/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>675284

Wine in the OT = fermented grape juice which makes one drunk, i.e. what we typically associate with wine today.

By NT times the meaning was modified to mean either regular grape juice or the fermented kind, as the Greek word oinos itself demonstrates. Since the Bible clearly warns against wine as sinful, and we know Jesus was sinless, we can deduce that he used grape juice not wine.

"Apostolics" BTFO!

>>675302

>le wacky sedevacantist

Hesse is a meme

Attacking people for drinking. Where have I heard that before?

>The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' (Luke.7:34)

But at least we all remember the wedding at Cana:

>and said, "Everyone brings out the choice GRAPE JUICE first and then the cheaper GRAPE JUICE after the guests have had too much SOBRIETY; but you have saved the best till now." (Pastor Jim.2:10)

>Drunkenness=drinking as a whole

Yeah, no. Good thing that Christ did use whole of Bible: Wine taken with sobriety is equal life to men: if thou drink it moderately, thou shalt be sober.

>>675325

"It remains for the new preachers to point out those falsehoods of which they accuse these books; which they will in truth never do. But I see them coming, bringing forward the intercession of Saints, prayer for the dead, free-will, the honouring of relics, and similar points, which are expressly confirmed in the Books of Machabees, in Ecclesiasticus, and in other books which they pretend to be apocryphal. For God’s sake take care that your judgment does not deceive you. Why, I pray you, do you call false, things which the whole of antiquity has held as articles of faith? Why do you not rather censure your fancies which will not embrace the doctrine of these books, than censure these books which have been received for so long a time because they do not jump with your humour? Because you will not believe what the books teach, you condemn it; why do you not rather condemn your presumption which is incredulous to their teaching?"

- St. Francis De Sales

If you reject the "apocrypha" why accept the rest of Sacred Scripture? The Church affirmed it for you.

Or, do you take it that the Jews have authority over the Christian canon?

"As to your saying that these books which you call apocryphal are not received by the Jews, you say nothing new or important. S. Augustine loudly exclaims: “It is the Catholic Church which holds the Books of Machabees as canonical, not the Jews.” (De. Civ. Dei. Xviii. 36.) Show me from Scripture that the Christian Church has not as much power to give authority to the sacred books as the Mosaic may have had. There is not in this either Scripture or reason to show for it."

If you believe in Transubstantiation why does it matter whether the grape juice is alcoholic or not, seeing as it will ultimately become Jesus' blood?

>>675394

If you're doing it in memory of Him it helps to remember it right.

>>675405

It's still the Fruit of the Vine

>>675325

Are you aware that Luther cut up the Bible literally because the kikes told him to?

Great job parroting the lies of the synagogue of Satan without even knowing. Top protestantism.

>>675341

>the church affirmed it for you

the church whose priests and prophets follow after the ways of baalim even to this day, anon. if christian church history has led to where it is today, then therebye do we know its fruits.

>>675409

It's not wine if it's not alcoholic.

It's not bread if it's not leavened.

>>675284

>*Jesus turns water into wine at a wedding feast*

<"Jews drank fruit juice at festivities I s-swear!"

>*No mention of fruit juice in the bible whatsoever, no knowledge to make and preserve fruit juice either*

>"Wine actually meant juice!"

Seriously protestants win gold on the Olympic games for mentaly gymnastics by a huge margin.

>>675419

Luther hated jews silly. He cut out the Catholic Bible because Masoretic text is much earlier then Septuagint which didn't have thosr catholic books

>>675584

>>675588

If Transubstantiation is the true doctrine then it doesn't matter what the original items used were because they are annihilated when they become the Body and Blood. I'm sure the wine used in Communion isn't the same as that Jesus used in Palestine 2000 years ago. Insisting on it being X and Y just smacks of Memorialism.

>>675590

The Septuagint was the Christian Old Testament for centuries, the Masoretic text was used by Jews to discount Christianity. Protestant Bibles are literally based on Jewish texts. Not surprised though considering that so many of your are "Christian" Zionists. >>675590

>>675593

>If Transubstantiation is the true doctrine then it doesn't matter what the original items used were because they are annihilated when they become the Body and Blood.

Wrong, they still have the outer appearance of bread and wine.

Christ used wine when he said "This is my blood", so we also use wine.

>I'm sure the wine used in Communion isn't the same as that Jesus used in Palestine 2000 years ago.

'The exact same' isn't an argument, we use the same kind of liquid, namely wine which is different from fruit juice.

Also as what you said here >>675394

>If you believe in Transubstantiation why does it matter whether the grape juice is alcoholic or not, seeing as it will ultimately become Jesus' blood?

This is like saying why does the bible or going to church on sunday matter if the only thing you need for your salvation is faith.

>>675590

He didn't hate Jews early on, it was only after he got burned by the Jews and the damage was already done.

From the essay "That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew" 1523 Martin Luther

> If I had been a Jew and had seen such dolts and blockheads govern and teach the Christian faith, I would sooner have become a hog than a Christian.

They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property

> I hope that if one deals in a kindly way with the Jews and instructs them carefully from Holy Scripture, many of them will become genuine Christians and turn again to the faith of their fathers, the prophets and patriarchs. They will only be frightened further away from it if their Judaism is so utterly rejected that nothing is allowed to remain, and they are treated only with arrogance and scorn. If the apostles, who also were Jews, had dealt with us Gentiles as we Gentiles deal with the Jews, there would never have been a Christian among the Gentiles. Since they dealt with us Gentiles in such brotherly fashion, we in our turn ought to treat the Jews in a brotherly manner in order that we might convert some of them. For even we ourselves are not yet all very far along, not to speak of having arrived.

1546 Martin Luther writes "On the Jews and Their Lies"

>>675284

is that a small cup of maple syrup with a teaspoon of butter?

>>675284

Is this a joke?

>>675307

Baptists and nondenoms aren't protestant. Protestants broke from the Church of Rome.

>>675711

Baptists are protestant, your entire tradition is sprung from puritans

>>675579

>the church whose priests and prophets follow after the ways of baalim even to this day, anon

If all you have are lies to back up your presumption, it is surely grievously sinful, anon.

>if christian church history has led to where it is today, then therebye do we know its fruits.

The biggest Christian and longest running Church of all-time? There's a reason why the Catholic Church traces itself back to Christ, your man-made church cannot say the same.

>>675819

>longest running church of all time

>vatican 2

>>675821

Get behind me, Satan.

>>675823

that's my line.

>>676167

Satan cannot be divided against himself, so I doubt that.