WINE
OR
GRAPE JUICE

by Davis Huckabee

   The following article is published with no ill will or anger
toward anyone.   I have some very dear friends who believe that
fermented wine is the scriptural liquid element for the Lord's
Table, and I respect their conviction.   I think they are wrong, but I
think they want to be and believe they are right.
   I will not enter into debates, arguments or fusses on the issue,
but if someone has a thesis in print which I have not read,
presenting the other view, I will read it.
   Davis Huckabee, the writer of this tract, would certainly
express the same attitude.   It is our desire that our readers will
look upon this article with the same charity and objectivity, and
that we may all arrive at a more clear understanding of the
Scriptures concerning this.

Forrest L. Keener (CB)

WINE OR GRAPE JUICE?
   There has long been a controversy in Baptist ranks over which
of these two is the legitimate element to be used in the Lord's
Supper, and it is not to be thought that this tract will settle the
matter in every person's mind. However, we do wish to set forth
some thoughts which might give occasion for reflection
concerning the liquid element in this ordinance. It is needful, first
of all, to establish what shall be the guidelines for determining this
matter. What shall be our authority for determining which of these
two is to be used?
Tradition, Human Reasoning or Scripture?
   Many churches determine this matter according to what they
have always done since their first observance of the ordinance.
This is tradition, plain and simple, and Baptist tradition is as bad
as any other, and can as quickly become the competitor of the
truth as it did in Jesus' day. Still other churches resort to human
reasoning to establish its practice, and if they can reason out
what seems a logical defense of the one or the other of these two
elements, they are content, not realizing that the most seemingly
logical human reasoning may be nonetheless wholly contrary to
the Scriptures. The Scriptures command "Casting down
imaginations
[margin: 'reasonings'], and every high thing that
exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into
captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ"
(II Cor. 10:5).
Since we are accountable for what is taught in the Bible, and for
nothing else but what is in the Bible, then it is clear that the Word
of God is to be our only standard in this matter.
The Cup - The Fruit Of The Vine
   "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 remissions 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"
(Matt. 26:27-29).
   These are the only terms ever used in the Scriptures for the
liquid element of the Lord's Supper. "Cup" is a figure of speech
for something to drink, and had it been left by itself, it would have
left the usage open to almost any kind of drink; but it is further

defined by the words "fruit of the vine", which reveals that this is
to be the expressed liquid of the grape. Neither of these
expressions give any indications whether this was to be
fermented or unfermented.
   The only symbolism required by the terms used is that of the
grape being crushed so that its juice might be "poured out", (Luke
22:20 (Greek). The purity of the Lord is symbolized by the
unleavened bread, but the Scripture is silent as to the fruit of the
vine ever symbolizing the purity of Christ's blood, and we go
beyond what is written if we insist upon this. Many people,
however, do insist that fermentation is necessary to purify the
natural juice of the grape of its impurities, and there are
quotations from human authorities which seem to substantiate
this reasoning. We believe that these authorities have been
misread, and in some instances, actually perverted, but be that as
it may, we have no concern about what human authorities may
say about which of the two forms is the purer. Our concern is with
what God says in the Word.

What Saith The Scriptures?
   Nowhere is the Bible is the word "wine" ever applied to the
Lord's Supper, which is exceedingly strange, if so be that this is
an absolute necessity to the scriptural observance of it. And our
Lord in His omniscience must surely have foreseen the great
controversies that would arise over this question. Why then did
He not in the beginning set the matter at rest and tell us that it had
to be fermented, if this was the case? The thunderous silence of
the Bible about this is surely significant, yet this significant silence
is drowned out by the loud voices of human reasoning and tradition
which are raised in defense of the fermented juice of the grape.
Now it is to be granted that the Lord's Supper is not to be found
in the Old Testament. But the question, which, in God's sight, is
the purer of the two elements, is settled by the Old Testament. Of
Israel's wilderness trek, it is said, "Thou didst drink the pure
blood of the grape
"
(Deut. 32:14), so that if we can determine
what Israel drank, we will know what the inspired word
designates as the pure element of the grape. A very similar
statement is found in Gen. 49:11: "Binding his foal unto the
vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his
garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes."

Here we see several things proven. (1) The blood of the grape is
found in the vine, not in the vat. (2) This fresh "blood" of the grape
is sometimes called "wine" though it is unfermented. Actually, the
Hebrew word for "wine" here means only that it is "pressed out."
It is a generic term for the extract of the grape, irregardless of its
condition. (3) Since the "blood" of the grape is found in the vine,
then the pure blood of the grape is the unfermented juice of the
grape.
   Further proof of this is found in Deut. 29:6: "Ye have not
eaten bread, neither have ye drunk wine or strong drink: that
ye might know that I am the Lord your God."
God fed the
Israelites on manna, and they drank of the pure juice of the grape
which they pressed out from the vines in their wilderness trek.
They drank no fermented wine nor other alcoholic beverages

during the forty years in the wilderness, so neither of these could
have been pure blood of the grape, which, for the Bible
believer
, makes it clear what God considers to be the pure blood
of the grape. To which then shall we submit ourselves, tradition,
human reasoning or the Scriptures?

God Has Spoken
   And we are not at liberty to dissent or disobey. Granted,
human reasoning can bring up objections, difficulties and
questions, but not one of these can stand against God's clear
declaration. He has declared that only that "blood" of the grape
which is found in the vine is the "pure" blood of the grape, so that
this must be our element if we would use the pure element in our
observance of the Lord's Supper. We are then faced with a
decision. Will we obey the Scriptures, or will we go with the
traditions and reasonings of the religious world, the majority of
which uses the fermented extract of the grape? It will take
considerable courage to stand against the practice of the
generality of the religious world, and many do not have the moral
courage to take such a stand. Do you?
The Lord's Supper Is A Symbolic Ordinance
   If the "fruit of the vine" is not pure by nature, but must be
purified by a process of fermentation, will this not suggest to the
thoughtful person that Christ was not naturally pure, but that He
had to undergo some sort of purification before He could redeem
men? But on the other hand, if, as the Bible declares, the "pure
blood of the grape" is found naturally in the vine, then this
corresponds exactly with what we know to be Christ's true state:
he is indeed a "Lamb without blemish and without spot" I Peter
1:19), and needed no purification before He went to the cross. Let
us praise God for this native purity, but let us also practice the
ordinance in such a way as to symbolize this truth.
Objections Answered
   No objections, difficulties and questions have any weight
when God's Word clearly speaks, as it has in this matter, and we
should not think that they justify the disregarding of God's Word.
In truth, where there is a confrontation between these, it is
generally because the objections, difficulties and questions have
arisen through a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the
facts. Let us note some of these.
   It is objected that there is leavening in the natural juice of the
grape, and that this is purged out in the process of fermentation.
ANSWER: there is indeed leavening in grape juice, but there is
a much higher degree of leavening in fermented wine, so much
so that to set off the process of fermentation, fermented wine is
introduced to grape juice to hasten the process. Thus, relatively
speaking, the fresh grape juice is the purer of the two, as the
Scriptures above show. But as we have previously noted,
nowhere is the liquid element of the Lord's Supper declared to
symbolize the purity of Christ's blood. This is symbolized in the
unleavened bread, which represents Christ's body, including the
blood in His body. Quotations have been made from human
authors to show that in the fermentation process, leaven is purged
out so that fermented wine is free of leaven. It would be

interesting to find these books and examine them (I have never
been able to locate a copy of any of them) to see if this is what
they really say, or if they do not rather say that in the fermentation
process, there is produced a "pure leaven", which is a vastly
different thing than being purified of leaven. A pure leaven is one
which is nothing but leaven, having no other ingredients or
impurities. This is what fermented wine is, a pure leaven, which,
when introduced to grape juice, quickly leavens it also. If this is
what the human authorities really say, then obviously we should
shun the fermented wine if we would use the pure element. On
the other hand, if they do, as claimed, state that the fermented
wine is purer of leavening than the unfermented, then they set
themselves against the Scriptures considered above, and they
still should have no weight with us, and we still ought to shun the
fermented element.
   Another objection is that Baptist have long used the
fermented element and only since the arisal of Temperance
movements have they thought otherwise. ANSWER: this is
arguing from Baptist traditions, and Matt. 15:3 applies to
Baptist tradition with equal force as against Jewish, Catholic and
Protestant tradition. Where the Scripture has spoken, it is sin to
follow tradition where it digresses from Scripture. To place Baptist
practice above the Bible is to do just exactly what Catholicism and
Protestantism has done for centuries in elevating their traditions
above the Bible. God forbid that we should be guilty of such a sin.
   Again it is objected that New Testament churches must have
used fermented wine since members of the Corinthian church got
drunk at the perversion of the Lord's Supper. ANSWER: nothing
is said of any person getting drunk at the Lord's Table in Corinth.
If one reads carefully I Cor. 11:20-21 he will find that
the condition described was already existing "when ye come
together into one place,"
(verse 20) and resulted from "every one
taking before other his own supper."
  This unconcern for the
needs of fellow church members created a division between them
that made it impossible to scripturally observe the Lord's Supper,
verse 21 f margin:) "Ye cannot eat the Lord's Supper." Not only
so, but the Greek word rendered "drunken" in verse 21 (methuel)
means only "satiated", and while this would be equivalent to
drunkenness if applied to spirituous liquors, yet in this case, being
used in opposition to "hungry", shows that it has to do with
overeating while neglecting the hungry brother, a sin in the light
of I John 3:17. Certainly, there is no evidence here to prove that
fermented wine was ever used in the Corinthian church, and it is
a going beyond what is written to claim so.
   Then it is objected that Jesus must have used fermented wine
since He used the common elements of the Passover supper
when He instituted the Lord's Supper. ANSWER: the reader will
probably be amazed, as was the writer, to learn that fermented
wine was never a part of the Passover celebration by divine
command or example. That the Jews used fermented wine in their
perverted celebration of the Passover may or may not be true, but
this in no way proves that it was used by Jesus and the disciples,
and it is purely gratuitous assumption to claim it, It is irrelevant

what the Jews used in the Passover, for if the New Testament
does not command the use of the fermented wine, or show an
example of it, we are not obligated to use it, nor should we use it.
   Another objection is that grape juice could not be preserved
for any length of time apart from fermentation, and so this must
have been the most common element in use. ANSWER: William
Patton in his "Bible Wines, or The Laws of Fermentation", a very
informative book in this controversy, shows that grape juice could
be preserved in at least five other ways than fermentation, and
that all were common methods of preservation in ancient time,
so that anyone who desired to, could have unfermented grape
juice at any season of the year for use as a beverage, or in the
Lord's Supper.

SUMMATION
   Human reasoning and tradition can be used as an argument
to sustain the use of fermented wine; but at the same time,
human reasoning and tradition can also be called to witness
against it, which only shows that these are not reliable bases for
the practice. The one and only authority for the elements in the
Lord's Supper is the inspired and infallible Word of God, which
speaks of the elements of this ordinance as being "the cup . . .the
fruit of the vine." If churches would use the pure fruit of the vine,
then according to the teaching of the Holy Writ, it must be what
Israel found growing upon the vines in their wilderness trek--the
pure blood of the grape, Deut 32:14; Gen. 49:11, which was
neither fermented wine nor strong drink, Deut. 29:6. This is what
the Scripture saith, and this shapes our responsibility as to the
liquid element of the Lord's Supper. You may reason out a
contrary conclusion, but it will be contrary--contrary to the Word
of God. What then will YOU use when you come to the Lord's
Table?   The pure blood of the grape or something else which
human reason or tradition may dictate?
Adapted from the author's booklet
THE ORDINANCES OF THE CHURCH.

[ Christian Helps Ministry (USA) ] [ Christian Home Bible Course ]