How much grape juice is too much grape juice?

There has been a lot mentioned more than once.

So we all agree that Christ was sinless, right? Oh wait...wrong thread.

 

Even though the bible says that new wine is in the cluster, and when you press a cluster of grapes into a cup, grape juice comes out of it... I can't say that cup is new wine? I think I have properly exegeted, unless you have a better reason that you care to show me. I know you have no more to say.

 

As a former Chemical Engineering major, a chemistry minor, and one who spent long hours in Organic Chemisty as a student, teacher aide, lab aide, let me be the first to say that though your comment is funny...it's not that accurate.

the chemical reaction itself (it's anaerobic, or in other words it takes place without oxygen) is as such:

C6H12O6 → 2 C2H5OH + 2 CO2 + 2ATP
(glucose) (2 ethanol) (2 Carbon dioxide) (2 Adenosene TriPhosphate)

"ATP" is "adenosene phosphate" (sp? I'm lazy, and my organic chem is rusty). It is an important "energy carrier" and mobilizer. "Ethanol" is of course grain alcohol. Ya'll know what carbon dioxide is.

The reactions, by-products, catalysts, and conditions for reaction are all quite different between anaerobic glucose respiration (fermentation) and the digestive process.

Man, this took me back! We had to do AGR (fermentation) in an Organic Chemistry lab. But we had to do veeerrrrryyyy small amounts of it...All we needed at a Baptist college was a "moonshine still!" Besides that, all of the Episcopals would have started showing up...:laugh:

ATP is important in the energy transfer process. It is not toxic or harmful under normal conditions (unlike human waste).

 

Only if you're willing to say blossoms are ripe grapes.

Yup. Sorry, but if you are going to exegete a dream as facts about new wine, we have nothing to discuss. Up until now, I had some respect for your opinions.

 

Hard to keep 'em straight though isn't it?

 

Your argument is illogical, brother. I am not using the verse about the cup to prove anything except that it is possible to squeeze grapes into one. Dream or no dream, what comes out of a grape when you squeeze it? A little wine. What comes out of a baptist? A little whine.

 

Grape juice comes from a grape when you squeeze it, not wine.

What happens in a dream makes no difference at all. If he dreamed that watermelons popped out of the grapes when he squeezed them (certainly possible in a dream), would you then conclude from the text that you get watermelons from squeezed grapes? You see, that's the whole point. You're pointing to a dream as evidence for something. That shows no integrity or respect for the truth. It's obvious all you care about is supporting your premise that wine is grape juice, and you'll stoop to any level to do it.

After all of HB's ridiculous misquotes about "poison of dragons", I thought I actually stumbled on a grape-juicer with integrity. I'm beginning to think no such person exists.

 

I could tell everyone to "quit yer wining," but that would be a terrible pun that is far below my lofty standards.



tee hee hee...

 

I'm only going to say it once more, because I think at this point you are either willfully misunderstanding what I am saying, or you are deceived by alcoholic wine and are incapable of seeing it. The bible says that new wine is found in the cluster of grapes. That is bible truth, not a dream, not a fable. If you squeeze that cluster into a cup, what comes out of the grapes is what the bible says is in the grapes. Call it a lack of integrity, or what ever you will. I am just doing a simple scriptural study and I see no reason to disagree with Isaiah 65:8 when it says new wine is in the grapes. You say it is grape juice and not new wine, so I suggest you find a scripture to back that up.

 

See the scripture where they claim the apostles are drunk on new wine. You can't get drunk on grape juice.

I can't even be bothered to look it up. Either grape-juicers are completely irrational, don't even know when they are lying, or they're simply unrepentant liars (or some combination). I've never seen such abuse of scripture - drawing from dreams to make a point? Misquoting "poison of dragons" to say that's what the Bible calls wine?

It's incredibly ironic that grape-juicers come across as so self-righteous when they seem to lack any integrity in their approach to scripture and, in some cases, are obviously lying. The 10 commandments forbids lies, not wine.

Honestly, I'd rather deal with an honest and repentant drunk who admits drinking to excess is wrong than a sober grape-juicer who tries to justify his abuse of scripture or lies.

 

I'll address that scripture as soon as you admit that the bible says grapes are full of new wine.

I am a repentant drunk, thanks for playing.

 

James, It's futile to discuss topics with someone who draws upon a dream to make a point, and then refuses to admit it was improper exegesis.

To the rest:

One of the many ironies here is that many historians say new wine refers to freshly fermented wine which people drank at full strength, but the daily "wine" was mature wine mixed with water. That means people who drank new wine could get drunk, but people who drank wine would have a very difficult time getting drunk, since the alcohol was diluted so much.

That also explains why the mockers specifically said "new wine" when accusing the apostles of being drunk. They could have, but didn't say they were drunk on "wine".

 

Excellent. Then I respect your honesty and integrity about having been a drunk. Now extend that to your approach to scripture and admit it when you screw up. Being in denial about one thing is no better or worse than being in denial about another.

 

This would be proper exegesis according to you...

The bible says new wine is in the cluster, but we know that this is just spiritual wine because grapes are really full of welches grape juice and all wine is alcoholic. Grapes can only be squeezed into cups in dreams, and then only grape juice may flow from the grape into the cup. We know this because of historians. Thank you, I'll be by next week to pick up my PhD.

 

That's true.

When I am talking to people unfamiliar with the passage, I sometimes explain that the disciples were being accused of being drunk on what we would consider "cheap wine." That is, the $2 fortified wines like Thunderbird, MD 20/20, Ripple, or Night Train.

 

I could think of another explanation but I'm waiting for someone to confess that the bible says new wine is found in a cluster of grapes.

 

and I'm about to have to go home, in which case I may have to leave this hanging until monday.

 

James,

New Wine is found in grapes. Isaiah made that perfectly clear.

He did not say 'New Wine is a product of the grapes,' but rather 'New wine is found in the grapes.'

It can't get simpler than that. Isaiah said that 'grape juice' is 'new wine'.

 

Any one else agree that that is what Isaiah said, and if anyone disagrees, would they care to share a scripture that explains what really is inside a grape?

 

The scripture actually says that it is in the cluster. You have interpreted it very literally to mean that wine is in grapes. Since the verse you are refering uses the word "as", you can be sure that Isaiah is giving us a comparison, not a literal discussion of grapes or wine making. The passage is speaking of the potential of the cluster of grapes to become something better. The passage is actually talking about the rebellious children of Israel (also known as Jacob) ... there is potential in them to become something better.

He did not say either of those things. Here's the KJV rendering of a small portion of the passage in question:

Isaiah 65
8 Thus says the LORD,
"As the new wine is found in the cluster,
And one says, 'Do not destroy it, for there is benefit in it,'
So I will act on behalf of My servants
In order not to destroy all of them.
9 "I will bring forth offspring from Jacob,
And an heir of My mountains from Judah;
Even My chosen ones shall inherit it,
And My servants will dwell there.

You can't ignore the context much more than you have...

No he didn't. The passage is not about grapes or wine at all.