Did Jesus Turn Water Into Intoxicating Wine?

The obvious answer to the question, "Did Jesus turn water into wine?" is yes. At the marriage feast in Cana of Galilee
recorded in John 2:1-11, Jesus turned water into wine. However, this question does not usually ask what is meant by it.
What is usually meant is "Did Jesus make intoxicating wine?" And the answer is no. Let me explain.

The word translated "wine" in English ( in Koine‚ Greek) can refer to either alcoholic or non-alcoholic wine. At
present, the term "wine" is almost used exclusively of alcoholic wine but let us never be guilty of interpretation based
solely upon modern day definitions. Consider these examples of the word "wine" being used in Scripture with
reference to unfermented grape juice.
 

  Joel 1:10 says "The field is wasted, the land mourneth; for the corn is wasted: the new wine is dried up, the oil
languisheth." (This refers to grapes dried up in the fields, which could not be intoxicating.)
  Isaiah 65:8 says "Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not;
for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants' sakes, that I may not destroy them all." (Alcoholic wine in
the cluster? No, the juice of the grape while in the cluster could not be intoxicating.)

  Jeremiah 48:33 says "And joy and gladness is taken from the plentiful field, and from the land of Moab; and I
have caused wine to fail from the winepresses: none shall tread with shouting; their shouting shall be no
shouting." (The wine of fresh squeezed grapes coming out of the winepress is grape juice and could not be
fermented.) Certainly other passages could be considered, but these are sufficient to illustrate that the word
"wine" can refer to alcoholic wine or simply grape juice.

"So, how do we know when it refers to grape juice or intoxicating wine?" The context in which the word is found
will determine whether it refers to alcoholic or non- alcoholic wine. So, consider the context.

The immediate context of John 2:1-11 is quite clear. The guests at the marriage feast of Cana were able to discern
between the quality of the drink that the Lord had made and that which had already been served. If intoxicating wine
had been served, and people "well drunk" or "drunk freely" (American Standard Version,1901) of it (verse 10), then
they would not have had such keen discernment. Though the amount is not specified as to what they had previously
drunk, if they consumed the six waterpots that Jesus had the servants fill with water and which contained "two or three
firkins apiece" (verse 6), then they would have consumed somewhere between 106 to 162 gallons of booze! This is far
more than enough to make the most casual drinker drunk. Those who twist this account to condone social drinking say
the term "well drunk" refers to the idea that the crowd was so drunk that they could not distinguish. However, the point
of "the governor of the feast" to the bridegroom is that the guests were able to discern between the "worse" and the
"good wine." If it is the case that these wedding guests were so drunk that they could not distinguish, then the Lord
made the six pots of alcoholic beverage for those who were already strongly under the influence, and caused them to
be even more drunk! Thus, the "good wine" of the wedding feast of Canaan must have been the fresh juice of the
grape.

Also, consider the logical consequence of those who want to use this passage to justify the consumption of alcoholic
beverages. Their argument goes something like this: "Since Jesus produced alcoholic wine, then it is morally right for
a person to drink it." However, notice that their logic takes them further than most of them want to go. Since Jesus
produced alcoholic wine (as they claim), then not only would it be morally right to drink it, it would be morally right to
produce it, sell it, distribute it, and make a living from it. But since that would most certainly cause someone to
stumble, then it must be morally right to cause someone to stumble. However, the logical consequence of their
argument would oppose the Lord's teaching (Luke 17:1-2). No, the reasoning is a foolish argument that has no
foundation in scripture.

Further, consider the general context of the Bible. Habakkuk wrote, "Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink,
that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness!" (2:15). The sin
Habakkuk is rebuking is the sin of contributing to drunkenness. If Jesus supplied intoxicating wine to the wedding
guests at Cana, then He contributed to their intoxication. Not only did Jesus contribute to it, He, also, condoned and
encouraged people to get completely soused! Since intoxication is sinful, then Jesus sinned, and the "woe" of
Habakkuk would be upon Him. If this be the case, then it would be better for Jesus "that a millstone were hanged about
his neck, and he cast into the sea" (Luke 17:2). As a perfect man, Jesus could not have turned water into alcoholic wine
and offer such to others.

Another passage to consider in this context is Proverbs 23:31-32, which says, "Look not thou upon the wine when it is
red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright. At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth
like an adder." If Jesus had turned water into intoxicating wine, then He would have caused others to look upon the
wine when it is red opposing the wisdom of Solomon. Since, Jesus is "greater than Solomon" (Matthew 12:42), He
would know the wisdom of sobriety and would not tempt others with an intoxicating beverage. Again, Solomon wrote,
"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise" (Proverbs 20:1).

"What, then, was the miracle of the wedding feast in Cana?" The miracle of Cana was that Jesus surpassed or
transcended the normal amount of time and the natural process that it takes to produce and harvest grape juice. That,
which normally takes months, took Jesus but a moment. Augustine wrote, "For he on that marriage-day made wine in
the six jars which he ordered to be filled with water he who now makes it every year in the vines; for, as what the
servants had poured into the water- jars was turned into wine by the power of the Lord, so, also, that which the clouds
pour fourth is turned into wine by the power of the self-same Lord." (As quoted in "Bible Wines" by William Patton,
page 91.)

"How could this be? Did they have any methods of preservation of grape juice in the first century?" Yes. In fact,
they had several methods. In the book "Bible Wines," the author, William Patton, discusses four methods that the
ancients used for the preservation of grape juice. One such method is to keep air completely excluded a method often
used today. R. C. Foster in his book, "Studies in the Life of Christ," said, "A Greek wine ship of the second century
B.C. found by divers off the southern coast of France several years ago contained a great number of wine flasks that
had been sealed so tight that after more than 2,000 years the sea water had not seeped into them."

With close examination, we must conclude that the Lord did not make intoxicating wine at the marriage feast in Cana
of Galilee. "Did Jesus turn water into wine?" Yes. "Did Jesus turn water into intoxicating wine?" Absolutely Not!

Alcohol has caused and/or contributed to broken homes, every kind of accident imaginable, disease both physical and
mental, poverty, and crimes of every kind. Since its effect is such, it is beyond my own imagination why anyone would
ever want to justify its use let alone mar the Lord's perfect example with its production and distribution. Its use is not
social in any way but is in every way antisocial. Its defense by sweet-talking, soft- pedaling, so-called preachers is
religiously hypocritical, morally irresponsible, and socially despicable. It has victimized the unborn, children,
teenagers, the middle aged, and the old. It has victimized business people and laborers, country folks and city folks, the
rich and the poor. There is probably not one person who has not felt its evil bite and its viperous sting! It is beyond my
reasoning power to understand how people who claim to be spiritually minded and morally upright will rationalize its
use. Blood has filled our streets because of this vile beverage. Graves have filled our hills and vales because of this evil
drink. Reproach has filled our nation because of this wicked intoxicant. Corruption has filled our society because of
this corrupted liquor. Shame and disgrace has filled our homes because of this malicious booze. Rather than justifying
its use, let us stand diametrically opposed to it for "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is
deceived thereby is not wise."

Here are ten proofs from Scripture that Jesus did not drink or make alcoholic, intoxicating wine.

THE FIRST REASON IS BECAUSE OF HIS HOLY NATURE. In Heb. 7:26, we read that the Lord Jesus is "holy,
harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners." No doubt, the Saviour, being God in the flesh, had an air of holiness about
Himself that could be seen by even the most casual observer. For instance, the profane soldiers, who were sent to arrest
Him, gave as their reason for returning without Him, that "never a man spake like this man." (John 7:46) The words of
Jesus were different; He, no doubt, had a very holy appearance, character, and speech.

Why is this so important? Consider this illustration. The word "cider" may mean an alcoholic beverage, or plain apple
juice. Suppose we lived during the 1920s, prohibition days, and were approached by two people offering us a drink of
cider. One of the persons, we knew to be one of the holiest men in town, faithful to the house of God, separated from
the world, diligent in prayers, always witnessing to others; the other was a known liquor dealer. If each one offered us
a drink of "his very own cider," we would assume that the holy person's was no more than apple juice, but there would
be no doubt about our opinion regarding the liquor dealer's cider! Obviously, the character of a person influences what
that one does.
Since the Lord Jesus Christ was "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners," we may safely assume that He
would not make that which is called in Scripture a mocker and deceiver of man, causing untold misery.

A SECOND REASON: HE WOULD NOT CONTRADICT SCRIPTURE. In Mt. 5:17-18, Christ made this clear,
saying, "Think not that I am come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you Till heaven and earth pass, one jot
or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Therefore, Christ could not have contradicted Hab.
2:15, "Woe unto him that giveth his neighbor drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that
thou mayest look on their nakedness!"

Certainly, Jesus knew that this verse was in the Bible; He was well-acquainted with Scripture, since it is His Word and
was written about Him. He did not come to violate Scripture, but to fulfill it. He could not have done so, if He had
made alcoholic wine and had given it to his neighbor.

Some people object to the use of this verse by saying that it would apply only to one who would give his neighbor
drink for the purpose of looking on his nakedness. But we must remember: when one gives his neighbor something
which will make him drunk, he is putting himself in the very class of those who do so in order to look on their
nakedness. And since the Scripture commands us to "abstain from all appearance of evil" (1 Th. 5:22), we can be sure
that the Lord Jesus would not have done something that would have been associated with such an evil practice as that
described in Hab. 2:15. For the same reason, no Christian should be engaged in the selling of alcoholic beverage.

THE THIRD REASON IS THAT LEV. 10:9-11 COMMANDS THE PRIEST OF GOD, "DO NOT DRINK
WINE NOR STRONG DRINK ... That Ye May Put Difference Between Holy And Unholy, And Between Unclean
And Clean; and that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statues which the Lord hath spoken..." Now, since Heb.
2:17 calls Christ "a merciful and faithful high priest," we would expect Him to obey all Scriptures pertaining to that
office. If He had made or drunk alcoholic wine, He would have disobeyed these verses and would have been
disqualified from teaching the children of Israel the statues of the Lord.

THE FOURTH REASON IS FOUND IN A PASSAGE WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY CONSIDERED: PR.
31:4-5 PROHIBITS KINGS AND PRINCES FROM DRINKING ALCOHOLIC WINE OR ANY OTHER
STRONG DRINK. IF THEY HAD DONE SO, THEIR JUDGMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN PERVERTED. It
was necessary for Christ to obey these verses also, since He was Prince of Peace (Is. 9:6) and King of Kings (Rev.
19:16). In Mt. 27:11, He admitted to being the King of the Jews. He rode into Jerusalem on a donkey's colt, to fulfill
Zec. 9:9, which prophesied that Israel's king would enter the city in just that way. Undoubtedly, He was king, and as
such, would have had to obey Pr. 31:4-5.

REASON FIVE: CHRIST DID NOT COME TO MOCK OR DECEIVE PEOPLE, yet Pr. 20:1 says that wine
does both. Rather than coming to mock or deceive he came to save!

REASON SIX: HE DID NOT COME TO SEND PEOPLE TO HELL. We have already seen that Is. 5:11-14
teaches that Hell had to be enlarged because of the drinking of alcoholic beverage. Christ did not come to send people
to Hell; listen to Jn. 3:17: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through
him might be saved."

REASON SEVEN: CHRIST DID NOT COME TO CAST A STUMBLINGBLOCK BEFORE ANYONE; yet,
Rom. 14:21 teaches that a person who gives another alcoholic wine does just that. "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to
drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak." Everyone who has studied
the problem of alcoholism has learned that some people cannot handle any amount of alcohol, while others may drink
one or two "social" drinks and stop. Experts do not know why this is true; various theories have been propounded, but
nothing has been proved to be true regarding every person. Some say it is chemical; others insist that it must be
psychological. The fact is, we do not know for certain. In any given group of people, there would be several potential
alcoholics. What a shame it would be for a person, who is a potential slave to it, to get his first taste at the Lord's table
in church, then proceed down the road of misery to an alcoholic's grave!

I certainly would not want my children to get their first taste of alcohol at the family meal; nor would I want them to
get it at church. One or more of them could well be potential alcoholics. As evidence that this is possible, we should
consider that some denominations which serve alcoholic wine in their religious services also operate homes for
alcoholic priests!

But we can be absolutely sure that Christ did not come to cause others to stumble!
THE EIGHTH REASON: JOHN 2, THE MIRACLE OF TURNING WATER INTO WINE, DOES NOT
REQUIRE THAT IT BE ALCOHOLIC. Many insist that it was, on the basis of verse 10, which says, "Every man at
the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse; but thou hast kept
the good wine until now." They would say that, in those days, it was common to serve the best alcoholic wine at first,
saving the worst until later, when men's tastes have been dulled by much drinking. But the point is just the opposite
here! These people could definitely recognize that the wine which Jesus made was much better than what they had
been served at first. This could not have been possible if they were already well on their way to becoming intoxicated!
The fact is, neither the wine which they had at first, nor that which Christ made, was alcoholic.

REASON NINE IS FOUND IN THE SAME PASSAGE: THE LORD JESUS CHRIST WOULD NOT HAVE
GOTTEN GLORY FROM MAKING DRUNK PEOPLE DRUNKER. Verse 11 is most important when it states
that, by this miracle, Jesus "manifested forth his glory." Verse 10 indicates that the people had drunk quite a bit of
whatever kind of wine they were drinking. If it had been alcoholic, they would have been intoxicated, or nearly so.
Had Christ made alcoholic wine, He would have made drunk people drunker, or almost-drunk people completely
drunk! Such a deed would certainly not have manifested any glory to Him!

This chapter also gives us the tenth reason: making drunk people drunker would not have caused his disciples to
believe more strongly on him, yet verse 11 says that, as a result of what He did in turning the water into wine, "his
disciples believed on him." Jn. 1:41 shows that they had already believed on Him as Messiah; this was a deepening of
their faith and a proof that they had not been wrong. Would making drunk people drunker inspire such faith? The
opposite would be likely! They were not looking for a Messiah who would pass out free booze! Thus, because of the
description of this miracle and its result, we cannot conclude otherwise than that this wine was non-alcoholic.

Would the perfect, sinless man make a drink, or partake of a drink, that causes the brain to shrink? Autopsies on
alcoholics show that their brains have shrunk considerably compared to people of their own age and gender.
There are two main Hebrew words in the Bible for wine, Tirosh and Yayin. Tirosh is always unfermented non-
alcoholic grape juice and gladdens the heart and is good for an upset stomach. Yayin is also non-alcoholic when it is
fresh and is sometimes referred to as a blessing, but when Yayin becomes fermented it becomes a poison and is
severely condemned. God's people were not to drink alcohol.

"Noah drank Yayin and was drunken in his tent" (Genesis 9:20). "come let us make our father drink Yayin and we
will lie with him." (Genesis 19:30-38) spoken by the daughters of Lot.
"Do not drink Yayin nor strong drink when you go into the tabernacle lest you die." (Leviticus 10-9-10).
"They have given a boy for a harlot and sold a girl for Yayin that they might drink." (Joel 3:3)
"Awake ye drunkards, weep and howl ye drinkers of Yayin." (Joel 1:5)
"Yayin is a mocker , strong drink is a raging and whosoever is deceived by it is not wise." (Prov.20.1)
"They assemble themselves for corn and Yayin and they rebel against me." (Hosea 7:14)
"Whoredom and Yayin ..take away the heart." (Hosea 4:11)
"Woe to those that are at ease in Zion...that lie upon beds of ivory…that drink Yayin (Amos 6:6)
"Be not among Yayin drinkers" (Prov. 23:20)

Look closely at the context when you are studying Yayin and remember it was not always fermented. If Yayin is
spoken well of in some scriptures it will be the unfermented Yayin. The weakness of our English language of the 21st
Century is that when we see the word wine we automatically think alcohol. This was not so in Biblical days.

There is even a warning about Tirsoh:

"Whoredom Yayin and Tirsoh...take way the heart" (Hosea 4:11).

Jesus made fresh grape juice and not the forbidden Alcoholic wine.
Would He who was sinless make a condemned substance? He would never have made a drink that causes people to
lose visual acuity, mental acuity, bodily motor control and that leads to ravings, fighting, vomiting, memory-loss,
cirrhosis of the liver, black-outs and loss of brain mass? It is unthinkable to suggest that He made alcoholic wine. It
says that the people at the wedding ran out of beverage. If they had drank all the alcohol they had, are we to believe
that Jesus made 60 gallons more? . They would have been falling down and slurring their speech and passing out.
Would the lover of our souls really do that to people? He came to set us free from alcohol, lusts of the flesh and things
that destroy the soul, not make party animals out of us.

What About Moderation?

Alcoholic Yayin is called "the poison of dragons, the cruel venom of asps" that comes from the grapes that are grown
on the terraces of Sodom and Gomorra (Deut.32:33 NEB ).

Even in moderation it is a poison. You wouldn't advocate adultery in moderation, or murder in moderation so why
would you advocate taking Alcohol in moderation?

SHAKAR
"Whoredom Yayin and Tirsoh and strong drink (Shakar) take way the heart" (Hosea 4:11).

There is another Hebrew word that is often linked with alcoholic Yayin and that is Shakar.

William Patton's Book Bible Wines 1874 republished by Star Bible Fort Worth Texas 1981 says:
"Shakar is a liquor obtained from dates and other fruits, or barley, millet etc.. both Yayin and Shakar have in them the
saccharine principle and therefore may become alcoholic. But both may be kept and used unfermented".pg 57

So just like Yayin when you read about Shakar in the Bible you have to look at it in context to see if it is fermented or
unfermented. For example in Leviticus 10:9 "Do not drink Yayin nor Shakar, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go
into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations". This is
obviously speaking about alcoholic Yayin and alcoholic Shakar. But in Numbers 28:7 "And the drink offering thereof
shall be the fourth part of an hin for the one lamb: in the holy place shalt thou cause the Shakar to be poured unto the
LORD for a drink offering. This is obviously non-alcoholic Generally in the Bible Shakar is referring to drunkenness.
Ps 69:12 "They that sit in the gate speak against me; and I was the song of the drunkard s (Shakar drinkers). "

Didn't Jesus Drink Wine at the Last Supper?

At the Last Supper Jesus passed around the cup of and said "This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is
poured out for you." (Luke 22:20)
Do you really think that he was saying that the symbol of the Christian Church and the New Covenant was the
forbidden drink Alcoholic Yayin?
Even a child can see mothers abused, children molested, homes destroyed, cars wrecked, divorces and fights, people
murdered all because of alcohol. Do you really think Jesus had alcohol in that cup?

Why it Was Not Alcohol

Here Are Two Reasons why it could not have been alcohol.

Alcohol is created by adding leaven (yeast) to grapes and then processing it at the right temperature. Jesus was
celebrating the feast of the Passover when all leaven/yeast is removed from Israel . Anyone eating bread with yeast or
any product that had yeast in it was "cut off from Israel". Jesus was eating unleavened bread and drinking unleavened
grape juice.

Christians are commanded to be temperate. That does not imply moderation. Temperate means literally to cut off all
intoxicants.

Proverbs 31:4 says It is not for kings to drink wine, nor for princes strong drink." Leviticus 10:9 says priests will die if
they attempt to serve God while drinking wine or strong drink.
Rev 1:6 says Jesus has made us "kings and priests". Therefore if you believe Christians are kings and priests then it is
not for Christians to drink wine or strong drink.

Micah 2:11 says if a man comes among sinners teaching that they can have alcohol and strong drinks they will hail
him as a prophet but he is "walking in a spirit of falsehood".

Satan has been laughing for over two thousand years that he was able to unite the cult of the wine god Dionysius to
Christianity. Dionysius was his name in Greece, but in Egypt he was known as Moloch. It's time for Satan to stop
laughing and the children of God to stand up and say no more compromise with the devil!