LIBERTY

In these last days the liberty of believers in Christ has been mortgaged by self serving and self appointed hirelings who parade themselves as ministers of Christ. These uninformed teachers of the bible impose their own piety on vulnerable believers who look up to them for guardianship. Today you hear of many ‘don’ts’; don’t touch, don’t taste, and don’t handle. Such doctrines have indeed the outward appearance (that popularly) passes for wisdom, in promoting self imposed rigor of devotion and delight in self humiliation and severity to the body, but are of no value in checking the indulgence of the flesh (Col. 2:20-23).

This voluntary self-abasement and severity to the body does not honor nor impress God in any way. The bible says; add not to his word else he will rebuke thee and thou be found a liar (Pro. 30:5-6). Moreover he asked, “Who had been his counselor”? (Rom. 11:35). There is only one lawgiver (God); who are you to judge another, in food or drink? (James 4:12). God is not in need of counselors to aid him in outlining the virtues of true holiness. The bible said, “it is not he who commends himself that is approved, but he whom the Lord commends” (2 Cor. 10:18). The doctrine that recommends abstention from intoxicants is false. No one can quote factually from any verse in the scriptures to support this assertion. This misguided doctrine is strongly upheld in the Pentecostal circles that it has become a taboo for a born again Christian to drink beer or palm wine or any other alcoholic drink. They held this doctrine fast as if we are yet under the law, (which stood in meats and drinks and diverse washings, and carnal ordinances Heb.9: 10). We know that the kingdom of God is not in food and drink, as if foods do commend us unto God (Rom.14: 17, 1 Cor.8:8).

The son of man came eating and drinking (wine) and they called him a wine bibber (Matt 11:19). Was it not because Jesus was drinking wine publicly that made the Pharisees to call him a wine bibber? The word rendered in KJV as “wine bibber” is called oinopotes in Greek, which means, a tippler. To tipple means, to booze. That is, to drink intoxicating liquor excessively. The Pharisee called Jesus a boozer, maligning him as one who engaged in drinking bouts because he drank alcohol in their presence. If it were only grape juice that Christ imbibed how would they have called him oinopotes (winebibber).

In Cana of Galilee Christ turned water into wine (John 2:1-10). In Greek the word ‘wine’ is called ‘oinos’, and it means, an intoxicating drink (made from grapes or other juices). Even in English (Chambers Concise Dictionary) wine is explained as “the fermented juice of grapes; an alcoholic drink made from other fruits”. Wine must contain alcohol; if it has no alcohol it is not wine. Some people due to ignorance call grape juice - wine, which is not true. In the bible there are different syllables used for the by products of grapes. In the Hebrew language the grapes fruit is called ‘enab’ (Num. 13:23), while grape juice is called mishraw or tirosh, (this is, an unfermented grape juice, Gen. 40:10-11, Num. 6:3).When grape juice is boiled it forms syrup, like honey, ( molasses). It tastes like honey, and is called ‘debash’ in Hebrew. The Jews use it as honey, and offer it to the priests (2 Chron.31: 5); but God rejected the natural honey of bees (Lev.2: 11). The Hebrew name for wine is YAYIN, that is, the fermented juice of grapes, (or fermentation). (Gen. 9: 20, Num. 6: 20,2 Sam 13: 28). Vinegar is called Chomets, (Pro.10: 26). Strong drink is called Shekar, which means an intensely alcoholic liquor (Deut. 14: 26). With these we know that the bible did not confuse syllables while speaking of these substances. Therefore, where the bible said, wine, it meant ‘an alcoholic drink’.

That Yayin or Oinos connotes alcoholic drink, could be proved further, and is understandable by how the fermentation process of wine is spoken of in some portions of the bible. Examples are Prov. 3: 10, Luke 5:37, Mark 2:22, thy presses shall burst out with new wine…else the new wine will burst the wineskin, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. All these verses imply fermentation. That is, as the enzymes metabolizes the yeast (in the juice) into carbon- dioxide and ethanol (alcohol H3C.CH3): it will reach an energy level (118kj) that a weak press or old wineskin could not assimilate, and then it will burst. Fresh wine made from grapes could contain, as much as 25% volume of alcohol, while stored wine has about 18%, one could dilute to his own taste, (to a lower percentage). While the average alcoholic volume in a lager beer is 5%; stout could have as much as 7.5%. The communion wine commonly in use in the Churches contains 15% alcoholic volume. Which of these drinks is not inebriating?

Some assume that the wine that Christ miraculously made from water was non-alcoholic. It is illusory for one to posit such a baseless doctrine. Such assertion is a euphemism for the denial of that miracle. Since the bible said that the Lord turned water into wine, it is better to believe it so, else we are making the bible a liar for claiming that Christ turned water into wine. Despite these differences of opinion, it is evident that the water actually turned into an intoxicant from what is written in the book of John 2:10; for the governor of the feast said “Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men are drunk, then the worse: but thou hast kept the good wine (oinos) until now”.

The confirmation by the governor of the feast of the high quality of the wine Jesus made insinuated that both previous and the later wine were of the same biochemical substance, but the later was better than the first, (just as one orange may be sweeter than others, yet all are oranges). He said also that, “men were drunk” with the old wine, therefore their mental capability might not accommodate the spirit in the new wine. If Christ’s miraculous wine was a soft drink there would have been no need for the chairman of the occasion to complain; because the soft drink could serve as a dilution to the alcohol that they have drunk. The Greek word used for ‘drunk’ here is “methuo”, that is, to drink to intoxication. Since Christ gave large quantity of alcoholic drink estimated at, between 480 liters and 720 liters (at 40 liters a firkin) to the wedding guests at Cana in Galilee, , how could one justify the doctrine that prohibits believers from drink alcohol? The bible says that what prompted Christ to turn water into wine was because his disciples wanted wine, because both Jesus and his disciples were invited to the marriage; and when they wanted wine” (John 2:1-3). Therefore the wine provided by Christ was mainly for him and his disciples. With this Christ had taught by action that his disciples were free to drink alcoholic drinks. They even reserve the right to ask him to give them money with which to buy alcohol, because it was at their request that he provided the wine at the wedding.

THE USE OF WINE IN THE SERVICE OF GOD: WHAT MYSTERY?

From the time of Abraham, wine had been employed in the religion of true worshippers of God. When Melchizedek (the Priest of the Most High God) visited Abraham on a religious mission: (for he came with blessings for Abraham from the Most High God); he gave bread and wine to Abraham (Gen. 14:18). After God talked with Jacob at El-Bethel he set up a pillar of stone in that place and poured a libation of a drink offering unto God on the stone (Gen. 35:14).

During the era of the Law of Moses wine was employed in the services of God, (daily oblations were incomplete without wine). The daily sacrifices of two lambs, offered, one in the morning, and the other in the evening, were offered, each, with ¼ of a hin of wine (One liter) as a drink offering (Ex. 29:40-41). Wine was offered as a sweet savour made by fire (burnth offering) unto God (Num. 15:7-10). Not only this, but strong wine was also offered at the altar during Sabbaths, new moon, and feasts of unleavened bread (Num. 28: 7-31, Num. 29:6-39). To buttress this point the bible says in Judges 9:13 that wine cheers God and man; thus proving that God is delighted in wine being offered to him.

Christ fulfilled this part of the daily libation when he confirmed that he actually is the true vine, which produced the wine (John 15:1). The scriptures explained that wine is not regarded as an ordinary agricultural produce, but as blood. As written in Deut. 32: 14, Gen. 49:11 …thou shall drink the pure blood of grapes…he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes. Before God, wine alternates for blood, because it contains spirit (ethanol).

When the enzyme in the yeast (zymase), which is inherent in the grape juice, breaks down sugar into carbon dioxide and alcohol; this biosynthesis will make the fluid to become spirituous. Then it becomes a lively drink that needs no artificial preservative (if sealed); for the spirit in it preserves it. Therefore wine has spirit in it, which qualifies it to substitute for blood.

WINE IN THE LORD’S SUPPER

The Lord’s Supper was instituted with a spirituous drink – wine. In Matt. 26: 27-29 it is written, 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 the remission of sins. I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until the day I drink it new with you in my father’s kingdom”. Some people argue that what Christ gave unto his disciples in place of his blood was not wine, rather it was grape juice. They hinge their argument on the fact that the English bible used the syllable “ fruit” (of the vine). This contention is borne out of ignorance, because they didn’t have access to the original manuscript and language. In the Greek bible the word used was, “gennema ampelos”, that is, ‘the issue of the vine’ not ‘karpos ampelos’, which stands for: the “fruit” of the vine.

It is more proper to say, “The product which issued out of the vine”, because biochemical changes have occurred. Assuming that only ‘the fruit of the vine’ was written, it means that it actually indicated stability. It means that the fruit is in its raw state – i.e., no biosynthesis has taken place. But what is written is, ‘of the fruit of the vine’; the preposition; “of” must be noted, because it showed a connection between ‘the fruit of the vine’ and another product. To some seeing that the word “fruit” is contained in the statement, is to them an indication of the juicy content of the cup, but it is not so. Reason: yeast is inherent in the juice of grapes, naturally (yeast is a parasitic fungus). Remember that the Law says in Exo. 12: 15-19…seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses, for whosoever that eats any thing with leaven shall die; (this is normally during the feast of Passover/unleavened bread). Christ who knew the law well would not have used grape juice for the feast of unleavened bread because grape juice contains yeast. We know that Christ was crucified on the day that the Passover was to be killed that is, in the day in which yeast is not to be found in Israel (Luke 22:7-15).

Having seen that it was impossible for Christ to have used grape juice for the Passover, it was impossible for him to have given the apostles grape juice as his blood; seeing that the grape juice contains no spirit (ethanol)? What ever must be used to represent the blood of Christ must have spirit in it; because the life of the flesh (which is the spirit thereof) is in the blood (Lev. 17: 11). The bible said further; it is the spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing. The body without the Spirit is dead (John 6:63, James 2:26). Therefore, a communion of the body and blood of Christ without spirit is dead. In Hebrew 9:14, the bible said…. the blood of Christ who through eternal Spirit offered himself. The blood of Christ which we drink was offered not without Spirit. It is also through this communion of Christ’s blood that we allegorically drink of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12: 12-13). For as we drink the blood we drink also of the Spirit in it (a type of Holy Spirit). Churches that use juices for Holy Communion are eating a dead Supper. The story in 1 Cor. 10: 20-21 shows how the Corinthian Church gathered to break bread but some were made drunk with the communion wine due to their intemperate disposition. It shows that communion wine contains alcohol. Apostle Paul did not tell them to stop using that kind of wine but he admonished them to eat and drink with decorum (1 Cor. 11: 33-34). If Christians are instructed to drink alcohol even at the presence of God, (at the Lord’s Table) how would it become unholy if they drink the same alcoholic beverage in his private life? Apostle Paul asked the Corinthians - have you not houses to drink in them? (1 Cor. 11: 22). It proves further that they reserve the right to drink alcohol in their private lives.

ILLEGAL MANUVERING

Some in their quest to strengthen the obnoxious man made law of abstinence from alcoholic drinks have cleverly twisted the scriptures to convince the simple to believe that alcohol drives away Holy Spirit from the life of a believer. They base their argument wrongly on the premise that since the Law of Moses forbade priests from drinking wine (when they go into the temple to minister Lev. 10:9); that we as priests ought to avoid wine too. My answer to them is, if our High Priest Christ Jesus drank wine should we who are lower priests pretend to be holier than our high Priest? In the Old Testament the best wine was for Aaron; therefore even in the old dispensation Aaron and his sons drank wine normally (Num.18: 12). Moreover, are we supposed to be judged by the law of the Levitical priesthood - are we under that Law? Some refer to the instruction given to Lemuel by his mother in Prov.31:1-7, “it is not for kings, O Lemuel to drink wine”. They say, since we are Kings we ought not to drink wine. Are we kings as yet? No, but we shall reign (Rev.5: 10). Yet kings drank wine Solomon had a vineyard at Baal-hamon (Songs 8:11-12). Others say that we should avoid wine like the Rechabites; yet refusing to note that Rechabites built not houses, but lived in tents, neither did they farm (Jer.35: 1-11). However, these disciples of the Rechabites build houses and own farms. Are we called to follow Christ or the Rechabites? Did the bible say looking unto the Rechabites, or looking unto Jesus? Others equate us with Nazarites, like Samson and John the Baptist, saying, “if one is filled with Holy Spirit he must not drink wine, because John the Baptist being filled with the Spirit from the womb was forbidden from drinking wine”. Who among us is filled with the Holy Spirit more than Christ? (The only begotten of the Father, in whom are the seven spirits of God Rev.5:6). Why should one even instruct Christians to walk by the law of the Nazarites, [a vow]? (Num.6: 1-8).

The bible is replete with the injunction: “do not be drunk with wine wherein is excess” (Eph. 5: 18, Titus 2:3 etc.). Wine is a mocker, unto those who tarry long till wine inflames them (Pro. 20: 1, Pro. 23: 29-35). Let no man Judge you in food or drink…all things are lawful unto me (Coll. 2: 16, 1 Cor. 6: 12). The scriptures are in no way against a believer in what he eats (naturally). Naturally, I say because smoking of cigarette or hemp, opium and the sniffing of cocaine or heroin or the snuffing of tobacco are not eaten naturally. (All these are poisons and are eaten contrary to the law of nature). It amounts to changing the natural use to that which is against nature, such acts prompt God to give one a reprobate mind (Rom. 1: 26). When Christ spoke in Matt. 15: 10-18, he said, what a person eats through the mouth does not defile the person: he went further to explain that what he meant was, things that are eaten through natural means and undergoes a natural digestive process and is cast out into the draught. Things that proceed from the heart, like evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, theft etc; defile a man. True followers of Christ believe these words of the Lord. Therefore they eat and drink what they would yet being temperate in all things, being led of the Holy Spirit: eating everything to the glory of God and giving thanks (1 Cor. 10: 30-31). Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it were received with thanksgiving (1 Tim. 4: 4). If yet any man seems to be contentious, we have no such custom in the Churches of Christ (1 Cor. 11:16). Finally, let no man judge you in food or in drink Coll.2:16.