Imardmd1, your hypotheses about this situation are unneeded, unnecessary, irrational, unspiritual, and ungodlike. From another aspect, they are exactly conformable to a Satanic viewpoint, which your casual flippant narrative displays.
Why do you deny Christ continuously?
Unfermented grape juice didn’t exist until 1869 when Thomas Welch invented a method for stopping the fermentation that otherwise begin the moment the grapes are crushed. Grape skins are covered in yeasts that instantly begin converting sugars to alcohol, so any grape juice stored for more than a day or two would have begun to become increasingly alcoholic.
Wine has its natural 5–6% average alcohol content because that’s about the point at which the alcohol concentration naturally kills the yeasts, stopping the fermentation. If we read the passage in its context, we know that this was a celebration of a wedding, which seems to be something universally celebrated (as God Himself commanded) with wine and merriment. The people at the wedding would have come expecting that, so it seems highly unlikely that they would have complimented the quality of what Jesus made, had it been mere juice
Jesus made wine - alcoholic wine - out of water
Another of your failures is to recognize that the narrative of the Cana wedding set forth by the Blessed spiritual theologian John "Boanerges" bar Zabdi, prompted by the Spirit to open his narrative of Jesus' earthly history of miracles.
The Cana vignette is significant in that it marks an event typical of the final feast of the Marriage in Heaven uniting Himself with His Bride, the Ekklesia of the First-Born, at which He also will provide the same kind of sweet blood of the cluster as He did miraculously at Nathaniel's home town, and which caused people there to exercise a saving faith in His Lordship, as the first-fruits of His march to the Cross, where He said, "I thirst" and refused the drug-laced sop.
This merry union of a godly couple, the celebration that excluded the Satanic intoxicant "yayin" described in Proverbs 23:31 lest the week-long gathering decay into a drunken brawl.
So it was that they of the wedding lacked (husterehoh) wine (oinos). They didn't "run out of it" as it has been wrongly interpreted in prarphrased versdions. As Jesus' Mother said, "They are not having wine."
But Jesus, calling forth His powers, blessed the event by providing a fluid that duplicated not "yayin" but "tirosh," the sweet, freshly pressed (in a mechanical device, not foot-tromped) delicious skin-free blood of the cluster, fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah:
"Thus saith the LORD, As the new winetirosh is found in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my servants'disciple's sakes, that I may not destroy them all" (Isa. 65:8 AV).A fluid refreshment like this was gladly received by the caterer of the feast; though at a time of year, our December, that it would have been available only from the ethanol-free concentrate, a syrup called "must," prepared at the time of harvest from filtered, boiled-down new wine against the days when the purple non-intoxicating reconstituted grape juice was desired at a holy gathering. In those days, the reconstituted product, while acceptanle, was probably not quite as tasty, as "good," as fresh juice would have been.
(The syrup thus heat-treated kills any yeast or microbes, and the sugar level thus elevated prevents any fermentation. when stored with a covering to prevent more evaporation, the product is stable, nold-free, and able to be restored to juice-consistence after years of storage, I have personally done this, and have som thirty-year-old syrup in my kitchen cupboard.)
Now consider: when at the table of Jesus' last meal with His chosen disciples, He promised in an oath, unforgotten yet:
"But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Mt. 26:29 AV; cf. Mk 14:24-25, Lk. 22:15-29)).Please take a note here, Cronos; let your education on the Memorial supper be greatly improved. The Scripture tells us beyond doubt that this fluid consumed is NOT called "oinos" (or "yayin" in Aramaic/Hebrew). Jesus uniformly termed it as "fruit of the vine" and "new," which makes it "tirosh" in Hebrew, a form necessary to comport with the prophetic Isaiah passage, NOT "oinos."
What can be rightly presumed here is that henceforth, any group taking this fruit of the vine should consume it only as either freshly-pressed, or reconstituted from the "must" syrup, to be truthful in kind as promised by Jesus, Risen, Ascended, and Coming Again Lord and Christ to establish His Kingdom of Righteousness and Peace. Rest assured, as at Cana that presages His Last Supper on Earth, and His Heavenly Marriage, the bread will not be moldy, and the fruit of the vine will not be man-made half-rotted grape laced with the toxin, the poisonous ethyl alcohol, in the juice.
Chew on that for a while, eh?
Personally, it is my opinion that anyone using intoxicating red wine in communion is knowingly throwing Jesus' promise to the ground (figuratively) and treading on it. It's the same stuff that leads some false religionists into alcoholic stupor and addiction to it.
You were there to determine the physical state of the KoolAid that he made?
In God I trust. You will have to bring data.
You are both adding to the Word, detracting from it, and twisting it:
"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned* and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:15-16 AV).(Your religious instruction is so poor that much of it is false. You just keep on destroying your credibility, without relief.)
* "unlearned" here is better translated "undiscipled";