Subject: making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. |
Bible Note: But the words "sweet" or "new" do not appear in any of the passages I cited except for the one in Acts 2. And the Greek word is different for that instance, anyway, so ruling that one out doesn't really change the meaning of "oinos," which is used quite frequently in the NT in the context of warning of its excesses. My main problem with the whole "non-alcoholic" wine argument centers around two issues: 1. Throughout the history of the church, until the nineteenth-century temperance movement spread like wildfire, all of Christendom used wine in its communion. There is no definitive historical record of anything else but regular alcohol-containing wine being used (no matter what the alcohol percentage may have been). If you are correct about the use of Eucharistic wine, then there was some unexpected "wrong turn" very, very close to the apostolic era, and I am very hesitant to step forward and say that something the church had been doing from almost the very beginning is in error. 2. The Jews still use wine in their Passover. It would be quite interesting to find out how the same alleged move from ultra-weak wine to the stronger stuff we can find today was mirrored by a group that has largely rejected its Messiah. Now, don't get me wrong: I am not asserting my "inalienable right" to drink wine. My freedom should not become a stumbling block for my brother, and it certainly is not a pass to enjoy licentiousness. However, when I get grief for having a thimble-full of the beverage I (along with most of the church throughout history) believe Jesus consecrated to signify His blood by which I was reconciled, I am a little less charitable. The point of Paul's messages on matters of conscience is two-way: the strong should not despise the weak in conscience, and the weaker brother should not judge the strong in these "gray areas." --Joe! |