The Preservation of Grape Juice

[prophet]

https://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/wine_in_the_bible/3.html

Earnestly Contend

 

[prophet]

This is a link for perusal of various methods of preservation of foods in ancient times, germane to the discussion on the Magic Blood thread.

Earnestly Contend

 

[praise_yeshua]

Its very interesting that you would post a work that appeals to "Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew" as evidence.

Do you accept this writing?

Its rather obvious that grapes were pressed into jars/skins and used at later date. Yeast occurs naturally on grapes. Thus, you have what you've called "corruption" due to yeast from the very start of the pressing. Its just a matter of degree.

 

[Ransom]

https://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/wine_in_the_bible/3.html

Bacchiocchi also opposed drinking coffee and wearing Jewelry. Seventh-day Adventists don't define reality for Christians.

 

[prophet]

https://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/wine_in_the_bible/3.html

Bacchiocchi also opposed drinking coffee and wearing Jewelry. Seventh-day Adventists don't define reality for Christians.

1.He wasn't the one being quoted, he was quoting sources from 2 millennia prior to any Seventh Day Inventists.

2. I linked the quickest site to come up for research into food preparation, and not doctrinal instruction.

Do I need to include a disclaimer for the slow among us?

Earnestly Contend

 

[Ransom]

1.He wasn't the one being quoted, he was quoting sources from 2 millennia prior to any Seventh Day Inventists.

Um . . . It was his book, and the quotations he selected were to serve his purpose.

2. I linked the quickest site to come up for research into food preparation, and not doctrinal instruction.

"It was the most convenient" - is that the intellectual virtue we used to call "laziness"?

Do I need to include a disclaimer for the slow among us?

"Warning: this poster is unfamiliar with the basic concepts of critical thinking"?

 

[prophet]

1.He wasn't the one being quoted, he was quoting sources from 2 millennia prior to any Seventh Day Inventists.

Um . . . It was his book, and the quotations he selected were to serve his purpose.

2. I linked the quickest site to come up for research into food preparation, and not doctrinal instruction.

"It was the most convenient" - is that the intellectual virtue we used to call "laziness"?

Do I need to include a disclaimer for the slow among us?

"Warning: this poster is unfamiliar with the basic concepts of critical thinking"?

Ha-ha.
Yeah.
The point was to get quotes up by Columella and Josephus' thoughts, and that mission was accomplished.

I'm not gonna do anyone else's leg work for them, I just posted a link with some of the available sources named.

Disclaimer: those with a bent towards RCC Orthodoxy may still find reason to whine about this link....pun intended.

1.He wasn't the one being quoted, he was quoting sources from 2 millennia prior to any Seventh Day Inventists.

Um . . . It was his book, and the quotations he selected were to serve his purpose.

2. I linked the quickest site to come up for research into food preparation, and not doctrinal instruction.

"It was the most convenient" - is that the intellectual virtue we used to call "laziness"?

Do I need to include a disclaimer for the slow among us?

"Warning: this poster is unfamiliar with the basic concepts of critical thinking"?

Earnestly Contend

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Wow.  The author should enter the Mental Gymnastics event at the next Olympics. 

 

[Ransom]

Ha-ha.
Yeah.
The point was to get quotes up by Columella and Josephus' thoughts, and that mission was accomplished.

Ever hear of "quote mining"? It's real popular with cultists and other pseudotheologians who have a conclusion they need an argument for.

 

[T-Bone]

When one has to support their unbiblical view of wine because of their ecclesiastical bent...they begin teaching the doctrines of men.  This whole issue is not that complicated...they didn't call Jesus a drunkard because he drank welches with too much yeast in it.  Once again, the Bible is clear about drunkenness...there is no need to run to the absurd to prove a non-existent point.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Best way to preserve grape juice is to let it form alcohol out of the sugar present and then when the process is complete the alcohol will preserve the grape juice indefinitely and can even be consumed hundreds of years into the future with no harmful effects. When the process is complete all of the corruption should be gone as it is replaced by the preservative and cleansing agent alcohol.

 

[prophet]

Best way to preserve grape juice is to let it form alcohol out of the sugar present and then when the process is complete the alcohol will preserve the grape juice indefinitely and can even be consumed hundreds of years into the future with no harmful effects. When the process is complete all of the corruption should be gone as it is replaced by the preservative and cleansing agent alcohol.

Like I said, I have made wine, successfully.
I have also made some nasty vinegarry disgusting sludge.
If you just leave it be, you won't get anything drinkable.

Earnestly Contend

 

[prophet]

When one has to support their unbiblical view of wine because of their ecclesiastical bent...they begin teaching the doctrines of men.  This whole issue is not that complicated...they didn't call Jesus a drunkard because he drank welches with too much yeast in it.  Once again, the Bible is clear about drunkenness...there is no need to run to the absurd to prove a non-existent point.

What ecclesiastical bent are you referring to?

To which ecclesiastical bent are you referring? (For the grammar police)

Is not the purity of Jesus' blood, the Lamb without spot, a basic doctrine for those of us who believe in Salvation by grace through faith?

If I was demanding teatotality, or calling wine "sin", or any other such stretch of the imagination, I could understand your response.

I'm not. I'm advocating for the correct remembrance of Jesus' Sacrifice.
All over, there are people putting up Crosses... Why don't you call them on it?
This is the only symbolic gestures we have :
The Supper
Baptism

Can't we do them right, understanding the symbolism?

Earnestly Contend

 

[praise_yeshua]

When one has to support their unbiblical view of wine because of their ecclesiastical bent...they begin teaching the doctrines of men.  This whole issue is not that complicated...they didn't call Jesus a drunkard because he drank welches with too much yeast in it.  Once again, the Bible is clear about drunkenness...there is no need to run to the absurd to prove a non-existent point.

What ecclesiastical bent are you referring to?

To which ecclesiastical bent are you referring? (For the grammar police)

Is not the purity of Jesus' blood, the Lamb without spot, a basic doctrine for those of us who believe in Salvation by grace through faith?

If I was demanding teatotality, or calling wine "sin", or any other such stretch of the imagination, I could understand your response.

I'm not. I'm advocating for the correct remembrance of Jesus' Sacrifice.
All over, there are people putting up Crosses... Why don't you call them on it?
This is the only symbolic gestures we have :
The Supper
Baptism

Can't we do them right, understanding the symbolism?

Earnestly Contend

You're the one demanding that grape juice, without yeast, be used in "The Supper".

Do you remember when Paul drew a comparison between being drunk with wine and being filled with the Spirit? Do you remember the day of Pentecost when those filled with the Spirit were accused of being "drunk" with wine?

If such things "symbolize" the work of the Spirit.... then why in the world are you claiming such symbolism is wrong in the celebration of the "blood" and "body"?

By the way..... You still refuse to admit that you claimed "yeast" is the problem with wine and bread being corrupted. Those were your claims. The only thing you've done is claim you get some "nasty"..."vinegar".... if you allow the grape to "naturally" ferment. This doesn't change the fact that yeast is present in any grape juice.

 

[prophet]

When one has to support their unbiblical view of wine because of their ecclesiastical bent...they begin teaching the doctrines of men.  This whole issue is not that complicated...they didn't call Jesus a drunkard because he drank welches with too much yeast in it.  Once again, the Bible is clear about drunkenness...there is no need to run to the absurd to prove a non-existent point.

What ecclesiastical bent are you referring to?

To which ecclesiastical bent are you referring? (For the grammar police)

Is not the purity of Jesus' blood, the Lamb without spot, a basic doctrine for those of us who believe in Salvation by grace through faith?

If I was demanding teatotality, or calling wine "sin", or any other such stretch of the imagination, I could understand your response.

I'm not. I'm advocating for the correct remembrance of Jesus' Sacrifice.
All over, there are people putting up Crosses... Why don't you call them on it?
This is the only symbolic gestures we have :
The Supper
Baptism

Can't we do them right, understanding the symbolism?

Earnestly Contend

You're the one demanding that grape juice, without yeast, be used in "The Supper".

Do you remember when Paul drew a comparison between being drunk with wine and being filled with the Spirit? Do you remember the day of Pentecost when those filled with the Spirit were accused of being "drunk" with wine?

If such things "symbolize" the work of the Spirit.... then why in the world are you claiming such symbolism is wrong in the celebration of the "blood" and "body"?

By the way..... You still refuse to admit that you claimed "yeast" is the problem with wine and bread being corrupted.

I didn't claim that bread and wine are corrupted, did I?
I claimed that God used it to symbolize the corruption of Death due to sin.
I claimed that God demanded that Israel remove all yeast from their houses, prior to the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
I claimed that yeast is added to wine, to make it ferment.
I claimed that the symbolism in the Lord's Supper is the same as the Passover.
I claimed that Jesus passed a cup, and broke bread, without added yeast, and prepared as was the pre-refrigeration case, so that the natural yeast was killed.
I claimed that I view the addition of yeast to the Feast to be blasphemy.

Why can't we, for a few minutes each Lord's Supper ceremony, abstain from yeast as well?

I don't know if anyone eating leavened bread for this ceremony, do you?
Why not then the cup as well?

BTW, do you believe that Jesus had uncorrupted blood?
I do.
I don't know if He sprinkled it on the Heavenly Mercy Seat, or if that is symbolic only.  But, if He had to do so, I believe He could have.
I just don't believe it was possible for Him to sin, for some fanatical follower to corrupt His sacrifice accidentally, and other suppositions.
He couldn't fail, or else He isn't God.



Earnestly Contend

 

[rsc2a]

Yes. I know of entire Christian faith traditions using leavened bread.

 

[rsc2a]

And He had to be able to fail it else He wasn't human. How are both true? *shrug*

 

[T-Bone]

And He had to be able to fail it else He wasn't human. How are both true? *shrug*

And might I add that if the temptation of Christ was not a real temptation to Him, then it wasn't a temptation at all.

 

[praise_yeshua]

When one has to support their unbiblical view of wine because of their ecclesiastical bent...they begin teaching the doctrines of men.  This whole issue is not that complicated...they didn't call Jesus a drunkard because he drank welches with too much yeast in it.  Once again, the Bible is clear about drunkenness...there is no need to run to the absurd to prove a non-existent point.

What ecclesiastical bent are you referring to?

To which ecclesiastical bent are you referring? (For the grammar police)

Is not the purity of Jesus' blood, the Lamb without spot, a basic doctrine for those of us who believe in Salvation by grace through faith?

If I was demanding teatotality, or calling wine "sin", or any other such stretch of the imagination, I could understand your response.

I'm not. I'm advocating for the correct remembrance of Jesus' Sacrifice.
All over, there are people putting up Crosses... Why don't you call them on it?
This is the only symbolic gestures we have :
The Supper
Baptism

Can't we do them right, understanding the symbolism?

Earnestly Contend

You're the one demanding that grape juice, without yeast, be used in "The Supper".

Do you remember when Paul drew a comparison between being drunk with wine and being filled with the Spirit? Do you remember the day of Pentecost when those filled with the Spirit were accused of being "drunk" with wine?

If such things "symbolize" the work of the Spirit.... then why in the world are you claiming such symbolism is wrong in the celebration of the "blood" and "body"?

By the way..... You still refuse to admit that you claimed "yeast" is the problem with wine and bread being corrupted.

I didn't claim that bread and wine are corrupted, did I?
I claimed that God used it to symbolize the corruption of Death due to sin.
I claimed that God demanded that Israel remove all yeast from their houses, prior to the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
I claimed that yeast is added to wine, to make it ferment.
I claimed that the symbolism in the Lord's Supper is the same as the Passover.
I claimed that Jesus passed a cup, and broke bread, without added yeast, and prepared as was the pre-refrigeration case, so that the natural yeast was killed.
I claimed that I view the addition of yeast to the Feast to be blasphemy.

Why can't we, for a few minutes each Lord's Supper ceremony, abstain from yeast as well?

I don't know if anyone eating leavened bread for this ceremony, do you?
Why not then the cup as well?

BTW, do you believe that Jesus had uncorrupted blood?
I do.
I don't know if He sprinkled it on the Heavenly Mercy Seat, or if that is symbolic only.  But, if He had to do so, I believe He could have.
I just don't believe it was possible for Him to sin, for some fanatical follower to corrupt His sacrifice accidentally, and other suppositions.
He couldn't fail, or else He isn't God.



Earnestly Contend

Again. You're saying yeast is the problem. Wild yeast is found on grapes. Thus, yeast is found in grape juice. You're not abstaining from yeast when you drink grape juice. Israel didn't abstain from yeast when they drank the fruit of the vine in any form.

 

[praise_yeshua]

And He had to be able to fail it else He wasn't human. How are both true? *shrug*

And might I add that if the temptation of Christ was not a real temptation to Him, then it wasn't a temptation at all.

We have this "fight" ever once in a while.

Sure Christ was tempted. The inability to give into temptation doesn't remove the fact He was tempted. He was so MUCH BETTER.... than that. If HE wasn't any BETTER then.... we are in serious trouble.

That NUT would started talking about this..... wants to drag Christ down to his level. He always has. When man drags His "GOD" down to his level........ You know who becomes the "god".