the parable, as we will see. In actual fact, the context of the parable provides a strong argu*ment for the preservation and use of unfermented wine. It is obvious from the parable that the new wine contained in the bottles was unfermented, for if the wine had already fer*mented no significant change in the wine could have taken place to cause the bottles to burst. If the intention was to have fer*mented wine, then the wine would have been allowed to ferment significantly enough before sealing the bottles. Thus eliminating the problem of bursting the skins. Therefore in the light of the text, the intention must have been to keep the new wine (unfermented grape juice) in the bot*tles from fermenting, thus ensuring that the bottles would not burst. Concerning this, The Rev. B. Parsons states: The art required was to keep the new wine from ferment*ing, not to keep the bottles from bursting. This brings us to the point of explaining the dilemma of the old bottles. Parsons explains the following:
[FONT="]
[/FONT] The difference between the new bottles and the old con*sisted 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 fer*menting 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 fer*mentation 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. Jesus could not have been likening His teaching of the Kingdom of grace to eventual fermentation, since this is funda-
[FONT="]
[/FONT] mentally 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.