A continuation of my thoughts on communion wine. Spurred by Peter, who was spurred by Alistair.
Luke 22:14-20 only refers to the contents of the cup at one point - where Jesus calls it the “fruit of the vine”. Matthew 26:27-29 is the same in this regard - Jesus uses the words, “fruit of the vine”. To be strictly literal, this would imply that the drink Jesus is drinking may have been of any fruit which grows on the vine. However, I understand that we must be contextual. What did Jesus mean, as a Jewish Carpenter in Palestine in the 1st Century?
Alistair contends, “There is a world of difference between grape juice and wine.” However, there is some debate as to whether the ancients made the same distinction. There seems to be a lot of material indicating that the word translated “wine” was often used interchangably with freshly squeezed juice and fermented juice.
From this essay, we learn the following:
Wine almost always was mixed with water for drinking; undiluted wine (merum) was considered the habit of provincials and barbarians. The Romans usually mixed one part wine to two parts water (sometimes hot or even salted with sea water to cut some of the sweetness). The Greeks tended to dilute their wine with three or four parts water, which they always mixed by adding the wine.
I would guess that the residents of Palestine and Judea would have followed the Greek tradition more than the Roman. Diluted as it was would have brought the alcoholic content of the wine they drank down to 3-4%. Light beer, in our parlance.
In another more scholarly piece I read online, we read this:
Ginberg’s conclusion is confirmed by The Jewish Encyclopedia. In its article on “Jesus” it says: “According to the synoptic Gospels, it would appear that on the Thursday evening of the last week of his life Jesus with his disciples entered Jerusalem in order to eat the Passover meal with them in the sacred city; if so, the wafer and the wine of the mass or the communion service then instituted by him as a memorial would be the unleavened bread and the unfermented wine of the Seder service (see Bickell, Messe und Pascha, Leipsic, 1872).”64
John Kitto’s Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature also refers to the use of unfermented wine at the Passover meal: “The wine used would of course be unfermented, but it is not certain that it was always the fresh expressed juice or ‘pure blood of the grape’ (Deut 32:14); for the Mishnah states that the Jews were in the habit of using boiled wine. ‘They do not boil the wine of the heave-offering, because it diminishes it,’ and consequently thickens it, thus rendering the mingling of water with it when drunk necessary; but it is immediately added, ‘Rabbi Yehudah permits this, because it improves it’ (Teroomoth Perek, c. xi).”65
Boiled wine was a means of storing newly pressed grape juice, to prevent it from fermenting.
Thus, from the material I was able to survey, it appears that it is hard to tell whether the wine that Jesus served to the disciples at the Last Supper was necessarily the alcoholic wine we are more familiar with today. It may or may not have been.
Alistair also says, “Are we willing to sacrifice all of this biblical imagery associated with the Lord’s Supper on the altar of modern evangelical prejudices concerning alcoholic drink? We cannot exclude alcohol from the Lord’s Supper without losing much of the theological import of the celebration.” See, the funny thing is I have no prejudice against alcohol. I don’t mind the occasional glass myself. My dad drank beer all through my years growing up. Yet, I do not share his viewpoint that wine is, and has always been exclusively something that was served fermented. I also do not share his idea that wine is necessary as a relaxant. I don’t need wine to party, to act silly, or to celebrate. I don’t see what this has to do with Jesus instituting wine as the contents of the cup.
As I said above, the idea of the passover feast being a party seems to be a bit of a stretch. From the Jews that I know, the passover is a pretty somber occasion. The Son of God announcing he will be killed the next day would be a bit of a downer too. Why does this need to be a relaxing party again? He says, “The Lord’s Supper should be more of a joyous feast than a sombre occasion,” and he is right, but isn’t the question he started out asking is, “what was this event to Jesus?”
“I have yet to see someone explain how grape juice ‘makes the heart glad’ in the same way as wine does.“. This might be an instance of hyperbole? I know many people who are “angry” drunks or “sad” drunks. Their hearts aren’t made glad - what does this mean for that scripture?
“The real question is whether God accepts alcohol-free celebrations of the Supper.” Well, since God no longer demands any sacrifice from us but faith in the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ, what is the point? God is not accepting anything from us but our faith and on THAT BASIS ALONE are we justified.
Man… there is so much more to say about this subject. Feel free to vent your thoughts.