“Would you explain 1 Timothy 5:23 about Paul’s advice to Timothy to drink wine?”
This verse has long been a source of controversy. It is the “wino’s” golden text, though abused mightily in the effort. Paul encourages his friend:
“Be no longer a drinker of water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your frequent infirmities.”
Perhaps the most convenient way to deal with this text is to segment it by its significant points.
(1) Timothy was afflicted with a stomach ailment, the nature of which is not precisely known. It was a sickness that came and went, but apparently more often “came” than otherwise. The apostle obviously suspects bad “water” as the source of the young man’s problem. Since the days of Hippocrates it was recognized that contaminated water could produce illnesses. Moreover, Ephesus was an ancient and decaying city. Its harbor was silting up which, in turn, created sewage problems that poisoned some of the underground water supplies. Such might well have been the cause of Timothy’s medical ailment (Williams, p. 101).
(2) The sentence is elliptical, i.e., certain words must be mentally supplied in order to complete the thought. The sense thus should be: “Be no longer a drinker of water only, but also take a little wine?” (see John 6:27; cf.1 Corinthians 4:20 with 1 Thessalonians 1:5). The apostle is not instructing Timothy to abstain from water entirely; rather, for medicinal purposes the youth was enjoined to mix with his water a “little wine.”
(3) The use of wine was a widely recognized remedy for some illnesses among both Jews and Greeks, as reflected in the Hebrew Talmud, the writings of Hippocrates, Plutarch, and Pliny (Fee, p. 135). “Wine was often helpful in settling stomachs and preventing dysentery (it disinfected water)” (Keener, p. 619).
(4) Something of Timothy’s character is revealed. He had refrained even from the medicinal use of wine, a perfectly legitimate remedy, for the sake of his influence. Such was going too far, however. His service to Christ was more valuable than the possible damage that might be done by some misguided critic. Incidentally, this negates the speculation of some that “wine” here possibly was grape juice. The young man would hardly have needed exhortation to use a little grape juice with his water.
(5) To suggest, as some have done, that Paul sees in Timothy a “false asceticism” due to the influence of the false teachers at Ephesus, is an example of drawing a conclusion without sufficient evidence.
(6) This passage can hardly provide any comfort for those who desire to engage in the pleasurable consumption of beverage alcohol. Imbibers rarely drink just a “little,” nor do they dilute their wine with water. They are looking for the “glow,” the “buzz.” Furthermore, ancient wines were not nearly as potent as today’s fortified wines.
(7) Finally, to contend that this passage is much too personal to warrant any importance, and therefore such constitutes an argument negating the Bible’s claim of verbal inspiration (as liberal critics charge), is absurd in the extreme. In fact, as Spence has argued, this passage provides evidence of the genuine Pauline authorship of this document. No forger of the 2nd or 3rd century would ever have dreamed of weaving something of this nature into the text (p. 207). It does, however, reveal the great love and concern of Paul for his young companion in the gospel.
What About Moderate Social Drinking?
*"In the 2nd chapter of John, Christ’s first miraculous sign was the turning of water to wine at a wedding. We know the purpose of wine at weddings – social consumption. And, if we look at the passage honestly, we know that this is a fermented beverage; for when the host tasted it he was confused that the best wine there was served last."
“In 1 Timothy 5:23, Paul instructed Timothy to take in wine for his stomach’s sake. Take notice that the apostle specified a “little” wine. If it were grape juice or non-fermented drink, I am sure that there would have been no concern over the amount consumed?"
“Looking into the qualifications of deacons and elders, the elders are told to be given to no wine but deacons not to be given to “much” wine. Are they talking about grape juice?"
“Christ would not create something that is sinful. So, if alcohol consumption was and is a sin, He would not have created it at all. Paul, inspired of God, understood the nature of God, and what was or was not pleasing to Him, and would not have advised his disciple to sin (consume alcohol) even for health purposes.”*
Normally we do not take the space to deal with “questions” that are more of an essayed affirmation than they are a serious inquiry. In this case, however — because of the prevalent interest in the theme, and due to the common erroneous conclusions drawn — we are prepared to make an exception. Hence we respond to the paragraphs above in order.
Jesus Turned Water to Wine
There is no proof that the “wine” at the marriage feast in Cana was fermented. The Greek word for “wine” in this text is oinos, which may refer to a fermented beverage (cf. Eph. 5:18), or it may denote freshly squeezed grape juice (cf. Isa. 16:10 – LXX). Since the word for “wine” is generic, the student has no right to import the concept of an alcoholic beverage into this passage without contextual justification — of which there is none.
Moreover, what may be “social consumption” in our day, says nothing about the practice of the first century. The juice of the grape was a common drink in that land of many vineyards.
Finally, the fact that the ruler of the feast could still distinguish the quality of the latter beverage from the former, suggests that his senses were not dull as a result of previous guzzling! [Note: For further study see “John 2:1ff – The Wine that Jesus Made”.
Timothy Took Wine for His Stomach
The fact that Paul instructed Timothy to “take a little wine for his stomach’s sake” involves several things.
First, it suggests that the young evangelist had been reticent to drink the wine prior to the admonition. If drinking fermented wine was common for the primitive Christians, the exhortation would scarcely have been needed.
Second, Timothy obviously suffered from a stomach ailment which required medicinal remedy. The water in Asia Minor could be very dangerous, hence the young evangelist was encouraged to take “a little wine” along with his water. The sentence is elliptical: “Be no longer a drinker of water [alone], but [with it] take a little wine . . .” (1 Tim. 5:23).
This text must be viewed in light of Timothy’s malady, and the conditions of that day. Paul’s advice, therefore, no more encourages the modern practice of social drinking than would the use of a prescription drug be a precedent for “pot” smoking.
Elders Qualification Quibble
With reference to the qualifications of an elder, Paul affirms that the candidate for bishop must not be “addicted to wine” (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7).
The Greek expression, paroinos, means “given to wine, drunken”.
To read into that some sort of license for moderate drinking is an irresponsible stretch. Would an admonition against “drug addiction” grant any measure of comfort to someone wishing to “smoke pot” recreationally?
Would such a warning be interpreted as a license for the moderate use of cocaine?
Moreover, Paul’s restriction regarding deacons that they must not be “addicted to much wine” (1 Tim. 3:8)
— similarly provides no permission for the moderate use of recreational alcohol in today’s world of distilled spirits which are far, far stronger than were the fermented beverages of the primitive age.
The fact is, within the same context, church officers are charged to be “sober” (nepho), which signifies “to be free from the influence of intoxicants” .
Josephus employs the word nephaleos (“sobriety”) of the priests, as they functioned in their appointed roles, commenting that they “are [not] permitted to drink wine". The word literally means “holding no wine”.
It is entirely possible that the use of “wine” in the Timothy and Titus contexts may be an example of the figure known as synecdoche, a form of which is when a specific object is made to stand for a general truth. For example, “bread” (Mt. 6:11) stands for food of any sort. It is mentioned specifically, however, because it was commonly eaten at meals.
Accordingly, moderation in “wine” may simply stand for the principle of self-control in at large. It is interesting how certain terms appear to balance one another. The bishop must be “temperate” (1 Tim. 3:2), and " . . .deacons in like manner . . .not given to much wine" (3:8); similarly, " . . .women in like manner . . .[are to be] temperate" (3:11).
In Titus 2:2, men are to “be temperate” and “women likewise . . .not . . .enslaved to much wine” (2:3).
Thus “wine,” because it was a common beverage, may be a specific illustration for moderation in general without any allusion as to whether or not it involved fermentation.
The New Testament represents the abuses of wine in a series of words that depict stages in transgression.
First, there is potos (rendered “banqueting” 1 Pet. 4:3). It denotes a drinking party, but as R.C. Trench noted, “not of necessity excessive . . .but giving occasion for excess” and yet it is condemned!
This aptly describes the modern cocktail scene.
Second, there is oinophlugia, which is rendered “wine-drinking” (Berry, Greek-English Interlinear, 1 Pet. 4:3), or “excess of wine”.
No conscientious Christian would want to dabble with beverage alcohol in any of these degrees.
The Creation Argument
It is truly remarkable that a brother would make the argument that if the pleasurable consumption of beverage alcohol is wrong, God would not have created it. The implication thus is: since liquors are here, the Lord must endorse them.
Would the gentleman care to make the same argument with reference to cocaine, opium, or marijuana? While it is true that “every creature of God is good” (1 Tim. 4:4), it is good for the purpose for which it was created; anything can be perverted.
God never intended that grapes, grain, the poppy, the marijuana plant, etc., be used as recreational, mind-altering substances.
For those who wish to pursue this study in greater detail, we highly recommend the following books:
The Bible and “Social” Drinking by W.D. Jeffcoat (1987), and “Beverage Alcohol” by Louis Rushmore (1998).
Credit: Christiancourier
0 comments: