Matt. 26:26-29 records the occasion when Jesus initiated the Lord's Supper. These verses say, "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed it, and break it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."

This discussion will be a look at why we use wine in the Lord's Supper. This is not intended to be a total look at why we use wine in the Lord's Supper; nor is it intended as an answer to all those, who oppose the use of wine, and who contend in favor of grape juice. It would take much more than one short discussion to deal comprehensively with every facet of this matter.

This discussion is intended to give some of the biblical reasoning that leads us to use wine in the Lord's Supper, and to raise some valid questions in the minds of those who don't.

LET US BEGIN THIS STUDY WITH A FAIR AND PROPER DEFINITION OF WINE.

WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY defines the noun, WINE, as having four possible definitions, depending on the context of it's usage:

1. "The fermented juice of grapes, used as an alcoholic beverage, and the cooking, etc. "

2. "The fermented juice of other fruits or plants: as dandelion wine. "

3. " Intoxication. "

4. " A dark purplish red, the color of some wines. "

It is noteworthy that in no case is the beverage wine, by definition, hinted to be anything less than a fermented, or fermenting beverage.

Now, a lengthy discussion could be given concerning the abstract use of the word Wine, as in Isa. 65:8, where the prophet says, "the new wine is found in the cluster. " This is true in the same sense that many apples are found in a single apple seed, or that many residential homes are found in a large forest. They are, only in a prospective, or abstract sense. As the apple seed must produce a tree with fruit before the apples in it are seen; likewise, the grapes in the cluster must ferment before there can be wine.

There are two Greek words for WINE, as used in the New Testament. The general for WINE is "OINOS". The fact that this beverage burst wine skins, as in Matt. 9:17, Mark 2:22, and Luke 5:37, shows that it is characteristic of fermentation. Of this beverage [oinos] Paul said, "Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess", Eph. 5:18. It wt would not take very much research in the New Testament to establish the fact that "OINOS" speaks of the intoxicating state of the juice of grapes.

"GLEUKOS" is translated "wine" one time in the New Testament. The reference is Acts 2:13, where the multitude accused the apostles of being "full of new wine". The context of this passage will quickly show that in view of the unusual conduct of the apostles, as result of the demonstration of the Holy Spirit in them, the multitude thought they were drunken. And, the accusation was that they were drunken on GLEUKOS (new wine); not OINOS (completely fermented wine). Their implication was that a man could get drunken quicker on new or partially fermented wine, than on old, or completely fermented wine. GLEUKOS denotes "sweet", or "new" wine. James Strong says GLEUKOS has more saccharine, and is therefore "highly inebriating". The point is that in EVERY use of the word wine in the New Testament (except it's metaphorical uses), it is seen to be the fermented beverage of the grape, capable of intoxication.

Those who oppose the use of wine in the Lord's Supper, make a big issue of SWEET or NEW wine. They go to great lengths in trying to prove that sweet, or new wine is a purified state of grape juice, which is not fermented; and is not capable of intoxication. Now, what a lot of men say on the subject matters little; but what God says on the subject establishes the truth. Men can, and have, established their own definitions of what sweet, or new wine is; but in ascertaining the truths of God's word, we must take the definitions established in the Word of God; not those which grape growers, or others, may propagate. If Webster's definition does not harmonize with God's, take God's; not Webster's.

Although, it so happens that Webster's definition of wine, be it new or old, does harmonize well with what is revealed in God's word. Contrary to what some men contend, new wine is fully capable of intoxication. Remember Acts 2:23. It was clearly known by the people of this context, that new, or sweet wine (gleukos) would intoxicate or make drunk. V. 15 of the same chapter says Peter answered their supposition that the apostles were intoxicated on "new wine"; by saying, "These are not DRUNKEN as ye suppose". The implication clearly is, that new wine will intoxicate. Hosea, the prophet was not under the false illusion that new wine will not intoxicate. He said, "Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart", Hosea 4:11. Wine differs from new wine in that old wine has completed fermentation, while new wine is still in the process of fermentation to some degree. Isaiah the prophet said, "They shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine", Isa. 49:26. The definition of a good many men is that sweet or new wine will not intoxicate: that it is something less than the fermented by-product of grape juice. But that is not God's definition. He says it will make one drunk; and from Isaiah's statement, very much so.

NOW IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT WE MUST USE WINE IN OUR OBSERVANCE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER

Both the bread and the wine of the Lord's Supper are designed to picture the body and blood of the crucified Christ. Jesus Christ's body and blood were pure: without sin. Hebrews 7:26 says of him, that he was "holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners." He "was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin"; Heb. 4:15. II Cor. 5:21 declares, "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him; "and I Pet. 2:22 says, he "did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth".

In order for his sacrifice to be effective and take away our sins, Jesus had to be sinlessly perfect. But, that he was. He was "as of a lamb without blemish and without spot", I Pet.1:19. Because of his being the perfect lamb of God, Rev. 5:5-6, 9-10 extols him, and him alone, as being capable and worthy to redeem men to God.

Now, when we take the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper, we are testifying of the pure body and blood, which were broken and shed for us. Jesus made that very clear in Matt. 26, where he said the broken bread typified his body V. 26, and the wine typified his "blood of the New Testament which is shed for many, for the remission of sins", V. 28. Thus we read in 1 Cor. 11:24 of the bread, "take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you;" and in V. 25, "This cup is the New Testament in my blood. "

In order to show the purity of our sacrifice, the Lord Jesus Christ, we use unleavened ingredients in the Lord's Supper.

Leavening, in the scriptures is symbolic of sin and false doctrine. Thus Jesus warned, "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees", Matt. 16:6. V. 12 says that "he bade them not, Beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. " Paul said, showing the evil connotation of leavening, "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump", 1 Cor. 5:6. He then exhorted, 'Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump'; V. 7.

So that there be no confusion, please understand that leaven is yeast, or another substance used to cause dough to rise, or bring about the process of fermentation. In short, it is an agent that initiates and brings about a fermentation process.

Now it is a certain fact that we do not want any leaven to be in the ingredients by which we show the pure body and blood of our Saviour. To include leaven in these ingredients would be to totally mispicture the body and blood and thereby indicate that our precious Saviour was sinful. Thus, we are careful to use unleavened bread and unleavened drink in our celebration of the supper. We use bread that has no leaven in it to represent the perfect body. The bread is unleavened because we simply do not put any leaven in it. The leaven is withheld; for in bread, once leaven is introduced, it cannot be gotten out, since it so mixes with the bread that it becomes inseparable.

As we use unleavened bread, likewise we use unleavened drink, which is wine. The unleavened state of the "fruit of the vine" (Matt. 26:29) is wine; not grape juice.

Grapes have the unique quality of having a natural parasite, or bacteria, on their skin, which is a leaven that causes the grape juice to ferment. Natural. grape juice, be it fresh or cooked, has this leaven in it. The only way to totally free grape juice of it's leaven, is to allow it to completely ferment. In the process of fermentation, the leaven or other impurities of grape juice, are separated, as

wine is produced. Impurities settle to the bottom, and the wine (pure and free of leaven) can be drawn off. So, the fruit of the vine is made unleavened by removing the leaven, which is already, by nature, there.

So, the bread is made unleavened by withholding leaven; and the juice is made unleavened by taking away the leaven. Although, in both cases, the end result is an unleavened product.

The inconsistency of those who insist on unleavened bread, yet who reject wine and use grape juice, is apparent. What they are actually doing, is insisting on and using an unleavened bread, and a leavened drink. Such is an inconsistent and contradictory practice. The bread says Jesus was pure; the grape juice says he was impure. Obviously, if it is important to use a pure product to picture Christ's body, it is just as important to use a pure product to picture his blood. And, wine is the only state of the fruit of the vine that is sufficiently pure to picture Christ's blood. Surely grape juice, with it's leaven, and numerous impurities cannot paint a true picture of the blood, for the same reasons that sour dough bread cannot paint a true picture of the body.

Thus, BOTH the elements which we use in the celebration of our Lord's Supper, are unleavened; the drink as well as the bread. If the use of an unleavened product is important in one area of the supper, it is also important in the other area, too. If we are going to insist on unleavened bread (and we do, in order to show the pure body of Christ), then we must insist on unleavened drink, which is wine, to show the pure blood.

THREE BASIC BIBLICAL ARGUMENTS LEAD US TO THE USE OF WINE IN THE LORD'S SUPPER

Wine in the Lord's Supper presents an UNPOLLUTED PICTURE.

Already, we have pointed out that the ingredient in the cup pictures the blood of Christ. Consider both Matt. 26:28 and I Cor. 11:25-26. We have futhermore pointed out that Christ's blood was pure and perfect. I Pet. 1:19 calls it "the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot. " John plainly said, "In him is no sin", I John 3:5. Remember also, I Pet. 2:22, II Cor. 5:21, and Heb. 7:26.

To properly picture the pure blood of Jesus Christ, the substance in the cup MUST be a pure ingredient; otherwise the picture is polluted. An impure substance in the cup cannot properly picture the pure blood of Christ. A pure substance in the cup is required to present an unpolluted picture of Christ's blood. Any stage of the fruit of the vine, short of wine, produces a polluted picture. It is ONLY by the process of fermentation that the impurities of grape juice are completely removed. Remember that grape juice is a leavened substance. It cannot rightly be called wine, "sweet "or "old". It is called "must". It contains numerous impurities. Encyclopedia Brittanica, under it's discussion of wine chemistry, says, "the surfaces of ripe grapes are covered with large numbers of yeasts, moulds, and bacteria, including the true wine yeast: saccharomyces ellipsoideus. Grape juice would ferment with the aid of the wild yeasts, .... The main fermentation takes a few days, but it continues at a slower rate for some time .... When fermentation is complete, the wine is racked off, or separated from the lees, or sediment. This contains precipitated organic matter, yeast, and acid potassium tartrate [cream of tartar], which is less soluble in the presence of alcohol."

It is a documented and observable fact that grape juice is an impure substance. Even if it be cooked so as to kill the live bacteria in it, the bacteria (though dead) remain in the juice. The impurities of the juice still have not been removed. Although, in the chemical process of fermentation, these impurities ARE REMOVED. They are not just killed so as to continue within the product; they are actually SEPARATED so that wine, the pure state of the fruit of the vine, can be "racked" or drawn off without any impurities. When fermentation brings about this separation in grape juice, the impurities settle to the bottom as dregs, or "lees"; and wine is left sitting on top of this mass of impurities. This is what Isaiah is talking about in Isa. 25:6, when he speaks of "wines on the lees". Metaphorically, this same picture is seen in Jer. 48:11, and in Zeph. 1:12.

When the process of fermentation has completed itself, a total purge has been wrought in the fruit of the vine; and the resulting product, wine, is pure. It is what Deut. 32:14 is speaking about when it speaks of "the pure blood of the grape". Nothing short of wine constitutes "the pure blood of the grape", or pure fruit of the vine. Yes, grape juice is the fruit of the vine, but it is not the PURE fruit of the vine. Some people contend that since Matt. 26:29 mentions "the fruit of the vine" for the cup, as Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, he could have only been talking of grape juice. Such thinking is extremely shallow, for wine is just as much the fruit of the vine as grape juice is. The main difference is that wine is pure and grape juice is not. All of the arguments about grape juice being pure, about sweet wines, etc. cannot get around the fact that the impurities are still there in such products. Only fermentation can produce the pure fruit of the vine.

Wine, being pure, can properly picture Christ's blood; and grape juice, being impure cannot. Wine presents an unpolluted picture of Christ's blood, and grape juice presents a polluted picture. Thus, here is extremely good biblical logic for the use of wine in the cup, in the observance of the Lord's Supper.

We also have an UNQUESTIONABLE EXAMPLE which teaches us to use wine in the Lord's Supper.

The example is that of the Lord Jesus Christ. Col. 1:18 says, Christ is "the head of the body, the Church: who is the beginning, the first born from the dead; that in all things HE MIGHT HAVE THE PREEMINENCE. " Folks, Christ is the example that takes priority above all other examples. Peter said, "Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps", I Pet. 1:21. Jesus himself said, "I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you", Jno. 18:15. If we can learn what Jesus himself used, when he instituted, or set up the Lord's Supper, then we will know what the right ingredient for the cup is, for we should surely follow his example. Jesus' example is the perfect example.

To institute the Lord's Supper, Jesus used the same food and drink that had been used in the Jewish celebration of the Passover. In the celebration of the Passover, ONLY UNLEAVENED foods and beverages could be eaten or drunken. On the night of the Passover, God told Israel to annually remember the Passover event with a feast, Ex. 12:14. He said, "Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day, ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel", Ex. 12:15. He continued in V. 18-20, "In the first month, on the 14th day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even. Seven days shalt there be no leaven found in your houses: for whosoever eateth that which is leavened, even that soul shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he be a stranger, or born in the land. Ye shall eat nothing leavened; In all your habitations shall ye eat unleavened bread. " We are not left to speculate as to whether wine or grape juice was used in the observance of the Passover. As we have already proven, grape juice is full of leaven. It is not free of leaven until fermentation occurs, and removes it, leaving wine. Since it was unlawful for Jews to have on their person, to have in their homes, or to consume anything leavened during the Passover celebration, they could not drink grape juice. The ONLY fruit of the vine lawful to them at that time, was wine.

Jesus came together with his disciples on the night before his crucifixion, and he kept the Passover celebration. He told his apostles to tell a certain householder, "The Master saith, My time is at hand; I WILL KEEP THE PASSOVER at thy house with any disciples ", Matt. 26:18. Jesus didn't come breaking the law; he came fulfilling it. He said of the law, in Matt. 5:17, "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill " If it was lawful to use only unleavened food and drink at the Passover, and it was, then Jesus used unleavened food and drink when he celebrated it. Since he used a beverage of the grape (Matt. 26:29), that beverage had to be wine, for only wine is the unleavened beverage of the grape.

While Jesus was eating the Passover meal with his disciples, he took the bread and beverage of the Passover, and used them to institute the Lord's Supper. Matt. 26:2627 says, "And as they were eating (the Passover, V. 19-20), Jesus took bread [unleavened Passover bread], and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup [the Passover cup, which could only contain wine] and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it. " Some argue that the New Testament does not specifically say he used unleavened bread. Although, in both cases we know from Old Testament considerations, that he used unleavened bread, and unleavened drink.

It is not too difficult to ascertain what Jesus used in the cup of the Lord's Supper. He used wine, and the scriptures are explicit that we should follow his example. His is an unquestionable, perfect example. Thus, again, the sensibility of using wine in the Lord's Supper emerges.

Furthermore, the use of wine in the Lord's Supper is an UNREBUKABLE practice.

It's use was practiced by the early churches of the New Testament. This is seen in 1 Cor. 11. Paul is discussing the observance of the Lord's Supper with the Corinthian Church, and he begins by commending them for "keeping the ordinances as I have delivered then unto you", V. 2. Their offence was not a use of the wrong food or beverage in the Supper, or an improper frequency. Their offence was that they came together with divisions, offences among themselves, and in the process made a meal of the Lord's Supper. Vs. 16-22. In the process of this abuse of the Lord's Supper, some of the Corinthians got drunk, V. 21. Long arguments have been advanced about how the proper beverage of the grape for use in the Lord's Supper is a beverage that will not intoxicate. That certainly was not the case here in the scriptures. And the fact that it wasn't lays those long arguments to rest. Here is a Church, whom Paul commends for using the right elements in the Lord's Supper; but then rebukes for their misuse of these proper elements; and the proper element in the cup made drunk those who overconsumed it. And, that is what the proper element for the cup, wine, will always do when overconsumed.

Now in view of the fact that the Corinthians got drunken on what was in the cup, it is self evident that it was wine, and not grape juice. Thus it becomes a scriptural conclusion to say that the churches of the Bible used wine in their observance of the Lord's Supper. I Thess. 1:7 establishes the fact that the God approved practices of the early Bible churches are examples for us to follow. Thus, since the early churches practiced the use of wine in the Lord's Supper, it becomes for us an unrebukable practice.

It is a very practical practice, especially in view of the fact that once fermentation is completed, wine is pure, and can easily be preserved for hundreds of years. Such is not true of grape juice. The natural bacteria and impurities therein make it difficult to preserve. These bacteria and impurities quickly bring about it's spoilage, or fermentation. Some argue that wine is evil. Although, wine is not evil; it is man that is evil. Truly men do sometimes abuse wine, as did the Corinthians; but such evil does not lie in the inanimate object, which has no mind, and no morals. Such evil lies in the heart of him, who misuses it.

It is true that wine can be tempting, just as money, sex, and food can be tempting. But surely no one can say there is something wrong with money, sex, or food, providing they are used in the proper way. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with using wine in the Lord's Supper, provided it is used in the proper way.

BEREAN PUBLICATIONS
Lester Hutson, Pastor
10250 North Freeway
Houston, Texas 77037
Phone 281-447-8484