1. 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!

Short Treatise - Wine any other name is Wine. Disprove?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by ituttut, Sep 3, 2006.

  1. ituttut

    ituttut New Member

    Jun 26, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Can we all take our time and look at His Word, and try to clear our mind of what we have been taught by man, and do what everyone here say we do, hopefully on our own in His Word - Study to Make Ourselves Approved. To arrive at the proper Christian ecclesiology in the matter of wine we are to be Berean proving scripture is after all correct, and our one true source.

    Scripture proves "wine" is a gift from God. To disprove, in our mind, we must either go outside His Word, or find proof in scripture this is a lie. If within scripture we find He did give it to man to "make His heart glad", we either believe His Word, or we don't. All the words and knowledge of this world will not negate the Word of God. It is only in our own mind we can prove Him wrong, and not by His Word.

    To disprove "wine" is not given to man by God to "make the heart glad", then we must first find scripture showing God repented, and took this blessing from man (Psalms 4:7; 104:15). The first we see of "wine" informs it will make one drunk, evidenced by Noah evidently being the first to be given this "gift" from God to make his "heart glad". If anyone ever needed it, "wine", it was those 8 lonely souls to begin the second begin of man.

    We must prove God did not give Noah the right, the privilege, and know how to grow, gather, and process the juice from the grape (called grape juice) into an alcoholic beverage for man to enjoy. It is here we learn we can drink "wine", and there is only one type of "wine" and that one type of "wine" can make one drunk. Don't believe this? Then you have to show scripture. If it is not in His Word, can any say they "believe the Word of God" when they argue in the theology of the mind of man?

    The next logical step to prove "wine" has always been "wine" that can make drunk, is to advance to the "Lord's Supper", using I Corinthians as our factual evidence. To help us further we again reach back to make sure we have no contradictions. We are looking for two (2) elements for there can be no "remembrance" without "food and drink". Look! We found them here in Genesis 27:28, and 37. In Him we are blessed, if we wish to partake of what He gives to us, our "food and our drink", which God expresses in that day as "thy corn, and thy wine". These are His very own people He is talking to. Man sees "wine" as bad.

    So what is our answer in this matter? So very many believe with man that "wine" is bad even though His Word tells is it is good, made bad by man. So even many in churches believe man and not God in this matter. A Good man does not have Bad habits, such as getting drunk. This is what those with Bad habits do.

    Now we should know about "wine" when we get to I Corinthians. If we don't, then we have one last chance to believe we have right to what God offers us. And this time it is again God giving us His Word from heaven. Notice from where Paul gets his information for we Christians on all aspects of our justification through faith, including how we are to "remember Him". He didn't get any of it from the earthly Apostles, but directly from Christ Jesus in heaven. I Corinthians 11:23, "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you,……."

    But you say "wine" is not even mentioned in I Corinthians, much less chapter 11. Isn't it? Something has to be in the "cup". Look again.

    The odds are stacked against those looking at "grape juice as His blood". Any takers that "wine" is not really "wine" from the beginning, but grape juice? Or in the NT "wine" became "grape juice" for "wine" that represents the blood of Christ is an affront to we in our churches today?