Grape Juice or Wine?

Sentinel of Grace, August 1972

WARNING! There are those who have accused the writer of advocating the use of Grape Juice and Crackers for the Communion Supper. Let me say up front. This is untrue. SKB.

"But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.

"God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth." John 4:23-24.

In the spirit of this text, we should be encouraged daily to continue our search for the truth. It is not enough simply to say we have the word with us; it is not enough to point to the customs and traditions passed down from the fathers, yea, is it not true that all those gone before, and those with us today, and those yet to come have had, have now, and most surely will have what we have with us today?

If this were enough, then I might ask: Why are there so many varieties of truth in the world today? The question might be further put as to how could there have been erroneous doctrines on the resurrection almost immediately after the ascension of Christ?

In keeping with the scripture that "God is a Spirit. and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth'', then are we not virtually commanded to seek that manner and substance of which is to be the elements of such worship?

Here and now it is our intent to examine one of the many facets of our external worship of the Father.

In his first letter to the Corinthian church, the Apostle Paul wrote, (Vs. 23-26 1lth Ch.) "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; And when He had given thanks, he brake it, and said, take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me."

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till He come."

The words of Jesus, ". .. This cup is the new testament in my blood..." brings a question to the enquiring mind; WHAT was in that cup that He partook of and further commanded those with Him to partake of.

Hear the echo, my dear people, (Heb. 9:11-23) "But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

"And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

"For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

"For a testament is of force after men are dead. otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

"Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, saying, this is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without the shedding of blood is no remission.

"It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these."

As we view the establishment, the enforcement, the effect and longevity of His testament; the New Testament, we are of necessity obligated to have a symbol, an emblem that is true in the representation of His blood.

The fact that it IS the new testament in HIS BLOOD, emblematic and a symbol of His shed blood dictates that we should determine what the substance of the 'cup' is.

If there were no other scripture, no other record, no tradition of the fathers we might be well justified in accepting any liquid to fill the 'cup'. Will you go with me to the 29th verse of the 26th chapter of Matthew! Hear the words of Jesus, "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my father's kingdom." We see here a definite reference to the fruit of the vine . . .", "Fruit" is rendered unto us from the Greek, meaning "generation, produce."

May we not reasonably conclude at this point the grape is the "fruit" of the vine: End the deliberation at this point? How can we?

The little word "drink" appears in scripture in Jesus' reference to the "fruit of the vine." Then we are led to believe surely His reference is to the "juice" of the grape. But, is it the juice under consideration? Considering the many scripture references to avoid strong drink, and the beverage of alcoholic content may well strengthen the theory that the unfermented juice of the grape is the proper substance of the "cup" of the communion--let us look further!

Hear with me some of the rational and reasonable(?) arguments in favor of the unfermented juice.

"In Bible times they did not have a way of bringing grape juice to a boil and sealing it so it would not ferment as people do grape juice today."[1]

"There was no way to tell exactly when it had fermented enough that people today would call it wine."[2]

"In the Bible there are no separate words for grape juice and for wine There was no distinction in language used."[3]

"Sometimes the Bible says 'new wine' and sometimes it says 'old wine', but usually the simple term 'wine' is used and it may mean grape juice or other fruit juice while it is fresh or it may mean the same fruit juice after it has fermented ."[4]

"Now, unfermented fruit juice is good but only an ordinary glass is usually enough for anybody: one glass of grape juice or orange juice or apple juice. But if it is fermented and alcoholic and the body has a taste for alcohol, then one may drink and drink, more and more of fermented wine until he is utterly drunken."[5]

" not given to wine . . ." I Timothy 3:3; "That would refer evidently to fermented wine. One who has the wine habit, and so gets hooked on a taste for alcohol would drink and drink and that is forbidden a preacher."[6]

"But one who had a glass of grape juice for breakfast would not be spoken of as 'given to wine'... and so Titus 2:3 also says that one should be 'not given to much wine'."[7]

"The Lord's Supper was not given with fermented wine. In the Lord's Supper the Lord takes particular pains not to say 'wine' in reference to the supper."[8]

"The Bible never says it was wine and so we ought not to think of it as intoxicating wine at the Lord's Supper. It was probably simply grape juice which properly pictured the shed blood of the Saviour. Fermented grape juice would not properly picture the pure blood of the Saviour because fermentation would indicate that microbes were in it and fermentation is a kind of spoiling that makes alcohol, and that would not picture the pure, sinless blood of Jesus."[9]

"SURELY THE WINE JESUS MADE AT CANA WAS 'NEW WINE', NOT FERMENTED."

"When Jesus turned the water into wine in John 2:1-11, it seemed certain He did not make intoxicating wine. The alcohol in wine is the product of fermentation, a kind of decay. But when Jesus turned the water into grape juice, it had no time to ferment or decay and there is no reason to think that Jesus would here contradict in His action what the Bible had plainly commanded it would be foolish to jump to the conclusion here that "Jesus made intoxicating wine."[10]

It is difficult indeed for me to continue these views and quotations of one so determined to minimize and disavow the miraculous power of Almighty God. The urge to answer these thoughts individually is almost uncontrollable. May God give us grace to press along and take a long, hard, objective look at these opposing views. Let our answers be according to a depth of revelation and comprehension in God's Word.

And I quote, "Paul said Timothy needed the vitamins of fruit juice,"[11] this in reference to the scripture of I Timothy 5:23. "Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities." Our source of the opposition says, "I think that what he is saying is,'Timothy, for your health and digestion you need fruit juice, you need the vitamins in fruit juice."[13]

As we turn once more to His word, pray that God will lead and enlighten. The word "juice" appears but one time in the whole of scripture, and this in the Canticles or Song of Solomon, 8:2, "... The juice of my pomegranate." The word "juice" here comes to us from the Hebrew, Aciye (aw-sees) "must, fresh grape juice."[14] Just this one time where the word "juice" appears is enough for me to know that there is a definite difference in "wine" and "juice."

The word "wine" appears some 230 times; 193 times in the Old Testament and some 37 times in the New.

Throughout the Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the word "wine" comes to us from the Greek, Oinos (oynos), meaning the same as the Hebrew YAYIN, "to effervesce."

We find the appearance of "new wine" in the Acts of the Apostles, 2:13, "Others mocking said, these men are full of new wine." This "new wine" is rendered unto us from the Greek, GLEUKOS, '' Sweet, wine, must, the most inebriating of wine."[15]

Other references at our disposal from Timothy, Titus, Romans and I Peter bring us the same word "wine" from the same root, "oinos," heretofore cited as that "effervescent, or working" wine.

I ask you: Why the allusion to drunkeness to those on the day of Pentecost if in fact that "new wine" was the unfermented juice of the grape? Surely in the language of Scripture we would not be led to believe those contemporary to Peter and the others knew not the difference. I do not assume an authority heretofore unknown; but, rather that we search the scripture and further to know the situation and conditions of the Last Supper.

It was at the evening of the first day of the feast of the passover when Jesus sat with the "twelve," and immediately after His making announcement of the betrayal that would come to Him, He "...Took bread, and blessed it...And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying. drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the vine..." Matt. 26:20-29.

Let us go now to one far greater learned than I, one well versed in the customs and traditions of the fathers, especially that of the nature of the elements of the passover.

"When wine is brought to them after food, if there is but that cup there, the house of Shammai says, he blesses, or gives thanks for the wine, and after that gives thanks for the food, the house of Hillel says, he gives thanks for the food and after that gives thanks for the wine. And this was usual at ordinary meals, to bless or give thanks for the wine, so at the passover; And which our Lord continued in his supper, and is to be practised by us. It should be further known, that the wine at the passover and so that Christ used at his supper was red. Says R. Jeremiah it is commanded to perform this duty with red wine. And elsewhere it is said, that it is necessary that there would be in it (the wine) taste and look. The gloss is on it, that it should be red: and which, as it most fitly represented the blood sprinkled on the door-posts of the Israelite, when the Lord passed over their houses; so the blood of Christ, shed for the remission of the sins of his people."[16]

"Vs. 28 of 26th Ch. of Matt.: For this is my blood of the New Testament, etc. That is, the red wine in the cup, was an emblem and representation of His precious blood, whereby was exhibited a new dispensation, or administration of the covenant of grace; and by which it was ratified and confirmed: and whereby all the blessings of it, such as peace, pardon, righteousness and eternal life, come to the people of God: the allusion is to the first covenant, and the book of it being sprinkled with the blood of bulls is and therefore called the blood of the covenant." Exodus 24:8[17]

Our learned scholar gives us the reason for Jesus' language in his reference to that cup as "the: fruit of the vine." "For the Jews blessed, or gave thanks for their wine, as well as for their food, and generally did it "in this form : 'Blessed art thou, O Lord, Our God, the king of the world, who hast created the fruit of the vine."[18] Drawing still from the great wealth of knowledge of those gone before us we see, ". . . and the drink offering thereof shall be of wine, the fourth part of an hin." Lev. 23:13. Hear the word of the Lord my people, "Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars; She hath killed her beasts, she hath mingled her wine; she hath also, furnished her table...Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled." Prov. 9:1-5, the literal as well as the figurative language using the substance of "wine."

Wine is the direct result or product of fermentation. According to my dictionary, fermentation is: "Any of a group of chemical reactions induced by living or nonliving ferments that split complex organic compounds into relatively simple substances; especially, the anaerobic conversion of sugar to carbon dioxide and alcohol by yeast."[19] And this miraculous fact is accomplished by that action of the "microorganism" able to live without the presence of "free oxygen." For some strange reason, not readily explained, the grape is the only fruit with these properties or peculiarities. The implications of fermentation are, boiling, unrest, turbulent, bubbling, troubled, effervescent, etc. It has been determined by experience that the grape grown from a properly balanced soil and adequate sunlight is the only known fruit capable of vinous fermentation without additives.

Is it so hard to see that when the fermentation has brought forth a clarified and purged substance; bright, clear, of strength and body why surely it was the "red wine" in the "cup" on that evening time so long ago?

I put the question: am I to use a substance as symbolic of the blood of Christ that in itself if not of the proper ingredients will surely send up a rancid and sour savor to the very nostrils of God? Consider the "must" that when left to itself is not capable of purging out the leavening impurities embodied within it.

Compare the clarified wine, purged of the leaven, no longer a "must" but clear and spiritous to penetrate and make itself known.

Consider the "winepress of wrath," that when the "blood" of the grape has taken its natural course the "old leaven" is purged out and there stands the red purified, cleansed and preserving substance of "the fruit of the vine."

How blind are we? Is it so small a thing to say, "in Bible times they did not have a way of bringing grape juice to a boil ..."?

Consider the finer's fire! Consider the fiery furnace wherein were cast Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego!

Is the gift of God to man in intelligence so small and narrow that we would believe the opaque skins of animals or stone jars is sufficient to keep man from knowing when the "red wine" had been made?

Oh, dear people of God, see these discrediting and God-dishonoring attempts for what they are: a further erosion and deterioration on the fundamental teachings of God's own word.

It is this same type of watered-down reason easily refuted by the diligent student that has been "baptizing" with no comprehension of what Baptism is! This type of gainsaying is surely the forerunner of a definite decay in what Christianity IS !

This type of reasoning will tell you and me that "any fool knows that a little leaven will NOT leaven the whole lump!"

I am convinced that the "cup" held in the hands of my Lord and Saviour at the Supper was with the "wine," that truly representative of the purged and unleavened, the moving and strong, the penetrating and exhilarating yea, even to the effusing throughout the whole being in true symbolism of that changed and new creature in Christ.

May God bless you all.

Amen.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12] Mr. John R. Rice, editor, Sword of the Lord. 4 Jul 69. Murfreesboro, Tenn.

[13], [14], [15] Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. Abingdon Press, 1970.

[16], [17] Mr. John Gill, Gill's Commentary. Vol. 5, pp 267, Turner Lassiter, Atlanta, Ga., 1954.

[18] Ibid.

[19] American Heritage Dictionary, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1970.