What Is Your Stance On Wine For The Lord's Supper

[Phillip W. Gordon]

 

 

  Does the Glorious Church have a particular stance on wine for the Lord's Supper or do you only use grape juice?

[Mike R. Prevost]

Wow.  This is one topic I can contribute to.  I wrote a ~70 booklet on this topic -- pretty exhaustive (OT and NT word studies, examination of Mishna/Talmud, symbolism, etc.).  Is there somewhere I can post it?  If someone wants a copy, I will be happy to email it to them.  My email is [e-mail].  

 

I have also done a good bit of work on the timing of the crucifixion in relation to Passover and the institution of the Lord's Supper -- including a review of the Passover laws in the OT and harmonizing the gospels with respect to the passover and crucifixion.  I can post/email that also.  

 

OH.  Now I see the "Upload Files" link.  Ill try that too.  Not sure where they will go.

 

Enjoy!

[Donnie Gillum]

A little late in the game for sure, but for whatever it may be worth, I’ll state my choice in the matter.  My preference is grape juice … for the following reasons:

• It was the Pure FRESH Blood of Jesus that was spilled at Calvary. 

Wine is a product of corruption (fermentation) over time (not fresh), so (to me) the pure blood of the grape would better represent the Pure Blood of Christ.

• To be the same in nature as the bread – unleavened – which represents the Body of Christ.

In Ex. 12, the Lord commands that there should be no leaven found in there house for the entire seven days of unleavened bread and they were to eat nothing leavened.  (Though, technically, one could say they are not eating, but drinking something leavened.) 

Leaven produces fermentation (look it up in the dictionary) and fermentation is the process of producing wine.  It seems illogical and inconsistent (to me) that the bread must be unleavened but the cup (drink) must not be. Thus, my conclusion.

As a bonus, I don’t have to depend upon a distillery to fulfill my spiritual needs :-)

 

[Mike R. Prevost]

Hi Bro Gillum!

Did you read the article I attached to the previous post?  The issues you mentioned are address there.  If there is a more thorough study of the topic of wine in the Bible (specifically in the Lord's Supper), I haven't found it.  Apostolic peer-reviewed material.  Worth a read for anyone who is genuinely interested in this topic.

[Donnie Gillum]

No, Brother, I have not read them.  Maybe I can work in some time to do so shortly.  Thank you for the reminder.

[Donnie Gillum]

Wow! Bro. Prevost, you've put the work in that "article" :-)  I've downloaded it for later reading when I can set aside time to do so. 

[Brandon Steinke]

Brothers,

A couple of years ago we did an in depth study of communion here in Janesville, for the express purpose of getting to the bottom of what we felt was scripturally accurate regarding this institution so as to be able to properly teach and practice it with in our assembly. The result was a very lengthy paper and a multi-week teaching series. I have included a handful of excerpts from this paper below, specifically in reference to the issue of wine versus grape juice and the significance of the cup:

If we read  Matthew 20:22-23, we gain some insight:

22 But Jesus replied, You do not realize what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink and to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized? They answered, We are able.

23 He said to them, You will drink My cup, but seats at My right hand and at My left are not Mine to give, but they are for those for whom they have been ordained and prepared by My Father.    AMP

 

We read here of Jesus speaking of a ‘cup’ that He is about to drink and asking a couple of His disciples if they are able to drink of this ‘cup’. Yet Jesus was not speaking of a physical cup, but instead He was referencing the things He must soon face, as recorded in Mark 10:33-34, “Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him…”   KJV

If we observe carefully here, we see that to ‘drink’ means to ‘participate in’. And, as we read previously, in John 4:34, Jesus said, “My food is to do the will of Him Who sent Me”, and in John 6:57, “As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.”Jesus was making a very clear statement and comparison here, that just as He lived and received nourishment by doing the will of the Father, we should live and receive nourishment by our obedience and submission to Him. Matthew 4:4 also reinforces, “…Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” So, to ‘eat’ this ‘food’ of God, appears to reference doing God’s will and living by His Word. 

***

This thought is reinforced by Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 10:16-22:

16 The cup of blessing [of wine at the Lord's Supper] upon which we ask [God's] blessing, does it not mean [that in drinking it] we participate in and share a fellowship (a communion) in the blood of Christ (the Messiah)? The bread which we break, does it not mean [that in eating it] we participate in and share a fellowship (a communion) in the body of Christ?

17 For we [no matter how] numerous we are, are one body, because we all partake of the one Bread [the One Whom the communion bread represents].

18 Consider those [physically] people of Israel. Are not those who eat the sacrifices partners of the altar [united in their worship of the same God]?

19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is [intrinsically changed by the fact and amounts to] anything or that an idol itself is a [living] thing?

20 No, I am suggesting that what the pagans sacrifice they offer [in effect] to demons (to evil spiritual powers) and not to God [at all]. I do not want you to fellowship and be partners with diabolical spirits [by eating at their feasts].

21 You cannot drink the Lord's cup and the demons' cup. You cannot partake of the Lord's table and the demons' table.

22 Shall we thus provoke the Lord to jealousy and anger and indignation? Are we stronger than He [that we should defy Him]?   AMP

 

As verse 16 states, thus, “…in drinking it] we participate in and share a fellowship (a communion) in the blood of Christ (the Messiah)” and, “…in eating it] we participate in and share a fellowship (a communion) in the body of Christ”

***

So, in the partaking of the Lord’s Supper, not only are we remembering and proclaiming His death, sacrifice, and obedience, but we are ‘communing’ with it. Some interesting historical insight may help us to better understand this aspect of sharing:

"In days gone by, monarchs feared that those around them would poison their drinks, so they employed the services of a cupbearer to sample the drink first. If it was poisoned, he died, sparing the king's life. If it was safe, he shared in its refreshing qualities and remained in the king's presence and confidence.

In the book of Genesis, Pharaoh's "chief butler" was actually the cupbearer (Genesis 40:20), a very influential position. Later, Nehemiah had that role as cupbearer to the king of Persia (Nehemiah 1:11). A cupbearer was frequently in the presence of the king, participating in whatever the king did.

The phrase "drinking of the cup" eventually symbolized sharing the consequences of what was in that cup. It also came to mean accepting what the king dealt out. The whole world drinks of Babylon's cup, full of the wine of her fornications and abominations (Revelation 17:4; 18:3). Since "drinking of the cup" means accepting whatever is appointed for one to experience—both good and bad, joyful or sorrowful—all who drink of Babylon's cup will share in her future.

In the Bible are numerous references to this cup of God's wrath and how Babylon and other nations will drink from it, symbolizing the divine punishments being inflicted (Revelation 14:10; 16:19; Psalm 11:6; Isaiah 51:17, etc.). Revelation 14:10, for example, speaks of drinking "of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation." Drinking of a cup means participating in whatever that cup contains.

Have we consciously rejected the cup of this world, of Babylon, in favor of the "cup of the Lord"? God will not mix the contents of these two cups; they are totally incompatible. We must choose one or the other. Paul says, "We cannot drink of the Lord's cup and of the cup of demons" (I Corinthians 10:21). We must totally reject this world, this Babylon, and that awful cup of the false church, full of her abominations and of the blood of the saints (Revelation 18:6).

If we have lived in this world—and we all have to some degree—we have sipped from that awful cup and have been affected by its contents. We must now unconditionally reject it, empty it, discard it and replace it totally in favor of the new cup of blessing from God.

According to tradition, when a young Hebrew man and woman were to be betrothed, the groom poured wine into his cup and invited the woman to drink of it. It was up to her. If she drank from it, she was considered betrothed to him. If she did not, no marriage would take place. Paul tells the church in II Corinthians 11:2: "For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." When the bride drank of the cup, she drank of the marriage covenant or contract, accepting it."  (Are You Drinking of the Master's Cup? - by Staff - Forerunner, March 1999)

From these excerpts, we gain great depth to our understanding of what it means to share in His cup. We see that drinking of His cup involves sharing in the consequences of, and participating in, whatever that cup contains. We see that drinking of His cup signifies our whole hearted and undivided allegiance to His Kingdom. And we see that drinking of His cup is an acknowledgement of our acceptance of His proposal to take us as His bride.

***

Much discussion is often given to the physical representatives of the body and blood, which are the bread and the wine. Some debate that the wine was really only juice, while others debate whether the bread must be unleavened.

Again we will go to the scriptures. The only reference, from each of the gospel accounts, that is made as to what was in the cup, are Jesus’ words following:

I say to you, I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it with you new and  of superior quality in My Father's kingdom.

 

So what did ‘fruit of the vine’ mean? Well, we know that it was certainly a reference to grapes. But was it fermented or unfermented? From this reference we cannot know for sure. What we do know from other portions of scripture is that it was common for fermented wine to be drunk in the culture of that day. Scripture clearly teaches us that it is not good to drink to excess or drunkenness, but there is nothing that speaks against casual cultural consumption, with the exception being the avoidance of placing a stumbling block before your brother:

Romans 14:20-21

20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.   KJV

 

Some scriptural references involving fermented wine include:

 Matthew 11:19

19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.  KJV

 

For clarification we read also the Amplified version:

19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking [with others], and they say, Behold, a glutton and a wine drinker, a friend of tax collectors and [especially wicked] sinners! Yet wisdom is justified and vindicated by what she does (her deeds) and by her children.   AMP

The phrase ‘wisdom is justified by what she does’ would seem to explain the exaggerations of Jesus’ accusers, yet, it would seem that although they are exaggerations, they are exaggerations of a truth. Meaning that, while he wasn’t gluttonous, he did eat, and though he was friendly with sinners, he was not friends with them in the terms of shared participation in their sinful lifestyle, and likewise, though he most certainly was not a ‘winebibber’ or a drunk, he most likely did drink fermented wine as was the cultural norm of the day.

An additional reference would be Paul’s admonition to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:23:

23 Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.   KJV

And a final reference would be Jesus’ first miracle:

John 2:3-10

3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.

4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.

6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.

7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.

8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.

9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.   KJV

 

Due to the context of this scripture, a celebratory wedding feast, we can be certain that this was fermented wine. The same original Greek word, oinos, is used in each of these passages and translated as wine.

So we know that it was not uncommon to consume fermented wine during that time period, yet this does not ascertain for us that it was fermented wine that was consumed at the original institution of the Lord’s Supper. As we discussed earlier, what we can be certain of is that, if it was of vital importance, the Lord most certainly would have made it clear in His Word. One could even argue that the ‘cup’ itself is referenced more than the contents of what was in the cup, and as we studied previously, this could be an important observation. It would appear that our Lord was indeed making the point and focus to be the communion and fellowship of the shared cup more than the significance and clarity of what was in it. 

That concludes the excerpts, but in addition to this, I would add that I have heard before of the idea that the culture of that day added wine to their water (or water to their wine) as a type of antiseptic to make the water safer to drink. Even though it is our belief that it was indeed fermented wine that was consumed at the Last Supper, we have chosen to utilize grape juice in our communion celebrations at this time instead, for the same reasons that others had mentioned previously. It is our belief that the significance and power of the event is much more present in the concept of the shared cup, the unity of the brethren, and the time of remembrance as opposed to the significance of what is in the cup. We actually just had communion last night in our home group. At the end of the meal the cup and bread were passed, we partook, and then we spent the rest of the meeting in 'remembrance'. It was a wonderful time that flowed very naturally as each shared and testified of our Saviors atoning work in their lives.

If you are interested in the complete paper, 'The Communion of the Lord's Supper', please let me know and I will email you a copy.   

-Brandon

[Brandon Steinke]

Didn't realize you could upload files, so here it is:

[David Huston]

Bro. Brandon, I notice that you "passed the cup." Does this mean that everyone drinks from the same container? Just wondering how you do it.

[Mike R. Prevost]

Hi Bro Brandon.  I'm interested to read your paper since it's a topic I also have put a lot of work into.  I have a couple of papers attached to this thread as well.  In "Wine in the Bible" I shed some light on the "fruit of the vine" comment at the Last Supper.  I don't think that it is a nebulous statement when put in the context of Passover.  To establish the context of the Passover meal, see the "Timing of the Lord's Supper" article that is also attached.

[Brandon Steinke]

Mike, I am very interested and will be sure to try to check out the papers you've written.

As for Bro. Dave's question, no we do not share the actual drinking cup, but rather pour into each's individual cup from a common container. In my mind this would be similar to the bread; we don't each take a bite of the bread as it is passed, but rather break a piece off and pass it on. The key, I believe is, as I had mentioned previously, that we share in what the cup symbolically contains; that we are all drinking the same drink.

It is one of the classic ironies, that an institution that the Lord intended as a vehicle of unity causes such disunity among believers. A sure sign of men who are full of themselves. (I do not mean that directed toward us participating in this discussion, but in a general sense.)  

[Donnie Gillum]

Bro. Brandon, What program is your article written in?  I tried to open it and it comes up in a bunch of little squares and "hieroglyphics". :-)

 

[Brandon Steinke]

Donnie Gillum said:

Bro. Brandon, What program is your article written in?  I tried to open it and it comes up in a bunch of little squares and "hieroglyphics". :-)

Yes, that's the way I wrote it, in hieroglyphics. I assumed you all would be able to read it. :)

Seriously, it was written in Word 2007. Has anyone else been able to open it? If not I will send you a copy.