Is this true that Jesus drank alcoholic wine as the lyrics, “Cause I heard Jesus, He drank wine”? Some question this. What kind of wine did Jesus drink? Did Jesus drink intoxicating amounts of wine?
The Definition of Biblical Wine
The word “wine” in the Bible is not always alcoholic or equivalent to modern wine. The Bible uses one Greek word for “wine” and “grape juice” which could mean alcoholic wine of varying amounts or non-alcoholic grape juice (1 Tim 3:8; Titus 2:3). The Hebrew word for “wine” is yayin and the Greek is oinos (MT; LXX). Biblical “wine” is grape juice that may or may not have fermented. However, the wine of today has considerably more alcohol than wine in the first century because of modified yeast. The Bible includes a number of examples of unfermented “wine”:
- “Wine” is the blood of the grape (Gen 49:11–12, Heb. yayin, Gr. oinos LXX; Deut 32:14, Heb. chemer; Gr. oinos LXX).
- The vineyard is the place of “red wine” (Isa 27:2, Heb. chemer).
- “Wine” refers to the grape juice from the grapes of the field (Deut 11:14; 2 Chr 31:5, Heb. tirosh; Gr. oinos LXX; Jer 40:10, 12, Heb. yayin; Gr. oinos LXX).
- Scripture describes “wine” that is in the grape (Isa 65:8, Heb. tirosh).
- The grape juice of the wine-press is “wine” (Prov 3:10, Heb. tirosh; Gr. oinos LXX; Isa 16:10; Jer 48:33, Heb. yayin; Gr. oinos LXX).
These references reveal that the word “wine” in Hebrew and Greek often refers to non-alcoholic grape juice in the Bible. Linguistics requires that one begin with the generic meaning and then determine other specific meanings of a word by its context and, or use.
In reading the Old Testament, Bible translations represent six different Hebrew words “wine” for which one word excludes alcohol. This word is asis meaning “sweet grape juice” or “new grape juice.” The word has no reference to alcohol, yet translators have interpreted it as “wine” to avoid interpreting the contexts with nuances and ambiguity. Therefore, the word “wine” does not necessarily mean alcoholic wine in the Bible.
The Bible does not appear to contain one positive statement about intoxicating wine or any such drink. The Bible does include positive words about generic “wine” that is grape juice (Gen 14:18; Num 15:5–10; Deut 14:26; Ps 104:15; Isa 55:1; Amos 9:14; John 2:1–11; 1 Tim 5:23). References to “strong drink” or “liquor” in the Bible refer to cider in biblical translations of sikera, σικερα, according to Danker and Gingrich’s Greek lexicon (cf. Deut 14:26; Luke 1:15; Wycliffe’s Bible).
Ancient Wine and Today’s Wine
In the Bible, alcoholic wine is not like wine today. The sugar of grape juice can only ferment to 3 or 4% alcohol with wild yeast — airborne yeast. For grape juice to exceed 4% alcohol, then the winemaker must add yeast. The yeast added to ancient wines produced between 4–11% alcohol. Alcohol kills these yeast cells and prevents levels of alcohol from exceeding ~10%. Today, wines average 12–20% alcohol due to modern fermentation by adding sulfur dioxide and Saccharomyces (a cultured GMO yeast) to a late harvest of ripened grapes with higher fructose (Winemaker Magazine, Wines & Vines, UC Davis, International Biblical Encyclopedia, “Alcohol in the Church,” Bible Wine). Today’s wine is not like biblical wine in regards to alcoholic content. Due to the later invention of distilling, strong drinks like liquor exceed 20% alcohol for which today’s wine is coming close to matching.
When reading the word “wine” in the Bible, the word may simply refer to grape juice or intoxicating wine not exceeding ~10% alcohol. The reader must interpret the word “wine” within its context to determine if it is alcoholic. However, biblical wine is certainly not like wine today.
Because of the use of the word “wine” in English Bibles, many presume that Jesus drank alcoholic wine. Jesus did not drink modern wine. The methods for fermenting highly-alcoholic wine had not yet been invented. Jesus’s opponents did accuse Him of being a “wine-drinker” from the Greek oinopoteis, because He came freely eating and also drinking grape juice unlike John the Baptist who restricted his eating and drinking (Matt 11:18–19; Luke 7:33–34). These antagonists appear to accuse Jesus of drinking alcoholic wine. However, when the reader considers the wedding that Jesus attended in Cana and Jesus’s institution of the Lord’s Supper, then His drinking of wine is not what many have presumed.
Water to Wine
What about Jesus turning water into wine? Upon reading John 2:1–11 in most English translations, many took the text as stating that Jesus turned water into intoxicating wine at the wedding in Cana, a small town in Galilee (John 2). These scriptures infer that the wedding guests “have well drunk” a large amount of oinos wine. The Greek word translated as “well drunk” is methuo meaning literally to fill or make full, and many times the word means “drunk” depending on the context. Translators correctly render methuo as “drunk” in contexts referring to drunkenness by drinking intoxicating wine or filling oneself with wine (Gingrich and Danker’s lexicon). John’s reference to the guests having “drunk well” and becoming full also implies that the wedding feast was relatively short especially if one takes this word in John 2:10 to mean that the guests were “drunk.”
In this case, Jesus either made more alcoholic wine for those who were drunk or He made more grape juice for those who would have their fill. Which is plausible: that Jesus created intoxicating wine for those who were drunk or that He made fresh “new wine,” grape juice, for those who had drunk well of the previous supply? If one interprets this passage as Jesus making alcoholic wine, then Jesus created more intoxicating wine for those who were already drunk or filled. If one perceives that the wedding guests were simply full of non-alcoholic wine, then Jesus made “new wine” with minimal to no alcohol.
Furthermore, “good wine” was limited late in winter and just before Passover when the wine had aged throughout the year (John 2:13). Jesus providing more aged and intoxicating wine would not have been an apparent miraculous sign. Jesus provided them with “good wine.” Was it “good wine” as though received from the grape press? The making of new wine would magnify Jesus’s sign because this was just before the Passover and before the first harvest of grapes. Therefore, Jesus’s production of fresh grape juice would have been an evident miraculous wonder of God.
The master of the feast depicted the situation that which the guests had filled themselves with wine from the meaning of “filled” of the Greek word methuo in John 2:9–10. A wedding feast may last a day and sometimes more (Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah). John depicted that many would have drunk well of the wine so the guests were full as implied by the Greek word methuo. Being filled with wine tells that this drinking of the wedding feast occurred in a short amount of time within a few hours. The guests would immediately drink the wine that Jesus made. If Jesus made alcoholic wine, Jesus would have made more intoxicating wine amounting to between 120 to 180 gallons of additional alcoholic wine. What would happen if three hundred guests “have well drunk” and then drank an additional 150 gallons of alcoholic wine? Jesus would have given each guest an additional 64 ounces of alcoholic wine. The average person would have drunk another 6–12 drinks of alcoholic wine if there were 300 guests. However, the abundance was part of the miracle like the 12 baskets of bread left over from feeding the 5,000. Maybe the wine was not meant to be consumed immediately.
Even considering a wedding party of a thousand guests who have well drunk, each person would have consumed about 19 ounces of wine. Presuming that this wine contained 10% alcohol because the scenario includes fermented wine and the guests drank it all in one day, Jesus would have aided a thousand people in binge drinking having intoxicated the guests with three additional drinks who were already intoxicated as indicated by the Greek methuo for having “well drunk.” For each guest to have had simply two more drinks, then the wedding would have had at least 1,600 attendees. Despite the number in attendance, Jesus would have presumably contributed a considerable amount of alcohol to those who were already filled with wine. For those proposing that Jesus made highly intoxicating wine like today’s wine, 16–24 ounces would intoxicate anyone at an alcoholic level of 12–15% according to the CDC. Either today’s intoxicating wine or first-century fermented wine appears to be an absurdity at this wedding.
To assume that Jesus made alcoholic wine is to assume that after everyone had drunk all the other wine, then Jesus made more intoxicating wine for all of those who had their fill. The scenario of Jesus producing alcoholic wine appears implausible and uncharacteristic of biblical commands to refrain from drunkenness. If Jesus did make a great amount of fermented wine, He would have aided the sin of drunkenness and excessive drinking and would have participated in a drinking party, which are all condemned by His disciple and apostle Peter in the Scriptures (1 Pet 4:3).
Wine and the Lord’s Supper
Did Jesus use alcoholic wine in the Lord’s Supper? What kind of wine would someone drink at a feast where yeast was thrown out? Many have assumed that Jesus drank wine because many churches have made alcoholic wine a part of the “Eucharist,” the Lord’s Supper. Did Jesus use highly alcoholic wine when He instituted the Lord’s Supper? First, the Scriptures never use the word “wine” in any of the four accounts of Jesus instituting the Lord’s Supper. Jesus mentioned the specific content of the cup containing “the fruit of the grapevine.” The passages about the Lord’s Supper make no reference to alcoholic wine. The Greek word for “wine” is never used in Scripture to describe any part of the Lord’s Supper.
Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper during the Passover Feast. What kind of wine did the Jews use during Passover? Jesus used unleavened bread in the Passover because this is also the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Israel threw out all leaven by God’s command including the leavened bread (Exod 13:6–7). The throwing out of the yeast implies that Israel removed the grape juice fermented by the leavening of yeast. Fermented wine was not likely a part of the Passover taught by Moses. Furthermore, Jesus referred to the contents of the cup as “fruit of the grapevine” in the Lord’s Supper indicating minimal to no fermentation even from wild yeast. The intent of the cup of the Lord was not to intoxicate.
What about those who got drunk by drinking the Lord’s Supper? Getting drunk by bringing intoxicating wine to the Lord’s Supper does not mean that Jesus gave the disciples alcoholic wine in the Lord’s Supper. First Corinthians 11:21–22 depicts, “Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk [methuo]” (ESV). This passage also uses the Greek word methuo, which can mean drunk or filled (cf. John 2:10). Some ate the Lord’s Supper as a meal so that they were filled and those who drank were also filled not necessarily drunk. However, Paul could have been correcting such intoxication as well. If one assumes that these Christians became drunk in the assembly using the grape juice for the Lord’s Supper, then they must also presume that those drinking brought enough intoxicating wine to get drunk and intended to use such for the Lord’s Supper. The use of alcoholic wine implies that some of these Christians brought intoxicating wine for the church to drink together for the Lord’s Supper. They would also have decided to drink and get drunk from that wine in assembly rather than wait for others. Whether the wine was alcoholic or not, 1 Corinthians 11 neither condones alcoholic wine for the Lord’s Supper nor suggests that Jesus used alcoholic wine for His disciples to commune with Christ in remembrance of His sacrificial blood.
Warnings about Wine
Jesus warned against drunkenness and filling oneself with intoxicating drinks that trap people in this life (Luke 21:34). The Bible warns those who do drink, linger, and look at the cup (Prov 23:29–35; Rom 14:17–22). Christians can and should warn others about alcohol.
The apostle Paul revealed that those who continue in drunkenness will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9–11; Gal 5:19–21). The Greek word translated “drunkenness” literally means “filling oneself” in Scripture (Eph 5:18–19; cf. Rom 13:13). Christ’s Spirit in Galatians 5:19–21 teaches that such “drunkenness” is a “work of the flesh” and “those who are doing such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Galatians 5 also condemned “wild parties” or “revelries” where any of the lists of sins like drunkenness would constitute a party as sinful and carnal. Paul also revealed in 1 Corinthians 6:10 that drunkards “will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Drunkenness and filling one’s body with intoxicants is a sin.
Filling oneself with alcohol is evil and compromises the sobriety of the Christian conscience and one’s heart (cf. Rom 2:14–15; 1 John 3:19–21). Christ’s words and those of His apostles and prophets urge all to avoid drunkenness, and so Christians should do likewise and warn others of drunkenness. Peter warned, “For the time that is past suffices for doing what the Nations want to do, living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness [lit. excessive drinking], orgies, drinking parties [lit. drinkings], and lawless idolatry” (1 Pet 4:3). The word for “drunkenness” in 1 Peter 4:3 is not the usual word for drunkenness, but the Greek word is oinophlugia made of two words oinos meaning “wine” and phlugia is “to do something in excess.” Excessive drinking is a sin. Furthermore, “drinking parties” is translated from the Greek word potos, which literally denotes occasions that people gather for the purpose of drinking.
The apostle Paul commanded Christians to remain sober and make no provision to become drunk on any level (1 Thess 5:8). Christ had no part with drunkenness and drinking parties, so His followers must not. According to Romans 14, Christians should not condemn their brother over a drink; although, every Christian has the scriptural example and the foresight to warn against its use and against looking at the cup (Prov 23:29–35; Rom 14:17–22). Solomon warned by the wisdom of God.
Do not look on the wine when it is red, When it sparkles in the cup, When it swirls around smoothly; At the last it bites like a serpent, And stings like a viper. Your eyes will see strange things, And your heart will utter perverse things. (Prov 23:31–33)
Therefore, “Wine is a mocker, Strong drink is a brawler, And whoever is led astray by it is not wise” (Prov 20:1). The assertions of positive statements about drinking alcohol in the Bible are private interpretations.
Conclusion
The wine that Jesus drank was not intoxicating. Alcoholic wine is not characteristic of Jesus or any godly behavior in the Bible. Jesus neither encouraged drunkenness nor drank intoxicating wine. No one can rightly reference Jesus to justify excessive drinking, drunkenness, and drinking events. The Bible neither promotes nor supports the drinking of intoxicants. God’s grace compels Christians no longer to continue in any excessive drinking of alcohol because they have been forgiven.
Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires. (Rom 13:13–14)
Bibliography
- Jeff Chorniak. “Wild Yeast: The Pros and Cons of Spontaneous Fermentation.” Winemakers Magazine. 2005. <http://winemakermag.com/758-wild-yeast-the-pros-and-cons-of-spontaneous-fermentation>.
- Jean L. Jacobson. “Upsides of Wild Fermentation.” Wine & Vines, 2012. <http://www.winesandvines.com/template.cfm?section=features&content=98687>.
- “Marking Red Table Wine.” University of California Davis, 2016. <http://wineserver.ucdavis.edu/pdf/HWM3.pdf>.
- James Orr, M.A., D.D. “Wine; Wine Press.” International Bible Encyclopedia, 1915. <http://www.studylight.org/encyclopedias/isb/view.cgi?n=9116>.
- “Alcohol in the Church.” 2016. <http://www.abidingplace.org/features/alcohol-in-the-church.html>.
- Kyle Pope. “Bible Wine.” Olsen Park church of Christ, 2013. <http://www.olsenpark.com/Sermons13/BibleWine.html>.
- Alfred Edersheim. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Christian Classics Ethereal Library, 1883. <https://www.ccel.org/ccel/edersheim/lifetimes>.
Related posts:
“Reconsider the Biblical Concept of Drunkenness“
The Breath of God 
Scott you blocked my comment but God spoke through Rudy anyway. Why do you dishonestly block my comments? Because you want to push your agenda. But it didn’t work Scott because Rudy said to all exactly what should have been said.
You are obsessed with things of minor consequence. It would be refreshing to hear you expound on the mystery of our own death and resurrection in Jesus and how His work translated us from this realm of darkness to His realm of light, no longer under law and living now by His life! That would be something worth talking about.
But you love to argue about the alcohol content of the wine in Jesus’ day. Very sad. Will you print my comment? Probably not.
Wrong, James. WordPress automatically blocked your comment because it contained a link. Furthermore, I do not permit link dropping to maintain the integrity of current links. You can post your site or source without a link.
The majority of my posts and current grad work is focused on the resurrection and soteriology. The article above is a result of repeated requests for me to speak about Jesus’s use of wine.
Scott, the only web site link I mentioned was in the field that asked for a web site on the form to submit a comment. I did not put a web site in my comment that you blocked.
I will double check. The last person who was blocked did that.
On December 1, WordPress did block your post for including a link. I have withheld approval for this.
James, welcome back to the conversation. I just got in. My take so far is that there are way too many personal opinions floating around without the corresponding Scriptural references.
Thanks Gary. I have enjoyed your comments as well. This whole discussion about how much alcohol was in the wine that Jesus made or in the wine they drank in the first century is such a waste of time and energy.
Rudy made it so clear that the issue is what does the scripture teach? Rudy is correct in everything he said. These guys like Seattlebruce and Scott have an agenda because they are concerned about people abusing alcohol but that is not what this discussion is about. Seattlebruce is not being true to the scriptures. He is trying to impose his beliefs on us who are reading the scriptures plainly and accurately and he is pretty arrogant in the way he talks about helping those who may stumble over alcohol. Makes me wonder about Seattlebruce because his tone is so condescending. Wisdom from above is full of mercy and peace and not combative. Seattlebruce fails that test for sure.
Hi James. In agreement the conversation about how much wine Jesus drank is unimportant. What difference does it make? Absolutely none. Also in agreement with your comments about SeattleBruce. I believe you pegged him correctly. Finally, about Rudy. You are correct. The only issue is what Holy Scripture teaches. Scott is letting his agenda influence his writing and Seattlebruce is allowing his emotions to control his understanding. The result for both of them is they are completely missing the Truth as taught by the Bible.
Now you’re “pegging” people Rudy? Nice work. You don’t comprehend, do you?
pegging people???
Don’t be confused Rudy. He has trouble distinguishing between Rudy and Gary, just as he has trouble distinguishing between drinking and drunkenness.
Gary, made a simple mistake. That whole mockery thing working out well for ya? You’re so persuasive!
“just as he has trouble distinguishing between drinking and drunkenness.”
Let me cut to the chase for ya Gary. When you work with people in recovery you’ll find out real quickly the difference between your esoteric take on this and what needs to practically happen to support and love these folks. Yeah, and guess what, it doesn’t include sittin’ down and chewing the fat with them over a beer to prove how moderate a drinker you are. It does include not drinking in front of them and taking that charge very seriously. Are you willing to do that, and comprehend how that fits into a life yielded to the Spirit of God? I notice you never answer my question about whether you minister to anyone in recovery. Because when you do, your views become very practical very quickly, and you don’t have the luxury of ignoring Romans 14:22, et al., or say mocking brothers in Christ that bring out these points. Now we haven’t even gotten to the dilemma of problem drinkers or children and not stumbling them…
Sorry Rudy, should have addressed that to Gary who literally used the phrase, “I think you’ve pegged seattlebruce…”
Interesting James, you get to judge me while calling me judgmental. BTW, can you point out how my concern for the mass of humanity that suffers from addictions is untrue to Scripture?
“and he is pretty arrogant in the way he talks about helping those who may stumble over alcohol. Makes me wonder about Seattlebruce because his tone is so condescending. Wisdom from above is full of mercy and peace and not combative. Seattlebruce fails that test for sure.”
James, what amazes me is that you skip over the combativeness with those you agree with, and your own combativeness and zero in on my combativeness. LOL. Yeah, I wonder about you too. I’m no perfect one, to be sure – Jesus will humble me under His mighty hand. As He will you and all of us. Have I erred on the side of addicts? Perhaps, but you’ve erred on the side of disregard. I’d love for you to mount a vigorous defense of your concern for addicts…humble me and prove me wrong.
“But you love to argue about the alcohol content of the wine in Jesus’ day. Very sad. Will you print my comment? Probably not.”
James, for someone who likes to opine about condescension, you sure have the hair trigger judgments going on. Look how quickly you jumped to incorrect conclusions about Scott. So you’re trying to “win” us over? LOL.
“The Christian approach to alcohol is not to judge or condemn the person who may drink without excess and drunkenness, but the Christian must follow the biblical examples and warn those who do drink, linger, and look at the cup (Prov 23:29–35; Rom 14:17–22).”
It IS the Christians responsibility to deal with brethren who have drinking problems.
Correct. The admonition is to drink in moderation.
Where is that?
1 tim. 3:8 – “deacons must not be heavy drinkers”…that means drink in moderation, don’t overdrink.
1 tim. 5:23 – “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine”…that means don’t get drunk, drink moderately.
Definition of moderation: ” avoiding extremes of behavior, observing reasonable limits”. Therefore, all of the many verses in the Bible warning against drunkenness, excessive drinking, being led astray, slaves to much wine, (more than 70 times in the Bible) are teaching moderation in use of alcohol.
If you read the Bible in its entirety you will discover the Word teaches moderation in all aspects of the Christian life…drinking, eating, sleeping, relationships, etc.
Years ago, someone handed me a book about Social Drink and Biblical Authority. It was a Master’s thesis, written for a class with Thomas Warren, at the Harding Graduate School. It was an interesting read, where the main purpose was to defend the position that alcohol at social occasions was sinful. It was an interesting exercise in logic – but the exegesis was abominable.
I see a similar issue in this conversation. The exegesis is incorrect.
To blame it all on translations is incorrect as well.
As your quoted passages show, moderation is expressed – but overlooked by those who have started their argument from the presupposition drinking anything with an alcoholic content is sin – and now have to find passages to prove such.
The difference between drinking a glass of wine and getting drunk is not understood. The jump to “excess” is made immediately.
I assume Bruce lives in Seattle, and I think Scott lives in the South somewhere. His approach I understand – it is a common perception in the Southern congregations of the church of Christ.
But the argument should not be based on presuppositions. Simple question: What does the Bible have to say about drinking alcoholic beverages?
The answer is NOT”It is sin, and un-Christlike behavior…”
Rudy said: I see a similar issue in this conversation. The exegesis is incorrect.To blame it all on translations is incorrect as well.
Gary says: I agree, In most cases translation is not the problem. If, for example, 15 different versions of the Bible representing hundreds of scholars all use the same basic wording, I’m not going to question the experts and say THEY are wrong. Not to mention that one of the principles of understanding the Word is that “Scripture interprets Scripture”. If the context of the passages under discussion are taken into account, there is very little room to blame anything on translations.
Rudy said: As your quoted passages show, moderation is expressed – but overlooked by those who have started their argument from the presupposition drinking anything with an alcoholic content is sin – and now have to find passages to prove such.
Gary says: That’s why I have emphasized the word “agenda” in many of my posts. Those with an agenda try, as you state, to find passages to prove their points. This is not only poor scholarship but blinds the writer to the real Truth of the Bible.
Rudy said: The difference between drinking a glass of wine and getting drunk is not understood. The jump to “excess” is made immediately.
Gary says: That’s what having an agenda in Scott’s case and being emotionally blinded in Seattlebruce’s case leads to. They find it extremely easy to read into Scripture things that just aren’t there. And it seems in these situations they don’t even know they are doing that.
Rudy said: But the argument should not be based on presuppositions. Simple question: What does the Bible have to say about drinking alcoholic beverages? The answer is NOT ”It is sin, and un-Christlike behavior…”
Gary says: Yes, it is simple. It only requires staying on subject and not let outside influences color what’s inside the Bible.
“Gary says: That’s what having an agenda in Scott’s case and being emotionally blinded in Seattlebruce’s case leads to. They find it extremely easy to read into Scripture things that just aren’t there. And it seems in these situations they don’t even know they are doing that.”
Do you hear yourself Gary? If you do not deal with Romans 14, if you aren’t even willing to discuss its implications, whO is blinded? Scripture informs and confirms itself, Scripture validates itself. The treatment of drinking alcohol/wine in the Bible amazingly doesn’t end with the simple conclusion that it’s OK for Gary to drink. No, more to it than that. The Word continues in various ways and many places to describe sacrificial love for the weaker brother, sister, child, “making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.” This goes far beyond some simplistic exegesis of Duet. 14. And it goes way beyond and much deeper than stereotyping, “pegging”, and casting aspersions at people. Get involved with some recovery ministry Gary. Go to some AA and Celebrate Recovery meetings. Look into the eyes of your brothers and sisters there. See and go deeper, and perceive how the Spirit of God informs you from the Word and through prayer about how you should then live. Quit telling me I’m blinded and go out there and open your eyes to your brothers in need.
Agreed.
Recently we are hearing more and more about the dangers of even so called moderate drinking and the dangerous health problems it can cause. There are doctors who will recommend total abstinence from alcohol as it is found to cause various forms of cancer and other illness. The world recognizes it as dangerous thing, yet Christians, who are called out of the world, are encouraging it! They are defending something that is so harmful in so many ways. They will never learn and never listen. The Jesus they believe in apparently tells man to do something proven to be very harmful and a cause of many of society’s ills. Not the Jesus I believe in.
Modern science is contradictory, Melanie. Apart from that, there are clear passages where the use of alcoholic drinks are prescribed and what do you want to do with those? Tear them out of the Bible because they do not match your point of view?
The Nazorite vow has a clear abstinence of wine. That means that for those who did not take that vow, wine was permitted – always remembering the “do not get drunk…” command.
Again, it might not fit with your point of view, but it is Biblical.
Melanie is right about this point. More doctors teach abstinence because the negative consequences outweigh the positive for evening starting to drink. On another source, I remember citing Mayo Clinic who recommend that drinkers moderately drink as one drink a day and only three days a week. Mayo Clinic surprised me by recommending that those who have not started drinking never start. Seeing the increase of stomach, mouth, and throat cancers among repentant believers who once drank “moderately” is heart breaking.
What really upsets me about modern wine is that people perceive that wine is less alcoholic, less harmful, and even beneficial to one’s health. However, two glasses of wine now exceeds the alcohol of four shots or four beers. The consumption of wine is greatly increasing. Servers over pour glasses of wine so that consumption is a more than one drink and often two in one.
the rest (or, at least more) of the story – From the Mayo Clinic website…
“Red wine seems to have even more heart-healthy benefits than do other types of alcohol, but it’s possible that red wine isn’t any better than beer, white wine or liquor for heart health. There’s still no clear evidence that red wine is better than other forms of alcohol when it comes to possible heart-healthy benefits.”
And yes, in the same article, “While the news about red wine might sound great if you enjoy a glass of red wine with your evening meal, doctors are wary of encouraging anyone to start drinking alcohol. That’s because too much alcohol can have many harmful effects on your body.”
And see the final statement, ” too much alcohol can have many harmful effects on your body.” Note the “too much” alcohol…
Food is good for you – but too much is not…
Exercise is food for you – but not too much…
Work is good for you – but not too much
I think I remember reading something that Paul wrote…
Agreed. However, the ambiguity has been devastating for many. I must warn others not to look or linger over wine.
Wine is wine liquor is spirits………wine and spirits. …choose which is harmful
The word translated sober in 1 Peter 5:8 literally means to abstain from wine. We are actually commanded to abstain. Not sure if you mentioned that in your article or not; I thought it was an interesting fact.
Wrong.
nēphō
Thayer Definition:
1) to be sober, to be calm and collected in spirit
2) to be temperate, dispassionate, circumspect
It is an ATTITUDE setting, and not related to the use of alcohol, Where did you get your definition from??
My Thayer’s lexicon does say “abstain from wine.” However, I do not think Thayer’s is a great lexicon, because it is dated via lack of Greek material for word-studies. Danker and Gingrich’s lexicon (BDAG) has been a very reliable source for Koine Greek. BDAG defines neipho as “sober, well-balanced, self-controlled” (132).
As, in many, many more words does TDNT…
Rudy, I do not understand your comment about the Theological Dictionary.
TDNT writes a much longer article, which eventually reaches the same conclusion.
Melanie has not responded to my request for her thoughts on the elder-passages, on the 1 cor passage, her source for the meaning of the word “sober” to mean abstaining from wine etc.
nor were she found the meaning of the word “sober” in 1 Peter… Now would be an awesome time to do that, Melanie…
What does TDNT say about methuo? I do not have ready access to the source.
i will check that when I get back to my own office.. Sometime tonight, after the local caucus is over. best i can do right now, from memory – being filled with… filled to overflowing…
BDAG is clear that methuo means drunkenness. However, the LXX uses the word for the state of becoming filled.
Being filled with wine is methuo but being filled with the Spirit is plerao (Eph 5:18).
I’m sorry, I forgot all about checking that! So, I checked. The interesting thing is that the same term is used in John 2 – “have well drunk” or, are drunk… So the good wine is what leads to that situation… And Jesus made wine like the good stuff…
“It’s called drunkenness.”
And the Scripture warns us not to stumble others, not to lead others into drunkenness Gary. The proclivity toward addiction is greater in a pretty large chunk of the population. Of course God is aware of, and wants us to be concerned for the 15% of humanity in that boat. How should we then live (in a world so full of addicts and addictions?) Carefully, lovingly, not flaunting our freedoms, but yielding them, and humbling ourselves under the mighty hand of God, Who then raises us up. Sacrificial love, actually.
Melanie cannot claim those who call on the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ are ‘fake Christians’. Their salvation ultimately is a matter between themselves and God, although Jesus said you can know a tree by its fruit, and also said that many will come in that day saying ‘Lord, Lord’ and He will say depart from Me, I never knew you. So clearly there are some or even many ‘fake Christians’. We should all be warned that ‘narrow is the way that leads unto life.’
And so the sincerity of our hearts and lives toward Christ matters. Ultimately how we live, our behavior, our passion to live for Christ and His Word, and to share Him with all around will flow out of real Christian faith.
The Word, Christ’s Word, the Word of God, warns us about alcohol, and instructs us about clear restrictions on behavioral freedoms, and to love God and the Kingdom above ALL else. Part of this is to love our weaker brothers. To not place Duet. 14, in context of all other Scripture is not being forthright about what the Scripture is truly teaching.
How we live for Christ and His word… That includes a correct use of that Word. And it excludes making laws where God has not made them.
The very first mention of wine in Scripture shows that it is able to get people drunk. Within the confines of the “Second Law” there is a command on what to do with the tithe when one lives too far away from the place that God will appoint, the people are to sell their tithe, and with the money then travel to the place God has appointed. When there, they are commanded to have a celebratory meal, which includes the use of wine and other strong drink.
When we read 1 Corinthians 11, 12 see that wine is used in the joint meal. Paul writes to Timothy to use a little wine for his stomach’s sake.
People here have argued about the alcohol content of the wine in the bible. That is an unknown, so it makes no sense to argue that.
What we do know is that wine IS used. That wine and “other strong drink” IS part of the command in Deuteronomy. That wine IS used in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper in Corinth.
We also know there is a command against drunkenness. Our responsibility as believers is to balance the two, giving equal value to the command and the warnings against abuse.
To deny the facts of Scripture makes us less then credible.
To suggest that modern fermentation is not different from ancient fermentation is just not true. Modern fermentation allows allows for much stronger alcohol content exacerbating all the issues that accompany drinking wine, and making it that much more vital that Christians approach wine with even greater caution than ever. No one is overlaying laws onto Scripture – this is a straw man you erect and knock down Rudy, for your own reasons.
Practically speaking though, to be obedient to Scripture requires great caution toward alcohol of all kinds, and sacrificial love in keeping with Romans 14, et al. How can you argue against this practical approach, especially when alcoholism has personally impacted your sibling, as I recall?
For me, it comes down to the alcoholics and youth I work with. Rudy, as a brother in Christ I implore you to think about them as you ponder your practical theology here.
Again, practical theology includes setting personal boundaries. But those are personal – and I cannot bind my personal boundaries on anyone else. Nor should I judge anyone who stays wishing Gods boundaries!
And that is exactly what is not understood by Melanie.
And let me state this again, clearly: we do NOT know what the alcohol content of wine in biblical history was. We DO know it was enough to get people drunk cf Noah and Corinthian believers.
Christ did not institute the Lord’s Supper with fermented wine. Any use of such wine in 1 Corinthians 11 was condemned whether they are filling themselves with drink or getting intoxicated at church. You have to interpret 1 Corinthians 11 one way or the other.
Biblical wine and today’s wine do not equate. Biblical wine was like bear and wine today is like brandy. Unless we assume that there was an ancient yeast that equates to saccharomyces — a genetically modified organism.
However, the Bible still warns against lingering over wine.
“Who has woe? Who has sorrow?
Who has strife? Who has complaining?
Who has wounds without cause?
Who has redness of eyes?
Those who tarry long over wine;
those who go to try mixed wine.
Do not look at wine when it is red,
when it sparkles in the cup
and goes down smoothly.
In the end it bites like a serpent
and stings like an adder.
Your eyes will see strange things,
and your heart utter perverse things.
You will be like one who lies down in the midst of the sea,
like one who lies on the top of a mast.
“They struck me,” you will say, “but I was not hurt;
they beat me, but I did not feel it.
When shall I awake?
I must have another drink.” (Prov 23:29–35)
Hi Rudy,
Personal boundaries. Sacrificial love implies that we set our boundaries for the sake of the other. Other centered love. It’s what Jesus was and is all about, and it’s what we should be all about. We can and do model Christian discipleship to others, and while their boundaries are personal, some may drink, some may not drink, they’re to be informed by the clear instruction to keep the freedom between yourself and God, for the sake of the other. For the sake of the weaker brother.
This is an ongoing conversation, where thoughts are shared. Preferably without using references like “fake Christians” and a less then responsible use of scripture.
For the record: I have neve stated anything about alcohol levels other than that we have no way of measuring.
Those were different types of wine. It is clear from bible passages that the word wine is used both of grape juice and of alcohol. The context of the verses make that clear. There are ancient writings describing the process of how it was made. Have any of you read the article on which you are commenting? The author demonstrates all these things for you! You live in a culture where alcohol is the norm and an accepted part of life- even when it is know to be dangerous. You are influenced by that culture, as I used to be.
I have read many articles over the past 40 years on wine and all that goes with it. Not just from sources in the U.S., for that matter. But there are responsible authors who recommend the drinking on a glass of wine a day. But whatever the articles say, either way, that does not matter. What matters in what the Bible says.
Corinthians used alcoholic wine during their assemblies (Obvious from 1 cor 11). Note that Paul does not tell them to stop drinking wine.
And before you go off on your rant, Melanie, these comments have nothing to do with drinking or not drinking, but with what the Biblical text actually says, rather than unsupported conclusions.
Amen.
You say that you believe in not adding to the Word. However, you make huge assumptions here.
Genesis 9.
Deuteronomy 14
1 Corinthians 11
And where are the assumptions, Scott??
Rudy. Again I like what you wrote. The arguments about the alcohol content of wine in the Bible have no merit. What difference does it make? The fact is it is clearly impossible to get drunk unless one drinks alcohol. Therefore, Biblical wine was not grape juice, new weak wine or wine mixed with water. With all the descriptions of and warnings against drunkenness in the Bible, it’s quite obvious that the wine in the Bible is not those. The wine in both the OT and NT were strong enough for people to get seriously drunk. All Biblical forms of wine were capable of producing intoxication.
Hi Gary,
You state that the alcoholic content of wine now vs. in Bible days doesn’t matter, that arguments about such have no merit. How do you apply Romans 14:22 – what’s your take on how to love and support weaker brothers and sisters with addictions and problem drinkers? Certainly to them the alcoholic content matters. Also, knowing that it took way more drinking to get drunk in Bible times would imply that Jesus having a glass of low percentage alcoholic wine isn’t nearly as problematic as if He were to drink a glass of fortified wine (sherry), at say 30-35% alcohol, vs. 3%. Finally, if the reason people drank wine was because it was hard to get hold of pure water, then Jesus would simply have been following an accepted and acceptable norm (from the standpoint of Biblical holiness) of the day. That is way different than tempting alcoholics and problem drinkers with strong drink, something Jesus did not do, as he was sinless, and didn’t tempt people capriciously like that. For those reasons alcohol content matters to this discussion, as does the question of the weaker brother.
Again, seattlebruce, you are bringing in non-issues to the conversation. No one is arguing in favor of passing the bottle around. There is a discussion dealing with handling the Bible in a responsible manner. I am well aware of the “weaker brother” passages.
And, as mentioned, I am well aware of the terrible results of alcoholism.
So, let’s stay away from those issues for THIS discussion. I would love to spend some time with you about the “weaker brother” concept, but this is not the thread for that.
Several things have been established:
1. Though the alcohol content is at best a stab in the dark, there was a sufficient strength in whatever the first known vintner made to bring shame on him and his children.
2. Though the alcohol content is at best a stab in the dark, there is a command from God to sell the tithe, and use the proceeds for all manner of food and “wine and strong drink.”
3. Though the alcohol content is at best a stab in the dark, the statement in Luke 7 (33 For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking,) means exactly what it says: The “came eating” is the parallel of “came eating neither bread…” where the “and drinking” is the parallel to the “nor drinking wine.”
4. Though the alcohol content is at best a stab in the dark, there is the drunkenness of the Corinthians.
So, as we have ample evidence of the drinking of wine is an accepted process in the early Christian community. And we KNOW that some of those were drunkards in the past (For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry).
But we also know there is no injunction against the use of alcohol, where there is number of places where warnings are given against drunkenness. For examples, when Paul writes, “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit,” there was is an awesome place to tell them not to touch the stuff, period. Or, “not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money… Since an overseer manages God’s household, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.” is yet another great place to make the statement not to touch the stuff.
Instead, the argument s against drunkenness, not the use of alcoholic drinks themselves.
Hi Rudy – these non issues you speak of are very much issues for the alcoholic and problem drinker. And we’ve been talking all along about the properly handling the Word of Truth, so why are you attempting to limit what the Word speaks on the topic? That’s called proof texting, and neither you, nor I should engage in it. I’m confident in what the Bible says to us in full treatment of what wine Jesus made, or drank, what His attitude, approach and behavior was/is toward drinking (Romans 14:22 “whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God.”) If Jesus drank a couple sips of wine, there’s no way they could accurately accuse him of being a wine bibber and it would gave been even further from the truth if it was just some low alcohol table wine. Point is Jesus didnt lead anyone into temptation, unless you’re willing to challenge His sinless nature.
I want to be like Jesus. With today’s wine being so much stronger for us to not stumble others we need to be even more cautious which us why I speak against wine events at church. Romans 14:22. We should be neutral on this topic to reach people and to love our weaker brothers and sisters.
How can you disagree with that Rudy, Gary?
On your #2 Rudy, are you suggesting that that one passage/command in Duet. is normative for today? What about the completely different context? But in any case I have no problem if someone wants to drink moderately privately, just don’t take it out and make a “ministry” of it, mocking the Scripture (Romans 14).
On your #3 Rudy, I never argued that Jesus could have drunk alcoholic wine, just been discussing that the alcoholic content was certainly less, perhaps even way less of it was just a common meal wine. Why do you seem so unwilling to accept that possibility, or trifle it as unimportant. More important than that is Jesus sinless nature, that He didn’t lead others to sin, and that we’re called to be like Him. If you don’t believe that, then yes, your use of Scripture, imho, is off.
As to #4 and the rest I never, nor has Scott ever argued there wasn’t drunkenness and alcoholic wine in the Bible. It is clear when looking at the history of fermentation that it took way more drinks to get one drunk. For some reason Rudy you seem dead set against this notion, and insist on calling it unimportant. But it sets the very context of our discussion and context is an important part of Biblical study, of hermanuetics – agreed?
Starting with # 4, no, I do not agree. Hermeneutics has clear rules, and the context indeed is important. The context in Gen 9 says, “When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk…” Does not tell us how much “some” was. Paul tells Timothy to drink “some” wine for his health’ sake. Are these the same “Some’s?” Obviously not. Both speak of an unknown quantity – but the effect of Noah’s “some” is different than Timothy’s “some.” THAT is obvious, THAT is in line with the rules of textual interpretation.
What you and Scot try to do, is outside the line of textual interpretation – you guess. But even apart from that, the argument never was about how much Jesus drank, or, in your terms, sipped. The argument deals with the simple fact that Scripture does not, either in Old or New Testament, forbid either Jew or Christian to drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine.
Number 3: “certainly less, perhaps even way less of it was just a common meal win…” has two problematic words. “Certainly” and “perhaps.” You cannot have that “certainly” and “perhaps” because the information is not present to make such a statement. You may “guess” and “surmise” and “assume” and “perhaps” all you want – but that is personal opinion (to which you are entitled, of course), but with all due respect, your personal opinion is not on the same level as what we actually read!
That, too, is an important part of hermeneutics!.
Re. # 2. I have never said that Deuteronomy is to be taken as “normative.” It illustrates, however, my point: When God COMMANDED (sorry about caps, prefer bold), how can anyone argue with that?
You wrote, ” just don’t take it out and make a “ministry” of it, mocking the Scripture (Romans 14).” That certainly is not anything I have ever suggested. I have actually argued against that very thing, and said a number of times that what I do in the privacy of my home is not anyone’s business but God’s. But the event you describe still has nothing to do with the subject at hand: Can a Christian drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine? And the answer is an unequivocal, “YES!” Is it allowable for a Christian to get drunk? And the answer is an unequivocal, “NO!”
You wrote, “Point is Jesus didn’t lead anyone into temptation, unless you’re willing to challenge His sinless nature…” I never did quite understand where that point came from, because I certainly never advocated for that. And, it still has nothing to do with the actual point of argument, which is, “Can a Christian drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine?”
You also wrote, “With today’s wine being so much stronger for us to not stumble others we need to be even more cautious which us why I speak against wine events at church. Romans 14:22. We should be neutral on this topic to reach people and to love our weaker brothers and sisters.
How can you disagree with that Rudy, Gary?”
Several points. First, “That’s called proof texting, and neither you, nor I should engage in it” I am a bit insulted by that statement. I quoted passages within their context, and within their application. Unlike Melanie, for example, who picked some totally unconnected passages and opined about their meaning, I might say. I did neither add nor subtract from their content, like “Jesus ‘may’ have sipped… ‘weak wine…’ So, no, I did not “proof-text” my argument.
Second, the strength of the wine has nothing to do with the point under discussion. It is moot. It is nonsensical. It does not change the actual point of discussion. Strong or weak, both can lead to drunkenness.
Next, I again wonder where you got the idea about “wine events at church…” Even our European brethren don’t do things like that! ;-)
Our relationship with our weaker brethren is also a moot point, because that, too, was not the point argued.
With Gary, whom I do not know personally, and never heard either from or about until yesterday. I will be glad to discuss our relationship with our weaker brethren – but that is a subject much broader than whether or not a Christian is allowed to drink fermented grape juice, a.k.a. wine.
Darn Rudy. I wasted my time writing to Seattlebruce. Without consulting each other we both responded exactly to his opinions about everything but the topic at hand, whether the Bible approves Christians drinking alcoholic beverages. However, you did it so much better. Way to go.
Gary to Rudy, about Bruce: “we both responded exactly to his opinions about everything but the topic at hand,”
Bruce: Touche Gary! You tell me what ‘the topic’ is, hmm? LOL.
You got me Seattlebruce. Generally I proof my writing better than that.
Come on now Gary. Tell me what the topic is, since you’re so fond of saying I’m off topic, and am opinionated. I’m super glad you’re not though! ;)
Rudy: “What you and Scot try to do, is outside the line of textual interpretation – you guess.”
Bruce: Ah, I see. We’re guessing, but you – you’re not guessing by ignoring the history of modern fermentation methods. And by suggesting that somehow Duet. 14 passage and a few others, sans all the other Scriptural context – is normative to Christians today. What about context there? Agrarian culture, different alcohol levels, clear sociology related to how cultures all over the world struggle with addictions. Ah yes – but I’m the only one ‘guessing.’ Say Rudy, when you point a finger, there are three fingers pointing back at yourself…try it! ;)
Rudy: “The argument deals with the simple fact that Scripture does not, either in Old or New Testament, forbid either Jew or Christian to drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine.”
Bruce: Never argued that. But this topic of what wine Jesus drank lends itself to discussion about our attitudes and behavior toward wine, and especially as we look at the full counsel of Scripture.
Rudy: ““Certainly” and “perhaps.” You cannot have that “certainly” and “perhaps”
Bruce: Hmm…certainly less (based on history), perhaps way less, in that we don’t really know what kind of wine Jesus may have drunk when he was sitting among the sinners, and the Pharisees or Sadducees accused Him of being a wine bibber. You most certainly can use both words in tandem. Just did.
Rudy: “You wrote, ” just don’t take it out and make a “ministry” of it, mocking the Scripture (Romans 14).” That certainly is not anything I have ever suggested.
Bruce: Please notice – did you read my post and see the context? ;) – that I was addressing both you, and Gary through parts of my post? My full statement is this, and the fact that I was referring to both of you within the post should clarify: “But in any case I have no problem if someone wants to drink moderately privately, just don’t take it out and make a “ministry” of it, mocking the Scripture (Romans 14).” I commend you for not doing that. Gary seemed incredulous that I would suggest wine and drinking events at the churches are horrible ideas, make alcoholics feel unwelcome, or worse, like they have to drink to fit in, and takes away our ability to witness to drinkers and alcoholics alike. Loving and reaching people for Christ is our first calling.
Rudy: “But the event you describe still has nothing to do with the subject at hand: Can a Christian drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine?”
Bruce: No! I disagree. That’s not the subject at hand. The subject at hand is – what did Jesus do, and how can I be more like Him? And a close f/u – what does the full counsel of the Word say about drinking visa vi item #1, and how can I follow its precepts to be more like Christ.
Rudy: “Can a Christian drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine? And the answer is an unequivocal, “YES!””
Bruce: I agree! An unequivocal yes – within certain bounds. Romans 14:22 – you may exercise the freedom to eat and drink within the bounds that those freedoms are between yourself and God and do not stumble your brothers and sisters.
Rudy: “You wrote, “Point is Jesus didn’t lead anyone into temptation, unless you’re willing to challenge His sinless nature…” I never did quite understand where that point came from, because I certainly never advocated for that. And, it still has nothing to do with the actual point of argument,”
Bruce: Let me spell it out for you Rudy – since you’re super fond of saying things like ‘it has nothing to do with the actual point of the argument’…. When we ask what did Jesus drink – as the article actually does – which is the actual point Rudy – we need to start from the context that Jesus was sinless, which informed His behavior and should inform ours – if we want to be like Him.
Rudy: ” First, “That’s called proof texting, and neither you, nor I should engage in it” I am a bit insulted by that statement.”
Bruce: I am suggesting that both you, and I, and Gary for that matter, need to be instructed by the whole counsel of God, and not be telling each other what we can and can’t discuss, what’s on topic, or not – telling each other that this or that is pointless, etc. I’m guilty of it too, especially at times in a heated discussion. And I admitted such. What I’m suggesting is – on this topic (LOL!) don’t just pick Scriptures that suit your argument, select others also that you struggle with, and bring them in. I admit to struggling with some of these passages – do you? Are you so proud to think you’ve nothing to learn at this point? Am I? God forbid that unteachable spirit.
Rudy: “Second, the strength of the wine has nothing to do with the point under discussion. It is moot. It is nonsensical. It does not change the actual point of discussion. Strong or weak, both can lead to drunkenness.”
Bruce: Bogus! I know alcoholics that are almost drunk after 1 or 2 glasses of wine – because they’re smaller, and because wine is more potent these days. Don’t tell me that alcohol content doesn’t matter – it does, and if we’re actually doing to discuss the actual point of what is a Christian to do about alcohol as we find it today – it matters.
Rudy: “Next, I again wonder where you got the idea about “wine events at church…”
Bruce: ?? This is happening in my neck of the woods. For sure. And in so called evangelical churches that are trying to reach people for Christ (except apparently alcoholics and problem drinkers…)
Rudy: “Our relationship with our weaker brethren is also a moot point, because that, too, was not the point argued.”
Bruce: Not moot – not in any way. In fact it may be THE point that you’re refusing to see. Because what does it matter if we can drink (or gain the whole world), but don’t reach others, love others? I’m sorry but all the other baloney means nothing in comparison. And so we’d best fit all our lofty thinking, our argumentation, our theologizing, into that point – how can I love others like Jesus Christ. This and every other argument we ever make as Christians fits into that. That is the ACTUAL point.
Rudy: “But the event you describe still has nothing to do with the subject at hand: Can a Christian drink fermented grape juice a.k.a. wine?”
Bruce: No! I disagree. That’s not the subject at hand. The subject at hand is – what did Jesus do, and how can I be more like Him? And a close f/u – what does the full counsel of the Word say about drinking visa vi item #1, and how can I follow its precepts to be more like Christ.
The Conclusion of the article by Scott: The reality is that the Bible neither promotes nor supports the drinking of intoxicants. God’s grace compels Christians to no longer continue any sin because they have been forgiven.
Gary: Seems pretty clear to me…the subject is, as Rudy writes: Does the Bible permit drinking of wine by Christians.
“Gary: Seems pretty clear to me…the subject is, as Rudy writes: Does the Bible permit drinking of wine by Christians.”
Clear, hmm? Here’s Scott’s full conclusion: “The wine that Jesus drank was not intoxicating any more than grape juice with no more than 4% alcohol. Jesus neither encouraged drunkenness nor is He recorded to have used intoxicating wine. Anyone using alcohol based upon Jesus must reconsider their position. If anyone uses Jesus to justify excessive drinking, drunkenness, and drinking events, then let that person hear this plea to rethink their views according to the words and life of Christ. The reality is that the Bible neither promotes nor supports the drinking of intoxicants. God’s grace compels Christians to no longer continue any sin because they have been forgiven.”
Among other things, Scott discusses excessive drinking, drunkenness and drinking events, and justifying such from Jesus’ wine miracle, and the wine bibber accounts, etc. Excessive drinking and drunkenness are sinful – would you agree Gary? Scott goes further, and seems to even hold that drinking itself is sinful. I don’t completely agree with that, but certainly thinking about ministry to alcoholics and problem drinkers, this is also a practical and Scriptural consideration given that God calls us to agape love, divine love (“be perfect like your Heavenly Father is perfect” “Imitate me, as I imitate Christ”), sacrificial love – you know, like Jesus loves.
BTW, you never answered whether you work in ministry with the 15% of the population that fits into that demographic Gary. If you have, or do, I could give your viewpoints more veracity, which at this point seem quite inconsiderate of our weaker brothers and sisters, and wholly inconsistent with Romans 14 – due respect.
I personally conclude that Christian drinking outside of the Scriptural bounds set out there in Romans 14 is sinful. Given that Scott’s conclusion discusses all kind of drinking behavior, and sin, why shouldn’t I? And how pray tell, is that ‘off topic’ as you have vociferously protested.
For one, Scott’s conclusion is unsupportable. “The wine that Jesus drank was not intoxicating any more than grape juice with no more than 4% alcohol. Jesus neither encouraged drunkenness nor is He recorded to have used intoxicating wine. Anyone using alcohol based upon Jesus must reconsider their position. If anyone uses Jesus to justify excessive drinking, drunkenness, and drinking events, then let that person hear this plea to rethink their views according to the words and life of Christ. The reality is that the Bible neither promotes nor supports the drinking of intoxicants. God’s grace compels Christians to no longer continue any sin because they have been forgiven.”
1. Where does Scott (Scott, where did YOU) get the idea that the wine Jesus used was not “intoxicating any more that grape juice with no more than 4% alcohol.” I hate to tell you about the facts of life, but that is enough of a percentage to get people drunk.
2. NO ONE has used Jesus to JUSTIFY EXCESSIVE drinking, drunkenness and drinking events (at least not a) on this list and b) in my 46 years of working in a number of different environments.
c) The Bible is definitely in at least one passage promoting the drinking of intoxicants – Deut 14!
And as you have asked (and Scott has denied) his last statement in the above quote definitely leaves only one possible conclusion: Drinking alcoholic beverages by Christians is sin.
Your definition of AGAPE is also incorrect, Bruce. AGAPE is commitment, and is used in both positive and negative ways in the New Testament (TDNT Vol. I, p. 25 ff). But that’s a whole new can of worms…
We ALL agree that drunkenness is wrong. No one has denied that. But equating the drinking of wine (whether 4% 0r 13% or whatever percentage you want to tie yourself to) with sin, and NOT acting in the image of Christ is just plain unbiblical.
I have used the argument of gluttony before, and was told that, “Well, we all need to eat, so it would be strange…” i can use the same argument for drugs prescribed to people in serious pain. Without that prescription many drug addicts would never have become addicted…
But that would be as bad a argument as “Well, but without that first glass of wine…”
Eating, drinking and prescription medication are all related to our behavioral decisions. We are expected to behave responsible with our eating habits – so as to not abuse our bodies. We are expected to behave responsible with the use of medications (I had shoulder surgery 13 years ago and a quadruple bypass last year – and boy, was that ever difficult. Dem painkillers were a blessing, and became a curse – so I dumped them).
A glass of wine at the end of the day or during a meal is not sinful in any way from any Biblical passage I have read over the past 40+ years.
I was taught that by my parents (whom I have never seen drunk), and I taught my kids (whom I have never seen drunk).
To guilt people into certain kinds of behavior is definitely wrong, no matter how many “good” reasons we think we have to do so. And it definitely is not the intention of Scripture to do so.
For Scott it seems to be a problem of conscience. So for him it is sinful – but it is not the drinking of the glass of wine; for him it is the going against his conscience which makes it sin!
I grant Scott the freedom to live according to his conscience. And I expect the same from him and others who have that as a matter of conscience. I will not judge him for his weakness (Or you, for that matter) but expect the same respect for the fact that my conscience gives me the freedom.
Your #1: Rudy: For one, Scott’s conclusion is unsupportable. [Scott]“The wine that Jesus drank was not intoxicating any more than grape juice with no more than 4% alcohol.”….[Rudy, again]: I hate to tell you about the facts of life, but that is enough of a percentage to get people drunk.
Bruce: Oh Rudy – look at the sentence structure. ‘was not…any more than…’ he didn’t say was NOT, he said, ‘not more than’ meaning it would have taken at least more drinks to get drunk – in the worst case scenario. I stand by the fact that Jesus was/is sinless. Not sure where sure where you’re standing, and certainly not sure where you’re standing regarding alcoholics and problem drinkers, as you claim that alcohol content doesn’t matter, when it surely does to those people. I’ve already told you that my friend with a small frame gets drunk on 1-2 glasses of wine. So is that sinful. Yup. And would it be sinful to contribute to her downfall. Yup. But according to you, somehow alcohol content doesn’t matter.
Your #2: “NO ONE has used Jesus to JUSTIFY EXCESSIVE drinking, drunkenness and drinking events” – perhaps not you Rudy, but there is plenty of this going on in the church – certainly in my neck of the woods. So others are doing that – hate to break the facts of life back to ya…
Rudy: “And as you have asked (and Scott has denied) his last statement in the above quote definitely leaves only one possible conclusion: Drinking alcoholic beverages by Christians is sin.”
Bruce: Aye, that’s the rub here Rudy. Drinking can be sinful. You can sin against God and yourself. And if you stumble others, believers are being sinful. So while Scott can’t make his no drinking position normative based on Scripture, any more than you can make Deut.14:26 normative, you can both advocate and appeal to people’s consciences – you for freedom (the positive side of Romans 14:22, and of course Gal. 5:1 – it is for freedom that Christ has set you free). Scott’s no drinking position is very practical – I think – for pastors, and lay workers that are reaching out alcoholics and problem drinkers – and guess what – with 15% of the population in that category – that includes every single pastor, if they would care to think it through, and want to remain neutral and reach both drinkers, nondrinkers and those with addictions.
Rudy: ” But equating the drinking of wine (whether 4% 0r 13% or whatever percentage you want to tie yourself to) with sin, and NOT acting in the image of Christ is just plain unbiblical.”
Bruce: Drinking of wine is sinful, if you stumble others – why won’t you include that in your Biblical treatment – as it is there?
Rudy: “We are expected to behave responsible with our eating habits…”
Bruce: We all need fellowship and help to overcome sin. There is a particularly nasty downside to alcohol abuse that the Bible calls out. To ignore that, or any other addictions that we may stumble people by being blithe and uncaring is foolhardy.
Rudy: “To guilt people into certain kinds of behavior is definitely wrong, no matter how many “good” reasons we think we have to do so. And it definitely is not the intention of Scripture to do so.”
Bruce: Agree. We need to be compelled, motivated, passionate about loving Christ so much, and others so much that we necessarily lay down some of our freedoms for the other. It’s actually a beautiful thing. I don’t see guilt trips here. I see passionate love, however.
Rudy: “but expect the same respect for the fact that my conscience gives me the freedom.”
Bruce: You are paraphrasing Romans 14, and since you’re there 14:22 says, “But whatever you believe about these things, keep between yourself and God.” That’s where I draw the line with believers, as I think it’s a practical idea that we need to love 15% of humanity well.
That’s why I’m so against wine events, and keggers in church parking lots, which is what’s been going on up here, and why recovering alcoholics are some of my greatest heroes, as they overcome pretty incredible odds, to live for Christ.
Bruce, granted, English is not my native tongue, but I sure did quote and understood Scott’s meaning! He assumes that the wine Jesus drank would not have been more than 4% alcohol…
“Your #2: “NO ONE has used Jesus to JUSTIFY EXCESSIVE drinking, drunkenness and drinking events” – perhaps not you Rudy, but there is plenty of this going on in the church – certainly in my neck of the woods. So others are doing that – hate to break the facts of life back to ya…”
YOUR neck of the woods is exactly that. But to take what happens in YOUR neck of the woods as normative for the rest of the country is not necessary. That would make my sister (In the Netherlands) right, when she says that everyone in the U.S. live like the people she sees on Oprah.
“Drinking can be sinful. You can sin against God and yourself. And if you stumble others, believers are being sinful…”
Bruce anything CAN be sinful , even preaching Christ! But that does not MAKE it sinful. And that is the difference between Scott and I: Scott does not allow the “can be” and goes straight to the “is” sinful conclusion.
“Bruce: Drinking of wine is sinful, if you stumble others – why won’t you include that in your Biblical treatment – as it is there?”
ANYTHING is sinful if it causes others to stumble. But that was not the point. The point was equating the sheer act of drinking an alcoholic beverage with a sinful act.
That is the same as saying that if I take one painkiller I am a drug addict!
“There is a particularly nasty downside to alcohol abuse that the Bible calls out. To ignore that, or any other addictions that we may stumble people by being blithe and uncaring is foolhardy.”
Bruce, no one is ignoring that! It just was not part of the conversation about equating drinking an alcoholic beverage with sin and un-Christlike behavior.
Now, if you want to have a separate discussion about the Romans 14 passage, I will gladly accommodate. But that will be a totally different discussion!
Rudy, just to amplify your always well thought-out comments.
First, there is no Christian or Christian Church that would use Jesus to justify drunkenness. That is one of the most ludicrous statements every made. Anyone making such a blanket accusation has an agenda and shows he isn’t really interested in Biblical Truth.
Second, drinking can never be sinful…the Bible is so clear about that. The lesson of Scripture is that abusive drinking not only “can” be sinful, it is a sin. Just as eating can never be sinful. It’s overeating (gluttony) that is a sin. Those making these kinds of statements are expressing their opinions without any factual information to back it up. That is poor scholarship, at best, and certainly shouldn’t be a part of this conversation.
I have never heard the phrase “stumble others”. If the reference is to causing others to stumble, I have a question. If a person is seriously obese, we know that is a deadly condition of the body. Does that mean we don’t eat with or in front of that person so we don’t cause him to stumble?
This is a question maybe you can help me with. I’m clueless about the Romans 14:22 passage that SeattleBruce has incessantly woven into so many of his posts. Can you explain to me how that fits into the discussion of whether Christians should drink alcoholic beverages?
To all:
I have heard of churches justifying drunkenness. I have heard people boast of how drunk their priests get. I have seen people get drunk and grant their liberty to Jesus drinking.
I have also read of churches who help and host recovery groups deciding to no longer use wine in the Lord’s Supper. Why? How does that help anyone?
“The Christian approach to alcohol is not to judge or condemn the person who may drink without excess and drunkenness, but the Christian must follow the biblical examples and warn those who do drink, linger, and look at the cup (Prov 23:29–35; Rom 14:17–22).”
Scott: I have heard of CHURCHES justifying drunkenness. I have heard PEOPLE boast of how drunk their priests get. I have seen PEOPLE get drunk and grant their liberty to Jesus drinking.
Gary: This is another example of how people ignore the subject of a sentence and insert in their reply what they want the subject to be. The subject matter concerned Christians and Christian Churches and not people and churches. The sentence ran like this: First, there is no CHRISTIAN or CHRISTIAN CHURCH that would use Jesus to justify drunkenness. Christians do not promote, encourage, endorse or support deliberate sin.
I agree. PEOPLE do these things. My article is for them and those seeking to reach them. See first sentences of article.
“First, there is no Christian or Christian Church that would use Jesus to justify drunkenness. That is one of the most ludicrous statements every made. Anyone making such a blanket accusation has an agenda and shows he isn’t really interested in Biblical Truth.
Second, drinking can never be sinful…the Bible is so clear about that. The lesson of Scripture is that abusive drinking not only “can” be sinful, it is a sin.”
Gary – where to start? Is abusive drinking not a form of drinking? Yes. So how can you make the ludicrous statement that drinking is never sinful. Of course it is, if abusive. I also hold it’s sinful if your drinking stumbles another brother or sister or child – which you seem incredulous to accept, despite the clear teaching of Romans 14 (particularly verse 22). If not drunkenness, some hipster churches in the US are using your attitude and blase approach to disregard their weaker brothers and sisters who have addictions, pretending they don’t exist, I suppose, and certainly not willing to sacrifice their drinking events for 15% of humanity for which they are a stumping block. You have yet to mount any reasonable defense about that, hiding behind the notion that it’s not on topic. That’s weak.
Hi again. Seattlebruce, let me input about non-issues. I believe what Rudy meant is that you are inserting issues that have no bearing on the current discussion. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it was my impression we are dealing with the question of whether the Bible supports Christians drinking alcoholic beverages. Therefore, lets stay focused on that issue and concentrate on the task before us. We can discuss weaker brothers, alcoholics, problem drinkers and whatever you desire at an appropriate future time.
You accuse Rudy of limiting “what the Word speaks on the topic”. From what I have been reading, you have generally been stating your opinions of the “Truth” without adequate Scriptural references. In fact, you have been adding your version to Scripture. Why do you constantly state that Jesus drank a couple sips of wine? Give me the verses. If he was accused of being a wine bibber they certainly must have seen him numerous times drinking more than a “few sips”.
Next you talk about today’s wine being stronger and others stumbling. You have again deviated from the topic. What in that statement addresses the topic of what the Bible says about Christians drinking? Your reason for speaking against wine events at church is that we have to be more cautious because the wine has more alcoholic content. You say we need to be neutral on the topic of drinking wine at church events. How about some Scriptural proofs for this. Since the Bible encourages Christians to drink, it stands to reason that church events would be the most natural places for this to occur.
When a person reads the Bible in its entirety with an open mind, it will be discovered that God intends wine and strong drink to be an important element in the lives, relationships, discussions and culture of Christians. The OT, especially, confirms this over and over by how the use of wine is interwoven in every facet of their lives. God says that wine is to be considered an extremely important gift from him to his people. Wine is a blessing, he says (Gen. 27:27,28, Deut. 11:14, Pro. 3:9,10,). He equates wine as being part of all the good things in life such as air, rain, bread, olive oil, grass for the livestock, plants for man to cultivate, wheat, milk and rich food. When these things have been listed, wine has always been included with them (Gen 27:27,28, Psalm 104:15,24, Deut. 14:23, Jer. 31:12, Pro. 9:5, Pro. 3:9,10,).
There is nothing better than to enjoy food and drink God says. He even commands it by saying that people should eat and drink because this is a gift from God and then repeats his commendation for drinking by saying it is “good and proper” for his people. So go ahead he concludes, eat your food and drink your wine with a happy heart “for God approves of this” (Eccl. 2:24, 3:13, 5:18, 9:7).
Your point #2. We should drink privately but not take it out and make a ministry of it, mocking Scripture. That’s what you believe…what does Scripture say?
Your point #3. Why your fixation on the alcoholic content in Jesus time? So what? It’s not important and doesn’t even fit in the topic of this discussion. There was enough alcohol content for drunkenness to be a primary concern in the Bible. That’s all we need to know about alcohol content.
Your point #4. Another so what. What difference does it make how many drinks it takes to get drunk. As Rudy says, it’s totally unimportant. Keep on topic Seattlebruce. What does the number of drinks it takes to get drunk have to do with the question of whether the Bible approves of Christians drinking? Some persons can get drunk on two drinks. Others are still not drunk after five. Each person has a different tolerance for alcohol.
Seattlebruch, since I’ve only been in this discussion for a few days, I haven’t had the opportunity to know you or Rudy very well through your posts. However, Rudy strikes me as being soundly grounded in Scripture to where he is able to discern the Truth. I use capital letters because we know that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Light. I have no doubt you are a sincere Christian, strong in your faith. You also are very emotional about such subjects as our weaker brothers and sisters, alcoholism and problem drinkers and what you perceive to be the Truth. However, emotions have no place in a study of the Bible and participation in discussions such as this. We need to set those aside and open our mind to receive the Truth as iterated in the Bible.
“When a person reads the Bible in its entirety with an open mind, it will be discovered that God intends wine and strong drink to be an important element in the lives, relationships, discussions and culture of Christians. The OT, especially, confirms this over and over by how the use of wine is interwoven in every facet of their lives.”
How do you reconcile that with Romans 14:22, all the stern cautions in the OT and NT, and with the reality of alcoholism, and problem drinking. Do you work with alcoholics in ministry? If so, how do you deal with this topic with them? Your blithe treatment of this topic makes me wonder.
‘So what’, ‘so what’ ‘who cares’ – guess what Gary – God loves people who are in addictions – how are you suggesting we love them? The ‘so what’s’ and ‘who cares’ don’t get it done friend.
Rudy, if I had read your reply to Seattlebruce, I wouldn’t have had to do so myself. You expressed it well. You understood the subject matter of my post perfectly. Somehow Seattlebruce missed it completely or he deliberately ignored it to insert his opinion again.
Thank you, again, for your kind comments. The “bad” thing about discussion groups and anonymous users is that a mean spiritedness can develop – after all, no one can trace me…
I appreciate a good, solid discussion where brethren can disagree on issue without becoming disrespectful and bring out the “fake Christians” label – or worse.
Apart from the current topic, I would like to see a similar conversation about the “Jesus and the Father are the same…” ideas.
As I read and listen, we seem to lose more and more sight of God, and are focusing too much on Jesus.
Any takers?
Thanks Rudy. I agree, we have to be careful such discussions don’t disintegrate. Concerning your comment about too much emphasis on Jesus, we need to remember they are both God. Having said that, you probably noticed I referenced God rather than Jesus in a couple of my posts. God bless.
Challenge for your thinking period…
Is the Son equal to the Father?
I have my opinion (based on Scripture, of course), but I’m not ready to go there.
Seattlebruce. It’s important that we keep on topic and not wander all over the map. The subject matter in my statement about alcohol content not being important was related to drunkenness. It was not related to supporting weaker brothers and sisters, how hard it was to get hold of pure water, tempting alcoholics and problem drinkers and how problematic it would be if Jesus drank fortified sherry. Those are all separate subjects that can be discussed later. Please read my post again and you will see that the point being made is that there are myriad warnings in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, about the abuse of alcohol and drunkenness. This tells you wine and strong drink in the Bible had kick, plenty of it, and that all forms of wine described were capable of intoxication. In other words, what difference does it make, you can get drunk with four percent alcohol or six percent.
Gary, are saying there wasn’t non-alcoholic wine in the Bible. There certainly was. Look at the passages Scott discusses in this article. Clearly there was both alcoholic and non- alcoholic wine there.
I’m sorry Seattlebruce, but there is no such thing as non-alcoholic wine. The very definition of wine implies it always has alcoholic content. The Bible is very clear in its use of grape juice and wine. There are examples of grapes being pressed into a cup (Gen. 40:11) where the term wine is never applied to the resultant juice. There is also an incident where the verbs for grape juice and wine are used side by side (Numbers 6:3). This teaches us that when God wants his words to be grape juice he uses that word. When he is referring to wine, that is the word he uses.
To begin, the Bible is consumed with warning against drunkenness. If the wine in the Bible doesn’t contain enough alcohol to get drunk, then these warnings wouldn’t be included. Second, the rapid change of grape juice to wine in the middle east is the reasons the Bible refers to wine presses rather than grape juice presses. Even on the vine, the juice within the grape is becoming wine. That why the Bible synonymously refers to grape juice as wine…it is one and the same. The reason being that unfermented grape juice was very difficult to keep in the warm and dusty conditions of the Palestinian world. Preserving grape juice in its original form was next to impossible. That’s why there are hardly any references to grape juice in the Bible…it basically didn’t exist.
Finally, I did look at the passages Scott discusses in the article. Talking about a stretch. He managed to accomplish what Melanie seems to be guilty of, that of reading the Bible and twisting the meaning to arrive at a personal agenda. It’s impossible to read these passages and conclude there is anything such as “non-alcoholic wine”. His first reference is an example: wine being “the blood of grapes” (Gen 49:11,12). Duh! Of course it is. Wine is made from grapes? Where do you read “grape juice” into these verses?
Gary, I’m referring to the English translations, which interchange the word wine in and out of references to more fermented wine and less or barely fermented grapejuice. As is referred to above 6 different words translated as “wine” in English. Perhaps both of us have a beef with the translations. We need to be careful to distinguish the blessings pronounced on the harvest of less fermented grape juice from any we claim are imputed to more fermented juice – both referred to as “wine” in English.
Gary, you discuss what the “topic” is here and implore me to stay focused. The article’s title is “What kind of wine did Jesus drink?” and flowing from that should come all kinds of discussion: theological, Christian behavior, concern for our fellow brothers and sisters and so forth. How in the world can you say that is off topic? That’s a ridiculous assertion especially considering we’re discussing the Bible with its core message of salvation and transformation. How we glorify God and carry the message of the Gospel is senior to all else. Gary, get back on the topic!
As to Scott having a personal agenda, I’m just so happy that you don’t. LOL.
“We need to be careful to distinguish the blessings pronounced on the harvest of less fermented grape juice from any we claim are imputed to more fermented juice”
Nothing of the kind! It is, again, not a matter of strength or weakness. It is a matter of ultimate outcome that we need to be concerned about.
“Nothing of the kind! It is, again, not a matter of strength or weakness. It is a matter of ultimate outcome that we need to be concerned about.”
Here’s my point Rudy. I need to study the original passages/language used more along the lines of the blessings of a full grape/grapejuice/wine harvest, but when the language used refers to non/low alcohol grape juice that is an important context for understanding how the Word is communicating about the blessings. Scott claims there’s not one positive passage that refers to fermented grapejuice/wine. You’ve pointed out Duet. 14 – which could be one passage, although strong drink may mean cider – according to Scott. Do you have a more thorough word study done on that passage? Willing to listen. I’d like to know the words used in conjunction with the blessings given, so that we/I may rightly handle/understand the Word of Truth.
Seattlebruce: The Word, Christ’s Word, the Word of God, warns us about alcohol.
Gary: Correction, the Word of God warns us against the abuse of alcohol.
“Gary: Correction, the Word of God warns us against the abuse of alcohol.”
What are the warnings of the Word against alcohol abuse Gary?
It’s called drunkenness.
When the bible says so yes I can claim it. You can tell fake Christians by their actions
Big assumptions here Deborah. They accused John of having a demon, and he clearly did not. They accused Jesus of being a glutton and wine bibber, and He clearly was not. We know he sat with the sinners and tax collectors. Did He sin? Of course not. Did He drink wine? Perhaps. Did he drink to excess? Of course not (that would have been sinful.) Did he drink fermented wine? Perhaps, but wine of that day didn’t have the modern fermenting process that can boost alcohol content to 12-18%. How fermented? Probably not much at all. Even grape juice has a slight amount of fermentation. Fermented wine of the day somewhat more, say 3% (if you look at the history of fermentation.)
What are we left to conclude? We know that Jesus did not sin, nor tempt others to sin. God does not tempt us. Our own flesh and lust tempt us and we get carried away in that (James 1). We also know, in looking at the Bible to confirm itself, and its teachings/instructions from God, that God tells us through Paul, (Romans 14:22): “Whatever you believe about these things [discussing eating and drinking freedoms], keep between yourself and God.” Jesus must not have been doing anything that was inflammatory, nor problematic for weaker brothers and sisters, perhaps taking some sips from a common table/meal wine that was only slightly fermented. Certainly not to excess. Whatever Jesus did or didn’t drink, we know He didn’t drink too much, or tempt his followers by even appearing to drink too much. He sat with the sinners and tax collectors – that He did. And when He did that and had a few sips of wine with a meal, ‘they’ accused him, completely falsely of being a glutton and wine bibber. Just like they completely falsely accused John the Baptist of being possessed by a demon.
Completely false, completely fallacious. And Jesus didn’t sin, nor did he tempt His weaker brothers and sisters, and kept that freedom between Himself and God – meaning, imho, He didn’t drink much at all, or even as much as He maybe could have. No, His concern was for the Kingdom, and for the sinners, not setting some tone for wine drinking for the 1st half of the 21st Century Christians to justify all sorts of wine drinking, wine events at church, keggers in the parking lot and so forth. Such excess Jesus was not party to.
I choose to want to be like Jesus!
Drinking wine is not sin! What does it take for you to understand that? You make an illogical jump from a glass of wine to keggers! That is like making the jump from breakfast to gluttony.
The question has never been quantity, ” He didn’t drink much at all, or even as much as He maybe could have…” The question has always been: Is it a sin to drink anything with alcohol content.
We know that drinking too much is sin, as is eating too much. We are really good at telling people to eat in moderation, but when it comes to drinking a glass of wine with my meal, or after my meal, or before I go to bed (Note: NOT and, but or situation, before you jump again), all of the sudden I am accused of excess and organizing keggers!
You wrote, “And when He did that and had a few sips of wine with a meal, ‘they’ accused him, completely falsely of being a glutton and wine bibber…” You have absolutely no foundation whatsoever for this statement. Or in your words, this statement is “Completely false, completely fallacious..”
I do not know, YOU do not know, Scott, Debora, or anyone else on this list has a clue about quantities. I know, and you SHOULD know, that it was “in moderation.”
And again, in your own words, “I choose to want to be like Jesus…”
Rudy – I never said drinking wine is/was a sin. Why are you waving your arms around about that? Drinking wine in excess is sinful. We also know Jesus didn’t lead others down the path of sin; He did not tempt them to overdrink. And we know He was consistent with the teaching of other Scripture like Romans 14:22, so Jesus was careful about wine, we can surmise.
What do you mean the question is not quantity? It surely is if you are interested in not sinning; in not being drunk, in not being a drunk.
Amen.
A number of comments on this thread have made it clear, Melanie (SP?) being the latest one. Even going so far as to call those of us who differ with her opinion “Fake Christians.”
There have been those who claimed that a) Jesus would never make “real” wine (i.e. with alcohol content) and that therefore b) the “wine” in John 2 was no more than very good grape juice.
We all (At least I think we do) agree that drunkenness is sin. But that should never lead us to forcing meaning into texts (As listed above) which are just plain not there.
Seattlebruce’s contention yesterday, “He didn’t drink much at all, or even as much as He maybe could have…” is making the Bible say things which cannot be deduced nor “inferred,” necessarily or not. His “And when He did that and had a few sips of wine with a meal…” too, is going way beyond the Biblical text.
I do not know how much clearer the bible can be when it tells us not to look at alcohol! many verses against alcohol and so many examples of the shame that drinking cab cause. Yes Christ made real wine, in the sense that it was not imaginary. It was real that does not make it alcoholic.
What version of the bible do you read that teaches wine is non-alcoholic?
Which translation does not teach about non-alcoholic wine like in the article above?
Rudy. You’re getting to the heart of the problem. Everyone seems to have opinions in this discussion but very few back them up with Scripture. I, too, questioned Seattlebruce’s statements about sips, quantities, “did he drink fermented wine? perhaps”, “did he drink wine? Perhaps”, “How fermented? Probably not much at all”, “He didn’t drink much at all” etc.
Obviously, this discussion cannot be categorized as an intelligent one. If people would
back up each of their statements with facts we could then respect the person with whom we disagree and who knows, we might even learn something.
Rudy. Well said. A minor correction however. In Matt.11:19 and Luke 7:34 “they” did accuse him of being a “glutton and a drunkard”. These are also the two passages where Jesus most definitely stated that he drank alcoholic beverages. You were right on with everything else.
I wholeheartedly agree. and for the record, I was quoting seattlebruce re. if, when, where, how much, little…
And thank you for contributing another voice of reason to this discussion.
Rudy, I never received your voice of reason compliment! :)
Thanks, Rudy. Reason relates to facts and whenever such discussions ensue about serious topics such as Holy Scripture’s teaching about Christians’ use of alcohol, it’s imperative the participants purge from their minds all their opinions and stick with what the Bible says, not what they want it to say.
Since when are “wine events at church” considered to be excess?
Do you work with alcoholics in any capacity? Do you think they would be welcome at these wine events Gary?
Seattlebruce, you and Scott are really missing the whole point.
Rudy and Gary are correct and you guys are in error.
The issue is what does the scripture teach. The scripture clearly teaches that to drink real wine with alcohol is not a sin. Period. To drink too much real wine with alcohol so that you become drunk is a sin. Big revelation! Even the world knows this.
But for a believer even his sins are not counted against him because a believer is not under law but under grace. Where there is no law there is no transgression of a law, the apostle Paul taught. God was in Christ reconciling the whole world to Himself NOT COUNTING THEIR SINS AGAINST THEM ANYMORE IF THEY WOULD ONLY BELIEVE!
Preach the good news of Jesus and stop this endless wrangling about drinking wine or not drinking wine! See from God’s eyes and grow up. Check out my web site for discussions that really matter: http://www.seeinggrace.com
James, you wrote: “The issue is what does the scripture teach. The scripture clearly teaches that to drink real wine with alcohol is not a sin. Period. To drink too much real wine with alcohol so that you become drunk is a sin. Big revelation! Even the world knows this.”
Your blithe treatment here dies not do away with Scripture or facts James. Here’s the big revelation to you apparently. A billion people are addicted to alcohol or problem drinkers, by statistics. While groups, like American Indians have shown extreme predilection to alcoholism. Yet in your commentary and blitheness about “big revelation”, I don’t see you address that or what the Scripture calls believers to regarding our responsibilities toward weaker brothers, sisters, children. This is hardly “wrangling” James, and I very much preach the Gospel at every occasion. I suggest you consider Romans 14, 15:1, et al, Jesus’ sinless nature, and your argument that this consists of wrangling, rather than Christlike compassion for the addicted, et al.
Seattlebruce. As Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, “there you go again”. You stated wine events at church are “excess” My question was, on what do you base your statement that wine events at church are excess? Do you have Scriptural references? Excess is a strong word that suggests sin in involved. You successfully skirted the question by bringing up alcoholics and who is welcome at church events. So, I’ll address the question again in a slightly different way. Seattlebruce, why are wine events at church considered to be excess, who made that determination and upon what Biblical facts is that statement based?
In Matthew 11:19, Jesus condemns the Pharisees because they said John the Baptist, who was famous for fasting from food and drink, must have had a demon. He condemns them again because He Himself came both eating and drinking, and they called Him “a glutton and a winebibber”. Thus He incidentally confirms that He did drink celebratory, alcoholic wine, though He was pointing out that the Pharisees oppose God in all of His messengers.
In light of this passage, all can rest content. The one who made the way for the Lord, did not drink. The One Who Is the Lord did. Both are okay decisions.
However, also in light of this passage, I think some real mental gymnastics would have to be employed to deny that Jesus was describing Himself as someone who at times both feasted and drank alcoholic wine.
His apostles and disciples did condemn drunkenness. Jesus also did fast frequently. But I can’t see saying He didn’t drink alcoholic wine at all. And the Wedding Feast at Cana, if it was a traditional Jewish wedding of the time, lasted a week, not a day. Plenty of time to run out of wine without anyone being drunk, and a huge humiliation for the hosts if in the middle of the week, there was no more wine to serve, since it was commonly taken at meals (though weakened with water) and celebrations.
I don’t do Facebook (For a number of reasons), so I cannot “like” you through that medium. So: I do appreciate your reasoned response!
So because he was accused of being a drinker it must be true. Also, he was accused of being a Samaritan so that must be true. He was accused of casting out demons by the prince of demons so that must be true. They called him mad so that must be true. Never mind that the OT tells us not to even look at alcohol; lets just ignore that shall we? Lets just pick out the bits that suit our lifestyle.
Again, you make a statement which goes against the Bibkical text. ““And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household,”
Deuteronomy 14:26 KJV
http://bible.com/1/deu.14.26.kjv
This is a COMMAND as to how to use the money received for a tithe. GOD told Israel to do this.
What do you think this means?
With all due respect, Scott, I would prefer Melanie answer this question. After all, she is the one who accused those Christians who believe it is okay to drink a glass of fermented grape juice (aka wine) “fake Christians.”
Don’t forget he also told them not to eat shellfish and they can divorce their wives and also have more than one wife. So I hope you are doing all these too? As you know those commands are for the Jews under the law. Also, if you have read this article in fill you would know that your idea of wine and string drink is very different to what the bible calls string drink. You are really getting defensive aren’t you. I must have hit a nerve.
Cute. You argue against the use of wine, indicating that the Bible everywhere forbids drinking alcoholic beverage. When I show you one of those passages that opposes your view, you make it related to the Old Testament. Of course, since Jesus was under the law, and since he did not take the Nazorite vow, there is no way to argue that he did not drink wine with an alcoholic content, nor that he did not make such in John 2.
Again, no one argues drunkenness is tolerated…
Cute. You argue against the use of wine, indicating that the Bible everywhere forbids drinking alcoholic beverage. When I show you one of those passages that opposes your view, you make it related to the Old Testament. Of course, since Jesus was under the law, and since he did not take the Nazorite vow, there is no way to argue that he did not drink wine with an alcoholic content, nor that he did not make such in John 2.
Again, no one argues drunkenness is tolerated…
But I have not seen anyone here make the case for Jesus using wine with alcoholic content during the Passover. John 2 – yes, but Passover, no.
But what is interesting is that Jesus used the term, “Fruit of the vine…” when he instituted the Lord’s Supper, rather than “wine” This is a generic term, which allows for any drink that resulted from the vine, being it freshly squeezed or months later, naturally yeasted etc.
Melanie. I’ve been following this discussion about drinking alcoholic beverages for awhile now. Your comments have encouraged me to contribute. Melanie, you seem to have a serious problem of reading the Bible and twisting the meaning to arrive at a personal agenda. For instance, Jesus wasn’t accused of being a drinker, he stated unequivocally that he did drink in both Matt. 11:18,19 and in Luke 7:33,34. Throughout the OT and NT, there are dire warnings about drunkenness and being a slave to alcohol. However, there are no passages that forbid drinking or say it is a sin. There are numerous verses that say drunkenness is a sin. If you would read and study the Bible in its entirety with an open mind, you will discover that God intends wine and strong drink to be an important element in the lives, relationships, discussions and culture of Christians. The OT, especially, confirms this over and over by how the use of wine is interwoven in every facet of their lives.
God says that wine is to be considered an extremely important gift from him to his people. Wine is a blessing, he says. He equates wine as being part of all the good things in life such as air, rain, bread, olive oil, grass for the livestock, plants for man to cultivate, wheat, milk and rich food. When these things have been listed, wine has always been included with them.
What is needed in these types of discussions are research, facts and Scriptural references. What I have been reading is mostly your opinions without any concrete information to back them up.
Actually I have studied the bible in great detail and continue to do so. I used to drink and have no reason to be biased about it or to twist anything. I used to believe that Jesus drank, but through much research have discovered otherwise. I have also prayed much about it. It is you and others like you (apostates) who twist things to suit your unchristian, hypocritical lifestyles. I have not been on here in a while and thought this discussion would have ended by now. However I see that some of you will desperately go to any lengths to make yourselves feel better. Do whatever you like; it does not affect me. If you believe drinking is fine why would you even be on here and why so concerned about what I think?
Rather than making derogatory remarks about those who disagree with you, how about sharing some of your research. For example, what do you make of 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 and the “elders should not be given to much wine…” (Or, addicted to wine, or drunken…)
Note that there is no command to ABSTAIN from wine, just not addicted/given
Yet again, I will pint out that the bible says NOT TO LOOK AT WINE WHEN IT IS RED, WHEN IT MOVETH IRTSELF ARIGHT. Also, there are so many verses that refer to the grapes as wine and the “first fruits” of wine. Do some research. Jesus cannot have served anything unleavened at Passover for obvious reasons, yet that is what these people accuse him of. Your whole comment was nasty and bitter. Many word have change their meanings or have more than one meaning, and wine is one of them.
Obviously that proves that wine was a generic term. Wine is a blessing but also do not look at wine when it is red, clearly these verses speak of two different things! I am really beginning to wonder of people on here commented without reading the full article. If they are so certain drinking is fine why bother even going on about it?
Melanie I thought you were going to unsubscribe from this site because you believe those who disagree with you and Scott about drinking real wine are “fake Christians.” I believe the scripture clearly teaches that Jesus made real wine, with alcohol, for the wedding celebration of that couple in Cana that day. So do most believers. Are we all “fake Christians” who believe the scripture teaches this? Are those who believe Jesus made real wine, with alcohol, in Cana that day living a lifestyle of sin? This is what I mean by you not having a clue. It’s not about the pros and cons of drinking real wine. This is all about what the scripture teaches. The scripture teaches that drinking real wine, with alcohol, is not a sin. Jesus made real wine, with alcohol, to celebrate the marriage of that young couple in Cana. The scripture teaches that excess drinking that leads to drunkeness is a sin. The scripture teaches that those who enjoy real wine, with alcohol, in moderation are not sinning.
I did unsubscribe, that does not mean I am unable to post comments. Obviously you do not know the difference. If you read this entire article carefully, without bias, you would have realized why drinking alcohol is not a all scriptural as you calm. I used to believe as most Christians do that alcohol is acceptable and scriptural but research has taught me otherwise. Those who want to drink will not be persuaded by anything and will refuse to learn. To answer your question ,yes all of those Christians who drink and condone drink are fake and sinful. Many are called but few are chosen and just because
Most Christians do something, does not make them right. The majority are seldom right. The scripture is clear when it tells us not to look at wine when it is red and when it moveth itself aright. We are not to look at it much less drink it. You believe as you choose, because as I said, most will never learn and will do just as they please.
JAMES BARRON: What do I not have a clue about? I can read scripture and think for myself, unlike some who are following the customs of the world in which they live. It is a typical reaction from a “Christian” like you to get nasty and defensive when their false beliefs are threatened. The author of this article has demonstrated clearly the reasons for not drinking, and there are other articles and videos online that are ion agreement with this. Nevertheless people like you enjoy your lifestyle and use your so called freedom in Christ to sin. Which means you are not free at all but a slave to sin.
Got to unsubscribe from this site. So many fake Christians
Can anyone deny that alcohol is a drug? The bible speaks many times against sorcery, and it is common knowledge that the greek for sorcery is pharmakeia. (I may have the spelling wrong). This is drugs (where the word pharmacy comes from. It is pretty much self explanatory) and was associated with paganism and occult practises. Ae we to represent the blood of Christ with pharmakeia? Are we to sit and worship in church whilst polluting our self with toxins that the bible hates? The bible could not be clearer on the subject. Alcohol is one of the most destructive drugs, killing more and destroying more lives than any other drug. It is extremely addictive. There is a wealth of information available concerning the dangers of alcohol. Ignoring it is wilful ignorance. We are to be alert and sober minded, as we are told. Alcohol destroys all of that.
Good point. Alcohol is a drug, and alcoholic wine was essential for women leading worship to Dionysius.
Luke was a doctor. Was he practicing witchcraft?
Aspirin is a drug. Do you take aspirins when you have a headache?
Novocaine is a drug. When you go to the dentist, do you use novacane?
When you have surgery, do you use opioids?
Excellent counter. However, does the medicinal use of drugs permit its use in parties?
Good answer Scott. We have to be accountable for our own actions. God gave us FREE WILL. It is not my will, but GOD’S WILL be done, that puts us on the right road, of our journey. This is what JESUS said before His Crucifixion. I love it that our Father in Heaven wants to take care of us. We all need Him. Amen
A long time ago, there was a cartoon in one of the religious journals. Some boys, leaning their backs against the wall of the wall, making the motion of smoking. When asked what they were doing, the answer was, “Pretending to be elders…”
Nobody ever argued against smoking at one point in time. An elder was offered a cigarette by another member, accepts it, and done… But immediately the picture changes when the elder is offered a glass of wine…
The Biblical text says of an elder that he may not be, “…given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous…” (KJV) or, “…not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money…” (NIV).
Note what the text says? It does not say he is not allowed to drink wine, it does speak against drunkenness.
The vow of the Nazorite could include (but was not limited to) abstinence of wine.
Whether or not you drink a beverage which has an alcoholic content, is a personal choice, and no one has the right to judge either the drinker or non-drinker. And again, the issue is not so much whether to drink or not to drink, the issue is how the Bible is used!
I agree, the people who don’t drink are being judgmental. If the person who has a drink, say with dinner, is responsible, a good person, loves God and does not drink to get drunk, why is it a sin? The person who is proud of their own holiness, because they don’t drink and judges someone else may be the bigger sinner. God is our judge and sees what is in the heart. Humility is better, than pride.
Once again, from a Biblical perspective, there is no way the proposition, “The Bible says that a believer cannot drink beverages with alcoholic content” can be defended.
As this thread has made obvious, all sorts of “arguments” are made to try to support that idea, but none of them are applicable.
In the context of the New Testament, 1 Corinthians 11 is about the strongest argument to be made for the presence of wine during the Lord’s supper. And there we see that it is not the fact that wine is present is the problem, but the lack of consideration!
And, before I get lambasted again, yes, the Bible does condemn drunkenness.
So you use medicine for recreational use do you? Pharmakeiah refers to the drug use by pagans, who dabbled in alcohol and other drugs. I do not take pain killers for fun, clearly. Noone gets drunk from aspirin. By the way the word physician was also used in Job, when he was talking to his friends. Not always referring to medical doctors
Rudy you are right on. This web site is really dead, spiritually speaking. Don’t waste your time trying to get Scott to see. Scott strains at swallowing gnats but swallows camels whole as Jesus said of the Pharisees, meaning that they majored on the things that were not important and they neglected the things that were important. Scott actually thinks Jesus was talking about clean and unclean things in Jesus’ metaphor. It’s hopeless. And people like Melanie really do not have a clue. Unbelievable.
Test the spirits.
I want to, but then you tell me it is wrong… ;-)
Melanie, you again miss the reason for the argument. It deals with the use of Scripture and judging others for their freedom.