When Jesus turned the water into wine, is it reasonable to believe the water tasted like wine?

[SyrianMariam]

Did the water remain 'water-like' in its colour, taste, texture, consistency? Or did it become wine in all respects?

 

[Tessa]

Hi SyrianMariam
Yes exactly as it says. In fact it was a very good wine as someone asked why the goid wine had been saved to last. It didn't just look and taste like wine it really had been turned into wine.
Blessings

 

[SyrianMariam]

Hi SyrianMariam
Yes exactly as it says. In fact it was a very good wine as someone asked why the goid wine had been saved to last. It didn't just look and taste like wine it really had been turned into wine.
Blessings

So Jesus literally turned the water into wine? It didn't just look and taste like wine. And it wasn't water that looked and tasted like water, and was nominally 'wine', it was genuinely wine?

 

[hawkman]

So Jesus literally turned the water into wine? It didn't just look and taste like wine. And it wasn't water that looked and tasted like water, and was nominally 'wine', it was genuinely wine?

John chapter 2

7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.

8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.

9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

As Tessa said it was the best wine saved for the last . It was normal to save the weaker, less tasty wine for later in the festivities , for most the party goers would not notice when the weaker wine was served . The governor of the feast was no doubt surprised to find the best wine was saved for the end of festivities .

 

[SyrianMariam]

John chapter 2

7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.

8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.

9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,

10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

As Tessa said it was the best wine saved for the last . It was normal to save the weaker, less tasty wine for later in the festivities , for most the party goers would not notice when the weaker wine was served . The governor of the feast was no doubt surprised to find the best wine was saved for the end of festivities .

Yes!

 

[SyrianMariam]

Well this is confusing!
Jesus can turn water into wine...we know this from scripture. Those who did not even know it had been water identified it as wine, and good wine at that!
So how is it that Jesus can turn water into wine, and it taste of wine, but when Jesus supposedly turns wine into his blood, it still resemble wine not only in taste but in all respects?

 

[hawkman]

Well this is confusing!
Jesus can turn water into wine...we know this from scripture. Those who did not even know it had been water identified it as wine, and good wine at that!
So how is it that Jesus can turn water into wine, and it taste of wine, but when Jesus supposedly turns wine into his blood, it still resemble wine not only in taste but in all respects?

The physical being used to explain the spiritual .
What did Jesus mean when He said we must eat His flesh and drink His blood?

 

[SyrianMariam]

The physical being used to explain the spiritual .
What did Jesus mean when He said we must eat His flesh and drink His blood?

So consuming the blood of Jesus isn't literal? But the Roman Catholics say they literally consume the blood of Christ...is this false?

 

[hawkman]

So consuming the blood of Jesus isn't literal? But the Roman Catholics say they literally consume the blood of Christ...is this false?

I am not Catholic , so here is a link . I like the explanation offered .
The Eucharist & Cannibalism

 

[SyrianMariam]

I am not Catholic , so here is a link . I like the explanation offered .
The Eucharist & Cannibalism

I am relieved to hear that you are a Christian and I hope you are saved.

 

[SyrianMariam]

I am not Catholic , so here is a link . I like the explanation offered .
The Eucharist & Cannibalism

"The Eucharist is life. Cannibals eat what is dead"

Not true. If I were to eat of a living human I am as much a cannibal as if I were to eat of a dead one.

 

[hawkman]

"The Eucharist is life. Cannibals eat what is dead"

Not true. If I were to eat of a living human I am as much a cannibal as if I were to eat of a dead one.

You may need to read that link more than once like I did too .

 

[jaybo]

So Jesus literally turned the water into wine? It didn't just look and taste like wine. And it wasn't water that looked and tasted like water, and was nominally 'wine', it was genuinely wine?

Yes, the water literally became wine. John 2:9-11, "the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside and said, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best [wine] till now.” What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

 

[jaybo]

Well this is confusing!
Jesus can turn water into wine...we know this from scripture. Those who did not even know it had been water identified it as wine, and good wine at that!
So how is it that Jesus can turn water into wine, and it taste of wine, but when Jesus supposedly turns wine into his blood, it still resemble wine not only in taste but in all respects?

Jesus did not turn wine into His blood. He was reclining at the table as a fully intact human (and wasn't bleeding!) " In the same way [as the bread], after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes." He was clearly describing the contents of the cup as being symbolic of His blood. It is absurd to take it literally. He did not turn wine into His blood. He said that when you drink the wine it is symbolic of the new covenant achieved by His shedding of blood on the cross.

Also, in Matthew 26:27-28, "Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." But He wasn't pouring it out; He told them to drink from the cup."

It is not confusing if you take these descriptions of "the last supper" (the Passover meal) and interpret them figuratively instead of literally.

 

[jaybo]

So consuming the blood of Jesus isn't literal? But the Roman Catholics say they literally consume the blood of Christ...is this false?

Yes, it is false. That is the principle of transubstantiation.

Roman Catholics believe that during the Eucharist (which they call Holy Communion) the bread and wine are transformed into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. In the Protestant Reformation, the doctrine of transubstantiation became a matter of much controversy. Martin Luther held that "It is not the doctrine of transubstantiation which is to be believed, but simply that Christ really is present at the Eucharist".

I agree with Martin Luther. For Protestants, the communion ritual only serves to commemorate Jesus' death and resurrection.

 

[for_his_glory]

God’s word can be literal and Spiritual as in the case of the wedding in Cana. The wedding represents the Spiritual being the union between Jesus and his bride whom are the children of God through repentance. Jesus brings his disciples to the wedding to show them the wonders of God through the renewal of his Spirit. I want you to see the relationship we have between the old self in the flesh and the new Spiritual rebirth in Christ. We are called the bride of Christ and I could not find any better example of this as in the story of the first wedding Jesus attended with his disciples, (Ref: John 2:1-11).

The word marriage represents our relationship with Jesus. We are called the bride of Christ which means when we ask Jesus into our life through repentance we become one in the Spirit that is in Christ and have communion with his life, death and resurrection. We are united with Jesus as one body that has been renewed through the Spirit that is God. We become as a bride to the bridegroom as we are joined together as one.

Matthew 9:15 And Jesus said unto them, Can the children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast.

Revelation 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.

The word call means that we do not just happen to fall into a relationship with Jesus as we are called of God or predestined before the world began for Gods purpose and grace. Jesus and his disciples were called to the wedding in Canaan, John 2:1-11 to witness the testimony of Gods power and authority through the miracle of changing water into wine, which was Jesus first miracle. The water and the wine represent the word of God and his Spirit as a renewal of our body and soul through the salvation of Jesus.
(Jeremiah 1:5; 2Timothy 1:9; John 3:5)

Wanting wine meant the disciples wanted understanding of those things Jesus was teaching them as they could not understand with their carnal minds, but did know that Jesus was a prophet sent by God. When Jesus said to his mother my time has not come yet he was speaking of his death and resurrection. Spiritual understanding could not come until Jesus ascended unto the Father and the Holy Spirit that is the Spirit of God be brought down from heaven to open our Spiritual eyes and ears to understand those teachings of Jesus while he walked the earth with his disciples.
(Romans 8:5-8; John 14:26)

The waterpots in themselves are a Jewish tradition of placing these pots outside the wedding feast so everyone could wash their hands and feet before entering into the feast. The significance of there being six water pots of stone is that the number six represents the number of the beast or sinful nations that are being controlled by Satan using others to deceive man like he used a serpent to deceive Adam and Eve as Satan is a spirit that has no form and has to use whatever or whomever he can to work through to deceive man.

When Jesus asked the servants to fill the waterpots with water and then he changed the water into wine is a Spiritual representation of the water being the word of God and the wine being the Holy Spirit as it is only by the word of God and his Holy Spirit that we can see the kingdom of God through a renewed Spiritual rebirth through repentance.

The governor asked Jesus why was the good wine served last after everyone was already drunk as he could not understand such a thing. In the beginning man was pure and knew no sin until they allowed themselves to be deceived by Satan who used the serpent to deceive them thus the knowledge of sin was revealed to them and extended to all generations. The good wine (Gods Spirit come to flesh in Jesus) was sacrificed for the atonement of sin as through repentance we now have the Holy Spirit (Spirit of God – new wine) that renews our inner man through the word of God that we can now have life eternal with the father.
(Revelation 13:18; John 1:14; Colossians 3:5-14; Genesis 3:6-7)

 

[Mungo]

Well this is confusing!
Jesus can turn water into wine...we know this from scripture. Those who did not even know it had been water identified it as wine, and good wine at that!
So how is it that Jesus can turn water into wine, and it taste of wine, but when Jesus supposedly turns wine into his blood, it still resemble wine not only in taste but in all respects?

This is all explained in the thread I started - Transubstantiation

But basically The substance of the bread changes into the substance of Christ's body but the accidents of the bread remain and it is those we perceive with our sight and taste. Similarly with the wine.

 

[Highway54]

Did the water remain 'water-like' in its colour, taste, texture, consistency? Or did it become wine in all respects?

The Bible simply says it turned into fine/good wine.

 

[WIP]

So consuming the blood of Jesus isn't literal? But the Roman Catholics say they literally consume the blood of Christ...is this false?

This is one area where there is disagreement between Catholic teaching and Protestant teaching. Some Protestant churches believe it is purely symbolic and some believe somewhere in between these two extremes.

Our Lutheran church believes in what has been defined as Consubstantiation. That is, the body and blood of Christ coexist with the bread and wine. In other words we believe that during the sacrament, the real presence of Christ is in the Eucharist and that the substance of the body and blood of Christ are present alongside the substance of the bread and wine.

 

[SyrianMariam]

This is all explained in the thread I started - Transubstantiation

But basically The substance of the bread changes into the substance of Christ's body but the accidents of the bread remain and it is those we perceive with our sight and taste. Similarly with the wine.

Does your thread cover the history and process of transubstantiation?