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.
L
You continue to give misinformed and twist facts. Your understanding of wine making is completely wrong.
If you squeeze grapes, put them into a container and put a lid on it, it will ferment to about 10% or so, depending on the sugar content of the juice. Grape juice does that naturally because they have yeast on the skins and there is yeast in the air.
The reason people add yeast to wine in home wine making is for two reasons:
1) The juice you purchase is sterile
2) While the juice will naturally fermented on its own upon exposure to air, the yeast will be a random, wild yeast that may produce undesired flavors.
There are companies out there that carefully produce lines of yeast that match the yeast used by a particular brewer or wine maker so that people making it at home can produce a similar product.
If you squeeze grapes, put them into a container and put a lid on it, it will ferment to about 10% or so, depending on the sugar content of the juice. Grape juice does that naturally because they have yeast on the skins and there is yeast in the air.
The reason people add yeast to wine in home wine making is for two reasons:
1) The juice you purchase is sterile
2) While the juice will naturally fermented on its own upon exposure to air, the yeast will be a random, wild yeast that may produce undesired flavors.
There are companies out there that carefully produce lines of yeast that match the yeast used by a particular brewer or wine maker so that people making it at home can produce a similar product.
The Jews served two type of drink at the time of Christ. The first was a mixture of a thick syrup made from boiling down the grapes unsuitable for wine making and water. Usually three or more parts water to one part syrup. The second was fermented wine (quality determined by the grapes selected). All wine had alcohol unless it had soured and turned to vinegar.
At a Jewish wedding feast of the era, the men and women did not mingle.
The Lord of the Feast was selected by the groom to be the host for the night.
Now we can argue either way as to whether the wine was alcoholic or not. Jesus was capable of doing anything. I'll leave it at that.
This was his first documented miracle. Why did he perform it at this time? How many people actually witnessed it? From this time his ministry was much more public.
At a Jewish wedding feast of the era, the men and women did not mingle.
The Lord of the Feast was selected by the groom to be the host for the night.
Now we can argue either way as to whether the wine was alcoholic or not. Jesus was capable of doing anything. I'll leave it at that.
This was his first documented miracle. Why did he perform it at this time? How many people actually witnessed it? From this time his ministry was much more public.
L
Please stop relying so much on what the world is using to define scripture with. If you pray in the spirit and ask the Word will define itself. You woulf be very bored if there were no internet to search out things such as fermentation processes.
Let me try to explain to you again how the spirit has revealved it to me.
During the crucifixion wine or vinegar (sour wine) was presented 2 times.
Matthew 27:34 "They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink." Mark 15:23 "And they gave him wine mingled with myrrh: but He received it not" (First time) Since he was telling us in the water to wine miracle. That the Bridegroom would drink "good" wine and be happy. He tasted the sour wine (vinegar) and spit it out. He was dying for our sin and maybe he refused to let his blood be consumed with bitterness?
Matthew 27:48 " And straightway one of them ran, and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed and gave him to drink." John 19:28" After this knowing that all things were now accomplished, THAT THE SCRIPTURE MIGHT BE FUILLED saith, I thirst. " (He knew it had to be done to seal the old covenant.
John 19:29-30 "Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar (this cup was full) and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon a hyssop, and put it into his mouth. When Jesus therefore had RECIEVED the vinegar, he said, it is finushed: and he bowed his head and gave up the ghost."
Let me try to explain to you again how the spirit has revealved it to me.
During the crucifixion wine or vinegar (sour wine) was presented 2 times.
Matthew 27:34 "They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink." Mark 15:23 "And they gave him wine mingled with myrrh: but He received it not" (First time) Since he was telling us in the water to wine miracle. That the Bridegroom would drink "good" wine and be happy. He tasted the sour wine (vinegar) and spit it out. He was dying for our sin and maybe he refused to let his blood be consumed with bitterness?
Matthew 27:48 " And straightway one of them ran, and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed and gave him to drink." John 19:28" After this knowing that all things were now accomplished, THAT THE SCRIPTURE MIGHT BE FUILLED saith, I thirst. " (He knew it had to be done to seal the old covenant.
John 19:29-30 "Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar (this cup was full) and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon a hyssop, and put it into his mouth. When Jesus therefore had RECIEVED the vinegar, he said, it is finushed: and he bowed his head and gave up the ghost."
First, I have drank wine before many times. Second, I also have read up on wine many times and know how it is made. Third, I also should have titled the thread differently. While wine does immediately forment. It does not forment at the levels of alcohol that we have today. I should have said that the wine Jesus served was a very super low level in alcohol (non intoxicating) fermented wine. But it is still not incorrect to say that the wine is unfermented because it did not go thru a major fermenting process by adding cultured yeast or letting it's natural yeast forment it (By allowing the yeast to eat the sugars and poop out alcohol). I say this because when you eat grapes or crush them, they do not immediately ferment into a 5-10% alcohol type beverage immediately. You need to add cultured yeast and seal it up in an air tight container and allow time for that to happen. Jesus made freshly squeezed wine straight from the vine. There was no intoxicating qualities to it. In other words, I would like for you to buy some grapes and squeeze them into a glass and save it for a few days and drink it. Will you get drunk off of it or tipsy? No. You most certainly will not. That's the type of wine that Jesus made. Granted, it was the best tasting grapes that probably ever existed. But that's a different matter altogether.
Last edited:
L
WRONG.
When you crush grapes, they have naturally occurring yeast on them. Even if you washed them off - it will still produce a fully fermented wine. Even if you use modern techniques and sterilized the juice, killing off all yeast, the yeast in the air will get into the juice and naturally ferment it.
It does not matter how much or how little yeast you have when you start. Yeast is an organism that reproduces on its own. It will consume the sugars and reproduce.
When you crush grapes, they have naturally occurring yeast on them. Even if you washed them off - it will still produce a fully fermented wine. Even if you use modern techniques and sterilized the juice, killing off all yeast, the yeast in the air will get into the juice and naturally ferment it.
It does not matter how much or how little yeast you have when you start. Yeast is an organism that reproduces on its own. It will consume the sugars and reproduce.
L
Clearly you do not understand how wine comes about. You seem to think that you have to add yeast to the existing yeast to get a complete fermentation.
WRONG.
Wine ferments the sugars until they are consumed. The difference between ancient wine and modern wine is that ancient wine growers did not have control over the strains of yeast being used. The wine was made using whatever yeast was naturally growing on the grapes and was in the air. Today, wine makers have more control. They sterilize the juice and use carefully selected lines of yeast to produce the flavors they feel make the best wine.
Again, you do not understand yeast. It does not matter if you add yeast or not, yeast will reproduce on their own.
If you squeeze grapes, they'll ferment to 10% or so within a day or two. You do not need to add yeast.
WRONG.
Wine ferments the sugars until they are consumed. The difference between ancient wine and modern wine is that ancient wine growers did not have control over the strains of yeast being used. The wine was made using whatever yeast was naturally growing on the grapes and was in the air. Today, wine makers have more control. They sterilize the juice and use carefully selected lines of yeast to produce the flavors they feel make the best wine.
Again, you do not understand yeast. It does not matter if you add yeast or not, yeast will reproduce on their own.
If you squeeze grapes, they'll ferment to 10% or so within a day or two. You do not need to add yeast.
First, the percentage of alcohol level is dependent upon the yeast on the skin of the grape. There is no set percentage or guarantee that every grape batch that is crushed is going to turn into a 10% alcohol. Please provide a verified wine source that proves your case otherwise.
Second, wine is still called wine even when it is freshly squeezed grape juice in earlier times.
Third, why would Jesus make a substance that would involve a process of decay and death? What type of message does that send about God? Is He the creator of life that represents life or is He the creator that represents death?
Fourth, for the sake of argument about wine turning into 10% alcohol naturally, there is no way that freshly squeezed grape juice would forment to a 10% level between the time of his miracle and the time they drank it.
Second, wine is still called wine even when it is freshly squeezed grape juice in earlier times.
Third, why would Jesus make a substance that would involve a process of decay and death? What type of message does that send about God? Is He the creator of life that represents life or is He the creator that represents death?
Fourth, for the sake of argument about wine turning into 10% alcohol naturally, there is no way that freshly squeezed grape juice would forment to a 10% level between the time of his miracle and the time they drank it.
Last edited:
L
i think the bridegroom and the master of the feast were two different people -
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...
(John 2:9)
but to me it's just common sense that the man in charge of the feasting, and the servants of the house, if they were honorable, would not have been anywhere near as indulgent (so intoxicated) as the guests at the feast. but essentially, yeah, the man who tasted the wine and said how good it is could not have himself been inebriated and implied that most of the guests wouldn't be able to tell how good it was.
people who do not drink wine probably shouldn't declare themselves to be experts on wine.
ask someone who does drink wine -- the best wine certainly isn't completely unfermented, and it's not so strong that it destroys your taste buds on contact either. the best wine doesn't have the lowest alcohol content or the highest, but a whole lot of subtle nuances put together make it good.
Jason, i've been rude and curt and flippant with you; i apologize. it's my wretched personality.
what i want you to understand is that even cough syrup, if you drink enough of it, will intoxicate you. speaking as a man who understands by experience light drinking, moderate drinking, heavy drinking and outright drunkenness, to a man who does not drink at all, i think you don't understand how alcohol works, and you're assuming a worst case that isn't true.
a 'normal' person can drink one shot of liquor in an hour and have very mild, but not unnoticeable effects.
after about an hour the body processes all the alcohol and it's as though they had not drunk at all.
2 shots in an hour, and the effects are more pronounced, but that person isn't "inebriated" though some of their reaction times and senses are deadened.
3 shots in an hour and the effects are even greater, the senses are deadened so the drink no longer burns your mouth, speech becomes slurred and motor control is reduced.
4 shots in an hour and by legal standards you are drunk; your motor responses are too poor to be statistically safe to operate machinery, you don't walk, talk or think straight anymore, and all senses, including pain, are numbed.
anything beyond that is complete drunkenness.
about every hour, about 1 shot of liquor's worth of alcohol is processed by the body.
1 shot of liquor ~ 1 full glass of 8-12% wine ~ 2-3 glasses of 3-6% wine ~ one or two beers depending on alcohol %.
i think "well drunk" puts you somewhere in the category of 2-3 shots per hour. this is all 'average' math, because every person's body reacts differently according to your specific chemistry, tolerance and mass, as well as temperature and exertion, because alcohol sweats out of you. a man working in the hot sun can easily drink 3 times what he could resting in the cool of his house before he gets "drunk"
also important in alcohol absorption rates is food. if you keep eating while you drink, the alcohol is absorbed into the food instead of your bloodstream directly, and you don't become as drunk nor as quickly as you would if you just sat in a cool room downing cup after cup.
Israel is a hot place. they didn't have air conditioning. they were eating and drinking, probably for days.
these people were at a feast, not a saloon. i doubt they were drinking gallons per hour of wine. i don't think the wine that Jesus made was 15% alcohol. but i think it's pretty silly to make yourself believe it wasn't actually what we call wine. even if it was 6-8%, the strongest any "table wine" today would be, it doesn't turn a whole house full of people who are eating, socializing and drinking immediately into a room full of passed-out drunks snoring on the floor.
it's entirely possible and probable that the people at the feast could continue eating and drinking wine for hours, taking only 1 or 2 glasses per hour with food, and never go beyond a certain moderate level of intoxication, one that no one who actually has experience drinking alcoholic beverages would call "drunkenness"
i grew up in a house of German ancestry. i've been drinking wine and beer with meals since i was barely out of my diapers. it's part of my cultural heritage. if everyone's glasses are empty half way through Thanksgiving dinner, and we refill them, we don't suddenly fall out of our chairs or start beating our wives. by the time we get to the pumpkin pie, the effect of that last glass of wine is gone.
i think you're just misunderstanding a culture of social drinking and the effects of drinking relatively low strength wine while eating, because you don't really have experience with these things.
as far as whether miraculously refilling the house's stores of wine is tantamount to causing them to sin, that's also i think a murky understanding. it should be self-evident that if i offer you candy, it's not a sin, but if you eat 100 lbs of it you're liable to become diabetic. it's wrong of me to keep offering more after you've had your first pound, and it's your responsibility to refuse it in the first place and/or let me know if you're allergic to it.
i don't carry one now, but i've had state-issued liquor sales licenses in the past. if i see someone who has had to much to drink (and i had to attend courses to learn how to see this) i am liable to the court if i offer them more. if they go and kill someone in a DUI, they can sue the bartender for letting them get to that point. any good servant in the house at Cana should have noticed someone at the point of drunkenness and cut them off. there is no reason to think that because Jesus made the wine that He also served it and forced everyone to drink. there is no reason to think that God is unrighteous for making the sun shine, even though your skin may burn and your heart fail from exhaustion if you stay out under the heat for too long. there's no reason to call Timothy a drunkard or Paul a drug pusher. there's no reason to call Solomon a teetotaler for writing that it is good for men to eat their bread and drink their wine with gladness. we're free for freedom's sake, not licentiousness, and it's our fault if we abuse our freedom, not God's for making us free.
i think arguments like this may have had something to do with why He was reluctant to perform the miracle in the first place.
perhaps He knew straightaway that believers would focus on the wine and ignore Him.
but let's get back to Him -- He came to a people who He knew would not receive Him, and He associated Himself with the social outcasts rather than smug and self-righteous. He came to a people He had blinded and made dumb, so the Word spoken was true, and so grace could be shown to those without hope, without righteousness of their own.
He taught in such a way that those whose senses were dull would be even more dull, and those whose ears could hear, could hear even better. and one of the first things He did was make wine -- wine that a people whose sense were dull couldn't taste, but a man whose senses were sharp declared the best of all wines!!
that is His glory, not His shame - that all things written will be fulfilled. it is beautiful, and Beautiful is His name.
that's where i'm coming from. i don't think we have to agree 100% on this to be brothers in Christ.
i'm sorry for being rude. just like you, i feel zealous to defend the Word and my God. someone posted a few days ago "when iron sharpens iron, sparks fly"
i still love you and i'm not offended. i hope we can all bicker less, and glorify God more
L
i think the bridegroom and the master of the feast were two different people -
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...
(John 2:9)
but to me it's just common sense that the man in charge of the feasting, and the servants of the house, if they were honorable, would not have been anywhere near as indulgent (so intoxicated) as the guests at the feast. but essentially, yeah, the man who tasted the wine and said how good it is could not have himself been inebriated and implied that most of the guests wouldn't be able to tell how good it was.
people who do not drink wine probably shouldn't declare themselves to be experts on wine.
ask someone who does drink wine -- the best wine certainly isn't completely unfermented, and it's not so strong that it destroys your taste buds on contact either. the best wine doesn't have the lowest alcohol content or the highest, but a whole lot of subtle nuances put together make it good.
Jason, i've been rude and curt and flippant with you; i apologize. it's my wretched personality.
what i want you to understand is that even cough syrup, if you drink enough of it, will intoxicate you. speaking as a man who understands by experience light drinking, moderate drinking, heavy drinking and outright drunkenness, to a man who does not drink at all, i think you don't understand how alcohol works, and you're assuming a worst case that isn't true.
a 'normal' person can drink one shot of liquor in an hour and have very mild, but not unnoticeable effects.
after about an hour the body processes all the alcohol and it's as though they had not drunk at all.
2 shots in an hour, and the effects are more pronounced, but that person isn't "inebriated" though some of their reaction times and senses are deadened.
3 shots in an hour and the effects are even greater, the senses are deadened so the drink no longer burns your mouth, speech becomes slurred and motor control is reduced.
4 shots in an hour and by legal standards you are drunk; your motor responses are too poor to be statistically safe to operate machinery, you don't walk, talk or think straight anymore, and all senses, including pain, are numbed.
anything beyond that is complete drunkenness.
about every hour, about 1 shot of liquor's worth of alcohol is processed by the body.
1 shot of liquor ~ 1 full glass of 8-12% wine ~ 2-3 glasses of 3-6% wine ~ one or two beers depending on alcohol %.
i think "well drunk" puts you somewhere in the category of 2-3 shots per hour. this is all 'average' math, because every person's body reacts differently according to your specific chemistry, tolerance and mass, as well as temperature and exertion, because alcohol sweats out of you. a man working in the hot sun can easily drink 3 times what he could resting in the cool of his house before he gets "drunk"
also important in alcohol absorption rates is food. if you keep eating while you drink, the alcohol is absorbed into the food instead of your bloodstream directly, and you don't become as drunk nor as quickly as you would if you just sat in a cool room downing cup after cup.
Israel is a hot place. they didn't have air conditioning. they were eating and drinking, probably for days.
these people were at a feast, not a saloon. i doubt they were drinking gallons per hour of wine. i don't think the wine that Jesus made was 15% alcohol. but i think it's pretty silly to make yourself believe it wasn't actually what we call wine. even if it was 6-8%, the strongest any "table wine" today would be, it doesn't turn a whole house full of people who are eating, socializing and drinking immediately into a room full of passed-out drunks snoring on the floor.
it's entirely possible and probable that the people at the feast could continue eating and drinking wine for hours, taking only 1 or 2 glasses per hour with food, and never go beyond a certain moderate level of intoxication, one that no one who actually has experience drinking alcoholic beverages would call "drunkenness"
i grew up in a house of German ancestry. i've been drinking wine and beer with meals since i was barely out of my diapers. it's part of my cultural heritage. if everyone's glasses are empty half way through Thanksgiving dinner, and we refill them, we don't suddenly fall out of our chairs or start beating our wives. by the time we get to the pumpkin pie, the effect of that last glass of wine is gone.
i think you're just misunderstanding a culture of social drinking and the effects of drinking relatively low strength wine while eating, because you don't really have experience with these things.
as far as whether miraculously refilling the house's stores of wine is tantamount to causing them to sin, that's also i think a murky understanding. it should be self-evident that if i offer you candy, it's not a sin, but if you eat 100 lbs of it you're liable to become diabetic. it's wrong of me to keep offering more after you've had your first pound, and it's your responsibility to refuse it in the first place and/or let me know if you're allergic to it.
i don't carry one now, but i've had state-issued liquor sales licenses in the past. if i see someone who has had to much to drink (and i had to attend courses to learn how to see this) i am liable to the court if i offer them more. if they go and kill someone in a DUI, they can sue the bartender for letting them get to that point. any good servant in the house at Cana should have noticed someone at the point of drunkenness and cut them off. there is no reason to think that because Jesus made the wine that He also served it and forced everyone to drink. there is no reason to think that God is unrighteous for making the sun shine, even though your skin may burn and your heart fail from exhaustion if you stay out under the heat for too long. there's no reason to call Timothy a drunkard or Paul a drug pusher. there's no reason to call Solomon a teetotaler for writing that it is good for men to eat their bread and drink their wine with gladness. we're free for freedom's sake, not licentiousness, and it's our fault if we abuse our freedom, not God's for making us free.
i think arguments like this may have had something to do with why He was reluctant to perform the miracle in the first place.
perhaps He knew straightaway that believers would focus on the wine and ignore Him.
but let's get back to Him -- He came to a people who He knew would not receive Him, and He associated Himself with the social outcasts rather than smug and self-righteous. He came to a people He had blinded and made dumb, so the Word spoken was true, and so grace could be shown to those without hope, without righteousness of their own.
He taught in such a way that those whose senses were dull would be even more dull, and those whose ears could hear, could hear even better. and one of the first things He did was make wine -- wine that a people whose sense were dull couldn't taste, but a man whose senses were sharp declared the best of all wines!!
that is His glory, not His shame - that all things written will be fulfilled. it is beautiful, and Beautiful is His name.
that's where i'm coming from. i don't think we have to agree 100% on this to be brothers in Christ.
i'm sorry for being rude. just like you, i feel zealous to defend the Word and my God. someone posted a few days ago "when iron sharpens iron, sparks fly"
i still love you and i'm not offended. i hope we can all bicker less, and glorify God more
I never said that wine cannot ferment on it's own yeast that is present on the skin of the grapes. Sometimes this yeast amount is very low, though. So the amount of yeast determines the amount of alcohol produced.
Yeast is naturally produced on the skin of a grape in the form of a substance like powder. Jesus would not have made the grapes, crush them, and then let them ferment to a high alcoholic level.
If you eliminate the yeast from the grape by boiling it, etc. You will then have created unfermented wine or grape juice.
Will it forment to 10% out in open air? Is this always the case? Please show me a source from a wine website or expert that would make this claim.
Yeast is naturally produced on the skin of a grape in the form of a substance like powder. Jesus would not have made the grapes, crush them, and then let them ferment to a high alcoholic level.
If you eliminate the yeast from the grape by boiling it, etc. You will then have created unfermented wine or grape juice.
Will it forment to 10% out in open air? Is this always the case? Please show me a source from a wine website or expert that would make this claim.
L
WRONG. Yeast reproduces. It does not matter how little or how much you start with.
I said the percentage depends on the sugar content of the wine.
"During the primary fermentation, the yeast cells feed on the sugars in the must and multiply, producing carbon dioxide gas and alcohol. The temperature during the fermentation affects both the taste of the end product, as well as the speed of the fermentation. For red wines, the temperature is typically 22 to 25 °C, and for white wines 15 to 18 °C. For every gram of sugar that is converted, about half a gram of alcohol is produced, so to achieve a 12% alcohol concentration, the must should contain about 24% sugars. The sugar percentage of the must is calculated from the measured density, the must weight, with the help of a specialized type of hydrometer called a saccharometer. If the sugar content of the grapes is too low to obtain the desired alcohol percentage, sugar can be added (chaptalization). In commercial winemaking, chaptalization is subject to local regulations.
Alcohol of more than 12% can be achieved by using yeast that can withstand high alcohol. Some yeasts can produce 18% alcohol in the wine however extra sugar is added to produce a high alcohol content." - Wiki
It has to do with sugars, not how much yeast you add to the batch.
Which is because people did not have access to fresh grape juice. Grape juice was invented by Welch.
Yeast are a living organism, so how does that related to death? Furthermore, bread is made out of yeast as well.
You are assuming he made grape juice, not wine.
I said the percentage depends on the sugar content of the wine.
"During the primary fermentation, the yeast cells feed on the sugars in the must and multiply, producing carbon dioxide gas and alcohol. The temperature during the fermentation affects both the taste of the end product, as well as the speed of the fermentation. For red wines, the temperature is typically 22 to 25 °C, and for white wines 15 to 18 °C. For every gram of sugar that is converted, about half a gram of alcohol is produced, so to achieve a 12% alcohol concentration, the must should contain about 24% sugars. The sugar percentage of the must is calculated from the measured density, the must weight, with the help of a specialized type of hydrometer called a saccharometer. If the sugar content of the grapes is too low to obtain the desired alcohol percentage, sugar can be added (chaptalization). In commercial winemaking, chaptalization is subject to local regulations.
Alcohol of more than 12% can be achieved by using yeast that can withstand high alcohol. Some yeasts can produce 18% alcohol in the wine however extra sugar is added to produce a high alcohol content." - Wiki
It has to do with sugars, not how much yeast you add to the batch.
Which is because people did not have access to fresh grape juice. Grape juice was invented by Welch.
Yeast are a living organism, so how does that related to death? Furthermore, bread is made out of yeast as well.
You are assuming he made grape juice, not wine.