Vin as wine or just juice

Getz takes the approach in investigating 'being moderate' and its application to drinking I had never heard until I was out of High Schol, that the 'vin' could actually be just like Welch's Grape juice. To me as a young man a novel idea and the way it was presented was in that intransitive way, not that it had to be nonfermented, but that it could be nonfermented, When you think about the turning of water into wine and the statements made as to its quality you are left to surmise and assume what quality iin wine was at that time. Was it higher in alcoholic content, dryer or sweeter in flavor, clearer in its presence, what about its bouquet? Perhaps some secular historian from the time has lent us his opinion on what most thought a good wine was, or what the elite thought a good wine was, or what the frequent imbiber or the drunk or the abstainer. We really cannot say, though we, as a rule usually form an opinion about it as we do on most things. But if we look at Jesus staements about the effect of new wine on old flasks then we might wonder if new wine is the good wine and old wine the less good and thereby make the assumption that of course new good wine was less fermented and at least more desirable to the untrained palate.

Where Getz spent most of his time was in the use of the phrase moderate in all things. I remember, more by the homily than by the direct memory(it has been so long), that too many pbj's(who could stop me?) will clog the system! Time and laxative to the young intestine'a rescue.

A word spoken is not communicated until it is understood. Getz pg86

After wincing and dodging through some of the earlier chapters, it is refreshig to read this chapter on communication. Not because I am the penultimate or even standard communicator, but rather because when I was young it was the highlight of my childhood to sit with a teacher and have them explain to me what I envisioned were the secrets of life. KNOWLEDGE A tool for the correct completion of any project, and who wants to complete a project incorrectly. Getz does a good job of explicating the surrounding context of his source verses to teach a teacher what teaching is. I went a little further though in my excitement, and looked above his reference at 2 Tim 2:23 where my literal translation reads

'|1161| But |3474| foolish |2532| and |0521| uninstructed |2414| questionings |3868| refuse, |1492| knowing |3754| that |1080| they generate |3163| quarrels.'

Now, you take the GSN 2414 and find he is refering to 'Jerusalem'. 052 is 'stupid'. and so we have 'stupid Jerusalem'. A better historian than I is required to understand exactly whazt Paul refers to here, but in the context of the 'Living Bible' or the 'Bible as the Living Word of God', it may be that any time the leadership of the church becomes enamoured of their own personal, self centered, and overly specific essayes, then they can be seen as the object of this statement, no matter how well meaning, otherwise respected by peerage, or well elocutioned. An effective tool of teaching, for any leaning or suasion, is the question which inspires introspection before answer. So people of position may be asking questions which lead us into stupid assumptions and therefore they are stupid questions and should not be answered at all. The one who is able to recognize these situations can stay away from direct involvement in that particular discussion but rather maintain the course of study, presenting Truth rather than 'uninstructed(misconstructed?) questions'.

All around the above referenced section by Getz on Didaktikos was a well thought out, kind, encouraging, peaceful summation of what teaching is, how it flows from the study and understanding of the teacher, when it might occur, and how the soft word of compassion, encouragement and enlightenment turns a violent hand!

Except for the middle part to which I have added some flourish it was a very edifying and peaceful read, this chapter of Didaktikos.