Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
Right now, our session is thinking through the wine we serve in the Lord's Supper. The discussion has gone to several places, including what it means to be "fruit of the vine". Some have said that something like blueberry or blackberry wine would be completely inappropriate because it does not grow on the vine, but on the brambles. Aside from failing to meet the Words of Scripture, the imagery of life associated with the vine is lost. In thinking through this, I have mentioned that the Lord chose bread and wine as a simple meal that could be replicated almost anywhere in the world. I began to wonder if there is, in fact, any place in the world that the native "fruit of the vine" could not be pressed and drunk?
On another note, the argument has been made that the wine drunk in New Testament times was heavily watered down and would not have "gladdened the heart" or tasted anything like the wine we drink from bottles today. What is the historical support (if any) here? I find it difficult to believe that Christ, on the night He instituted the Lord's Supper, would have used something that was more water than wine.
On another note, the argument has been made that the wine drunk in New Testament times was heavily watered down and would not have "gladdened the heart" or tasted anything like the wine we drink from bottles today. What is the historical support (if any) here? I find it difficult to believe that Christ, on the night He instituted the Lord's Supper, would have used something that was more water than wine.
