Dear Kris,

Do you think that your coworkers would be convinced of the claims that the Savior drank only the “pure wine of the grape” and not fermented wine if some non-LDS scholars were to agree with the LDS scholars? The only information available is that which is written in the scriptures. But there is some understanding among scholars what was meant by the various types of wine that were mentioned in the scriptures.

I’m sorry that I can’t cite any non-LDS scholars on this subject. If your coworkers, who are non-LDS, had any real interest in the answer, perhaps they could look up their own sources. Rather than responding to such a devious challenge, who don’t you ask them to “prove” that any wine that the Savior drank was alcoholic?

Here’s what some of the LDS scholars have to say on the subject. I think that any unbiased person would recognize that this information is as objective as any other that your friends could find.

“The use of ‘pure wine’ in the Sacrament is permitted. But what is ‘pure wine’ if not the pure juice of the grape, before it has been adulterated by the process of fermentation? No fewer than thirteen Hebrew and Greek terms are rendered in our Bible by the word ‘wine.’ There is the pure grape juice, and a kind of grape syrup, the thickness of which made it necessary to mingle water with it previously to drinking (Prov. 9:2, 5.) There was a wine made strong and inebriating by the addition of drugs, such as myrrh, mandragora, and opiates (Prov. 23:30; Isa. 5:22.). Of the pure wine which was diluted with water, or milk, Wisdom invites her friends to drink freely (Prov. 9:2, 5.) There was also ‘wine on the lees,’ which is supposed to have been ‘preserves’ or ‘jellies’ (Isa. 25:6.) The ‘pure wine’ is not an intoxicating, but a harmless liquid” (Smith and Sjodahl, in “Doctrine and Covenants Commentary”, Sec. 89, p. 572).

Gramps