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.
Oh, and just because I believe the KJV is the divinely inspired Word of God for our world language today does not mean I am KJV-onlyist because I do also read other Modern Translations to update various certain passages. In fact, despite it's flaws, I do love the verbage that is used in the NLT. It is very beautiful at times and I just love my KJV / NLT parallel Bible. However, I just don't make the NLT my final word of authority, though. I believe there is only one perfect Word of God that has existed in various different languages perfectly and without error thru out time (i.e. the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English). I also believe my position can be defended Biblically, too (Unlike those who are against my position).
So you label John chapter 2 as a mystery? Then why do you give "like" comments in the expression of comments that show that it was intoxicating wine at the Wedding at Cana? Why did you hint and allude and say that only one man at the party who was sober? Why did you say that you have gottten drunk before and you don't believe it was wrong but it was simply just your life? Can you honestly say that God just ignores an occasional sin? What if it was murder or rape? Would God not call that person a murderer or a rapist just because they don't do so habitually? Think about it. All sin needs to be confessed and or repented and we are to walk uprightly with God. Granted, I understand that we do not have to confess every single sin in our lives when we come to the Lord, but we do say we are sorry for sinning against Him and we do recognize that our old way of life is behind us. However, if we sin again, though: We do have to confess that sin so as to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 2:1) (1 John 1:9).
Last edited:
And taking the cup (potérion),and giving thanks, He gave to them, saying, Drink all of it. For this is My blood of the New Covenant which concerning many is being poured out for remission of sins. But I say to you, I will not at all drink of this fruit of the vine after this until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of My Father.(Matt 26.27 – 29)
Further proof that it was wine that Jesus drank is provided by the Greek term ‘potérion’ which literally means ‘wine cup’!
Why use a wine cup for grape juice?
So murderers are not murderers if they just murder once or on occasion? Rapists are not rapists if they don't do so habitually? Thieves are not thieves if they do not make a life out of doing so? Witches are not witches if they only practice witchcraft on Halloween? Adulterers are not adulterers even when they look upon women in lust every time they see a beautiful woman?
For John the Baptist has come neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, He has a demon. The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, Behold, a man, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.(Luke 7.33 – 34)
The above passage declares quite plainly that John the Baptist abstained from drinking alcohol, while Jesus drank alcohol frequently.
The above passage declares quite plainly that John the Baptist abstained from drinking alcohol, while Jesus drank alcohol frequently.
I want to clarify what is meant by wine.
#1. The Bible speaks of the new wine that comes straight from the cluster of the grape. This is the type of wine or (grape juice) that I am referring to. Freshly squeezed juice or wine from a grape is not powerful enough to intoxicate you.
#2. The wine that Jesus made is not a wine that has been purified of the fermentation process (Like Welch's Grape Juice - Which is true 100% unfermented wine - Or a non alcoholic drink). This is NOT the type of grape juice I am referring to.
#3. It is a freshly squeezed wine from the fruit of the vine that is INITIALLY very low in alcoholic content because it takes the right conditions and time to create natural fermentation for it to be naturally alcoholic (or intoxicating) on it's own power.
#4. One of the major problems with natural fermentation is that it does not always completely reach a complete fermentation. Thiis is why cultured yeast (and sometimes sugar) is added.
In other words, (Although it is technically wine immediately starts to ferment when the yeast on the skin of the grapes activates with the sugars inside when they are crushed in a vat) it is not wrong to say that Jesus made unfermented wine because it was a juice that did not go thru a complete process of fermentation. God makes things that are natural and good. He would not need to make something intoxicating for it to be considered good. Also, the process of fermentation symbolizes death and decay with the yeast feeding off the sugar (whereby it poops out alcohol and dies). Jesus blood symbolized the wine. Jesus' blood was pure and it gives us life and washes away our sins. If his blood represented decay and death and not life, then that would be sending the wrong message about the purpose of what His blood does for us.
#1. The Bible speaks of the new wine that comes straight from the cluster of the grape. This is the type of wine or (grape juice) that I am referring to. Freshly squeezed juice or wine from a grape is not powerful enough to intoxicate you.
#2. The wine that Jesus made is not a wine that has been purified of the fermentation process (Like Welch's Grape Juice - Which is true 100% unfermented wine - Or a non alcoholic drink). This is NOT the type of grape juice I am referring to.
#3. It is a freshly squeezed wine from the fruit of the vine that is INITIALLY very low in alcoholic content because it takes the right conditions and time to create natural fermentation for it to be naturally alcoholic (or intoxicating) on it's own power.
#4. One of the major problems with natural fermentation is that it does not always completely reach a complete fermentation. Thiis is why cultured yeast (and sometimes sugar) is added.
In other words, (Although it is technically wine immediately starts to ferment when the yeast on the skin of the grapes activates with the sugars inside when they are crushed in a vat) it is not wrong to say that Jesus made unfermented wine because it was a juice that did not go thru a complete process of fermentation. God makes things that are natural and good. He would not need to make something intoxicating for it to be considered good. Also, the process of fermentation symbolizes death and decay with the yeast feeding off the sugar (whereby it poops out alcohol and dies). Jesus blood symbolized the wine. Jesus' blood was pure and it gives us life and washes away our sins. If his blood represented decay and death and not life, then that would be sending the wrong message about the purpose of what His blood does for us.
Last edited:
That makes no sense at all...as BOTH the wine and the bread were merely spiritual representations.
Look at it this way....both the liquid and the solid food died and were converted into energy for the ones who partook.
Therefore a renewal took place.
That it was alcoholic wine (for blood) and stale bread (for body) are merely two everyday food items of the day...
U
Legalists always have trouble submitting to Scripture.
When works are the basis, very little makes sense, and contradictions run rampant in their reading of the Word.
Rather than trying to apologize for the Word, just submit to it: that it is the Word of God, and says what it means.
This theory of yours is an attempt to prop up the Word of God, because in your understanding it needs help, and cannot stand on it's own.
Does God need you to help Him out by adding to His Word, because it isn't clear enough?
Or do you need God to help you understand what is already clear in Scripture?
If you are having to insert meaning into the words on the page, then you are not submitting to the Word, but forcing it to submit to you, and your preconceived notions/dogmatic doctrines.
Jason, I really want to see you grow. This legalism is holding you back, preventing you from pressing forward from the foundation of repentance and dead works (read Hebrews 6 a few times).
You will likely see this rebuke as me placing myself above you, and over you as a judge: that is not the case. I see you stumbling over the same Stone that I stumbled over for several years. If you would allow yourself to be open, I would like to help you get through this.
I am not your enemy, but your brother. I want to see you grow in grace, rather than law.
When works are the basis, very little makes sense, and contradictions run rampant in their reading of the Word.
Rather than trying to apologize for the Word, just submit to it: that it is the Word of God, and says what it means.
This theory of yours is an attempt to prop up the Word of God, because in your understanding it needs help, and cannot stand on it's own.
Does God need you to help Him out by adding to His Word, because it isn't clear enough?
Or do you need God to help you understand what is already clear in Scripture?
If you are having to insert meaning into the words on the page, then you are not submitting to the Word, but forcing it to submit to you, and your preconceived notions/dogmatic doctrines.
Jason, I really want to see you grow. This legalism is holding you back, preventing you from pressing forward from the foundation of repentance and dead works (read Hebrews 6 a few times).
You will likely see this rebuke as me placing myself above you, and over you as a judge: that is not the case. I see you stumbling over the same Stone that I stumbled over for several years. If you would allow yourself to be open, I would like to help you get through this.
I am not your enemy, but your brother. I want to see you grow in grace, rather than law.
But let's say for the sake of argument that they were drinking at the party because of some false commandments that they were following, Jesus miracle of a non intoxicating wine would have been 1 million times better in taste and quality than some crumby intoxicating wine that they might have had at the Wedding feast. It is true that Jesus manifested his miracles before unbelievers before (With the bread and fish). So it is a possible (Although I do not see that is how happened, though). But if Jesus made an intoxicating wine, then he would be contributing to their drunkenness and that would be evil and wrong. Jesus does not add to people's sins. Jesus was sent forth to save men from their sins and to set them free from sin (So they are no longer slaves to it).
Last edited:
M
`To the OP: "Wine" in and of itself IS fermented juice. IF it is 'wine' it is fermented. If it is not fermented, it is just simply juice. Wine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pretty Simple.
Maggie
Pretty Simple.
Maggie
No, not true, my friend. See Matthew 15:6, 9.