|
I. The Preservation of Wine
A. One of the assumptions that modernists, both Christian andnon-Christian, make is that the ancient world did not know how to preservegrape juice in order to prevent its fermentation. Therefore, it is reasoned,unfermented grape juice must have been very rare, and whenever the Biblerefers to wine it must be fermented wine--wine with an alcoholic content.This line of reasoning assumes only two states of grape juice--unfermentedand fermented. However, a third state of grape juice is spoiled, as insour, acidic, and moldy. Actually, the ancients found it as least as difficultto preserve grape juice in order to allow it to properly ferment as theydid to preserve it sweet and unfermented. Spoilage was the natural tendency,not fermentation.(1)
B. The process of fermentation is possible if conditions arejust right because of two ingredients within the grape--glucose (ie., naturalsugar) and albumen. Albumen is located within the lining of the grape'sskin and contains yeast, or ferments. If the temperature is maintainedwithin the moderate range and air is present, then the yeast within thealbumen is released and multiplies, unites with other yeast germs in theair, and these yeast germs "eat" the glucose in the juice. This processchemically breaks down the sugar into ethyl alcohol and carbon dioxide;the alcohol provides the intoxicating effect, and the carbon dioxide providesthe bubbles.(2) Historical references amongancient works illustrate the great difficulties they had in maintainingthe fermentation process without the wine going sour. The use of boiled-downgrape juice, salt, seawater, marble dust, lime, crushed iris, and solidpitch were among the ways the ancient world employed to keep the fermentedwine from going bad.(3)
C. An abundance of historical sources clearly shows that theancient world did, in fact, know how to preserve grape juice in order toprevent its fermentation into an alcoholic beverage. Since the fermentationprocess requires a moderate temperature and air, the ancients devised andpracticed the following four (4) principle ways to preserve grape juicein an unfermented state:
1. Boiling the juice down to a syrup. The boiling heat killedthe natural yeast germs; it also increased the sugar content of the juice.To drink grape juice preserved in this manner, water was added to dilutethe syrup back into the required consistency.(4)
2. Cold Storage. Ancients would pour fresh grape juice into acontainer and seal the entire container with pitch. Then the containerof fresh juice was placed in a cistern or pool of cool water in order tokeep its temperature at or below 40 degrees Farenheit. This cold storagemethod would also prevent the yeast germs from multiplying and chemicallyproducing alcohol.(5)
3. Filtration. By filtering the juice through strainers, theancients removed the albumen, separating it from the juice. In this way,there were no yeast germs with which the fermentation process could takeplace.(6)
4. Sulphur Fumigation. The ancients burned sulphur dioxide inthe empty space above the line of grape juice in jars. Sulphur dioxidethen absorbed the oxygen, which also prevented formation of live yeastgerms. The jars of juice would actually be sealed while the sulphur dioxidewas still burning in order ensure the absence of oxygen in the jars.(7)
II. The Meaning of Wine and Other Biblical Words
A. Another assumption of modernists is that the word "wine" inherentlymeans the fermented or alcoholic juice of the grape. In any language, themeanings of words tend to change through the centuries as people use themto mean something they did not mean before. This is referred to as theusage meaning of a word. In the English language, the word "wine" originallywas used to denote the juice of grapes, whether in a fermented or unfermentedstate. Long ago, of course, that word has taken on the usage meaning ofonly grape juice in its fermented state. That's why today we distinguishthe two drinks by using the terms "wine" and "grape juice." What has happened,even among professed Christians, is that many have assumed that the Hebrewand Greek words translated as "wine" must have the same meaning that themodern usage meaning of the English word "wine" does. Thus, it is assumedthat whenever the Bible speaks of wine or strong drink it must be referringto an alcoholic beverage. And because there are a number of Bible textswhich speak positively of the use of these drinks, people assume that theScriptures do not condemn the use of alcoholic beverages but just the abuseof them. Complicating this picture is the unfortunate fact that many Biblicalscholars and lexical authorities have made the same assumptions and havebeen sloppy in their research as to the linguistics and historical usagemeanings of the key words necessary to understand this subject accuratelyand honestly. Under this section, linguistic and historical evidence ispresented on all the original language words used in the Bible with whichthere is controversy about their meanings. And for the two most commonlyused original words, evidence will be presented concerning their usagein Scripture.
B. "Yayin." This is the most common Hebrew word used inthe Old Testament to denote wine, as it appears 141 times. According toseveral authorities, including Jewish and ancient Christian authors, "yayin"is a generic word for wine that can refer to grape juice in either itsfermented or unfermented state (just like the original meaning of the Englishword "wine").(8)
C. "Oinos." This is the most common Greek word used inthe New Testament to denote wine, appearing 32 times. According to severalauthorities, "oinos" is also a generic word for wine that can refer togrape juice in either its fermented or unfermented state.(9)
D. Although "yayin" and "oinos" are easily the most commonlyused words in the Bible to denote wine, there are a few other words whichare controversially interpreted. A brief summary of information follows:
1. "Shakar." This Hebrew word appears 23 times in the Old Testament.It is usually translated in the King James Version as "strong drink," butthe word is a common root in many different languages for the word "sugar."It was a sweet drink made from non-grape sources--either dates, other fruits,or even grains mixed with honey.(10) Sinceit contained a great deal of sugar, a "shakar" could ferment (since yeast"eats" sugar). At the same time, it could have been kept from fermenting,just as grape juice was often preserved. Almost all Biblical referencesto "shakar," however, are negative ones.
2. "Chemer" (or "Khemer"). This Hebrew word appears just 9 timesin the Old Testament. It is usually translated as "wine" (or "red wine;""pure"). It is from a root which means "to boil up." Thus, it may referto the foaming appearance of grape juice during fermentation or to thefoam of newly pressed grape juice.(11)In three of its nine appearances "chemer" is spoken of approvingly.(12)
3. "Tirosh." This Hebrew word appears 38 times in the Old Testament.It is translated by the King James Version as wine 26 times, as new wine11 times, and as sweet wine one time.(13)The precise meaning of the word is in question, with some authorities sayingit refers to the solid fruit (the grape itself), others to fresh grapejuice, and still other authorities maintain that "tirosh" can even sometimesrefer to fermented wine.(14) Actually,the word is obviously used in a generic sense because sometimes the Biblicalreference is to solid fruit (as in Micah 6:15) and sometimes it is definitelyto fresh grape juice (as in Isaiah 65:8). The use of words by ancient peoplesto refer to several things was not unusual. However, the position that"tirosh" can also refer to fermented grape juice is dependent upon a specificinterpretation of one single text--Hosea 4:11.
Hosea 4:11 reads as follows: "Whoredom and wine [yayin] and new wine[tirosh] take away the heart" (KJV). Some argue that new wine (tirosh)is really newly fermented wine in this passage. By the time of the Talmud(the Jewish commentary on the Old Testament), "tirosh" was being used todenote fermented wine. But it is highly unlikely that such was the casewhen Hosea wrote his book in the 8th century B.C. since scholars generallyrecognize the fact that in the Old Testament the word is associated withthe fresh natural product of the vine.(15)And indeed, the context in Hosea precludes any possibility of interpreting"tirosh" as fermented wine. First, the only thing that connects whoredom,wine, and new wine together is spiritual apostasy, which fits the contextof the entire book. Besides, fornication does not literally intoxicate;so these words do not have meanings parallel to each other. In Hosea 2:8,wine ("tirosh") was given to Hosea's wife (a symbol of Israel in the entirebook), who did not know it was a blessing from God; thus, she used it toworship Baal instead. This is interestingly paralleled by the prophecyof Deuteronomy 32:14-16, in which Israel's prosperity was used by her tospiritually fornicate. Since whoredom is not equal to "yayin," then "yayin"is not equal to "tirosh" either. The proper conclusion to be drawn fromthe context of Hosea is that Israel's idolatry (Baal, 2:8), spiritual drunkenness(represented by "yayin"), and even God's blessings of prosperity (representedby "tirosh") took her heart from God. The phrase "take away the heart,"then, does not refer to being intoxicated, but to a spiritual departurefrom God.
Therefore, it is clear that when "tirosh" does not refer to the actualsolid fruit of the vine, it always denotes sweet, unfermented grape juice.It is noteworthy that in 36 of the 38 occurrences in the Old Testament,the Septuagint (LXX--Greek translation of the Old Testament) translates"tirosh" with the Greek word "oinos." And "oinos" is usually the word theLXX translates from "yayin." This is further proof that both "yayin" and"oinos" indeed are sometimes used to denote unfermented grape juice.
4. The few remaining Hebrew words translated "wine" in the Old Testamenteither unquestionably refer to fresh grape juice (as does "asis") or thereare no positive language associated with them that would make them partof the controversy over whether alcoholic beverages are acceptable or not.
5. "Gleukos." Nearly all authorities agree that this Greek word,which occurs only once in the New Testament (Acts 2:13), means sweet, freshgrape juice.(16) That a few scholars attemptto see its use in Acts 2:13 as a reference to newly fermented wine is notwarranted (see section "V.A." for a discussion of that passage). In Job32:19, the LXX translates "yayin" with the word "gleukos." The contextthere makes "yayin" refer to fermented wine. Either the LXX mistranslated"yayin" in that text, or perhaps "gleukos" did not yet have the exclusivemeaning of fresh grape juice during the intertestamental period, when theLXX was translated. In any case, the Jewish historian Josephus is quiteemphatic that "gleukos" referred only to fresh grape juice.(17)
E. As already stated, "yayin" is the most commonly used Hebrewword in the Old Testament for wine. Since we have established that it hasa generic meaning, the immediate context must be the determining factorin a Biblical passage as to whether it is referring to a fermented or anunfermented wine. Because the Bible authors generally were not overly concernedabout defining the precise nuance of their words, the context often failsto provide conclusive evidence to make that determination. However, a carefulreading of the context of several of the 141 passages does make it abundantlyclear that the Biblical usage of "yayin" is consistent with the secularauthorities. In other words, "yayin" in the Bible does indeed sometimesrefer to fermented wine and sometimes to unfermented grape juice.
1. Fermented Wine. See Genesis 9:20-21; 19:32-33; I Samuel 25:36-37;II Samuel 13:28; Esther 1:10; Proverbs 20:1;
Isaiah 5:11-12; 28:7; Habakkuk 2:5; and Hosea 7:5.
2. Unfermented Grape Juice. See Genesis 49:11; Nehemiah 13:15;Song of Solomon 1:2, 4; 4:10 (compare the same author's condemnation of"yayin" in Proverbs 20:1; assuming he was consistent in his teaching, thisproves that "yayin" is used to denote both kinds of wine); Isaiah 16:10;Jeremiah 40:10-12; and Lamentations 2:12.
F. The same point made in "E" (immediately above) is valid forthe Greek word "oinos." Its 32 appearances in the New Testament are accompaniedby less contextual evidence as to whether fermented or unfermented wineis meant. Nevertheless, in harmony with the language authorities discussedabove, there is sufficient evidence in the New Testament usage of "oinos"to demonstrate its consistency with that secular testimony.
1. Fermented Wine. See Ephesians 5:18; Revelation 14:10; 16:19;and 17:1-2.
2. Unfermented Grape Juice. See Revelation 6:6. In symbolic languagea famine is described in that passage. Just as wheat and barley in thesame verse are natural products, so the oil and wine represent the naturalproducts of the olive and the vine. Fermented wine is not a natural product,but pure, fresh grape juice certainly is.
III. Old Testament Approval and Disapproval of Wine
As stated above, there does not exist a large number of New Testamentpassages in which the context is clear as to the meaning of the wine. Thereare a few passages there that do recommend wine ("oinos"), directly orindirectly. Several of these are discussed in sections 1V and V below.Since the Old Testament provides the greater portion by far of the "wine"texts in the Bible, this section will demonstrate that it both approvesand disapproves of wine. A resolution of this apparent problem is providedafter the various lists are given.
A. Wine is approved. In Numbers 18:12-27 and Deuteronomy12:17-18 and 14:23, wine ("tirosh") is part of the tithe that the peopleare permitted to drink before the Lord. Evidence provided above establishedthat "tirosh" refers to the natural product of the grape, and the contextin these passages here do not conflict with that linguistic conclusion.
The following passages use "yayin" to denote the drink offering or libationwhich the priests poured on the burning sacrifice as a sweet aroma to theLord: Exodus 29:40; Leviticus 23:13; Numbers 15:5, 7, 10; 28:14; Deuteronomy32:38; I Chronicles 9:29; and Hosea 9:4 and 14:7. Since the wine ("tirosh")used as tithe and drunk by the people was unfermented grape juice, therewould be no reason to assume that the "yayin" used for the drink offeringswas not unfermented also. Leviticus 2:11 forbids the use and burning ofleaven. Yeast is a leaven, and thus the fermentation process is a leaveningprocess. The animals, flour, and oil also used for various offerings wereall natural products. And fermented wine is not a natural product. Therefore,the "yayin" of all drink offerings must also have been unfermented grapejuice.
The following non-sanctuary texts alluding to wine all approve of itsuse by God's people: Genesis 27:28 ("tirosh"); 49:10-11 ("yayin"); Deuteronomy7:9-13 ("tirosh"); 11:13-14 ("tirosh"); 33:28 ("tirosh"); Judges 9:13 ("tirosh");Psalm 4:7 ("tirosh"); 104:14-15 ("yayin"); Song of Solomon 5:1 ("yayin");Isaiah 55:1 ("yayin"); 65:8 ("tirosh"); Jeremiah 31:10-12 ("tirosh"); Hosea2:8 ("tirosh"); Joel 2:18-19 ("tirosh"); and Amos 9:13-14 (1st word = "asis;"2nd word = "yayin").
Sometimes people argue that God permitted His people to drink alcoholicbeverages during times of ignorance, but since modern man knows the scientificfacts about the effects of alcohol we should abstain from it today. Therecertainly is a Biblical principle that God sometimes permits behavior thatHe does not really endorse. However, that argument cannot be used in thiscase. Besides the fact that some of the "yayin" texts cited above informus that God instructed its use in drink offerings, the following11 of the 15 non-sanctuary references to wine cited above show not divineconcessionbut an absolutely positive commandmentof divineblessingassociated with wine: Genesis 27:28 ("tirosh"); Deuteronomy 7:9-13 ("tirosh");11:14 ("tirosh"); 33:28 ("tirosh"); Psalm 104:14-15 ("yayin"); Isaiah 55:1("yayin"); 65:8 ("tirosh"); Jeremiah 31:10-12 ("tirosh"); Hosea 2:8 ("tirosh");Joel 2:18-19 ("tirosh"); and Amos 9:13-14 ("yayin").
B. Wine is disapproved. The following Old Testament textsshow God's disapproval of wine, as "yayin:" Genesis 9:21; 19:32; Leviticus10:9-11; Deuteronomy 32:33; Psalm 60:3; Proverbs 4:17; 20:1; 23:20, 29-35;31:4-5; Isaiah 5:11-12; 28:7; Ezekiel 44:21; and Hosea 7:5.
People often argue that the Bible only condemns the abuse of alcohol,not the use of it per se. But that is clearly not the case because thefollowing 3 of the above 13 references to "yayin"clearly identifywineitselfasanevilthatiscondemned:
1. Leviticus 10:9-11--The context in the preceding verses ofthis chapter is the story of Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron's sons, whoobtained fire from a source other than the altar of burnt offering andoffered it to the Lord in the sanctuary. It is obvious from vv. 9-11 thatalcohol affected their judgment and led to their careless disregard ofGod's instructions. Therefore, God told Aaron that the priests were notto touch alcohol in order that they may make a difference between holyand unholy and clean and unclean, and that they may properly teach God'slaw. Some argue that this prohibition of alcohol only applies to priests,pastors, and rabbis, and only when they go into the house of the Lord.However, that argument says too much by saying, in effect, that it is alrightfor church leaders to impair their judgment as long as they do so whenthey are not going to be immediately officiating in the church. Thus, thislogic would allow Bible teachers and leaders to conduct religious seminarsand Bible studies in private homes and non-church buildings after justhaving indulged in some alcoholic beverage. But the distinction betweenholy and unholy or clean and unclean is obviously important outside theworship building context because all of God's people are called to be holy.God used this particular occasion to command the abstinence of alcoholby His priests. But that fact doesn't mean that it only applies to themand only under special circumstances at that. It is not logical to concludethat whatever behavior God prohibits for some He automatically approvesin others. Although directed to the priests because of the event whichhad just occurred, God is clearly establishing the principle that alcohol(its use, not just abuse--He forbid it altogether, remember) impairs spiritualjudgment (at least) so that people cannot know right from wrong and therefore,they have a strong tendency to disobey Him when they drink it at all. Andthis principle clearly applies to everyone, leaders and followers alike.
2. Proverbs 20:1--First, note that Solomon, the wisest man whoever lived, wrote this book. Then notice that he declares wine itself--notthe person who drank too much--to be "a mocker," "strong drink" as "raging,"and both as a source of deception. This context obviously makes the referencesto "wine" and "strong drink" to be alcoholic beverages. In other words,it is alcohol's very nature that is condemned by the Lord through Solomon.That means its use, not merely abuse, is condemned.
3. Proverbs 23:31-35--Again, the very nature of fermented wineis categorically condemned as a "serpent" and an "adder" that bites andstings. While verse 30 refers to those who "tarry long at the wine," verse31 commands us not to even look at it in its fermented, or alcoholic, state.
C. This section examined Old Testament passages about the approvaland disapproval of wine because the New Testament does not provide sufficientcontext to easily discern God's will on this matter. Sections IV and Vdiscuss several New Testament passages which are used by many Christiansto justify moderate drinking. But it is only the Old Testament that providesus with both a set of superficially contradicting statements on alcoholand the resolution to that apparent contradiction. And in that resolutionis found the Bible's teaching about whether God's people should or maydrink fermented wine or other alcoholic drinks. It is very significantthat, with only one exception, there is no text which the context clearlyproves is discussing alcoholic beverages in which the Scriptures speakpositively, approvingly, or commandingly. But there are dozens of textswhich the context clearly proves are discussing unfermented wine, or grapejuice, in which the Scriptures speak positively, approvingly, or even commandingly.Every student of the Bible knows that one should interpret the uncleartexts by the light of the clear texts. Therefore, although the contextsof many "wine" and related texts do not provide conclusive contextual evidenceof the precise nature of the drink, the several that do provide such clearevidence gives the objective Bible student sufficient data by which todraw an accurate conclusion. And that conclusion must be that the Biblecondemns the use itself of all alcoholic beverages and highly recommendsunfermented grape juice!
The only exception to this consistent rule in Scripture is Proverbs31: 6-7, which commands that alcoholic beverages be given to those whoare dying. Verses 4-5 had just stated that wine and strong drink shouldnot be touched by kings and princes. Therefore, verses 6-7 is a contrastto show who only is permitted to drink alcoholic drinks--namely,those who are dying and in great pain. (By the way, to anyone who believesthat the very last part of verse 6 means that the depressed should drinkalcohol, remember that even modern, secular science has classified alcoholas a depressant. Giving a depressed person alcohol is very bad advice becauseit will only aggravate his depression. And by faith, how can a Christiansay that the Bible gives bad advice?) In Biblical times, alcohol and certainherbal narcotics were the only pain medications for the very ill and dying.In lieu of modern pain medications, a prescription of alcohol to one whois dying is hardly a striking endorsement of even moderate, social drinking.Actually, the fact that this passage of Scripture uses contrast to statethat only the dying and those in severe pain should drink an alcoholicbeverage makes it a fourth clear Biblical passage that forbids the veryuse of alcohol in any normal type of circumstance.
IV. Jesus and Wine
Most Christians do not read or study the Old Testament references towine. Nor do they have readily available to them accurate historical referenceswhich could assist them in reaching the accurate conclusions. It is theNew Testament that is most often quoted in alleged support of the viewthat it is alright to drink alcoholic beverages as long as you do not getdrunk. As we look at the five most quoted passages about Jesus and wine,please remember a few important facts already established in this paper:(1) "oinos," the Greek word for wine, is a generic word that applies toboth fermented and unfermented wine; (2) the context must therefore bethe key to correctly understanding the meaning of the New Testament passages;and (3) since the Old Testament established the principle of abstinence,the burden of proof that the New Testament approves and/or commands theuse of alcoholic wine is upon those who allege that it does.
A. John 2:1-10--This passage contains the story of Jesus'first miracle--the turning of water into wine. Here it is alleged thatJesusmade wine; therefore, Christians may certainly drink it in moderation.The following assumptions are made by those who use this text to justifymoderate drinking: (1) that "oinos" means fermented wine; (2) that thebest wine is always fermented wine; and (3) that the words "well drunk"indicate that it was fermented wine. As already demonstrated earlier, "oinos"is a generic word that was used to describe both fermented and unfermentedwine. As to the best wine, ancient secular sources give ample evidencethat unfermented wine was considered the best wine by the ancients.(18)And the word used twice in v. 10 for "good" wine is a Greek word whichrefers to something or someone morally excellent or intrinsically goodrather than the normal word for "good." This confirms the historical testimonythat the best wine was unfermented grape juice. While the Greek for "welldrunk" usually was used to describe the effects of intoxicating beverages,it also was occasionally used to simply describe the concept of "satiation"--ofeating or drinking freely.(19) In otherwords, in John 2, it could simply be a reference to the fact that a lotof wine was drunk, without identifying the nature of that wine. That thewords "well drunk" must have this latter meaning is demonstrated by twosound reasonings: (1) if the wine possessed an alcoholic content, thenthe taste buds of the guests would have been dulled, and they could nothave clearly tasted Jesus' wine in order to identify it as the best; and(2) if Jesus made fermented wine, then the fact that the guests had become"well drunk" would have meant that Jesus endorsed excessive drinking. Therefore,either Jesus endorsed excessive drinking of alcohol or the wine was unfermentedgrape juice! Obviously, then, the wine that Jesus made was unfermentedgrape juice.
B. Matthew 9:17; Mark 2:22; and Luke 5:37-38--The contextof these passages shows that Jesus and His disciples are eating with agroup of "publicans and sinners." (Note that the "sat" of Matthew 9:10introduces the meal context, which is not over until the "arose" of verse19.) During this meal, He is questioned about why he eats with sinnersand doesn't fast more often. In part of His reply, Jesus gives a briefillustration about people not putting "new wine" ("oinos neos") into oldwineskins. Those who argue for the moderate use of alcohol allege thatthe new wine is a reference to newly fermented wine. Thus, they allegethat Jesus commended wine. However, that cannot be the correct conclusionbecause no wineskin can withstand the pressure created from the fermentation-producedgas.(20) Old skins would contain yeastparticles from part of the grape, so that even grape juice would eventuallybe triggered into fermenting and burst the old skin. Therefore, only unfermentedwine could be safely stored in new skins, and the "new wine" in these passagescould not refer to newly fermented wine. In its Biblical context, Jesuswas using old wineskins to represent the Pharisees and new wine to representHis own gospel. And He was saying that the Pharisees cannot accept thegospel, but they would ferment it and destroy it. In a figurative way,Jesus was thereby saying that fermentation ruins good wine, making thesepassages an indirect criticism of alcoholic beverages.
C. Luke 5:39--This text in Luke is the last part of Jesus'comments reviewed in "B" (just above), in which Jesus states the following:"No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith,The old is better." The proponents of the moderate use of alcohol agreethat the old wine is fermented wine and the "new" is unfermented. Thenthey conclude that Jesus again commends wine by His statement ofthe obvious--that old (ie., fermented) wine is better. The interestingthing about this argument is the inconsistency in their interpretationof "new wine," for in verses 38-39 (the very same context) they maintainthat "new wine" is newly fermented wine but here in verse 39 they acknowledgethat the "new" is unfermented. Regardless of their inconsistency, the pointis not that Jesus Himself believed the old (ie., fermented) wine was better,but that the person who is used to the fermented wine does not immediatelydesire grape juice. But again, in the context, Jesus uses His referencesto the different wines to illustrate a spiritual truth--that old religionseems better to those who are used to it. (That's why they are hostileto new truths.)
D. Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:34--In these passages, Jesus'critics compare Him unfavorably with John the Baptist by declaring thatJohn neither eats bread nor drinks wine, while Jesus eats and drinks. Infact, Jesus is accused of being both "gluttonous" and a "winebibber." Modernadvocates of moderate drinking teach that this proves that Jesus Himselfdrank fermented wine. There was certainly a grain of truth in whatJesus' critics said in that He and John the Baptist lived totally differentlifestyles. John ate primitively and alone in the wilderness while Jesusate socially with the people. John's specific mission was to preach repentanceand reformation by rebuking the excesses of his day; his simpler, wildernesslifestyle provided a good context for such a mission. Jesus' primary missionin His ministry was to bring the good news of the gospel directly to thepeople; to do this, He had to mingle freely with them, including the worstof sinners at times. As a Nazarite (see Numbers 6:1-4), John abstainedfrom all products of the vine, including wine in any state and the grapesthemselves. Jesus was not a Nazarite. And remember that it was Jesus' criticswho accused Him of being a drunkard. That doesn't mean He drank fermentedwine any more than His eating bread made Him a glutton.
E. Matthew 26:27-29; Mark 14:23-25; and Luke 22:18, 20--Theseare the passages which record the events of the Last Supper. There Jesusinstituted the ordinance of communion as the Christian replacement forthe Passover, part of which involves the drinking of the cup. Despite thefact that the word for "wine" is not even present in any of these passages,those who favor the moderate use of alcohol declare that through this serviceJesuscommanded His followers to drink fermented wine. Actually, Jesus isconsistently recorded as having called the content of the communion cupthe "fruit of the vine." According to the usage of Josephus, a first centuryJewish historian, the "fruit of the vine" refers to fresh grape juice;Josephus also calls it "gleukos" (see "II D 5" above), which was anotherterm for unfermented wine.(21) In additionto the testimony of Josephus, the very expression "fruit of the vine" suggestsa natural product of the vine, which the fermented wine is not. Jewishrabbinical testimony about whether the Passover wine was fermented or unfermentedis conflicting and inconclusive because both views on the nature of thatwine were held among ancient Jewish scholars.(22)Since the Scriptures should be the final authority for Christians, andJesus, not any group of Jewish rabbis, is to be our Example, we must letScripture speak for itself. Exodus 12:15 and 13:7 forbid the very presenceof "leaven" anywhere in the homes during Passover. The New Testament--inMatthew 16:12 and ICorinthians 5:7-8--provide the explanation by declaringthat leaven is a symbol of evil. Leaven is a yeast, so the leavening processis parallel to the process of fermentation. In the light of these facts,plus Jesus' statement in the disputed passages that the "fruit of the vine"represented His own saving blood, we must surely conclude that the communioncup did, and should always, contain unfermented (ie., uncorrupted) grapejuice.
V. The Apostles and Wine
There are a number of New Testament references to wine made after thedeath, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. Several of these are misinterpretedby advocates of moderate drinking as at least condoning such a use of alcoholicwine. In this section, the six most common such passages are examined.The data already given in this paper will help the reader to avoid misleadingconclusions and to allow the words in their own context to provide theanswers to the question at hand. If we do this, we find that the Scripturesare remarkably consistent and a reliable guide as to the consumption ofalcohol by the believer, as well as on other subjects.
A. Acts 2:13--This passage is part of the record in thechapter concerning the Day of Pentecost in Jerusalem, shortly after theascension of Jesus to heaven. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit on thatday gave the apostles the gift of tongues in order for them to instantaneouslyspeak an unlearned language to the many foreign visitors who came to Jerusalemfor that occasion. In the middle of this speaking in tongues, critics interruptedand mocked the speakers, saying that "These men are full of new wine."The Greek word there is "gleukos," which we already demonstrated was universallyacknowledged by ancient authorities to refer only to fresh, grape juice(See II D 5 of this paper). The use of "gleukos" rather than "oinos" illustratesthe "mocking" attitude of these critics in that they mockingly or laughinglyalleged that the apostles were drunk on grape juice. The fact that Peterresponded in v. 15 by declaring that it was too early in the day for peopleto get drunk is taken by advocates of moderate drinking to prove that Christiansmust have at least touched alcohol (or else Peter would have denied theyever drank it in any amount). Actually, Peter responded in much the sameway as we would when someone accuses us of something obviously ridiculousor impossible. Furthermore, if he had denied that they drank "gleukos,"that would have meant that Christians never drank fresh grape juice, whichcertainly would not have been true. Indirectly, the fact that the mockersreferred to "gleukos" as the supposed source of intoxication suggests thatthey knew the apostles never touched fermented wine!
B. Romans 14:21--In this verse the apostle Paul declaresthat "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine ["oinos"], norany thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."(KJV). The argument used by the proponents of moderate drinking is thatsince v. 20 states that "All things are pure," Paul is only telling Christiansnot to eat or drink certain things in the company of weaker brethern. Otherwise,the believer can eat or drink whatever he desires (presumably as long ashe does not become a glutton or a drunkard). Since it is assumed that unfermentedgrape juice would never offend anyone, then Paul must be referring to fermentedwine. Bible scholars have long debated the exact problem that the apostlewas addressing in Romans 14. Many have suggested that the association of"days" (vv. 5-6) in the same context of food and drink indicates that thechurch at Rome contained some who advocated certain specific days for fasting.Others have suggested a possible connection to the influence of the EsseneJewish community, which held certain taboos and lived an ascetic (or spartan)lifestyle--thus, the reference to vegetarianism and a probable abstinencefrom all grape products (the latter like the Nazarites).
It may be forever impossible to determine the exact nature of the dispute,but one thing is certain: verse 1's reference to "doubtful disputations"(ie., people's own opinions) means that the controversy that Paul was addressinghad nothing to do with the prohibitions or other teachings of Scripture.Therefore, v. 20's statement that "All things are pure" cannot accuratelybe used to negate the Old Testament teaching about "unclean" foods. (Besides,the Greek word for "unclean" in Romans 14 is a different word with a differentmeaning from the Greek word translated from the Hebrew in the Septuagintof Leviticus 11.) Neither, therefore, can it negate the Old Testament teachingon alcohol. In another place (ICorinthians 6:12), the apostle Paul declaredthat "All things are lawful" just after he had listed several detestable,sinful practices. Obviously, "all" must be defined by the context; herein Romans 14, the statement that "All things are pure" means that amongthose practices in dispute at the church in Rome, no one was teaching orpracticing anything that was intrinsically wrong or sinful, but that certainpractices were wrong if done in a context which might offend or furtherweaken an already weak brother (or sister) in the church. Whether the "weak"brethern in Rome were advocating vegetarianism and total abstinence fromgrape products or abstinence from certain foods and drinks on specificfast days, Paul was counseling the stronger brethern not to argue withthem or offend them by their actions which would otherwise be consistentwith Scripture. Therefore, Romans 14:21 cannot be used to infer that thereis nothing inherently wrong about drinking alcoholic beverages under ordinarycircumstances.
C. I Corinthians 11:21--The King James Version of thisverse states that some believers in Corinth were sometimes "drunken" wheneating and drinking with other believers in the church. Advocates of moderatedrinking see this as evidence that alcoholic beverages were even servedat church fellowship meals, and that what was wrong was that some actuallybecame intoxicated. The context in this chapter strongly implies that thereference to a meal at church was an Agape, or Love, Feast eaten in connectionwith the Lord's Supper. This, then, is taken to mean by some scholars thatfermented wine was used in the communion service of the early church.
The Greek word translated "is drunken" by the King James Version is"methuo," a word which sometimes simply means "satiation" or "fully satisfied"(as in John 2). The use of the word for "hungry" in the same connectionwith "is drunken" ("one is hungry, and another is drunken") makes the meaningof "satiation" mandatory here. (Two persons or groups of persons comparedor contrasted with each other would not be indicated with "hungry" versus"drunken." Rather, this would be shown with the words "hungry" versus "gluttoness"or "sober" versus "drunken.") Thus, the meaning of "methuo" in this contextmust refer to those who were selfishly being gluttoness while other churchmembers had not even eaten. (Note v. 22's reference to "shame them thathave not".) The problem was selfishness in eating; the reference is tothe food at the Love Feast and not to drink of any kind at all. Therefore,there is no evidence in this passage that Christians drank alcoholic beveragesduring ordinary meals or in the Lord's Supper.
D. Ephesians 5:18--This passage contrasts two statementsin its command--"be not drunk with wine" versus "be filled with the Spirit."Those who favor the moderate use of alcoholic beverages claim that theemphasis is on the word "drunk" rather than "wine," and that therefore,the abuse rather than the use of fermented wine is here condemned by theapostle. Otherwise, they maintain, Paul would have said something like,"Drink no wine at all."
Actually, the above interpretation cannot be the correct one becausethe verse clearly does not contrast moderation with excessive drinking,but the fullness of wine with the fullness of the Holy Spirit. This contrastplaces the emphasis of the verse on wine and the Holy Spirit as sourcesfor the very different fillings. And since you obviously have no room foranything else if you are "filled" with the Holy Spirit, then fermentedwine is in fact prohibited by this verse. Critics argue that the relativepronoun (translated as "wherein" by the KJV) really points back to "benot drunk with wine," with the emphasis on "drunk." The Greek constructionhere would allow for the antecedent of "wherein" to be either "drunk" or"wine," but the positioning of the word "wine" between "drunk" and "wherein"(in the Greek as well as the KJV) strongly suggests that the intent ofthe writer was to make "wine" the antecedent of "wherein." This is alsomore consistent with the apostle's obvious focus on the contrast betweenthe two sources of fillings. The word translated "excess" literally means"unsavableness," which, according to the text, is the result of being filledwith wine. Indeed the structure of the entire text adds further proof tothe thesis that the author really condemns wine (obviously fermented winein this context) as the source of placing one in a potentially unsavablecondition:
Statement: "And be not drunk with wine,"
Result: "wherein is excess; (ie., "unsavableness")
Contrasting Statement: "but be filled with the Spirit;"
Contrasting Result: "psalms," "hymns," "spiritual songs," "thanks,"etc. (See vv. 19- 20).
One Bible scholar has paraphrased Ephesians 5:18-19 in the followingaccurate manner:
" 'Do not get drunk with wine, because the use of wine places a personin a state of asotia [literally, "unsavableness"], that is, of moralcorruption inimical to the reception of saving truth. Instead, be filledwith the Spirit. Find enjoyment not in the stimulation of wine but in theinspiration of the Spirit who causes you to sing and make music in yourheart to the Lord.'"(23)
E. I Timothy 3:8--This passage states that church deaconsmust be "not given to much wine." Those who allege that the Bible permitsChristians to indulge moderately in alcoholic beverages emphasize thatsince the apostle Paul said "much wine," he must have meant that only anexcess of fermented wine was prohibited.
In verse 3 of the same chapter, the apostle admonished bishops to be"not given to wine" at all; the Greek there literally means "not near wine."Then in verse 8, the author begins with the word "Likewise," implying thatthe advice he is about to give to deacons is in essence the same as alreadygiven to bishops. That would suggest that deacons should not touch fermentedwine either. It is also interesting to note that the same author in thesame book (chapter 5, verse 23) urged Timothy to take a "little" wine forhis stomach's sake,etc., obviously prescribing it for a limited medicinal use and not forpleasure. (See "F" below for a complete discussion of that text and thenature of the wine there.) Thirdly, what is wrong in excess is not necessarilyright in moderation. For example, IPeter 4:4 says that believers no longerrun to "excess of riot" (KJV) as the heathen do; that doesn't mean thatbelievers riot moderately! What is even more interesting is that threeverses later (IPeter 4:7) believers are urged to "watch"--from a Greekword whose primary meaning is to "abstain from wine." Thus, the "excessof wine" (IPeter 4:3) is not all that is condemned by that chapter. Therefore,in ITimothy 3:8, the apostle Paul is simply saying that deacons shouldnot be drinkers of fermented wine. (That does not mean that only churchleaders should abstain while other believers may indulge in moderation,for otherwise, in context, the passage would be giving them permissionto be frivolous, double-tongued, and greedy of filthy lucre.)
F. I Timothy 5:23--In this passage, the apostle Paul encouragesTimothy to "use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities."Evidently, Timothy suffered repeatedly from some type of intestinal problems.When the apostle said just before that Timothy should "Drink no longerwater" (also v. 23), he obviously meant not only water, implyingthat Timothy had avoided all products of the grape like the Nazarites did.In any case, the text makes it clear that the wine advocated by Paul was"a little" and for medicinal purposes, not pleasure. (Note the same contextin Proverbs 31:6-7, discussed in III C above.) Even the verb "use" is fullyconsistent with prescription language. The testimony of historical sourcesis that, while fermented wine was sometimes used, unfermented wine waspreferred for stomach ailments by the ancients.(24)Even if fermented wine were meant by Paul in I Timothy 5:23, it was formedicinal purposes only and explicitly given just to Timothy. The immediatecontext here suggests that probably unfermented grape juice is the subject,but in any case, this text clearly cannot be used to justify moderate socialdrinking.
VI. Summary
1. The assumption is usually made by proponents of the moderate useof alcoholic beverages that the ancient peoples did not know how to preservethe juice of the grape in an unfermented state, and that therefore, virtuallyevery instance of wine mentioned in the Bible must be to fermented wine.This assumption is totally false as the ancient historical records areabundantly clear that there were several major methods of preserving grapejuice in its natural, unfermented state.
2. Most modern Christians assume that the very words translated as "wine"or "strong drink" in the Bible must have the same meaning they have tomodern users of the English language. Such an assumption ignores the obviousfact that many words in nearly all languages change in usage meaning throughthe centuries. Even in the English language, the word "wine" originallyreferred to any drink from the vine, whether fermented or unfermented.
3. The most common words by far used in Scripture to refer to wine are"yayin" (Hebrew Old Testament) and "oinos" (Greek New Testament). Bothsecular sources and the Bible itself (in context) make it very clear thatthey were each generic words used to describe the juice of the grape inboth its fermented and unfermented state. The immediate context, if sufficientlyclear (and it often is not), is the determining factor in interpretingthese words as referring to fermented or unfermented wine.
4. There are definitely a sufficient number of times in Scripture inwhich the immediate contextdoes make clear which form of wine ismeant that a consistent pattern exists. Never in Scripture when the contextmakes it clear that fermented wine is the subject does that Scripture speakapprovingly or commendingly of that wine, with the exception of Proverbs31:6-7, which was for medicinal purposes to the dying who were in greatpain (and remember the lack of modern pain medications). And when the contextis clearly referring to unfermented wine, the Scripture always speaks ofit in an approving manner; in fact, unfermented wine was used as a symbolof God's blessing to His people in the Old Testament. This pattern establishesthe Bible teaching on wine, and by extension, its teaching on all alcoholicbeverages. And that teaching is that fermented wine is prohibited to thosewho believe in the true God.
5. Most modern Christians argue that the Bible only condemns the abuse,not the use, of alcoholic drinks. The Bible is not a systematic theologytextbook; it usually does not attempt to prove its teachings. But the carefulstudent will note that in a few key places, the Scriptures clearly teachthat the very nature of alcoholic beverages is that which brings spiritualapostasy and otherwise affects the mind (and body too) of whomever drinksit. In other words, it is not excessive drinking only that the Bible condemns,but the beverage itself and its consumption in any amount.
6. Many modern conservative Christians maintain total abstinence fromintoxicating beverages on the basis that we know from medical science thedangers and subtle negative effects on our health or mental alertness ofeven the moderate use of alcohol. Their view is that God excused the ignoranceof His people in Biblical times and allowed them to drink alcoholic beveragesthen. While such a position comes to the right conclusion about the presentbehavior in this area expected from a Christian today, it is based on asuperficial study of the Bible. Many times in the Old Testament, God spokenot the language of divine concession but of divine commending and commandingof wine as a positive blessing from Him designed to be enjoyed. The accurateinterpretation comes when one realizes that some of the same words translated"wine" or "strong drink" there were generic words that could also be usedto describe grape juice in its natural, unfermented state. Although evenmost Bible scholars are in error on this matter, a deeper study of thelexical evidence reveals this to be an obvious fact.
(It always amazes sincere Christians that Bible scholars could be inerror, but the truth is that we are all human, and there is a human tendencyin all of us that gives us a bias in a given area. The problem is thatmany, even among theologians, do not work to identify their built-in assumptionsand/or do not analyze them in the light of Scripture and other sourcesto see if they are really valid. And no matter who you are, if you beginyour theological study from one or more false assumptions, all the otherevidence in the world will not correct your final conclusion of the matter;you are bound to end up with the wrong answer. So it really isn't thatdifficult to understand how even brilliant minds are sometimes wrong abouttheological matters.)
7. Since most Christians do not study the Old Testament today--a shamebecause it is so rich in revealing the character of man and God--they superficiallylook at New Testament passages which seem to justify their moderate drinkinghabit. But a careful examination of the statements of Jesus and His apostlesreveals that none of them sanction even the moderate use of alcoholic beverages.
8. Although it is abundantly clear that the Bible condemns the use ofalcohol in any amounts, it is only that clear to those who dig deeply forits truths. However, when all that is said and done, how in God's name(literal use intended) can modern Christians justify the touching of suchbeverages? Romans 12:1-2, and many other New Testament passages, make itclear that believers are in a life-and-death struggle for our eternal destiny.And that struggle is centered in the mind. Medical science is unmistakablein its acknowledgment that the first place in the brain affected by evensmall amounts of alcohol is the frontal lobe area. And that is known tobe the center of judgment and the will in human beings. It should go withoutsaying that a Christian should never touch any substance that even in smallamounts begins to break down the moral inhibitions even though it may notbe obvious to the external observer! Let God be every man's judge, butit is difficult not to conclude that even many professed Christians aresimply rationalizing what they want to do regardless of the facts or theconsequences to their spiritual, or physical, natures. May God have mercyon their souls!
ENDNOTES
1. Pliny, Natural History 14, 26. See also Bacchiocchi, Samuele,Winein the Bible, Biblical Perspective, 1989, pp. 110-114, 127.
2. Albion Roy King, Basic Information on Alcohol (Washington,D.C., 1964), pp. 22-24. See also Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible(Berrien Springs, Michigan, 1989), p. 115.
3. Columella, On Agriculture 12, 20, 1; 12, 19, 3; 12, 20, 5-6;12, 25, 1; 12, 25, 4; 12, 23, 2-3. See also Marcus Cato, On Agriculture148, 23, 107, 109-110 trans. William Davis Hooper, The Loeb ClassicalLibrary (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1960). Also Samuele Bacchiocchi,Winein the Bible (Berrien Springs, Michigan, 1989), pp. 110-114.
4. Virgil, Georgics 1, 295-296; Columella, On Agriculture,12, 20, 8, 12, 26, 1; Athenaeus,Banquet 1, 25; John Kitto, Cyclopediaof Biblical Literature, 1845 ed., s.v. "Passover," vol 2, p. 477.
5. Columella, On Agriculture 12, 29; 12, 30, 1; Pliny, NaturalHistory 14,11; Marcus Cato, On Agriculture 120, 1, trans. WilliamDavis Hooper, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Massachusetts,1960).
6. Pliny, Natural History 23, 24; 14, 28; Plutarch, Symposiacs8, 7.
7. John Kitto, Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, 1845 ed., s.v."Wine," vol 2, p. 956.
8. William Patton, Bible Wines or Laws of Fermentation and Winesof the Ancients (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, n.d., originally publishedin 1871), pp. 56-57. Patton cites John Kitto's Kitto's Cyclopedia ofBiblical Literature, under "wine;" the London edition of E. Nott'sLectures,1863, p. 68; and the Bible Commentary, Appendix B, p. 412.
See also The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1906 ed., s.v. "Wine," vol.12, p. 533; Encyclopedia Judaica, 1971 ed., s.v. "Wine," vol. 16,p. 538; and a citing by Louis Ginzberg, "A Response to the Question WhetherUnfermented Wine May Be Used in Jewish Ceremonies," American JewishYear Book 1923, p. 408.
9. Aristotle, Metereologica 384. a. 4-5; also 388. b. 9-13; Athenaeus,Banquet1, 54; 2, 24; 6, 89; 2. 35; a citing by Irenaeus, Against Heresies5, 33, 3-4, trans. Edgar J. Goodspeed, The Apostolic Fathers (NewYork, 1950), p. 263; and Nicander, Georgica fragment 86, cited byRobert P. Teachout, "The Use of 'Wine' in the Old Testament," Ph.D. dissertationat Dallas Theological Seminary, 1979, (n. 25), p. 370.
10. William Patton, Bible Wines, n.d., p. 58; see also A CompendiousSyriac Dictionary, ed. J. Payne Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press), under"Shakar;" Young's Concordance, p. 273 ("satiates" = "fully satisfies"or"intoxicates); The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and ScripturalDictionary, 1909 ed., s.v. "Strong Drink," p. 546; Oxford EnglishDictionary, 1933 ed.;Webster's New International Dictionary,1959 ed.; Kitto's Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, vol 2, s.v."Wine," p. 953; and Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol2, p. 927.
11. William Patton, Bible Wines, n.d., p. 60; Patton also citesF.R. Lee, Biblical Commentary, Appendix B, pp. 415-418, Liebig,Chemistryof Agriculture, 3rd ed., and Bible Commentary, Prelim. xvi.note.
12. Ezra 6:9; 7:22, and Isaiah 27:2.
13. William Patton, Bible Wines, n.d., p. 59.
14. Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible (Berrien Springs,Michigan, 1989), p. 237.
15. Ibid., p. 238.
16. Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon,1968 edition, s.v. "Gleukos;" James H. Moulton and George Milligan, TheVocabulary of the Greek New Testament, s.v. "Gleukos;" Joseph HenryThayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, s.v. "Gleukos,"etc.
17. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 2, 5, 2, trans. WilliamWhiston in Josephus Complete Works (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1947),p. 48.
18. Pliny, Natural History 23, 24, trans. W.H.S. Jones,TheLoeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1961); also, Plutarch,Symposium8,7; and John Kitto, Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, 1845 ed.,s.v. "Wine," vol. 2, p. 951.
19. Herbert Preisker, "Methe, Methuo, Methuskomai," Theological Dictionaryof the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids, 1967), vol.4, p. 547; also, John Parkhurst, A Greek and English Lexicon to theNew Testament, 7th edition (London, 1817), s.v. "Methuo."
20. Encyclopedia Biblica, eds. T.K. Cheyne and J. SutherlandBlack, 1903 ed., s.v. "Wine and Strong Drink," vol. 4, p. 5315; also, AlexanderBalman Bruce, The Synoptic Gospels in The Expositor's Greek Testament(Grand Rapids, 1956), p. 500; and see Job 32:19.
21. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 2, 5, 2, trans. WilliamWhiston, Josephus Complete Works (Grand Rapids, 1947), p. 48.
22. Louis Ginzberg, "A Response to the Question Whether UnfermentedWine May Be Used in Jewish Ceremonies," American Jewish Year Book 1923(New York, 1922), pp. 414, 418; see alsoEncyclopedia Britannica,8th ed., 1859, s.v. "Passover."
23. Samuele Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible: A Biblical Study on theUse of Alcoholic Beverages. (Berrien Springs, Michigan, 1989), p. 195.
24. Aristotle, Metereologica 387.b.9-13; see also Athenaeus, Banquet 2, 24 and Pliny, Natural History 23, 24.
©Builders of Faith 1994
|
