Habakkuk 2: 14-16

Hab 2:14:

            For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.  “Woe to him who gives drink to his neighbor, Pressing him to your bottle, Even to make him drunk, That you may look on his nakedness!  You are filled with shame instead of glory. You also—drink! And be exposed as uncircumcised! The cup of the LORD’s right hand will be turned against you, and utter shame will be on your glory. 

            This passage sets up a dilemma for Jesus if he made alcoholic wine at the wedding of Cana. If the wine Jesus produced was alcoholic, then Jesus would have been guilty of giving “drink to His neighbor”. This would have pronounced this woe described here on Jesus. This would have been true regardless of the alcoholic content in any alcoholic wine Jesus could have produced.

            But we know that Jesus did not produce “wine” at the wedding of Cana, as we know the definition of the word today. Our modern definition of the word “wine” is describing an alcoholic drink. To some people it is “religious and romantic” but, alcoholic none the less. Jesus produced “oinos”, which is the word translated wine in the Bible, and only the context of the scriptures can tell you if oinos is alcoholic or not. The Bible translators chose to translate this word “oinos” to “wine” in John, Chapter 2 and not to attempt to make a distinction as to whether it is sweet, pure grape juice or alcoholic wine. We are left to decide that part on our own. And many people choose to call it alcoholic wine and never consider the consequences of what that does to Jesus. Some do this because they do not understand that the New Testament was written in Greek and translated into English and Greek words can carry many meanings just like some English words do. Others see the word “drunk” in verse 10 and think that means that the wedding guests were drunk on this wine Jesus produced.

John 2:10

             And saith unto him, 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.

If you were not careful here, you might conclude without thinking this through, that Jesus produced wine that was capable of making men “drunk”. This conclusion would be disastrous for Jesus because it would have Jesus participating in a drinking party where people are expected to get drunk. This would be sinful and just cannot be. But a study of the text will show us once more that these words are poor choices by the translators and they have translated the Greek word “methyo” into the English words “well drunk” when a better translation would have been “filled” or “satisfied”. If you substitute the word “filled” for “well drunk” look at what this does for the perception of the context.

John 2:10

               And saith unto him, every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men are filled, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

            No, Jesus did not produce alcoholic wine at the wedding of Cana in John 2. He produced good, pure, grape juice of a very good quality. Not watered down, not weak or soured, not some type of “low alcoholic content”, but good, sweet, juice of the grape. He produced this from water and it was a miracle of great significance that had the desired effect on the people around Him.

Carl O. Cooper