According to my schooling and some internet research, I have discovered that there were two different kinds of wine during Biblical times, one was alcoholic the other was just grape juice though stated it was wine. Translators of the King James Version used the single word “wine” to translate several different Hebrew and Greek words throughout the Bible. Charles Wesley Ewing, in the book “The Bible and Its Wines” shows that English dictionaries from the early 1700’s defined wine as liquid from grapes, without attaching words like “fermented” to its definition. Though fermented wine was implied by some definitions, they were not the predominant usage at the time. Today’s culture has changed this understanding of wine to an alcoholic drink.
The Greek in the New Testament gives validity of two wines in the Bible. “Yayin” is a general use of the word wine in Hebrew, and “Oinos” is also a general term for wine in Greek. Stephen Reynolds, who wrote The Biblical Approach to Alcohol, demonstrates how oinos must also be able to refer to unfermented wine as well as fermented. According to Reynolds, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, uses” oinos” to translate “yayin” in Isaiah 16:10 and “tirosh” in Proverbs 3:10. Both of these passages refer to grape juice in the Old Testament.
The boiled wine in scriptures required water to be added to the resulting syrup, which seemed to have been a choice drink in ancient times. How popular was unfermented wine in the Jewish culture? The Mishna the oral Jewish teachings put into written form around A.D. 200, mentioned boiled wine as a common part of Jewish life. The attitude towards wine was favorable of the unfermented type.
There are many negative scriptures regarding the drinking of alcoholic wine:
Genesis 9:21- Noah’s drunkenness, Genesis 19 – Lots two daughters use wine to intoxicate their father, Proverbs 20:1 – calls alcoholic wine “a mocker” and “raging” by context. Proverbs 23:29-35 – gives a description of the wrong type of wine. In the New Testament Ephesians 5:18 - …And be not drunk with wine…..
There are also positive scriptures as well, but I will only list of couple of them:
Genesis 14:18 – Melchizedek bringing bread and wine to meet Abraham, I Corinthians commands believers to observe the Lord’s Supper with unleavened Bread and fruit of the vine. The fruit of the vine in the Lord’s Supper could NOT have had leaven or fermentation. According to the Old Testament Exodus 12:15 – no leaven was even allowed to be in one’s home, leaven is synonymous with yeast, the very substance which makes and exists in fermented wine. And the biggest misconception is when Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach….
When Paul said “Take a little wine for thy stomach sake” this was also unfermented wine. It was common in his day to put grape juice in water to kill water-borne bacteria, which caused stomach ailments such as Timothy’s. This is what Paul told Timothy to do. He was not telling Timothy that it was acceptable to drink wine.
Christ was part of the Levi house; he was a priest which is why he was baptized at the age of 30. The men in the house of Levi were baptized at the age of 30 before they began their ministries. Now Jesus turning water into wine, was probably the sweet wine, which the Bible talks about, but would have been made by fruit, something like grape juice and it would not have been the fermented type. Because if it was, Christ would have gone against everything that God had taught, and he would have gone against the law. This would have been disobedience to God, and Christ NEVER sinned. Since the marriage feast was probably family, and they were poor, (probably the reason why they ran out of wine) they couldn’t afford the fermented wine. So my understanding of this miracle is that YES Christ did turn water into wine, but again as I stated a few minutes ago, it was the sweet wine (“Sweet wine is that which has not yet worked or fermented.”) which was grape juice or some other form of fruit juice.
I found this VERY interesting since I never knew that there were two different kinds of wine. Now this makes total sense to me, as I just could NOT see how Christ would have made real wine out of water, though he could without a doubt, but again he would have sinned by doing so. I struggled for years trying to understand why Christ would have made fermented wine and given to his mother, his apostles, and the guests of the wedding. But now I can honestly say, this makes more sense, because I always felt in my heart that this couldn’t have been correct at least by today’s standards.
Also a note, the Bible does not look at drunkenness as a sickness; it looks at it as sin. When the Bible talks about the “sweet wine” never once does it mention that anyone got drunk off it, so obviously there were two kinds of wine in Biblical times? If there weren’t, the Bible would be contradicting itself by saying on the one hand, that drunkards will not see Heaven, and basically it’s a sin, and then saying take a little wine for thy stomach’s sake, and also showing that Jesus turning the water into wine.
Give me your thoughts; does this change anyone’s mind at looking at these scriptures?
The Greek in the New Testament gives validity of two wines in the Bible. “Yayin” is a general use of the word wine in Hebrew, and “Oinos” is also a general term for wine in Greek. Stephen Reynolds, who wrote The Biblical Approach to Alcohol, demonstrates how oinos must also be able to refer to unfermented wine as well as fermented. According to Reynolds, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, uses” oinos” to translate “yayin” in Isaiah 16:10 and “tirosh” in Proverbs 3:10. Both of these passages refer to grape juice in the Old Testament.
The boiled wine in scriptures required water to be added to the resulting syrup, which seemed to have been a choice drink in ancient times. How popular was unfermented wine in the Jewish culture? The Mishna the oral Jewish teachings put into written form around A.D. 200, mentioned boiled wine as a common part of Jewish life. The attitude towards wine was favorable of the unfermented type.
There are many negative scriptures regarding the drinking of alcoholic wine:
Genesis 9:21- Noah’s drunkenness, Genesis 19 – Lots two daughters use wine to intoxicate their father, Proverbs 20:1 – calls alcoholic wine “a mocker” and “raging” by context. Proverbs 23:29-35 – gives a description of the wrong type of wine. In the New Testament Ephesians 5:18 - …And be not drunk with wine…..
There are also positive scriptures as well, but I will only list of couple of them:
Genesis 14:18 – Melchizedek bringing bread and wine to meet Abraham, I Corinthians commands believers to observe the Lord’s Supper with unleavened Bread and fruit of the vine. The fruit of the vine in the Lord’s Supper could NOT have had leaven or fermentation. According to the Old Testament Exodus 12:15 – no leaven was even allowed to be in one’s home, leaven is synonymous with yeast, the very substance which makes and exists in fermented wine. And the biggest misconception is when Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach….
When Paul said “Take a little wine for thy stomach sake” this was also unfermented wine. It was common in his day to put grape juice in water to kill water-borne bacteria, which caused stomach ailments such as Timothy’s. This is what Paul told Timothy to do. He was not telling Timothy that it was acceptable to drink wine.
Christ was part of the Levi house; he was a priest which is why he was baptized at the age of 30. The men in the house of Levi were baptized at the age of 30 before they began their ministries. Now Jesus turning water into wine, was probably the sweet wine, which the Bible talks about, but would have been made by fruit, something like grape juice and it would not have been the fermented type. Because if it was, Christ would have gone against everything that God had taught, and he would have gone against the law. This would have been disobedience to God, and Christ NEVER sinned. Since the marriage feast was probably family, and they were poor, (probably the reason why they ran out of wine) they couldn’t afford the fermented wine. So my understanding of this miracle is that YES Christ did turn water into wine, but again as I stated a few minutes ago, it was the sweet wine (“Sweet wine is that which has not yet worked or fermented.”) which was grape juice or some other form of fruit juice.
I found this VERY interesting since I never knew that there were two different kinds of wine. Now this makes total sense to me, as I just could NOT see how Christ would have made real wine out of water, though he could without a doubt, but again he would have sinned by doing so. I struggled for years trying to understand why Christ would have made fermented wine and given to his mother, his apostles, and the guests of the wedding. But now I can honestly say, this makes more sense, because I always felt in my heart that this couldn’t have been correct at least by today’s standards.
Also a note, the Bible does not look at drunkenness as a sickness; it looks at it as sin. When the Bible talks about the “sweet wine” never once does it mention that anyone got drunk off it, so obviously there were two kinds of wine in Biblical times? If there weren’t, the Bible would be contradicting itself by saying on the one hand, that drunkards will not see Heaven, and basically it’s a sin, and then saying take a little wine for thy stomach’s sake, and also showing that Jesus turning the water into wine.
Give me your thoughts; does this change anyone’s mind at looking at these scriptures?