Jesus turned water into unfermented wine and not fermented wine.

[JackH]

It doesn't. Jesus made wine that came straight from the cluster of the grape. This of course is a natural wine that is naturally already fermenting. But at the start of freshly squeezed juice that comes from grapes, it is not going to be instantly strong in alcoholic content. It takes time to ferment and the right conditions, too. Sometimes there is problems with natural fermentation, as well. That is why yeast is added. But Jesus does not need to make the wine strong in alcoholic content or intoxicating to make it taste insanely good or to make people go "Wow" that is like the best drink I ever had in my life. There was no need to make it alcoholic. Folks here wish it was alcoholic or intoxicating because they want to either justify the occasional drinking party at their house, get drunk on occasion, and or drink in public (Despite it possibly making their brother to stumble). They have a motive.

You are the one with a motive. An agenda.

You start with your conclusion and then twist the Word to fit your conclusion. You have done this elsewhere with your KJV-ONLY nonsense.

In the OT Melchizedek provided wine (yayin) as per Genesis 14:18. The yayin contained alcohol.

In the NT Jesus provided wine (oinos) for the wedding as per the verses that have been discussed here in John 2. The oinos contained alcohol.

The difference between the first wine (oinos) served at the wedding and the wine (oinos) Jesus provided is that the latter tasted better.

Back in Jesus time, yeast wasn't added like it is today. Although some winemakers today still rely on wild yeast, most inoculate the must with cultered yeast cells, which are available in various strains that affect the characteristics and thus taste of the wine. I suspect that Last could explain this in considerable detail.

So the taste of the first wine served at the wedding was affected by the strain of wild yeast that got to it, by chance. The wine Jesus provided tasted better.

Most people can tell the difference between Welch's Grape Juice and Thunderbird. They can also tell the difference between Thunderbird and Screaming Eagle (it generally costs over $1,000 a bottle).

So the first wine at the wedding tasted like Thunderbird. The wine Jesus provided tasted like Screaming Eagle.

There is little historical, cultural, exegetical, contextual, or lexical reason to understand the wine Jesus provided to be anything but an alcoholic product similar to the first wine, other than it tasted better.

I'm done with this thread. It's going all over the place now.

I'm sure you will start another one that will astound me with its babble-on (Babylon).

 

[lisa79]

You have things backwards. You are under the false impression that it is okay for God to create an intoxicating beverage so as to make people (Who are already drunk or tipsy) to be drunk with his miracle that showed forth his glory. This is wrong because we know that drunkennes and or being a drunkard is a sin. We also know that it is wrong to influence a child to sin, too. Right? For Jesus said it would be better if a millstone were to hung about such a person's neck. Now, we are the children of God, too. For we are to have a heart of a child. So if we are like the children, then it would not be possible for God or anyone else to influence us into doing anything remotely bad.

No Jason please open your eyes and see that I have been trying to tell for days....right or wrong is not for you to decide. You have fallen in the enemies snare. You have it backwards God is judge not man for only He knows the hearts of men. We have presented enough fact and evudence to convince an atheist yet your heart is still hard and though you hear you can not comprehened. Why would you take a chance on offening God this way? Drunkards cant inherit the Kingdom of God because they dont know when they have been beaten. You are drunk on zeal but not of absoultue certainty.

 

[kennethcadwell]

No Jason please open your eyes and see that I have been trying to tell for days....right or wrong is not for you to decide. You have fallen in the enemies snare. You have it backwards God is judge not man for only He knows the hearts of men. We have presented enough fact and evudence to convince an atheist yet your heart is still hard and though you hear you can not comprehened. Why would you take a chance on offening God this way? Drunkards cant inherit the Kingdom of God because they dont know when they have been beaten. You are drunk on zeal but not of absoultue certainty.[/QUOTE


You are right, we have presented enough evidence.

Some will want to stay blinded to the truth because it is still beyond understanding.

They are still in the milk stage, and are not ready to accept the meat of the word.

The biggest evidence we have given against their debate, is the word oy'-nos.

This is the one used in the original text for wine, which means fermented.
Yet they still refuse to believe.

 

[KJV1611]

I haven't been following this thread very closely, but the bible is crystal clear that new wine is not fermented. New wine is found in the cluster. Common sense right ???? Grape juice in the cluster is not fermented.

Isa 65:8 Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all.

 

[phil112]

I haven't been following this thread very closely, but the bible is crystal clear that new wine is not fermented. New wine is found in the cluster. Common sense right ???? Grape juice in the cluster is not fermented.

Isa 65:8 Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all.

You don't know much about the bible, considering your user name.

Acts 2:13 "Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine."

 

[KJV1611]

You don't know much about the bible, considering your user name.

Acts 2:13 "Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine."

Don't argue with me, argue with God he wrote it in Isa 65:8. Now tell me, according to the bible where is new wine found?

 

[Jason0047]

Is Christianity just an analyzation of what is wrong in your own eyes? Just a bunch of creed with no practicality, form without function? Hate your own sin, then maybe God will start doing something with you

It is written...


1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil."

Romans 12:2
"And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."

Romans 12:9 KJ2
"Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good."

Revelation 2:2
"I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"

2 Timothy 3:1-7
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Matthew 7:15-23
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

 

[Agricola]

How many threads does it take and how many posts does it take for you to realise that 2 opposing sides can take same verse and use it to support thier claims, just saying, "God wrote it take it up with him" is a underhand tactic to gain the upperhand, by claiming that God supports that particular view point.

 

[Jason0047]

No Jason please open your eyes and see that I have been trying to tell for days....right or wrong is not for you to decide.

Not true. You can prove what is right and wrong by the Word of God. How so? The Holy Scriptures tells us to do so (By His Word). Just check out these verses in my recent post on this very page,

here.

You have fallen in the enemies snare.

It is written,

1 Peter 5:8
"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:"

 

[Jason0047]

You have it backwards God is judge not man for only He knows the hearts of men. We have presented enough fact and evudence to convince an atheist yet your heart is still hard and though you hear you can not comprehened.

1 Corinthians 6:2-5
"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you?

Why would you take a chance on offening God this way? Drunkards cant inherit the Kingdom of God because they dont know when they have been beaten.

Drunkenness is not categorized as habitual act. Drunkenness at any point in time is a sin. It is listed along a list of other sins (See Galatians 5:19-21). Also, check out a dictionary, too.

You are drunk on zeal but not of absoultue certainty.

Not true, I have a more sure Word of prophecy (2 Peter 1:19).

 

[KJV1611]

How many threads does it take and how many posts does it take for you to realise that 2 opposing sides can take same verse and use it to support thier claims, just saying, "God wrote it take it up with him" is a underhand tactic to gain the upperhand, by claiming that God supports that particular view point.

I would like to see you use Isa 65:8 to support new wine meaning alcoholic wine.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Not true. You can prove what is right and wrong by the Word of God. How so? The Holy Scriptures tells us to do so (By His Word). Just check out these verses in my recent post on this very page,

here.



It is written,

1 Peter 5:8
"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:"

The thing I think lisa79 was trying to point out to you was we are not to question the Lord our God on what He does.

He says He makes the rain fall on the just and unjust alike.

Meaning He does as He pleases, and that His understanding is above and beyond ours. So we are not to say we speak on His behalf on what He will or will not do. We are to let His word speak for us.

If it is not in the word, it is not of the word.

oy'-nos meaning fermented is in the word in Jesus turning water to wine, unfermented is not in this scripture.

 

[Jason0047]

The thing I think lisa79 was trying to point out to you was we are not to question the Lord our God on what He does.

He says He makes the rain fall on the just and unjust alike.

Meaning He does as He pleases, and that His understanding is above and beyond ours. So we are not to say we speak on His behalf on what He will or will not do. We are to let His word speak for us.

If it is not in the word, it is not of the word.

oy'-nos meaning fermented is in the word in Jesus turning water to wine, unfermented is not in this scripture.

Read the verses I posted. Doesn't sound like the apostles were confused on what was good and or evil.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Read the verses I posted. Doesn't sound like the apostles were confused on what was good and or evil.

We can determine what is right or wrong thinks to God, and Him showing us this through the law.

But even though we are not to question God on why He did what He did, and we are not to judge others now while in the flesh, we are to help and correct them in understanding so that they are not mislead and drawn away further. We are to help bring them back to the truth.

Instance, those who just read the English versions of the bible and do not study, or look into the original text and get the meaning/context that was used in that scripture can easily misinterpret it.

How many people believe a believer can not fall away even though scripture says they can, how many believe long hair on a man is wrong even though scripture does not say that, how many believe works of love do not work hand an hand with faith for salvation even though the scripture says they do ?

And the list goes on...........

 

[Nautilus]

why is it always the inane kjv-onlyists who start this stuff? We dont care for their other threads so they try to annoy us with different nonsense like this? Like how much false doctrine can one cult have?

 

[Jason0047]

You are the one with a motive. An agenda.

You start with your conclusion and then twist the Word to fit your conclusion. You have done this elsewhere with your KJV-ONLY nonsense.

In the OT Melchizedek provided wine (yayin) as per Genesis 14:18. The yayin contained alcohol.

In the NT Jesus provided wine (oinos) for the wedding as per the verses that have been discussed here in John 2. The oinos contained alcohol.

The difference between the first wine (oinos) served at the wedding and the wine (oinos) Jesus provided is that the latter tasted better.

Back in Jesus time, yeast wasn't added like it is today. Although some winemakers today still rely on wild yeast, most inoculate the must with cultered yeast cells, which are available in various strains that affect the characteristics and thus taste of the wine. I suspect that Last could explain this in considerable detail.

So the taste of the first wine served at the wedding was affected by the strain of wild yeast that got to it, by chance. The wine Jesus provided tasted better.

Most people can tell the difference between Welch's Grape Juice and Thunderbird. They can also tell the difference between Thunderbird and Screaming Eagle (it generally costs over $1,000 a bottle).

So the first wine at the wedding tasted like Thunderbird. The wine Jesus provided tasted like Screaming Eagle.

There is little historical, cultural, exegetical, contextual, or lexical reason to understand the wine Jesus provided to be anything but an alcoholic product similar to the first wine, other than it tasted better.

I'm done with this thread. It's going all over the place now.

I'm sure you will start another one that will astound me with its babble-on (Babylon).

What profit do I have to gain? Money? No. Popularity? No. Pleasure of drinking? No. See, you can't see the proverbial intoxicating wine from the new wine that comes from the grape of the cluster (i.e. you can't see the forest from the tress). Believing Jesus pushed people to be drunk with an intoxicating beverage is not about you doing a bunch of gymnsastics with words. It is not a head issue. It is heart issue. And you ignoring the heart and morality of the situation. For I am defending the goodness of my God, who is Jesus Christ. What exactly is your moral position on this situation? Do you have one? Can it be defined as selfless or Christ like? If so, how?

 

[Jason0047]

why is it always the inane kjv-onlyists who start this stuff? We dont care for their other threads so they try to annoy us with different nonsense like this? Like how much false doctrine can one cult have?

Your statement is an avoidance of the morality of the issue at hand, my friend. However, distractions and or slight of hand magic tricks that say "Hey! Look over here! Don't think about that!" is not going to work. People will know the truth, and the truth will set them free. For how exactly can you explain the goodness behind Jesus Christ pushing an intoxicating beverage that would have gotten people drunk? How is something like that exactly moral and good? What about all the alcoholics who were to read this chapter? If God endorsed intoxicating drinking, then it must be okay for the alcoholic, right?

 

[kennethcadwell]

Your statement is an avoidance of the morality of the issue at hand, my friend. However, distractions and or slight of hand magic tricks that say "Hey! Look over here! Don't think about that!" is not going to work. People will know the truth, and the truth will set them free. For how exactly can you explain the goodness behind Jesus Christ pushing an intoxicating beverage that would have gotten people drunk? How is something like that exactly moral and good? What about all the alcoholics who were to read this chapter? If God endorsed intoxicating drinking, then it must be okay for the alcoholic, right?

You keep putting the blame on Jesus, and now saying He would be pushing it on them.

He does not force anything on people. We are given the freewill to chose the proper way to use things.

Like I mentioned before about the snakes, spiders, and plants, you justify some of them being poisonous from the sin being initiated in this world.


I pose you a question;


Couldn't God just as easily make them non-poisonous and safe to handle or eat for all ?


Yes He could, but He gives us the freewill to chose the proper way of doing things, and living our lives.
Also it says in the scriptures that for a true believer the snake will not harm him.

 

[Jason0047]

We can determine what is right or wrong thinks to God, and Him showing us this through the law.

But even though we are not to question God on why He did what He did, and we are not to judge others now while in the flesh, we are to help and correct them in understanding so that they are not mislead and drawn away further. We are to help bring them back to the truth.

Instance, those who just read the English versions of the bible and do not study, or look into the original text and get the meaning/context that was used in that scripture can easily misinterpret it.

How many people believe a believer can not fall away even though scripture says they can, how many believe long hair on a man is wrong even though scripture does not say that, how many believe works of love do not work hand an hand with faith for salvation even though the scripture says they do ?

And the list goes on...........

Dear Kenneth:

Grace, peace, and love to you from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Please do not take this the wrong way, but I take it that you either (a) didn't read the verses or (b) you were really not listening to what they had to say (or looking closelly enough at them). For the apostles made clear that we can have a clear sense of right and wrong.

In fact, the Scriptures say that believers can know God's Judgments because God teaches it to them,

Psalm 119:102
"I have not departed from thy judgments: for thou hast taught me."

Yet, by what you said, you are implying we cannot know the truth on God's righteousness. However, the Scriptures say that a believer will be guided into ALL truth,

John 16:13
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." (cf. John 16:14 KJV, John 16:15 KJV,).

 

[kennethcadwell]

Dear Kenneth:

Grace, peace, and love to you from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Please do not take this the wrong way, but I take it that you either (a) didn't read the verses or (b) you were really not listening to what they had to say (or looking closelly enough at them). For the apostles made clear that we can have a clear sense of right and wrong.

In fact, the Scriptures say that believers can know God's Judgments because God teaches it to them,

Psalm 119:102
"I have not departed from thy judgments: for thou hast taught me."

Yet, by what you said, you are implying we cannot know the truth on God's righteousness. However, the Scriptures say that a believer will be guided into ALL truth,

John 16:13
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." (cf. John 16:14 KJV, John 16:15 KJV,).

Psalms is speaking on how God told us to walk, and he has not departed from that judgment on how he should walk.

John is speaking of the Holy Spirit guiding us to say and do the right things.

The individual can still refuse to listen to that guidance, and walk in there own desires and wants defiling the word.

I am not saying we can not know God's truth, that He exists and that He helps us to live a good and righteous life to Him.

What I am saying is we are not to question His motives, and His laws was placed for us to abide by.
He can do what ever He wants whenever He wants.

He is above all.

Psalm 115:3
But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.