Growth Church Ornaments: Inspiration

[Malachi]

You made an effort to assert "the cup" contained an "unfermented fruit of the vine" and drew special attention to it by typing it in bold font. So it seems you are pretty sure of this and I'm curious what scripture you support this with since the one you cited doesn't say this?

When you turn to Matthew 26:29, you will notice that the Lord Jesus was very careful in His choice of words. He says there "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". In all the other passages pertaining to the Lord's Supper, we always read of "the cup", never of "wine".

Leaven in Scripture represents corruption, hypocrisy and sin. Christ broke the unleavened bread of the Passover and drank from the unfermented "fruit of the vine" at the Last Supper since these elements alone would represent the sinless Lamb of God. In Acts 20:28 we read of "the church of GOD which He hath purchased with His own blood". That is something to think about for those who deny that Christ is indeed God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

 

[jasonc]

When you turn to Matthew 26:29, you will notice that the Lord Jesus was very careful in His choice of words. He says there "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". In all the other passages pertaining to the Lord's Supper, we always read of "the cup", never of "wine".

Leaven in Scripture represents corruption, hypocrisy and sin. Christ broke the unleavened bread of the Passover and drank from the unfermented "fruit of the vine" at the Last Supper since these elements alone would represent the sinless Lamb of God. In Acts 20:28 we read of "the church of GOD which He hath purchased with His own blood". That is something to think about for those who deny that Christ is indeed God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

so its a sin to eat levean?if so tell me where it says not to eat leaven?

 

[Malachi]

so its a sin to eat levean?if so tell me where it says not to eat leaven?

Sorry there is some misunderstanding. What was said is that leaven cannot be connected with elements representing the broken body and the shed blood of Christ.

The ordinary use of leaven (yeast) is certainly no forbidden. But we should always remember that in Scripture leaven = sin. Hence "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (1 Corinthians 5:6-8; Galatians 5:9).
In the first passage Paul equates leaven with malice and wickedness (as well as sin in general). In the second passage Paul equates leaven with the false "gospel" of salvation by Grace + the Law.

 

[jasonc]

Sorry there is some misunderstanding. What was said is that leaven cannot be connected with elements representing the broken body and the shed blood of Christ.

The ordinary use of leaven (yeast) is certainly no forbidden. But we should always remember that in Scripture leaven = sin. Hence "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (1 Corinthians 5:6-8; Galatians 5:9).
In the first passage Paul equates leaven with malice and wickedness (as well as sin in general). In the second passage Paul equates leaven with the false "gospel" of salvation by Grace + the Law.

so when jesus made the wine and also borrowed from the chuppa tradition it wasn't whine he was using? im saying it was as today. but well jews do celebrate with alcohol that isn't that strong today.

this sounds like the sbc version and the sda teaching. how could jesus be called a whinebibbler if he didn't do that? notice he didn't say he wasn't. the idea of fruit of the vine is just grape juice? would you drink a few day old grape juice? I know from Afghanistan not to drink or consume anything that wasn't hot from the locals. if you did it was a guaranteed sick day or a week. amoebic parasite did wonders or some other thing.

 

[Malachi]

the idea of fruit of the vine is just grape juice?

That is the only logical conclusion. The Holy Spirit was careful to avoid the word "wine" in connection with the Lord's Supper. Christians should ask themselves "Why?"

It is significant that Aaron and his sons (and by extension all Hebrew priests) were forbidden to drink "wine nor strong drink" (Leviticus 10:9) because they would be going into the Tabernacle. The following verse says "And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean". Christ, as our undefiled Great High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, entered into the true Tabernacle in Heaven (Hebrews 9:11-16; 22-24) with His own blood.

 

[Obadiah]

When you turn to Matthew 26:29, you will notice that the Lord Jesus was very careful in His choice of words. He says there "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". In all the other passages pertaining to the Lord's Supper, we always read of "the cup", never of "wine".

Leaven in Scripture represents corruption, hypocrisy and sin. Christ broke the unleavened bread of the Passover and drank from the unfermented "fruit of the vine" at the Last Supper since these elements alone would represent the sinless Lamb of God. In Acts 20:28 we read of "the church of GOD which He hath purchased with His own blood". That is something to think about for those who deny that Christ is indeed God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

I had always heard that we really didn't know what was in the cup, but we can assume it was wine because wine was the only thing people drank at the time that could be said to be from "the fruit of the vine". Non-alcoholic grape juice as something people would drink wouldn't exist for several centuries after the first Lord's Supper because it couldn't be made safe to drink until the discovery of pasteurization. If it was some other type of drink and it was so critical for Jesus to make it clear that it could not have been wine, why didn't He simply say what it was instead of using a term that most in that day and time would assume to mean wine? Also, I understand your reasoning about the bread being unleavened, but I don't think that gives any indication of what was in the cup because finished wine has no leavening in it.

I don't know, to me it seems we really don't know for sure what it was, but I don't really think the fact that scripture doesn't specifically say it was wine necessarily means it couldn't have been wine. But to me it doesn't really matter what we use in our modern communion services. It's what the elements symbolize that is important to me, not whether it's wine or grape juice. The church I'm at now and most I've gone to use grape juice, and that's fine. But then, they don't use unleavened bread either. So that tells me the specific elements aren't that important to them so that can't be the real reason they favor grape juice. It's what the elements symbolize that's important. I just was wondering if you might have known of some scripture that actually said it wasn't wine or stated specifically what it was in terms that aren't so ambiguous.

 

[Malachi]

I just was wondering if you might have known of some scripture that actually said it wasn't wine or stated specifically what it was in terms that aren't so ambiguous.

We have no specific Scripture to tell us the exact nature of the contents of that cup. We can draw inferences from other portions of Scripture. Since the contents of the cup represent the shed blood of the sinless Son of God, the symbol must also represent purity and sinlessness.

Those who disregard the necessity for unleavened bread also fail to understand that the symbols must correspond to the reality.