Alcohol Drinking - a NEW perspective?

[Melchior]

Could you explain the wine skin bursting to me please - I do not understand that.

Old wineskins would lose their elasticity. The chemical reaction of fermentation cause new wine to expand. This reaction cause the old wineskins to burst because they were stiff and had no room to expand with the wine. This problem exists because of fermentation. Old wine could go into old wineskins because the initial chemical process that cause the expansion of the wine was over.

As well; I have been told that the greek word “good” in “kept the good wine till last” is the same greek word as in John when scripture referrs to the “good shepard”. And that the greek word mean pure, unblemished, uncorrupted…

uncorrupted being opposite to fermentation. Thoughts.

You are contrasting things the bible never contrast. Death is also corruption. Yet we kill to eat. The fatted calf in sacfifice to God or for a meal was good thing. That the calf had to die does not take away the goodness of the meat itself. Similarly, food is “corrupted” in your stomach to your benefit. So we really don’t want to be rigidly literalist about opposites when to context makes it relative.

Further, because this corruption process is the means God uses to make wine, we cannot put it in the same category as corruption such as death or sin. Otherwise you need to apply the same standard to your degestive system. However, even actual corrupted wine, vinegar, still has good uses.

As well, why would the bread HAVE TO BE unleavened (uncorrupted - no yeast) and then we consume corrupted (fermented) wine? That I cannot grasp. Thoughts?

Because bread is not wine. Bread was sybolic of one thing and wine another. What was unleavened bread? Essentially it was not the lack of yeast but the lack of previously used yeast (“a little leaven”) recycled for new loaves. Essentially what we do in modern times with sour dough bread. Wine is not leavened in this manner (not that it would matter because the symbolism is still different) the yeast came from the skin of the grapes themselves.

Since you are referring to the Passover seder you should consider that the Jews always used wine and the commandments about each portion of the meal were different. See my reference to corrupted animal flesh about. Also consider Jews always, to this day used wine, not grape juice for Passover.

Mel

 

[Orionthehunter]

I would disagree but you are free to have your opinion. I call that “your God”. “Your God” would sit and have a drink - but he doesn’t exist. Not the God of the Bible(IMHO). Think about it - a God so righteous that his son Jesus had to bear extreme torture…so we can have a beer at whatever. So righteous that he just couldn’t have said “ah well, I forgive” - No JUSTICE needed to be done. Hense God’s sacrifice. The Lamb of God.

The way I see it - all knees will be bowed. We will be silent.

Romans 14:11 “…every knee shall bow to me…” - we shall give an account. (also see Phil 2:10)

Sounds pretty serious.

Rom 3:19 “…that every mouth will be stopped, and all the world will become guilty before God…”

Sounds pretty serious.

You have misunderstood the analogy. He is talking in reference to being in friendship and fellowship (Christ said “I now call you friend”) that He would share whatever tradition friends culturally share (so long as it wasn’t unholy of course) just as He did at Cana.

God is the I AM and His nature is the “alls and omnis” which should strike awe in all of us always. But He doesn’t intend in His “all and omnis” to have us consider Him distant from us. This is why Christ called those who walk with Him “friend”.

When He dined and drank w/ those the “righteous” called sinners, He went into their homes and accepted their hospitality. He didn’t chastise them for breaking “rules” but saw the real Holiness in opening themselves up to Him in fellowship. If Jesus had gone to their house and not drank with them, I am pretty sure that the “righteous” wouldn’t have criticized Him in the manner they did.

One of the great travesties that is the fruit of our separation as Christians is that certain understandings get lost. So much of sin is a disordered pursuit of gifts from God. For instance, sacramental sex isn’t a sin but a gift from God. Lust is a disordered pursuit of love and sex. Or, taking pride in our work isn’t a sin but honor and glory for God in gratitude for our many gifts. Pride (capital P) is a disordered taking personal honor and glory. Similarly, sharing fellowship and gaity and fun is an expression of gracious acceptance of our many gifts. But going to the extreme where it becomes debauchery, licentiousness, etc. is a worship of self vs. God.

When the understanding of disorder is lost or downplayed, it becomes easy to look at the end result and misapply the cause. Debauchery, lust, pride aren’t the result of alcohol, sex, or work/accomplishments but in their disordered pursuit. Instead of focusing on how they manifest (drunkedness, fornification, etc.) the perversion of heart, we need to cure the perversion itself.

Malachi, many go to great effort to find (in some eyes manufacture) Biblical support for the prohibition of alcohol and dancing in an effort to eliminate/diminish what we Catholics call the “near occassion of sin” (things which aren’t inherently sinful but can lead to sin).

As one who grew up with an alcoholic, if you could wave your hand and eliminate alcohol, it wouldn’t have done a single thing to correct or eliminate the core problems of my father. He was led into his alcoholism by a perversion of heart and he needed a conversion of heart to come out of it. His alcohol abuse was only the manifestation of his unholy heart.

There are many who are trying to lessen sexual sin with attempts to legislate/prohibit access to pornography. With the internet, I’m sorry but I don’t see how this is going to work. Instead, we need to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in the formation of healthy hearts via a healthy understanding of the sacramental gift of sex vs. it being just another “pleasure” to be “enjoyed” with impunity.

For those things that need to be absolutely prohibited, Scripture is clear (do not steal, commit adultery, etc.). For those that need to be pursued as God intended and allows, we need to depend on our pursuit of holiness and a healthy interior state.

Finally, I don’t think the concept of following the Bible as a source of God’s will is served when one has to go to mental and scriptural re-engineering to contradict the simple fact- Christ made wine in plentiful quantities to be served in His presence. By His nature, He cannot and will not cooperate in evil. To assert alcohol consumption is evil IMHO says alot about one’s concept about Jesus and His perfection.

 

[Melchior]

A quick search on the internet says the wine at the passover meal was unfermented.

"So in the second Passover and each year thereafter, they used the cup, and they used wine in the cup. But the wine was unfermented. No leaven was to be used in anything on the Passover table, because leaven spoke of sin. Since leaven was used in fermenting wine, the wine had to be unfermented. Therefore, the cup of wine took the place of the blood of the lamb sprinkled on the door post. The cup took on a symbolic meaning referring to the work of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross. Jesus said to two of His disciples in Matthew 20:22, “…are you able to drink from the cup that I shall drink from…?” Then in Matthew 26:39, Jesus said, “…O my Father, if it be possible let this cup pass from me, nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.”

angelfire.com/mt/tabor/passover.html

I will keep searching.

That site is wrong. There is nothing to support what he says other than speculation. The yeast for wine, as I mentioned in my previous post came fro the grapes skin. There was not way to stop this process until a little over 100 years ago. Leavened was an issue specific to bread.

 

[Melchior]

Small clear plastic cup of red wine or grape juice

From a Jesish site I believe. Again looks like opposing practices.

72.14.253.104/search?q=cacher436yBzMRMJ:www.yeshuatyisrael.com/pdf/sedersetup.pdf+Passover+Seder+wine+or+grape+juice%3F&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ca

That is from a Messianic Jewish site. Most Messianic Jews are essentially Baptists in theology. So this source provides no historical insights. Clearly the optional grape juice is an addition, not the norm. I grew up in a half Jewish home and Passover was a part of my upbrining trust me on this. Jews use wine. Sweet, disgusting Manishewitz wine.

 

[Melchior]

ynca.com/Mini%20Studies/passovercupwineorgrape.htm

Yahweh’s New Covenant Assembly says grape juice.

I guess I can search and search and it will not help.

I guess no wine for me yet

But you just keep looking at like minded websites of Jewish Chirstians who share your same fundamentalist understanding. There ethnic heritage does not give them an internal knowledge of history and science. They act like all good Fundamentalists when it comes to alcohol. They adhere to the 11th Commandment - Thou Shalt not drink. It’s comes right before though shalt not dance. Site that just repeat a certain believe with no sources cited or refences are not helpful and really don’t give you information. They just present their conviction without evidence.

 

[NotWorthy]

If some Jews use grape juice nowadays it could easily be interpreted (and probably verified) that this is to protect those who are alcoholic.

I understand the Passover included 4 cups of wine. As someone who has suffered in the past from binge drinking, I have found it’s much easier to turn down the first drink then any of the remaining drinks. I would have been hard pressed during a Passover to stop at just 4 cups of wine. In my mind, “IT’S ON, BABY!!!”. I would have been much better off using grape juice. But this is applying 21st century reasoning with a 3500 year old tradition. I certainly wouldn’t want to impose my “weakness” onto others traditions, but I could see how this would be offered to today’s Jews who suffer from the same weakness that I have.

Am I even remotely making sense?

 

[Orionthehunter]

Malachi, I just read and grasped the assertion that the gift of wine in temple didn’t mean it was licit to consume it. This is a gross mental gyration that has profound misrepresentation of Scripture. Offering of temple sacrifce was to be a great sacrifice. To offer as sacrifice something that was only worthy of being poured down the drain is an insult to God.

Let me make an analogy. Imagine that the Holy Land wasn’t in an area conducive to growing grapes but bananas.

Family A picks their best banans and brings it to Temple as a sacrifial gift in gratitude for all their gifts.

Family B has no fresh bananas but uses their over ripe bananas (otherwise only good as animal feed) and lovingly adds labor to make banana bread as their sacrificial gift.

Family C has fresh bananas, doesn’t know how to make banana bread, and instead of throwing out their over-ripe bananas brings it as their Temple offering.

Which will God see as the insult?

 

[Contarini]

This is so glaringly obvious that people have to mentally choose to ignore it in order to defend the whole “grape juice” position. As a student of the sciences, I can assure you that the fermentation reaction is quite simple (albeit an important one). Take a source of sugar (grapes), add heat, humidity, and some lovely microorganisms (all of which were facts of life back then) and voilà…it’s unavoidable really.

That’s not entirely true. There is such a thing as “must,” which in my experience (I’ve tasted it once on a train in Romania) is still slightly fermented, but not deliberately so. And, of course, you could drink the juice before it had a chance to start fermenting. Supposedly it was or is the tradition in the Coptic Church to squeeze the grapes directly into the chalice for the Eucharist (at least that’s what 19th-century temperance advocates asserted).

My wife wrote her doctoral dissertation on 19th-century Methodist arguments in favor of switching to “unfermented wine” in the Eucharist. That’s how I know about this. Contrary to what many people think, the advocacy of grape juice was not logically or temporally subsequent to Welch’s invention, but quite the other way around.

Edwin

 

[SeekerJen]

My gratitude for the teaching authority of Holy Mother Church has been renewed and strengthened.

 

[steveandersen]

That’s not entirely true. There is such a thing as “must,” which in my experience (I’ve tasted it once on a train in Romania) is still slightly fermented, but not deliberately so. And, of course, you could drink the juice before it had a chance to start fermenting. Supposedly it was or is the tradition in the Coptic Church to squeeze the grapes directly into the chalice for the Eucharist (at least that’s what 19th-century temperance advocates asserted).

My wife wrote her doctoral dissertation on 19th-century Methodist arguments in favor of switching to “unfermented wine” in the Eucharist. That’s how I know about this. Contrary to what many people think, the advocacy of grape juice was not logically or temporally subsequent to Welch’s invention, but quite the other way around.

Edwin

Sure people may have argued for grape juice before Welch but that doesn’t get around the fact that canning and pasteurization are 19th century inventions.

Grape juice may have been available around harvest time. Maybe a month or two out of a year max? But since Passover comes months after harvest and Sunday comes every week you’re kind of stuck. Grapes rot and grape juice firmaments as sure as the sun rises.
So those arguments were in vain.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Hey I am just searching the web. On the web it says alcohol making is hard. Others say easy. Some say keeping grape-wine is easy - alcoholic wine as we know it - hard.

Where on a site about actually making alcoholic wine have you found it stated as being hard (when doing so in secrecy and without soliciting advise because of legal concerns was not part of the equation)? That is the kind of site you need to look at as far as the actual mechanics of making wine and the level of skill involved. Squeeze grapes, place in a container with a minimum of surface area exposed to air, but not sealed (so the CO2 can escape as it bubbles out) and let it go for a few weeks, strain off into another container and let it sit a few weeks more. Then taste and enjoy. There are certainly tricks I wouldn’t have been aware of trying it without outside guidance that may have required several attempts to work out otherwise, but the process is actually quite straight forward.

If the Jews are split - how could that be used to help Christians. I do not think it can.

So far you haven’t posted from any Jewish resources indicating a split. The group Yahweh’s New Covenant Assembly is also not of Jewish origins, but another group of evangelical fundamentalist Christians that borrowed old terms and spellings to imply a historical background to what is in reality a very new belief set. Find evidence that there is a split within Orthodox / Conservative (or even Reformed) Judaism at large and you’ll have something to talk about, but undocumented essays by Christian fringe groups and allusions to practices during Prohibition are not at all sufficient to use as the basis to claim there is a split in the Jewish mindset on this.

First, the lead in to that paragraph you left out:

This however has not invariably been the case, and several testimonies from and about American Jews in the middle of the nineteenth century tell us about a

when you presented this:

widespread opinion that unfermented “raisin-wine” was the only acceptable beverage for Passover use, and that alcoholic wine was severely frowned upon by Jewish tradition. Some even went so far as to say that alcoholic fermentation was included within the prohibition of h\ametz.
Now the preference for raisin-wine is not completely unreasonable. After all, commercially produced kosher wines were a rarity at this time, especially in America, so that the only way to procure a ritually satisfactory beverage would be to make it at home.

Based on your pattern of citations, I’m having difficult coming up with a plausible reason that you cut out the time frame that would have been the clear tip-off that the article you quoted was addressing what was done by Jews in America during Prohibition rather than worldwide practice.

Keep raisins then when need “fruit of the vine” drink. Boil raisens. Pretty easy

Easy where you have a lot of extra fuel and water (say, most of the US during the Prohibition era) but we’ve already pointed out the short supply of both water and fuel in Judea (this is also an issue in mass production of the only partially fermented must, though that was probably added to sweeten a wine. Again, you are ignoring very key facts to try to preserve a conclusion that was initially made in a vacuum.

Wine?..a miniscule pocket between drinkable and vinegar and spoiled. But I am no expert. But that Jewish professor seems to be.

The pocket between drinkable and vinegar is not so minuscule, even in ancient days. Once vinegar it will keep just about forever if kept sealed.

Again, that Jewish professor was speaking to attitudes by American Jews during prohibition, when they wanted to acceptable alternatives to using Christian sacramental wines
for their especially holy feasts. He did have a point though in that wine making was a learned art supervised by those skilled in it, but knowledge on doing so could be transferred freely, which was very unlike the situation during Prohibition where the access to the knowledge was abruptly cut off.

 

[Pious_Mat]

First of all, there are less than 500 million buddhists worlwide, not all of whom abstain from alcohol. Second, alcohol is not explicitly forbidden in hinduism, just as most hindu scholars advocate vegetarianism, only about 40% of hindus actually practise vegetarianism.

Also, I would discount anything the old testament has to say about alcohol, since OT dietary laws fall under traditions that were to be replaced by those of Christianity, hence only OT moral law need be adhered to.

Also note that most warnings are against drunkenness, as if it is obvious progression from mild alcohol consumption.

The truth is that alcohol was a part of everyday life in Palestine at the time of Christ; its sweet grapes made some of the best wine in the world, and it would have been consumed by many on a daily basis.

Also note that Luther and Calvin both advocated the enjoyment of wine as a biblical blessing, going above and beyond the Medieval Catholic definition of temperance.

And yet it was their followers, or at those who followed in their footsteps, that started the modern temperance movement.

 

[malachi_a_serva]

I shall be back to respond later.

Here is an interesting perspective

irfi.org/articles/articles_51_100/alcohol_is_prohibited_for_jews_a.htm

We are told in the Qur’an that the Jews and the Christians altered or misinterpreted their Scriptures to suit their needs and cravings. This article is intended to analyze their Scriptures to arrive at the truth.

“Contrary to popular opinion, in the ancient world the preservation of grape juice unfermented was a relatively simple process. It was accomplished by boiling down the juice to a syrup, or by separating the fermentable pulp from the juice of the grape by means of filtration, or by placing the grape juice in sealed jars which were immersed in a pool of cold water, or by fumigating the wine jars with sulphur before sealing them. The use of such techniques clearly indicates that the means of preserving grape juice without fermentation were known and used in the ancient world.” (REF. Bacchiocchi, Ibid)

 

[malachi_a_serva]

The Wedding at Cana

In the Bible (Revised Standard Version or RSV) in the book of John, Chapter 2 and verses 1-11, describe that Jesus (PBUH) his mother and his disciples were invited to a wedding at Cana in Galilee. Here Jesus (PBUH) shows a miracle by converting water into wine.

           " When the steward of the feast tasted the water that was made wine, and did not know where it came from: the steward of the feast called the bridegroom, and said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first; and when men have drunk freely, then the poor wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          John 2: 10, 11.

Samuele Bacchiocchi (REF: S. Bacchiocchi. The Sobering Facts About New Testament Wine, Signs of the Times, January 1990, pp. 3-5 ) argues that “good wine” does not mean that it has a high alcoholic content.

He says Christians believe that the wine was fermented from grape juice and that the word “the best” (John 2: 10 NIV) is interpreted as “a high quality alcoholic wine.” He further states that the words “have drunk freely” does not mean that they were intoxicated from an overuse of fermented wine. According to Bacchiocchi the wine” used in the wedding at Cana was unfermented grape juice and that the Jews at that time knew how to preserve unfermented grape juice through the year. The expression “have drunk freely”, he says, “is used in the sense of satiation. It refers simply to the large quantity of wine generally consumed at a feast, without any reference to its intoxicating effects.”

One can read “In Cana, the disciples did not enjoy the new supply of wine but ‘believed in him’ who had made it (John 2: 11).” (The Broadman Bible commentary Vol. 9, 1970, p. 229).

“ And no one puts new wine into old “wineskins”; if he does, the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost, and so are the skins; but new wine is for fresh skins.”

Mark 2: 22

Christians interpret this verse to mean that Jesus (PBUH) is advising not to put “new wine into old wineskins.” This is rebuffed by Bacchiocchi by quoting Alexander B. Bruce (”The Synoptic Gospels” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, Grand Rapids, 1956, p.500) “ Jesus was not thinking at all of fermented, intoxicating wine, but of must, a non-intoxicating beverage, which could be kept safely in new leather bottles, but not in old skins which had previously contained ordinary wine, because particles of albuminoid matter adhering to the kin would set up fermentation and develop gas with an enormous pressure.”

“ For John the Baptist (Yahya (AS)) has come eating no bread and drinking NO wine; and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, ‘Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!.’

Luke 7: 33,34 (RSV)

Again Christians believe that Jesus (PBUH), is admitting his ‘eating and drinking’ life style and they conclude that Jesus (PBUH), must be drinking alcoholic wine, otherwise he will not be called a “drunkard.” In counter argument, Bacchiocchi (Ibid) says “Jesus used the phrase “eating no bread and drinking no wine” to describe the life style of John the Baptist (Yahya (AS)) who was socially isolated, whereas Jesus describes his own life style as “ eating and drinking” meaning that Jesus lived a “life style free of social association.” “ The important point is in the words “Son of man has come eating and drinking” the word wine is missing. Hence if Jesus (PBUH) was a wine-drinker he could have repeated the word wine which he used in describing John the Baptist.

The word “drunkard” used against Jesus (PBUH) is a false accusation. Because on two occasions his adversaries said of him “you have a demon” (John 7:20., 8:118). Does it mean that Jesus (PBUH) had an evil spirit within him simply because his adversaries say so. Jesus (PBUH) was a Prophet and his life style of self-denial is the proof.

The following verses refer to the Last Supper of Christ (PBUH):

“Drink of it, all of you for this is my blood of the cove*nant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of’ the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s Kingdom.”

Matthew 26: 28-29 (RSV).

“ And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant,

Which poured out for many. Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the Kingdom of’ God.”

 

[malachi_a_serva]

Mark 14: 24-25 (RSV)

Christians believe that the wine used during the Last Supper was alcoholic because words “fruit of the vine” are interpreted as fermented wine. Secondly they assume that during Passover time Jews drink only fermented wine. Bacchiocchi (Ibid) says “Fermented wine is not the natural fruit of the vine but the unnatural fruit of fermentation and decay. The Jewish historian Josephus, who was a contemporary of the apostles, explicitly calls the three clusters of grapes freshly squeezed in a cup by Pharaoh’s cupbearer “the fruit of the vine.” Thus the phrase was used to designate the sweet unfermented juice of the grape…. Christ could hardly have commanded “all” of his followers through the ages to drink the cup if it contained alcoholic wine. There are some to whom alcohol in any form is very harmful. We cannot conceive of Christ bending over to bless in grateful prayer a cup containing alcoholic wine which the Scripture warns us not to look at (Prov 23:31). A cup that intoxicates is a cup of cursing and not “the cup of blessing” (1 Cor 10:16); it is “the cup of demons” and not “the cup of the Lord” (1 Cor 10:21); it is a cup that cannot fittingly symbolize the incorruptible and “precious blood of Christ” (1 Peter 1:18-19). This gives us reason to believe that the cup He “blessed” and gave to His disciples did not contain any “fermented thing” prohibited by Scripture."

JEWS

Jews are no exception and consumption of alcohol is prohibited for them also. According to Mosaic Law no fermented beverages are allowed during the Passover feast.

“Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread; On the first day you shall put away leaven out of your houses, for if any one eats what is leavened, from the first day until the seventh day, that person shall be cut off from Israel.”

Exodus 12: 15 (RSV)

“Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day there shall be a feast to the Lord. Unleavened bread shall be eaten for seven days; no leavened bread shall be seen with you, and no leaven shall be seen with you in all territory.”

Exodus 13: 6-7 (RSV)

As we can see there is no mention of wine or any fermented drinks in the Mosaic Law cited above.

Bacchiocchi (Ibid) supports the view that Jews are prohibited from drinking alcohol and he says “The Talmud prohibits drinking alcohol to the accompaniment of musical instruments at festive occasions such as weddings. This prohibition is confirmed by later testimony of the rabbis. For example S.M. Isaac, an eminent nineteenth-century rabbi and editor of The Jewish Messenger says, “ The Jews do not, in their feasts for sacred purposes, including the marriage feast, ever use any kind of fermented drinks. In their oblations and libations, both private and public they employ the fruit of the is, fresh grapes-unfermented grape juice, and raisins, as the symbol of benediction. Fermentation is to them always a symbol of corruption." Though Rabbi Isaac’s statement is not quite accurate, since Jewish sources are not unanimous on the kind of wine to be used at sacred festivals, it still does indicate that some Jews used unfermented wine at wedding feasts.

Please report any broken links to Webmaster
Copyright © 1988-2007 irfi.org. All Rights Reserved

 

[Ray_Scheel]

I shall be back to respond later.

Here is an interesting perspective

irfi.org/articles/articles_51_100/alcohol_is_prohibited_for_jews_a.htm

We are told in the Qur’an that the Jews and the Christians altered or misinterpreted their Scriptures to suit their needs and cravings. This article is intended to analyze their Scriptures to arrive at the truth.

If you are not ready to respond to the points that have already been brought up, it is very inappropriate to flood a thread with copyrighted content, and even more so to present yet another source that declares its prejudice against the long held Christian and Jewish position, particularly in order to make its own beliefs on that issue look better.

 

[Orionthehunter]

If you are not ready to respond to the points that have already been brought up, it is very inappropriate to flood a thread with copyrighted content, and even more so to present yet another source that declares its prejudice against the long held Christian and Jewish position, particularly in order to make its own beliefs on that issue look better.

Bingo. There are two options:

1. One can take the Scripture at face value: Christ turned water into wine for a wedding where the clear tradition was it was alcoholic. Christ went into the homes of sinners and enjoyed their hospitality which traditionally would have included wine at the meal. God demands that we make precious sacrifice in the Temple vs. bringing something only fit to be poured down the drain. If the wine wasn’t to be consumed, it was not precious. Thus, for drinking to be evil, Christ cooperated in an evil which means He wan’t God.
2. One can take a great deal of mental, historical, and Scriptural gyrations which when combined can only be so persuasive as to raise doubt with regard to item #1 above.

For this Bible-believing Christian, I know which camp I am in.

 

[NotWorthy]

Malachi, Why aren’t the all the mainstream Jewish groups admitting that it’s been grape juice all along? I mean, what do they have to gain by denying the grape juice angle? Do they all own stock in Manischevitz?!?

 

[NonDenom]

NotWorthy;2580335]Let’s not ignore the fact that Grape Juice was not invented yet.

Hi NotWorthy
This statement is wrong, wine is grape juice before it’s wine.
Luke 5:39 Also no one having drunk old wine immediately desires new, for he says, The old is better.
Why do you suppose this is, because the new is just grape juice.

Mar 2:22 No one puts new wine into old wineskin’s, else the new wine bursts the wineskin’s, and the wine spills, and the wineskin’s will be ruined. The new wine must be put into new wineskin’s.

Why do you suppose this is, because the new is just grape juice. As grape juice ferments it gives off a gas which causes the wineskin to expand. If you put grape juice in a old wineskin which had already expanded it would burst.
I would guess that the so called wine that Jesus drank was really grape juice that had not fermented yet

 

[NotWorthy]

Hi NotWorthy
This statement is wrong, wine is grape juice before it’s wine.
Luke 5:39 Also no one having drunk old wine immediately desires new, for he says, The old is better.
Why do you suppose this is, because the new is just grape juice.

Mar 2:22 No one puts new wine into old wineskin’s, else the new wine bursts the wineskin’s, and the wine spills, and the wineskin’s will be ruined. The new wine must be put into new wineskin’s.

Why do you suppose this is, because the new is just grape juice. As grape juice ferments it gives off a gas which causes the wineskin to expand. If you put grape juice in a old wineskin which had already expanded it would burst.
I would guess that the so called wine that Jesus drank was really grape juice that had not fermented yet

Sorry, but grapes are harvested about 10 months prior to Passover. After 10 months, that stuff is wine or it’s vinegar.

Also, New Wine into wine skins still has some expanding to do. That’s why it tears old wineskins that have lost their elasticity.