Did Jesus Make Alcoholic Wine?
by Greg Gwin
It is discouraging, even disgusting, to hear some brethren continue to use the same old, worn out arguments to defend “social drinking.” Is it not clear that their stubborn adherence to these discredited “proofs” is evidence of a rebellious heart?
For what it’s worth, let’s cover one of these old arguments that frequently circulates. It has to do with Jesus turning water into wine at the wedding feast in Cana of Galilee (John 2). One man wrote: “The fact that the guests said that the “best wine” was served AFTER the ‘inferior wine’ suggests quite strongly that the wine was alcoholic. It would be (and still is) normal practice to serve the ‘good stuff’ first; then after the guests get a slight ‘buzz’ (not suggesting drunkenness!) the cheaper stuff is served.”
If getting a ‘buzz’ does not suggest some level of drunkenness, then what does it suggest? But, beyond that, serving one’s best — of anything — to guests is ALWAYS the norm. If you come to my house for a cookout, I may serve steak. After that is gone I may have to fix some hamburgers. Finally, I might need to break out the hot dogs. Do you see the point? The fact that the wine Jesus miraculously produced was better than what had been served before in NO WAY proves that the former or the latter had any alcoholic content. In this case, the ruler of the feast was simply amazed that the best wine (quality, not alcoholic content) had been saved until last.
Furthermore, how could it be that our sinless Lord was supplying more wine — in fact, lots more wine (many gallons) -- to people who were already experiencing a ‘buzz?’ Someone has correctly observed as follows: “If Jesus made fermented wine for people to drink, there is nothing wrong with drinking alcoholic beverages. Also, if there’s nothing wrong with drinking it, there’s nothing wrong with giving it away or selling it. Furthermore, if Jesus supplied it we ought to do the same, and follow in His steps (I Peter 2:21).” Who can believe it?