• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Hypothetical Communion Question

P

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
Matt,

There is no evidence from Scripture that alcoholic wine was demanded. The fact that people at Corinth were drunk does not mean that they were drunk on communion wine. Likely, in the observance of communion, there would not be enough wine to get drunk. Their drunkenness probably came from the pre-communion feast.

I don't see anything being interpreted away. The evidence of the NT times shows that wine was far different then than now. Secondly, with the existence of former alcoholics in attendancer (hopefully the church is reachign them), the use of wine could be detrimental. THe use of grape juice would detrimental none.

I think there is absolutely no purpose to serving alcoholic wine. I just don't see why, since the Bible does not prescribe it and grape juice is equally "fruit of the vine."
 
W

Window Wax

New Member
"grape juice is equally "fruit of the vine.""

Although I can not personally argue against the use of wine for communion (except on the basis of causing the weaker brother to stumble), I do also agree with this statement...
 
B

Bartimaeus

New Member
Why not go German and have liquid Bread? You know a little hops and barley? It is bread you know! What about a little liberty here? Then all the American brewing companies would have you folks as a stable market. Hey, what do you know a little communion service at the half time show! (how far do you want to go with this?)
Thanks -------Bart
 
B

Bartimaeus

New Member
What 24 hrs later and you folks who want a little vino at the table.....yet no takers on the German answer to this question? I was only giving you the option of a little more "Christian" liberty. Beer is truly liquid bread and that way it could all be done faster. How about it... eh? Take a little bread for thy brain's sake. Go ahead and give me some scriptural diatribe on "why beer cannot be used at the Lord's table". After all it doesn't really say what kind of bread was used, now did it?
Thanks -------Bart
 
S

Shiloh

New Member
Pro 23:31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, [when] it moveth itself aright.
Pro 23:32 At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.
What other part of the Bible do you not believe.
 
M

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apparently, then, Paul didn't 'believe' that bit either when he exhorted Timothy to take a little wine?

Yours in Christ

Matt
 
P

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
But why did he say that Matt? For his stomach's sake ... Health reasons. That verse cannot be legitimately used as an open door policy on drinking.

I am a tee totaler, but I don't insist that everyone else be. Personally, I believe drinking alcohol is a stupid thing to do. It opens the door to drunkennes; It can cause those in the body to stumble and those outside the body to continue in sin; It can harm the testimony of Christ. And there are simply too many good things to drink that we don't need that. If others, in good conscience, can drink wine in moderation, that is between them and God, but I would certainly not hesitate to challenge their thinking on it.
 
M

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But by saying all of the above you ARE passing judgment on myself and other Christians who drink in moderation and insisting that we are all teetotal. Now, I don't insist that you join me in drinking or pass judgement on you for abstaining - so why are you seeking to do that to me?

Yours in Christ

Matt
 
P

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
Matt, did you read the first sentence of my second paragraph? I explicitly said that I did not insist everyone else be. I am not judging you. I said what I believe, but I do not insist that you believe the same thing.

Why would you say such a thing? I am not a drinker; I think it is a dumb thing to do. But I don't insist that you agree with me. I also think it is dumb to go to NASCAR races, but I don't insist that people agree with me on that either.

The fact that I believe something doesn't mean that I enforce that on everyone else.
 
M

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The tone of your post suggests that you look down on and pass judgment on those who do drink; instead of saying, "Look, this works for me, but I accept that works for you", your post implies, "This works for me and it ought to work for you and I don't accept that you've chosen an alternative". That is both judgmental and implies that the other person should conform to your lifestyle. Why not just agree to differ and live and let live?

Yours in Christ

Matt
 
P

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
If he said he would do it to be true to Scripture, then a vote should be immediately called to remove the man from the pastorate of the church. He is not spending enough time studying if he thinks that is true to Scripture ... Okay, so maybe that is a big overboard, but seriously, there is no reason to serve exclusively alcoholic wine. The wine of Scripture was vastly different from the alcohol of today. It was greatly diluted and its intoxicating properties were vastly different.

There is no reason to serve alcohol at all. You may have some people who were saved out of drunkenness (no, they are not recovering alcoholics). Why tempt them with the taste? If you are going to serve alcoholic wine, why? What purpose does it serve?

Serve both and give people an option if you must; don't serve exclusively wine.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with you 100%. We are NOT dealing in a day and age where wine had to have alcoholic content to keep it from spoiling and to kill "worms" that infested much of the food that was eaten.

Alcoholism in America is enough reason NOT to serve wine. Besides, don't think that every newspaper within the county wouldn't have the story on the front page "Baptist Church Offers Wine to Congregation". . .

Which deacon are we going to appoint to go to the local liquor store and pick it up? :rolleyes:
 
P

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by Matt Black:
The tone of your post suggests that you look down on and pass judgment on those who do drink; instead of saying, "Look, this works for me, but I accept that works for you", your post implies, "This works for me and it ought to work for you and I don't accept that you've chosen an alternative". That is both judgmental and implies that the other person should conform to your lifestyle. Why not just agree to differ and live and let live?

Yours in Christ

Matt
Click to expand...
Uh, I think that is what he did say. . . I think you are the one placing the "attitude" into his post.
thumbs.gif
 
O

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Well since the Lord's Supper was instituted in the spring of the year and grape juice was perishable I would say that wine was used in the first Lords Supper and should be used today.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Administrator
Administrator
Just in passing.

The laws of fermentation were made by our Lord! He knew how long grapes take before producing alcohol.

Through pasturization and refrigeration we can almost cause the process to stop. For Jews in Palestine, even putting skins of juice into wells (a common means of cooling and storing perishables throughout history) it would only slow down the process, not stop it.

I've traveled in Israel and seen grapes ripening in late Spring . . but well after Passover.
 
P

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Why not just agree to differ and live and let live?
Click to expand...
I did. I gave my reasons for my positions, and clearly stated that I did not insist that others agree with me and clearly said that is someone chose to drink wine it was between themselves and God.
 
M

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So why did you describe it as 'dumb'? That implies you think I'm 'dumb' because I drink wine on occasions.

Yours in Christ

Matt
 
P

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
I didn't say "dumb," I said "stupid" ... :D ...

But here is the full context of what I said, with some highlighted portions that show your conclusions to be unjustified.

I am a tee totaler, but I don't insist that everyone else be. Personally, I believe drinking alcohol is a stupid thing to do. It opens the door to drunkennes; It can cause those in the body to stumble and those outside the body to continue in sin; It can harm the testimony of Christ. And there are simply too many good things to drink that we don't need that. If others, in good conscience, can drink wine in moderation, that is between them and God, but I would certainly not hesitate to challenge their thinking on it.
Click to expand...
I gave my reasons for why I believe it is a stupid thing to do. You don't have to agree with me. I don't insist that you do.

I don't think you are dumb because you drink. I said I believe drinking is a stupid thing to do for various reasons, all of which are entirely biblical reasons.
 
M

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
I am not a drinker; I think it is a dumb thing to do.
Click to expand...
If you say that an action is stupid or dumb, please explain how you can think that those performing that action are not likewise stupid or dumb

Yours in Christ

Matt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top