 | |
| FRUIT OF THE VINE |
| by Lonnie Kent York |
| Bible Text from New King
James Version |
| The night that our Lord instituted the memorial for His death
is a hallmark of history. The events of that evening have been
debated throughout the centuries, yet the simplicity of this
institution defies the wisdom of man. Often, in the simple things,
God expresses deep truths. We miss such truths because we are
seeking something beyond what God intended. We need to examine the
Lord's Supper in its simplicity. What do the elements of the Lord's
Supper memorialize? To learn this, we must study the Lord Supper in
its scriptural and historical setting. This study will reveal the
great wisdom of God in His selection of the elements of the Lord's
Supper. |
| Throughout the scriptures we see spiritual things in triplets.
The three dispensations; the three members of the Godhead; the three
parts of man (body, soul and spirit); and many other triplets. The
spiritual number of Christ is three, and this is His perfect number.
In the Passover, there were three literal elements to represent
three spiritual reminders of Israel's deliverance from bondage. The
ratifying of a covenant always required three elements: the body of
sacrifice, the blood of the sacrifice, and the covenant ratified by
the blood. A similar triplet can be found in the emblems of the
Lord's Supper. |
| From the texts where we read about the institution of the
Lord's Supper we find the following facts. |
- Our Lord took bread (a loaf of unleavened bread) and blessed
this loaf of bread.
- Our Lord interpreted this to mean that the loaf "is my
body which is given for you."
- Our Lord took a cup and blessed this cup. He then gave this
cup to the disciples with the following command -- "Drink
from it, all of you."
- Our Lord then gave the interpretation for this cup. In
Matthew and Mark we find the reference is from the perspective
of the contents of the cup. In Luke and Paul's writings we have
it from the perspective of the container.
- Our Lord then said that as often as they would eat this bread
and drink from this cup that they would show forth His death
till He would come again.
|
| Over the centuries a lot has been written regarding the three
elements in the Lord's Supper. Some elements have received more
attention than others. This does not mean that one part is more
important than the other, rather that some have either questioned or
brought into dispute one more than the other. One element that has
not had as much modern day attention is the contents of the cup.
What was in the cup? What must me have in the cup today? These are
vital questions, and we shall answer these and other questions about
the contents of the cup. |
| We do not have to wonder what was
contained within the cup that our Lord blessed. Our Lord told us
what was in this cup. It was the "fruit of the vine."
|
| We do not have to wonder what was
contained within the cup that our Lord blessed. Our Lord told us
what was in this cup. It was the "fruit of the vine."
|
| Mark 14:25 "Assuredly, I say to
you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day
when I drink it new in the kingdom of God." |
| Luke 22:18 "For I say to you, I
will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God
comes." |
|
| These are the only verses that mention the contents of the cup
in the institution of the Lord's Supper. If we simply take the
Lord's statement, that it was the fruit of the vine, then we have no
problem with understanding what we must use. However, there have
been many, over the centuries, that have claimed that the cup
contained something vastly different. The contention became so great
during the time of the restoration movement in the United States,
that some denominations substituted either water or nothing in the
cup to resolve the disputes. This did not resolve the problem, it
merely avoided the truth. |
| The phrase "fruit of the vine" is another way to
refer to the juice of the grape. The "fruit of the vine"
or grape juice is something that is not fermented. We are now
stating this as fact, however, the proof of this statement will be
developed as we progress in this material. First, we must consider
some foundational truths that will aid us in our investigation of
the drink element of the Lord's Supper. |
| UNITY OF SYMBOL |
| The night that our Lord instituted the Lord's
Supper He took a loaf of unleavened bread. He also took a cup
containing the fruit of the vine. There were two things that He
handled, yet there were three elements within the two. To understand
the meaning of the Lord's Supper, we must recognize that there are
three important elements in this supper. Each of these elements is
there for a definite purpose. God has never set something up for His
people by happenstance. There is always a purpose and design in what
He does. There is a unity of symbols in the three elements of the
Lord's Supper. The key to this unity can be found in the words of
Paul: |
| 1 Corinthians 11:26 For
as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the
Lord's death till He comes. |
| This verse tells us that whenever we partake of
the emblems of the Lord's Supper, we are "proclaiming" the
Lord's death. This word "proclaim" or in the KJV "show
forth" comes from "kataggello" and means to "proclaim
or teach." This word is used elsewhere in the scriptures to
show that when something is done, there is teaching or demonstration
occurring. Whenever we partake of the elements of the Lord's Supper,
we are not only remembering the death of the Lord, we are
demonstrating (teaching) others what occurred in the death of our
Lord. If we are teaching, or demonstrating the death of our Lord, we
need to lean what occurred in the death of our Lord. The elements of
the Lord's Supper must proclaim those events that occurred in our
Lord's death. Herein we shall learn the unity of the symbols. |
| What do we proclaim in the Lord's death? Our Lord
did three very important things in His death. Each of these is
symbolized in the elements of the Lord's supper. The three things
accomplished by the Lord's death can be found in the three things
necessary to ratify a covenant. In all Biblical covenants, there had
to be a body that was sacrificed; the blood of the sacrificed body;
the covenant or agreement that was made binding only after the
shedding of the blood of the sacrifice. |
| When we partake of the loaf, which represents the
body of our Lord, we are showing that our Lord gave His body freely
as the sacrifice necessary to establish the New Covenant. Before any
covenant could become effective, there had to be a sacrifice. This
sacrifice was a symbol of unity and binding force between all who
would come into covenant with each other. Under the Old Covenant the
body of sacrifice also was a symbol of what would happen to anyone
who broke covenant. The sacrifice was slain and had to forfeit its
life. If anyone broke covenant, their fate was symbolized by the
body that was sacrificed in ratifying the covenant. The sacrificed
body of our Lord not only represented all the animal sacrifices
under the Old Covenant, it was also the body that was necessary to
establish the new covenant. |
| Hebrews 10:4-5 For it
is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away
sins. Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: "Sacrifice
and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for
Me." |
| Christ came into this world so that He could
establish the New Covenant. This could only happen by His death.
Christ could not die in His deity, so God prepared a body for Him to
inhabit. He was made a man, after the likeness of men, so that He
could die. This idea is taught in detail in Hebrews chapter two and
eight. The essential thing for us to remember is that it took the
body of the Lord in sacrifice so that we could come into a covenant
relationship with God. Every time that we partake of the communion
of the body of our Lord, we are showing forth this sacrifice. We are
teaching others that it took the sacrifice of our Lord's body to
bring us into covenant with God. |
| The next two things proclaimed by the Lord's
death, when we observe the communion of the blood, are united in a
way that they cannot be viewed apart. Christ shed His blood, thereby
ratifying the covenant. Now the blood of the covenant is not the
covenant, neither is the covenant the blood of the covenant. They
are distinct, yet cannot be separated from each other. Without the
one the other could not be effective. |
| Paul recognized this unity of symbol when he
reflects back upon the establishment of the first covenant God made
between Himself and Israel. |
| Hebrews 9:19-20 For
when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to
the law, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water, scarlet
wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the
people, saying, "This is the blood of the covenant which God
has commanded you." |
| From this account, we see that the blood came from
the calves and goats that were sacrificed to ratify the covenant.
The book of the covenant was something different from the blood.
When Moses sprinkled the blood on the covenant and the people, this
became a binding symbol of the unity of God with His children
through that covenant. The covenant, although presented to Moses in
the mount many months before this event, did not become binding
until this ceremony. It took blood to make it binding. |
| What wisdom God displayed in giving us this unity
of the blood and the covenant ratified by the blood. What better
symbol for this unity than a cup and its contents! An empty cup is
of no value to people. Like the covenant written on stone, it was of
no value until the blood made it binding. The cup, with its contents
(the fruit of the vine), is the united and unbroken symbol. The cup,
Paul says "is the new covenant in my blood." Thayer
implies that the expression "in my blood" means ratified
by my blood. |
| "Moreover, since Christ's dying blood served
to establish new religious institutions and a new relationship
between men and God, it is likened also to a federative or covenant
sacrifice: the blood by the shedding of which the covenant should be
ratified, Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24, or has been ratified, Heb. 10:29;
13:20 (cf. 9:20); add, 1 Cor. 11:25; Luke 22:20 ..." (page 15)
|
| The writers of the New Testament picture this
unity of symbol between the blood and the covenant: |
| Matthew 26:28 "For
this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins." |
| Luke 22:20 Likewise He
also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new
covenant in My blood, which is shed for you." |
| Although it seems that Matthew and Luke are saying
two different things about the cup, they are saying the same thing,
yet from different perspectives. These two statements give greater
force to the unity of the symbol of the cup and its contents. Just
as the blood is of no value without the covenant, so too, the
covenant is of no value without the blood. Matthew views the saying
from the contents of the cup, saying that "this is" the
blood which ratified the covenant. The expression "this is"
had reference to the drink element. Luke, however, concerning the
cup says "this is" the new covenant that is ratified by
the blood. Both the blood of the covenant and the covenant are
important. You cannot speak of one without speaking of the other.
|
| What wisdom God employs in this united symbol. It
is a simple, common, everyday necessity that God chose to show the
unity of the blood and the covenant. To separate the two, or exclude
the one does violence to God's wisdom. |
| Herein lies the significance of the expression "fruit
of the vine." God chose something that was a natural symbol of
blood to represent the shed blood of Christ. Without blood, Paul
says, there would be no remission of sins. Without the blood of
Christ there would be no remission of sins, nor a covenant between
God and man. |
|
| BLOOD AND THE FRUIT OF THE
VINE |
| After giving thanks for the cup, our Lord gave it
(the cup and its contents) to the disciples. He commanded them to
drink from this cup. According to Matthew and Mark, our Lord then
said: |
| Matthew 26:28 "For
this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins." |
| Mark 14:24 ..."This
is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many."
|
| The expression "this is" is a metaphor
and refers to the drink element contained in the cup. In the next
verse, Christ says that he would not drink from that time on of "this
fruit of the vine." We now have clearly stated what was
contained within the cup - fruit of the vine. This fruit of the
vine, in some way, by metaphor, resembles blood. This implies that
there are some characteristics of the fruit of the vine that would
bring to the mind the idea of blood. Can we discover this
relationship from the scriptures? If so, then we will possess a
direct correlation between the fruit of the vine and the blood of
Christ. There are two verses in the Old Testament that show that the
fruit of the vine's juice had reference to blood. |
| Genesis 49:11 Binding
his donkey to the vine, And his donkey's colt to the choice vine, He
washed his garments in wine, And his clothes in the blood of grapes.
|
| Deuteronomy 32:14 ...
And you drank wine, the blood of the grapes. |
| These two verses show that there is a direct
relationship between blood and the juice of the grape. The word for
blood in these verses is "dam" and is defined as "blood;
of wine (fig.)." Now blood is something that naturally exist
within the body. The blood is the life of the body (Lev. 17:14). The
juice of the grape is naturally within the grape, and is its life.
Again, the wisdom of God out weighs the wisdom of men. No better
element could have been chosen as the representative of the shed
blood of our Lord. The fruit of the vine aptly represents blood in
the communion: the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. |
| In the second text, Deut. 32:14, the KJV renders
this text by: "the pure blood of the grape." This word "pure"
comes from the Hebrew word "chemer" and occurs only in one
other verse, Isa. 27:2, where it is translated as a "vineyard
of red wine." The grapes that grow in this part of the world
are red or dark purple in nature. The juice from these grapes
resembles the color of blood. Again, we can see a correlation
between the juice of the grape and that of blood. |
| It was not an accident that our Lord had the fruit
of the vine present. He did not just use what was handy, rather
there was purpose and design in choosing the fruit of the vine to
represent His shed blood. Our Lord realized that we could make the
connection between the blood of the grape and the blood that He soon
would be shedding. He used something that was commonly understood in
His day and made the application to what we are to proclaim by His
death. |
|
| BLOOD OF THE COVENANT |
| Our Lord said that the fruit of the vine was the "blood
of the covenant." This aspect of the Lord's Supper is often
over looked. The blood of our Lord was shed, primarily to ratify the
New Covenant. It would take His death to establish the New Covenant.
Without the death of Christ, we could not have the New Covenant. As
long as Christ lived, the Old Covenant was in force. Paul
illustrated this point when writing to the Roman brethren. |
| Romans 7:4 Therefore,
my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body
of Christ, that you may be married to another -- to Him who was
raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God. |
| Paul also makes this point when writing to the
Hebrews. They were a covenant oriented people, therefore they
understood the significance of the blood and the covenant. Consider
carefully Paul's words: |
| Hebrews 9:16-20 For
where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the
death of the testator. For a testament is in force after men are
dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.
Therefore not even the first covenant was dedicated without blood.
For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according
to the law, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water,
scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all
the people, saying, "This is the blood of the covenant which
God has commanded you." |
| From this text, we can understand that the death
of Christ brought about the opportunity for the New Covenant to be
established. As long as Christ lived, He was under the Old Covenant.
It had life, therefore it was the law that Christ lived under. Upon
His death, the Old Covenant was removed. God prepared a body for
Christ so that he could die. This was the purpose of Christ's
earthly journey. Hebrews is filled with this theme about the body of
Christ being the sacrifice for our sins, and the establishment of
the new covenant. The new could not be established until the old was
removed. |
| Hebrews 10:9-10 ... "Behold,
I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first
that He may establish the second. By that will we have been
sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for
all. |
| When Christ shed His blood on the cross, His life
went from His body. In His death, the old covenant was removed as a
binding covenant between God and man (Col. 2:14). The New Covenant
was made effective by the blood that our Lord shed. It ratified the
covenant that He had presented throughout His ministry. Without the
shedding of the blood of our Lord, we could not have the covenant
relationship with God our Father. |
| When Luke and Paul wrote about the institution of
the Lord's Supper, they used the expression "This cup is the
new testament in my blood." The cup represented the covenant,
and the fruit of the vine the blood that was shed to ratify that
covenant. Together, the blood and the covenant show our relationship
with Christ. On the cross, Christ both shed His blood and died. In
His death, by shedding of blood, Christ established the New
Covenant. Whenever we partake of the communion of the blood of
Christ we are showing forth this event which occurred by the death
of our Lord. To show forth one without the other is to do violence
to God's wisdom. If we reject this idea, then we have rejected the
simple wisdom of God and the pattern established by our Father in
Heaven. |
| THE BLOOD WAS SHED FOR
REMISSION OF SINS |
| Matthew also said that the contents of the cup
represented the blood that our Lord would shed so that we can obtain
the forgiveness of our sins. This aspect of the communion of the
blood is acknowledged by all, however it is not the sole aspect of
our remembrance. What we need to point out is that the fruit of the
vine was not the literal blood of our Lord. His blood, when the
Lord's Supper was being instituted, had not been shed yet. It would,
however, be the symbol of what His shed blood would represent. |
| Christ was our Passover (1 Cor. 5:7) sacrificed
for us. The symbol of blood and the Passover is well known. All the
blood of the animals sacrificed under the Old Covenant was a picture
of the shed blood of Christ. Through the shedding of blood there is
forgiveness of sins. Without the shedding of the blood of Christ, we
could not have any hope of obtaining the forgiveness of our sins.
|
| Often, when we think of the communion of the blood
of Christ, we only view the aspect of the forgiveness of our sins.
This is part of what His blood was shed for, yet it also was shed to
ratify the New Covenant. In the unity of the cup and the fruit of
the vine, we have this dual symbol presented to our minds. The blood
was shed to give us the New Covenant (represented by the cup), and
this blood also was shed to cover our sins. |
| THE CUP OF BLESSING |
| When Paul wrote to the Corinthians regarding the
communion, he stated the following: |
| 1 Corinthians 10:16 The
cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood
of Christ? |
| Paul called the cup that we use in the communion a
"cup of blessing." The cup of blessing has reference to
the contents of the cup. What does this expression really have
reference to? This expression could well be translated by "this
cup, which contains a blessing." It was called a cup of
blessing because it contained a blessing - Not because it had been
blessed. The next statement shows that this cup of blessing received
the blessing, or thanksgiving. It was the cup of blessing over which
our Lord gave thanks. It is the cup of blessing that is the
communion of the blood of Christ. To learn what this blessing was,
we need to go to the Old Testament. |
| Isaiah 65:8 Thus says
the LORD: "As the new wine is found in the cluster, And one
says, 'Do not destroy it, For a blessing is in it,' So will I do for
My servants' sake, That I may not destroy them all." |
| The word for "new wine" is the Hebrew
word "tirosh." This is one of the many Hebrew words for
wine. Tirosh is used to refer to the fresh pressed juice of the
grape. The definition from the Theological Wordbook of the Old
Testament (TWOT) is significant. |
| "BDB defines tirosh as 'must, fresh or new
wine.' The word is used thirty-eight times, twenty of these in
conjunction with grain and/or oil as the fresh produce of the field.
It is said to be 'in the cluster' (Isa. 65:8); the vats or presses
overflow with it (Prov. 3:10; Joel 2:24). In Mic. 6:15 yayin 'wine'
(q.v.) is said to be produced from tirosh. The word is never
associated with drunkenness except perhaps in Hos. 4:11 where yayin
is also mentioned. It is natural to suppose that this word for a
product often associated with fruitfulness, productivity and
blessing is to be distinguished from the yayin and shekar (q.v.)
which definitely are intoxicating and are often mentioned together."
(Vol. II, p. 969) |
| This new wine, or fresh pressed juice of the
grape, is the blessing that was contained in the cluster. The
cluster refers to the cluster of grapes. The blessing was contained
within this cluster of grapes. It was called "new wine."
This new wine was not intoxicating, but fresh pressed juice of the
grape. In most of the occurrences of this word in the Old Testament,
it is associated with the produce of the land. This would be
something produced naturally from the produce, rather than something
that had to be manufactured by the process of man. |
| Under the tradition of the Jews of the Masoretic
period (500-1000 A.D.), they included a cup of unfermented grape
juice in their Passover observation. This cup was filled often
during their celebration of the Passover. One filling of this cup,
and the offering of a blessing, was over what became known as the
cup of blessing. Scholars have used the time of the Masoretic's as
the pattern for the observance of the Passover during the time of
our Lord. This, however, is not correct. The original institution of
the Passover did not have a cup of the fruit of the vine as one of
its emblems. When Paul referred to the "cup of blessing"
he was not referring to a tradition that would not come to past for
a few hundred years, but to the blessing that was in the cup. That
blessing was the fresh pressed juice of the grape. |
| The cup of blessing has two specific designations.
First, to the fruit of the vine, which was known as a blessing from
the produce of the land. Second, to the blessing that we, as
Christians, have from the shed blood of Christ. When we partake of
this cup of blessing, we then have fellowship (communion) with each
other. This was known as the "communion of the blood of Christ."
We have table fellowship with one another when we share in this cup
of blessing. |
| This cup of blessing also has reference to a
covenant meal. In this meal, those who were in covenant would share
in a common cup. This showed unity and renewal of the covenant
pledge. Whenever we partake of this cup of blessing, we are publicly
proclaiming that we are renewing our pledge to be faithful to the
New Covenant. |
| FRUIT OF THE VINE AND WINE |
| We have waited till this point in our material to
introduce the difference between the fruit of the vine and wine. In
the past, most articles on the contents of the cup have been
directed at the false doctrine of using something intoxicating in
the cup. I do not feel that this is the most important aspect of
this subject. The meaning and unity of the symbol should be what we
remember from this material. When we partake of the Lord's Supper,
we should be showing forth the death of our Lord. We should be
concerned that we are doing this just as the Lord intended. This is
the important message of the communion. |
| When the Lord instituted the communion He used the
phrase "fruit of the vine" instead of one of the words
that could have been translated by "wine." This should
settle the issue. There are those who need more proof that the fruit
of the vine is the only element that we must use in the cup our
Lord. We shall now present this proof. |
| The phrase, fruit of the vine, comes from the
following Greek words: tou gennhmato" th" ampelou. The
word for "fruit" is "gennema" and means: "that
which has been born or begotten; the offspring or progeny of men or
animals: the fruits of the earth, the produce of agriculture."
The word for "vine" is "ampelos" and its
definition is simply "a vine." The word "vine"
as it appears in the scriptures always has reference to the grape
vine. In only one situation, that being the Old Testament, it has
reference to a gourd plant. The vine culture of the land of Israel
is well know, so when we use this word, it has reference to the
grape vine - no other is under consideration. |
| The phrase has reference to the produce of the
vine. Because Jesus had reference to drinking, we naturally conclude
that it was the juice produced by the vine. This is what we know as
grape juice. This was a common drink during the time of our Lord,
and throughout the history of God's people. |
| If the Lord had used the word "oinos,"
which is the normal word for wine, then there might be debate as to
what was inside the cup. However, the Lord did not use this word,
but the phrase "fruit of the vine." This should settle the
question, yet there are those who will still argue the issue. |
| There are certain facts that we must recognize
about the time that the Lord instituted the communion. First, it was
the time of the Passover. During this time period, there could not
be anything that had been fermented or leavened within the homes of
the Jewish people. For one week before this feast, there was an
effort to remove anything leavened from their homes. Since wine is
the result of fermentation, there could not be any alcoholic wine
within their home. This alone would bring us to the conclusion that
the fruit of the vine was not wine. |
| Leaven has been used as a symbol of evil and sin.
The word for leaven in the Greek is "zume." It occurs
thirteen times in the New Testament scriptures. It means: "1)
leaven; 2) metaph. of inveterate mental and moral corruption, viewed
in its tendency to infect others. Leaven is applied to that which,
though small in quantity, yet by its influence thoroughly pervades a
thing; either in a good sense as in the parable Mat. 13:33; or in a
bad sense, of a pernicious influence, 'a little leaven leaveneth the
whole lump.'" (From Thayer's, as found in Logos.) |
| Logic would conclude that the Lord would not have
chosen something that represented sin and corruption to be a symbol
of His blood. Our Lord lived a pure and sinless life. Whatever
represented His blood would have to be pure and free from any
corruption. The fruit of the vine fills this need. |
| There is always the objection to the use of the
fruit of the vine that says that they could not keep fresh grape
juice during this time. This is not true. There were many different
ways to preserve fruits fresh during the time of our Lord. Often,
they would boil the juice of the grape down to a tick syrup called
sapa or defrutum (Latin words that mean "must or new wine
boiled thick.") This could be kept for long periods of time
without spoiling. All they had to do was add water or goats milk,
and the thick syrup would become thin and drinkable. Throughout the
Old Testament history, this was a common practice among the nations.
It was a product of quality and desired among many. When Jacob sent
gifts to Egypt, one of these was honey (or the boiled down juice of
the grape.) In Gen. 43:11, the word for honey has reference to grape
honey. Gesenius defines this on page 188-89: "debash" (2)
{honey of grapes}, i.e. must or new wine boiled down to a third or
half (Gr. epsami, Lat. sapa, defrutum, Ital. musto coto;) which is
now commonly carried into Egypt out of Palestine, especially out of
the district of Hebron (comp. Russel's Natural History of Aleppo, p.
20); Gen. 43:11; Eze. 27:17. |
| Another source that supports grape honey is from
Unger's Bible Dictionary, p. 1158, 1970 edition: In Palestine the
finest grapes, even today, are dried as raisins, and the juice of
the remainder, after having been trodden and pressed, is boiled down
to a syrup, which, under the name of dibs (heb. debash), is much
used by all classes, wherever vineyards are found, as a condiment
with their food. |
| From the writings of Cato we can learn that fresh
must or grape juice was highly prized, and kept fresh throughout the
year. He wrote a book on agriculture of his time. He wrote about the
time of Christ. Also, Pliny wrote about similar subjects and he
lived about the end of the first century. Both writers mention how
to preserve the fresh grape must, and to use it to make various
medicines. Josepheus mentioned that the palace of Masada had stores
of fruits and other produce that had been laid up during the time of
Herod. These fruits were found fresh when the Roman's took
possession of Masada almost a hundred years later. These and other
accounts show that fresh grape juice could be kept fresh. |
| Our Lord used an illustration on the preservation
of wine (grape juice) to teach principles of the kingdom of heaven.
|
| Matthew 9:17 "Nor
do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins
break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they
put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved."
|
| This text teaches that to preserve new wine (must,
or grape juice) you must store it in a new wine skin. The reason for
this was because once the seal had been broken from the wine skin,
the air would get into the skin, and the germ of fermentation would
be present. If new wine were put into the new skins, then sealed,
the wine would be kept from the fermentation process. If the new
wine were put into the old skins, the fermentation germ would be
present, and the wine would begin to ferment, and the skin would
burst from the pressure created by the expanding gasses released
from the fermenting grape juice. |
|
| CONCLUSION |
| The symbol of the blood of our Lord is the "fruit
of the vine." As we have seen, this has reference to the juice
of the grape. This juice was not fermented, but was pure and free
from the influence of the fermentation germ. This juice was known as
the "blood of the grape," therefore a fit symbol for the
blood of our Lord. When we observe the communion of the blood of our
Lord, we are proclaiming that it took the blood of Jesus to ratify
the covenant by which we have fellowship with God. Also, by the
shedding of the blood of Jesus, we can obtain the forgiveness of our
sins. |
| The next time you observe the communion of the
blood of Jesus Christ, remember what He has done for you. Show forth
His death and honor Him who died for all. Renew your determination
to follow, faithfully, that covenant that He died for. In the end,
you shall receive a blessing. |
|
|