An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 7:34: The Son of Man “Eating and Drinking”
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 7:34: The Son of Man “Eating and Drinking” is based on a b-greek discussion from no specific date mentioned in the post content. The initial inquiry raises a question regarding the precise meaning of Jesus’ statement in Luke 7:34, where he describes the Son of Man as having “came eating and drinking.” Four possible interpretations are proposed: a general statement about human sustenance, a specific reference to Jesus’ personal diet, an allusion to Jesus’ consumption of food and wine, or an impossible assertion of continuous past action.
The main exegetical issue concerns the interpretative scope of the phrase “eating and drinking” (ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων) within its immediate literary context (Luke 7:29-35). This phrase appears in stark contrast to the description of John the Baptist’s ascetic lifestyle in the preceding verse (7:33) and is immediately followed by the accusations leveled against Jesus as a “glutton and a drunkard” (7:34). The core question is whether this phrase primarily refers to the specific *types* of food and drink Jesus consumed, the *quantity* of his consumption, or more fundamentally, the *social manner* and *inclusive nature* of his ministry, especially in comparison to John’s more austere approach. Understanding this distinction is crucial for grasping Jesus’ self-characterization and the criticisms directed at him by the religious authorities.
Greek text (Nestle 1904)
29 Καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ἀκούσας καὶ οἱ τελῶναι ἐδικαίωσαν τὸν Θεόν, βαπτισθέντες τὸ βάπτισμα Ἰωάννου·
30 οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ οἱ νομικοὶ τὴν βουλὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἠθέτησαν εἰς ἑαυτούς, μὴ βαπτισθέντες ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ.
31 Τίνι οὖν ὁμοιώσω τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης, καὶ τίνι εἰσὶν ὅμοιοι;
32 ὅμοιοί εἰσιν παιδίοις τοῖς ἐν ἀγορᾷ καθημένοις καὶ προσφωνοῦσιν ἀλλήλοις λέγοντες· Ἠυλήσαμεν ὑμῖν καὶ οὐκ ὠρχήσασθε, ἐθρηνήσαμεν ὑμῖν καὶ οὐκ ἐκλαύσατε.
33 ἐλήλυθεν γὰρ Ἰωάννης ὁ Βαπτιστής μήτε ἄρτον ἔχων μήτε οἶνον πίνων, καὶ λέγετε· Δαιμόνιον ἔχει.
34 ἐλήλυθεν ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων, καὶ λέγετε· Ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος φάγος καὶ οἰνοπότης, φίλος τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν.
35 Καὶ ἐδικαιώθη ἡ σοφία ἀπὸ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς πάντων.
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- Verse 29: Nestle 1904 reads τὸν Θεόν, while SBLGNT 2010 reads τὸν θεόν (difference in capitalization).
- Verse 30: Nestle 1904 reads τοῦ Θεοῦ, while SBLGNT 2010 reads τοῦ θεοῦ (difference in capitalization).
- Verse 32: Nestle 1904 reads λέγοντες (participle), while SBLGNT 2010 reads λέγουσιν (indicative verb).
- Verse 33: Nestle 1904 reads μήτε ἄρτον ἔχων (“neither having bread”), while SBLGNT 2010 reads μήτε ἄρτον ἐσθίων (“neither eating bread”). This is a substantive difference.
- Verse 35: Nestle 1904 reads ἀπὸ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς πάντων, while SBLGNT 2010 reads ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς (word order difference).
Textual Criticism (NA28): For Luke 7:32, the NA28 generally follows the reading λέγουσιν (SBLGNT) rather than λέγοντες (Nestle 1904), with strong support from major uncials and manuscript families (e.g., א B D L W Ξ Ψ f1 f13 33 M syh copsa). In Luke 7:33, NA28 decisively adopts ἐσθίων (“eating”) instead of ἔχων (“having”). This reading, supported by an overwhelming number of early and significant manuscripts (א B C D L W Ξ 0102 Ψ f1 f13 33 M), provides a more direct and intentional contrast with Jesus’ subsequent “eating and drinking,” aligning the activity with the accusation of “glutton.” The difference in meaning is subtle but relevant, as “not eating bread” more explicitly describes an ascetic practice than “not having bread.” For Luke 7:35, NA28 prefers the word order ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς (like SBLGNT) based on robust textual evidence, though the meaning remains unaffected.
Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):
- ἐσθίων (participle of ἐσθίω, “to eat”): BDAG defines ἐσθίω broadly as “to take food, to eat.” In the context of Luke 7:34, its significance extends beyond mere physical sustenance to encompass social interaction. Kittel (TDNT) emphasizes that communal eating and drinking in the ancient Near East and Jewish tradition often symbolized fellowship, acceptance, and shared identity, making Jesus’ regular participation a significant statement about his ministry.
- πίνων (participle of πίνω, “to drink”): BDAG defines πίνω as “to drink.” Like eating, drinking, especially wine, was a central feature of social gatherings and celebrations. Kittel further details the symbolic weight of wine, linking it to festivity, covenant, and cultic practices. The accusations later leveled against Jesus involving wine thus highlight perceptions of his social behavior.
- φάγος (“glutton”): BDAG describes φάγος as “one who eats much, glutton,” a pejorative term implying excessive and undisciplined consumption, often associated with moral looseness.
- οἰνοπότης (“drunkard/wine-drinker”): BDAG defines οἰνοπότης as “one who drinks much wine, wine-drinker,” similarly implying intemperance and social impropriety through excessive alcohol consumption.
The combined accusation of φάγος καὶ οἰνοπότης vividly portrays the critics’ perception of Jesus not just as someone who ate and drank, but as one who did so immoderately and in the company of disreputable individuals, thus undermining his prophetic authority and contrasting sharply with the expected piety of religious leaders.
Translation Variants
The grammatical structure in Luke 7:33-34 employs present participles (ἔχων/ἐσθίων and πίνων for John; ἐσθίων and πίνων for Jesus) to describe characteristic or continuous actions during their respective ministries. For John, the double negative μήτε… μήτε… (“neither… nor…”) strongly emphasizes a complete abstinence from common social practices related to food and drink, defining his ascetic posture. In contrast, Jesus’ simple ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων (“eating and drinking”) highlights his active engagement in these social practices, signifying an inclusive and accessible ministry. While specific objects (bread, wine) are mentioned for John, Jesus’ “eating and drinking” is left more general, though the subsequent accusation implies wine was involved.
Rhetorically, this passage is structured as a powerful chiasm, as noted in the original post, effectively demonstrating the hypocrisy and unresponsiveness of “this generation” (vv. 31-32). The parallel between the children playing pipes and not dancing (A1-A2) and the Son of Man “eating and drinking” but accused of gluttony/drunkenness (α’1-α’2) links the rejection of a joyful, inclusive message to Jesus’ social engagement. Similarly, the parallel between the children singing a dirge and not crying (B1-B2) and John the Baptist’s asceticism leading to accusations of demon possession (β’1-β’2) illustrates the rejection of a call to repentance and sobriety. This chiastic arrangement underscores that the critics consistently found fault with both contrasting approaches to ministry—John’s severe austerity and Jesus’ open conviviality. The issue was not the *nature* of their actions but the *perverse judgment* of their audience. Thus, “eating and drinking” for Jesus primarily signifies his inclusive social practice and his willingness to engage broadly with people, even “tax collectors and sinners,” which implied a celebratory atmosphere, in stark contrast to John’s penitential call.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The phrase “eating and drinking” in Luke 7:34 is best understood not as a specific dietary description, but as a socio-rhetorical statement characterizing Jesus’ ministry. It fundamentally conveys his active participation in communal life, his open fellowship, and his inclusive approach, especially with those marginalized by society. This stands in direct opposition to John the Baptist’s ascetic withdrawal and serves as the perceived basis for the accusations of gluttony and drunkenness leveled against Jesus by his critics, who misinterpreted his inclusivity as moral laxity. The emphasis is on the *manner* and *social context* of Jesus’ engagement, portraying him as accessible and participating in everyday life, rather than on the *what* or *how much* of his consumption.
Here are three suggested translations emphasizing the socio-rhetorical meaning:
- “The Son of Man, in contrast, *came participating in meals and social gatherings*…”
This translation highlights the active social engagement implied by “eating and drinking,” framing it as a characteristic of Jesus’ public ministry and inclusive fellowship. - “The Son of Man came, *enjoying common hospitality and fellowship*…”
This version underscores the normalcy and accessibility of Jesus’ lifestyle, contrasting with John’s exceptional asceticism, and implicitly pointing to his non-segregated approach to society. - “The Son of Man, however, *came openly sharing food and drink with others*…”
This emphasizes the public and inclusive nature of Jesus’ actions, directly linking his “eating and drinking” to his interactions with a broad range of people, including “tax collectors and sinners.”
Here we go Link Hudson Phil Brown Jr. Take a hit:
ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 7:34 Greek NT: Nestle 1904
ἐλήλυθεν ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων, καὶ λέγετε Ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος φάγος καὶ οἰνοπότης, φίλος τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν.
I admit that I do not know Greek. I rely on English translations, the translations of Greek scholars and other helps i.e. lexicons, concordance, commentaries etc. However Titus of Bostra, who I would believe was fluent in Koine Greek, seemed to believe that Jesus drank wine “For Christ would not abstain from this food, lest He should give a handle to heretics, who say that the creatures of God are bad, and blame flesh and wine.”
This is what Dr. French L. Arrington wrote about the passage of Jesus “drinking” http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-french-l-arrington-the-bible-and-alcoholic-beverages-beer-wine-liquors-and-total-abstinence/
Troy Day I believe that Dr. Arrington makes a jump to state that there is proof in error. There is not enough evidence to prove that Jesus did in or did not in fact drink wine. Also there is not one person alive that understands and speaks Koine Greek in its direct cultural context as well as our early church fathers.
Also I found the following in another article pertaining to Mark 14:25
Yes – same author submitted it There is also the reference of Jesus begin given and accepted sour wine on the cross. How do you feel this proves your thesis?
Did Jesus drink wine? I don’t know, and I don’t think we can say for sure from the scriptures. The scriptures however do strongly and clearly warn from becoming drunk. The scriptures also warn to not be a stumbling block to others. This should be a clear indicator that social drinking should not be the practice of a Christian.
We have gathered sufficient evidence to conclude that Jesus in fact did not drink wine at all. Furthermore, IF any wine was indeed meant in the NT it was 2 parts water 1 part wine as per Jewish tradition (Tom Steele ) which puts it way below the common Nyquil content. Additionally, we have Gospel authors on purpose saying things like
– the cup
– the fruit of the vine and so on
quite intentionally excluding the word “wine”
just like it is said that John did not drink wine
BUT it does not say Jesus drank wine, just drank – wine is excluded
Finally, we do have 2 cases that require further attention
Jesus on the cross DID accept sour wine though most English translation omit that; not sure if this counts TOWARD Jesus drinking wine
Second, we have His promise he will drink the fruit of the vine NEW with us in His Kingdom, though we neither know what the NEW fruit of vine may be in eternity nor in what shape and form Jesus will be consuming it…
Troy Day I disagree. I believe most scholars that come to outcome to state that Jesus emphatically did not drink wine do not look at the scriptures objectively. The evidence is not there to make a concrete decision one way or the other.
How is it that we have church fathers from the first century church that spoke fluent Koine Greek say that they believe Jesus did drink wine and scholars today, removed from cultural context, in a era in which Koine Greek is no longer fluently spoken, come to differing conclusions?
Troy Day Yes, I am aware of the water/wine mixture used in those days.
If you can find a copy, I recommend getting a hold of a book called The Temperance Commentary by Fredrick Lees. It was done in the 1800’s during prohibition, when this issue would have been a really hot topic. They cover just about everything you would ever want to know about the matter of wine/alcohol in the Bible. Sure, they seem like they are bias toward a no alcohol position, so you’ll probably like that too. If you cannot find a hard copy, which you likely won’t as I have been unable to at this time either, the whole thing is on Google Books. I have found it very useful in past studies.
I haven’t looked into it, but I imagine it’s possible that they even address your concerns about Nazirites in it as well.
Phil Brown Jr. that is a GREAT question!
Phil Brown Jr. The Orthodox church and the Catholic who claim they came from Peter himself also drink strong wine and more BUT in the NT we have not been able ANY proof that Jesus drunk wine. Ricky Grimsley knows some of the church fathers and how to trust their writings
Troy Day nor is there any concrete proof that He did not. There is not enough evidence. To lean either way emphatically is a stretch that I do not believe is there.
There is sufficient evidence He did not.
I believe I presented more than enough
What you presented is not sufficient. There is likewise sufficient evidence that proves otherwise. Myself and others have also presented that.
Titus of Bostra died in 378 AD, before Christianity became the official religion of Rome in 380AD. His writings are not to be written off as unreliable.
Jesus did NOT drink wine – the Bible says so
– most Gospel writers omitted the word wine
– instead the word CUP is used by all, Paul included
– the better wine in Jn2 was NEW wine – Jesus made NEW wine
– mostly water with a pinch of low grade wine was used in Passover – wine was mixed only for purification of the water not the intoxication of the receiver
– the false accusation toward Jesus was exactly that false – He never drunk wine; actually wine is not even used in regard to Jesus in Lk. but to John. When Luke came to Jesus he did not even dare use the word wine to creat the full parallel! This alone settles it for me
Yes
Did you know the new wine still has alcohol in it (although very little).
The omission of the word wine does not mean He did not drink it. It means they were careful to not make Jesus look to be a drunkard, as nd rightfully so. To let yourself be swayed by lack of concrete evidence only goes you are not treating the evidence that is there objectively. It appears as if you are grasping at straws to come to a predetermined conclusion. It just is not there. Until you do come up with evidence other omission of words, lack of statements and song and dance comparisons, this is open for discussion.
but it does mean there’s a purposeful redaction on part of the Gospel writers NOT to associate Jesus with wine in their writings until the sour wine reference on the cross which is connected with the sinners and a sinful act on part of Christ’s enemies. BTW your own church scholars and leading theologians say Jesus did not drink wine
Troy Day I know what CoG leading theologians say in regards to to this issue. I am still able to read the scriptures for myself objectively.
So do you think you read it objectively better than Dr. French Arrington who wrote
On one occasion Jesus contrasted Himself with John the Baptist. He said, “For John came neither eating nor drinking and they (the Pharisees) say, ‘He has a demon!’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard’” (Matt.11:18-19). He did not offer an apology for His behavior. He had done nothing for which to apologize.
http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-french-l-arrington-the-bible-and-alcoholic-beverages-beer-wine-liquors-and-total-abstinence/
Troy Day yes
Dr. Arrington stated that Jesus did nothing for which to apologize. I agree with him on that statement.
However I do not agree there is sufficient biblical evidence to state that aside from vinnegar (sour wine) Jesus never drank wine. I think we view wine in the US through a prohibitionist subcultural lens. This lens causes some scholars to not view scripture objectively. The proof is not in the pudding to prove either way. You may be right, but then again so could I. I guess we will have to meet on the other side of eternity to finally lay this issue to rest.
YES finally Jesus never drank wine You’re correct
Troy Day Did you call me?
I believe in a Pre-Wrath Rapture.
I do not drink alcohol beverages, but we used alcohol beverages to cook with.
I do not believe no one can say scripturally did not drink wine.
Matthew 11:18-19 does imply that He did, as well as Jesus Christ also being a heavy eater. I can imagine Jesus Christ being a heavy muscular man, considering that Joseph was a carpenter and they can be large people and according to natural looking Jesus was probably trained to be a carpenter.
I do not believe Apostle Paul taught total abstinence from Alcohol.
Isn’t it amazing that Timothy couldn’t be a bishop because he was admonished to drink a little wine for the stomachs sake.
I am obese, and have been most of my life. Recently, aftet all these years of ministering I am being told that obese people will not be in heaven.
So maybe I shouldn’t comment about any sins they say. But i just thought I would throw that in.
What do you mean that ‘Timothy couldn’t be a bishop…’?
Link Hudson drinking wine
Scotty Searan Tradition says Timothy was a bishop. The Bivle uses ‘apostles’ and ‘evangelist’ in connection with his ? istry. But is your point that the prohobition against excessive of wine did not mean consume no wine as Timothy may have been doing? Paul may have been reacting to an early teetotaler.
Tradition is not the Bible
The Bible never says Timothy was a bishop
He never oversaw multiple congregations
AND was too young for the position anyway
Tradition also tells about Quo vadis Domine but that was more of a novel and a movie. The bishops the Bible actually talks about like Paul and John were not even married
Troy Day Where are these men, Paul and John, called ‘bishops.’ Why would you assume John was not married?
Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in local churches. He told Titus to appoint elders and went on to use the term interchangeably with ‘the bishop’ when describing the qualifications. He calls elders of the church in Ephesus ‘bishops’ in Acts 20:28 and exhorts them to pastor the church. The elders of the church were ‘bishops’. Peter told the elders of the flock to take the oversight (c.f. bishop) thereof and to pastor the flock.
Link you are playing with terms without knowing their proper application neither their Biblical meaning – what do you mean when you say elders? presbyter (an old man) OR episkopos OR apostles or what exactly? Also, per OP which qualifications do you claim women do not have to fulfill those offices?
Troy Day ask Scotty about wine. As for terms, I realize presbuteros can be translated older men, but there seems to be an idiomatic sense even in first century Greek. Were the elders referred to along with the chief priests and scribes all the old men in the whole nation of Israel? Thst is unlikely.
I pointed out where Paul calls eldersbishops and used the terms interchangeably.
Women cannot fulfill the qualification of being a man as in one woman man.
A bishop should not be given to wine. That is a qualification of the Bishop.
But Paul also instructed Timothy. “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.”
But according to our dietary standards in this country, a person should drink 6 to 8 8 oz. glasses of water a day. A physical therapist who was treating my mother in law said she was not drinking enough water and he told her the same thing and more water if you drank coffee, tea or sodas with caffeine, because they are diuretics.
I am not picking on Timothy, because I believe he was a great Christian.. Be realistic analyze it.
No water.
1/2 gallon of wine per day maybe more if was sicker on an given day.
Why?
For His stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.
Could this be evidence of the Gifts Of The Spirit, Word of Knowledge and Wisdom? How about Gifts of Healing?
Either way that was a lot of wine to drink in one day.
Now this might have been an instruction just for a particular period of time. Yet, It appears that these instances of sickness had gone on over a long period of time.
Like you know me I think outside the paradigm..
Scotty Searan They used to dillute wine with water mayne 2 to 1 more water.
Link Hudson Paul’s admonition to Timothy, Wine not water, so I don’t believe it would have been diluted.
I do not drink alcohol, we do use alcoholic beverages in cooking some
Scotty Searan not water only anymore. No mention of quantities.
Scotty Searan same here except communion. Alcohol cooks out.
Link Hudson Our body needs so much water or liquids to sustain itself and the basic rule is is 1/2 your body weight in ounces. You are being like Troy Day. Just Google it.
Link Hudson Another thing is Alcohol is also a diuretic which will also make your body give off more liquid than it takes in.
Some doctors have told people to drink a beer to flush out the kidneys because of the diuretic effect of alcohol
If you don’t drink beer or wine, Cranberry juice will flush out your kidneys. 100% juice not cocktail which is 10% juice.
Scotty Searan how am I being like Troy Day? I have no argument with the diuretic effects of alcohol.
As I can remember. When they had communion. It always said they took the cup. They took a sup or sip , but the Bible Calls it a sup , and passed it around. When they made wine in that day. They mixed so much water it couldn’t be called wine that was called Alcoholic. But they did drink strong drinks. Because Noah got drunk. Noah crushed Canaan. His grandson. Lots daughters made him drunk. His grandchildren was by incest. Their land was never in the line of Jesus except Ruth. Getting drunk , never brought good. Always curses. So no I don’t believe Jesus , drank or made strong drink.
In the Old Testament. It was called wine, while still on the vine. I’ll have to look it up.
We know a preacher he advocating the use on pot instead of pills….I won’t listen to a drunk, pill popper, grass smoking preacher. He ain’t no example for me.
I am in the boat with you.
we know preachers that drunk a case of beer watching the Bama game last night and be trying to preach on Holy Ghost power this AM but they aint got none
Troy Day How they get around 1st. Corinthians 6:9??? “No drunkard shall inherit the Kingdom of God.”
they say the dont get intoxicated or something
Troy Day
Why are they blowing smoke? A small percentage of alcohol can cause you to be legally drunk and go to jail for drunk driving or public drunkennesss.
Not the same as today’s wines with Alcohol added by volume…Night Train, Mad Dog, and Thunderbird are cheap wines with High Alcohol content and sold to the poor. I heard one old preacher say that in the N.T. days it was a fermented grape juice and he went on to say it was thick like a Jelly, which makes kinda sense that they were winebibbers, sucking on the jelly.
he probably meant that wine makes your brains into jelly
I can agree to that.
How much alcohol does it take to get drunk?
For someone about 150 pounds, two drinks in two hours would probably make you legally drunk (.08 blood alcohol level). It doesn’t take much alcohol at all to make you legally drunk, and alcohol stays in your system for hours before it is all gone. From google…
Someone in the group actually experimented with that to prove us wrong. The Cops dont care how much – as soon as you drink you are already somewhat intoxicated
I was told by a friend that he went into a Presbyterian Church in N. California and found that they have a full bar.
bro Jerome anyone who drinks does it cause they want to drink not cause of some “liberty” in the Spirit
NO
Yes unless he was fasting. He was attending a wedding. So he was doing with good Jews do during a wedding! A more complex question might be, “was Jesus still maintaining his Nazirite Vow during his ministry?
At the last supper we know he definitely did because he plainly said, “I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
Matthew 26:29
many have attended weddings without any drinking I know I’ve been one
JOHN never says Jesus drunk from the wine in ch 2 – just turned it There is major difference between turning and drinking PLUS its a very BAD example too – because only frees you to drink wine which JESUS turned from water Not sure where you can find such wine nowadays
Neil Steven Lawrence when did Jesus take a Nazarite Vow? Can you provide that scripture
James Michael Sanders it’s a speculation. It’s interesting to see that the Shroud of Turin shows Jesus had a ponytail. Hair that was uncut was one of the rituals done in a Nazarite Vow. Now you might say… Do you being Pentecostal and protestant believe that the shroud of Turin was really Jesus burial shroud? Yes.
Neil Steven Lawrence Jesus was NO Nazarite He touched dead bodies at least 2 times that we know
Troy Day there are a lot of things Jesus did that did not fit the mold yet he is prophet priest and king rolled into one.
I don’t really know for sure but I don’t think Nazirite Vows were always done throughout an entire lifetime. Some could’ve been done for a period of time.
His cousin John the Witness definitely did live under a Nazarite Vow.
This one will only know when we get to heaven.
Neil Steven Lawrence he is also a JUDGE the Office of Judges also experienced anointing without being a king, prophet or priest as often alluded The 4 correspond with the 4 Gospels too
Now then JESUS never took Nazarite Vow
BUT ALL THIS is straw man arguments and speaks NOTHING to the subject at hand from OP on wine drinking
Jesus said he will drink NO wine till NEW in Heaven
Thus shall we do also until commanded otherwise
Troy Day i’m Pentecostal what choice do I have except to live by the scriptural admonitions and the rule of the church.
Didn’t Jesus say He was saving the best wine for last ? This has 2 meaning’s
where did he say that?
Yes
pls give us the NT reference where it says Jesus did drink wine Thank you
Troy Day read Matthew 11:18,
The marriage supper of Cana – he made the best Wine,
And
the Jewish Passover (which Jesus celebrated since he was 12 years old ) has always been celebrated with Wine – not grape juice.
Stan Cooke not actually true about the Passover We’ve discussed this with Tom Steele just to come up with historical proof that the wine was not pure alcoholic wine but mixture of wine water and spices as it was done back then
NOW lets read the verse you misquoted so freely
Matthew 11:18-19
18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Here is a glutton and a drunkard
Who are THEY that say this?
Do they also say Jesus has a demon?
If what they said was true and Jesus drunk wine
does it also mean Jesus had a demon?
Your exegesis – not mine
Troy Day You are taking a twisted Gentile Christian point of view That was developed within the holiness movement.
There is not a single Jew that has converted to Christianity that will agree with you on your interpretation of wine.
Troy Day To use your view you would have to say the bishops are not supposed to drink grape juice but the deacons can drink some grape juice according to the book of Titus and Timothy
Stan Cooke yep I believe Jesus was a good Jew; unless he was a Nazarite he definitely drank wine – not grape juice.
Matthew 26:29
New Living Translation
“Mark my words—I will not drink wine again until the day I drink it new with you in my Father’s Kingdom.”