Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | John 2:1 On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | John 2:1 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; |
Subject: water into wine |
Bible Note: Hi Tim! I guess we're going to disagree on this one - you're probably a more conservative evangelical than I am. I really believe that it was wine that Jesus made at Cana. It may be that wine was not as strong back then as it is now, but I think it was definitely an alcoholic beverage. In my reading of the story, that's the whole point of the banquet master's comment to the bridegroom. It's also occured to me that assuming that the "wine" was in fact just grape juice raises an interesting question: Would there really be "grades" of grape juice? Good wine vs. not-so-good wine, certainly. But good or not-so-good grape juice? Unless it it would be fresh vs. old grape juice, but in that climate in the 1st century, "old" grape juice would either be vinegar or true, alcoholic wine very quickly. I guess that's where I have the biggest problem. No matter what people may have wanted to do, there is simply no way that, except for a very brief period after the harvest, anyone could drink anything other than alcoholic wine. It would either ferment, or it would spoil. For at least 10 months of the year (maybe only 8 if there were two growing seasons), people would either drink real wine, or they would drink water. It's worth mentioning here that neither I, nor the church I belong to, frown upon the moderate, responsible consumption of alcohol. I'm going to quote C.S. Lewis here - definitely a theologian for whom I have a tremendous amount of respect. Like me, Lewis and his denomination did not believe in a Christian prohibition against alcohol. I'm going to point out, though, that there is a criticism explicit in his comments that is not present in mine. Please don't ANYONE take this as an attack. Or at least, if you do, take it up with the honorable Dr. Lewis, not me. (g) The following was a response that Lewis wrote to a question from some American Christians about his stance on alcohol: "I have always in my books been concerned simply to put forward "mere" Christianity, and am no guide on these (most regrettable) "inter-denominational" questions. I do however strongly object to the tyrannic and unscriptural insolence of anything that calls itself a Church and makes teetotalism a condition of membership. Apart from the more serious objection (that Our Lord Himself turned water into wine and made wine the medium of the only rite He imposed on all His followers), it is so provincial (what I believe you people call "small town"). Don't they realize that Christianity arose in the Mediterranean world where, then as now, wine was as much a part of the normal diet as bread?" I have to say that I am much more willing to trust Lewis's scholorship on matters like this than I am my own. And since my church's beliefs coincide with my own, it's not an issue of conscience for me. Anyway, my two cents worth, together with a least a dollars' worth of Lewis. Yours in Christ, Jim D. |