DRINKING AND THE SCRIPTURES

Stephen63 · Mar 14, 2014

I don't base my beliefs on opinion or commentary.

Barclay's

This is a text which has much troubled those who are advocates of total abstinence. It must be remembered that it does not give any man a licence to indulge in drink to excess; it simply approves the use of wine where it may be medicinally helpful. If it does lay down any principle at all, E. F. Brown has well stated it: "It shows that while total abstinence may be recommended as a wise counsel, it is never to be enforced as a religious obligation." Paul is simply saying that there is no virtue in an asceticism which does the body more harm than good.

Albert Barnes

Thus considered, this direction is as worthy to be given by an inspired teacher as it is to counsel a man to pay a proper regard to his health, and not needlessly to throw away his life; compare Mat_10:23. The phrase, “drink no longer water,” is equivalent to, “drink not water only;” see numerous instances in Wetstein. The Greek word here used does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament.
But use a little wine - Mingled with the water - the common method of drinking wine in the East; see Robinson’s Bibliotheca Sacra, 1:512, 513.

Expositor's Bible Commentary

It remains to ascertain the meaning of the curious parenthesis "Be no longer a drinker of water," and its connection with the rest of the passage.
It was probably suggested to St. Paul by the preceding words, "Beware of making yourself responsible for the sins of others. Keep your own life above suspicion." This charge reminds the Apostle that his beloved disciple has been using ill-advised means to do this very thing. Either in order to mark his abhorrence of the drunkenness which was one of the most conspicuous vices of the age, or in order to bring his own body more easily into subjection, Timothy had abandoned the use of wine altogether, in spite of his weak health. St. Paul, therefore, with characteristic affection, takes care that his charge is not misunderstood. In urging his representative to be strictly careful of his own conduct, he does not wish to be understood as encouraging him to give up whatever might be abused or made the basis of a slander, nor yet as approving his rigor in giving up the use of wine. On the contrary, he thinks it a mistake; and he takes this opportunity of telling him so, while it is in his mind. Christ’s ministers have important duties to perform, and have no right to play tricks with their health. We may here repeat, with renewed confidence, that a touch of this kind would never have occurred to a forger. Hence, in order to account for such natural touches as these, those who maintain that these Epistles are a fabrication now resort to the hypothesis that the forger had some genuine letters of St. Paul and worked parts of them into his own productions. It seems to be far more reasonable to believe that St. Paul wrote the whole of them.

John Gill

Drink no longer water,.... Though it was commendable in him to keep under his body, as the apostle did, by abstemious living, and not pamper the flesh and encourage the lusts of it, and so preserve purity and chastity; yet it was proper that he should take care of his health, that it was not impaired by too much severity, and so he be incapable of doing the work of the Lord. And it seems by this, that his long and only use of water for his drink had been prejudicial to his health: wherefore the following advice was judged proper:

but use a little wine; some, by "a little wine", understand not the quantity, but the quality of the wine; a thin, small, weak wine, or wine mixed with water; and so the Ethiopic version renders the words, "drink no more simple water", (or water only,) "but mix a little wine"; though rather the quantity is intended, and which is mentioned. Not as though there was any danger of Timothy's running into an excess of drinking; but for the sake of others, lest they should abuse such a direction, to indulge themselves in an excessive way; and chiefly to prevent the scoffs of profane persons; who otherwise would have insinuated that the apostle indulged intemperance and excess: whereas this advice to the use of wine, was not for pleasure, and for the satisfying of the flesh, but for health,

Matthew Henry

2. He charges him to take care of his health: Drink no longer water, etc. It seems Timothy was a mortified man to the pleasures of sense; he drank water, and he was a man of no strong constitution of body, and for this reason Paul advises him to use wine for the helping of his stomach and the recruiting of his nature. Observe, It is a little wine, for ministers must not be given to much wine; so much as may be for the health of the body, not so as to distemper it, for God has made wine to rejoice man's heart.

Now take your pick.

When you use several commentaries, you can get a consensus of what the truth is through their agreement. These agree that wine for medicine purposes, probably watered down. There's no agreement for casual drinking.

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

john832 said:

The debauchery is in the drunkenness. You really believe that a bottle of wine in a warehouse somewhere is debauchery?

"occaisions of excess" - again, overdoing it. By the way, gluttony is considered just as much of a sin as drunkenness, just to be safe, shouldn't you quit eating?

No doubt and I agree.....

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

watcher2013 said:

Let me review your meaning:

Primary meaning - Intoxicated

Secondary meaning - full,satiated
FULL OF WHAT?

again:
Secondary Meaning - Full of wine = drunk...same as primary intoxicated...
Secondary meaning - full of food+grape Juice = Gluttony...
Secondary Meaning - Full of grape Juice = Stupidity (full of non sense)

Paul suggested you have house to eat and drink....He did not say get Drunk....

Drunkenness is the result of excessive drinking of (intoxicating) fluids..

Paul did not contradict himself...Your doctrine on the other hand contradict itself...

Bishop-No wine
Deacons - not too much
timothy - little wine
not drunk with wine in excess
Lord supper - cup of wine
aged man -Sober
Aged women -not given to much wine

Herein is the biblical margin
from nothing ---to---> little/ not much wine....

excessive drinking is not encourage and will result in drunkenness.

I agree with this biblical truth in context although the hyper critical hypocrites will reject the truth in favor of man made religious hand cuffs!

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

watcher2013 said:

AMEN and I agree!

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

john832 said:

HAHHAHA I like the analogy as well...

p_rehbein · Mar 14, 2014

Drinking never hurt me...................

..........most folks can't even tell I drink!

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

p_rehbein said:

Now that is funny hahahah ........

p_rehbein · Mar 14, 2014

john832 said:

I do not agree...........If one eats just what is required to sustain them or to sate their appetite, that does not equate to a "partial sin." Nice try at analogy......but wrong.........Scripture speaks of all things in moderation..........and if one is obedient to Scripture they are not a "partial sinner."

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

Stephen63 said:

Who cares what bias men think and what the commentaries have to say...at the end of the day instead of being open to scripture you are regurgitating what other men regurgitate......Not to mention that Matthew Henry has never impressed me one iota.....

p_rehbein · Mar 14, 2014

Nothing wrong with reading commentaries.........I have a couple I often refer to when reading Scripture...........

Now, if one replaces Scripture with the commentaries...........then THAT is a sore mistake yes?

Shoot, think about it.......think about what a commentary is.............it is a publication of a persons opinion of what a Scripture/passage of Scripture means.........

Christian Chat is chock-a-block FULL of commentaries is it not?

I enjoy reading them too! Don't agree with all of them, well, ok, most of them

, but I enjoy reading them!

dcontroversal · Mar 14, 2014

p_rehbein said:

Nothing wrong with reading commentaries.........I have a couple I often refer to when reading Scripture...........

Now, if one replaces Scripture with the commentaries...........then THAT is a sore mistake yes?

Shoot, think about it.......think about what a commentary is.............it is a publication of a persons opinion of what a Scripture/passage of Scripture means.........

Christian Chat is chock-a-block FULL of commentaries is it not?

I enjoy reading them too! Don't agree with all of them, well, ok, most of them

, but I enjoy reading them!

Touche mi amigo....HAH!

Kerry · Mar 14, 2014

Go to the the DRUNK thread. then buy another bottle.

Stephen63 · Mar 15, 2014

dcontroversal said:

That's right folks, you read it correctly...... not interested in commentaries that have 20 times his education..... just a conservative guess.

Because...... you're right. What possibly could I have been thinking? Obviously, these God-fearing commentators are biased, because after all YOU SAID SO!

Now that you've just accused & judged falsely well-respected commentarians........ who then are these hyper critical hypocrites anyway? It's easy to see you're name-calling & judging somebody in this thread.

I think.... it's those people who investigated for truth & found it. And when they did..... they all disagreed with you.

So when you can't convince them, you psychologically project on them, calling them the heretics & hypocrites!

Didn't you tell me last month you were a pastor?

Stephen63 · Mar 15, 2014

watcher2013 said:

Yeah, I have that choice, but that's the choice of a coward.

SeaBass · Mar 15, 2014

watcher2013 said:

Methuo is sinful when one is FILLED with an intoxicant Rom 13:13; Gal 5:21. One can also be FILLED-methuo but not with an intoxicant but filled with food.

In the LXX, the Greek word methuo is found in:

Psa 23:5 "Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth (methuo) over" God was not getting David intoxicated in the presence of his enemies but David's cup was FILLED

Lam 3:15 "He hath filled me with bitterness, he hath made me drunken (methuo) with wormwood"
Filled is made equivalent to drunken.

Isa 51:21 "Therefore hear now this, thou afflicted, and drunken (methuo), but not with wine"

Psa 36:8; Isa 34:5; Isa 34:7; Jer 31:25; Jer 31:14among other OT verses where methuo is used but not specifically about intoxication but about being filled.

The verse at hand "For in EATING every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken." 1 Cor 11:21

Paul is speaking about thier EATING supper, some were getting nothing to eat while others were being filled. Hungry being conrasted to drunken > filled.

Earlier in this epistle, Paul mentioned the sin of being "drunkards", 1 Cor 6:10 and then said to the Corinthians such WERE some of you, verse 11. So why in the same letter would Paul say they were NOT drunkards then accuse them being drunken (intoxicated)?

If they were getting intoxicated at the Lord's Supper Paul would have condemned it and not tell them they have houses to get drunken in. That would be the implication.

Eph 5:18 "And be not drunk (methuo) with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;"

In Eph 5:18 Paul made the mutually exclusive proposition one cannot be filled with some wine and some spirit, one can only be filled with one or the other but not both.

Here again methuo/drunk is made parallel with FILLED. Paul is not saying one is to be intoxicated with wine no more than he is saying be intoxicated with spirit. Filled therefore would be the meaning of methuo...not filled with wine but filled with the spirit.

1 Pet 4:3 Peter lists three varying degress of drinking/drunkenness from excess to small and in the context he condemns all the varying degrees.

SeaBass · Mar 15, 2014

john832 said:

Nowhere I find the Greek word onios used in connection with the Lord's Supper. All that is used is "fruit of the vine", literally meaning that which is naturally born of the vine, which would be grape juice. If I recall correctly, Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper during sedar, no yeast in the house or yeast products consumed. So Jesus would used UNLEAVEN bread and fruit of the vine/grape juice, fermented wine being a product of yeast.

SeaBass · Mar 15, 2014

john832 said:

But if one eats just one normal plate of food that is not gluttony, but if one drinks a glass of alcohol he leaves soberness and enters some degree of drunkenness.

The thing about sober is there are no degrees of soberness. It is like a light switch that can be either "on" or "off" but not a little of both at the same time. So one is either in a sober state or a drunken state, no little of both at the same time.

SeaBass · Mar 15, 2014

homwardbound said:

Not trying to get around Law. The law in itself is perfect, but when it flows in me in my flesh it shows me my impoerfection and need of the Savior Christ
1 Corinthians 15:54-56

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

[SUP]54 [/SUP]So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. [SUP]55 [/SUP]O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? [SUP]56 [/SUP]The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

So I do not try of my own accord to obey Law, rather trust God through me to teach by his Spirit of truth to just Love as God does, shown best through Son by Faith and was led by God his Father our Father, those that God has accepted in this miraculous Mercy through Son to walk as Christ walked in the Spirit of God and none other
Thanks for your posts

But if you do not of your own accord obey the law you never will obey, God wil not force you to against your will to obey. You have to determine with your own self-will to obey God.

SeaBass · Mar 15, 2014

dcontroversal said:

.......but you have not even came close to proving your position to be calling other hypocritses......

SeaBass · Mar 15, 2014

dcontroversal said:

...but we should care about your bias?

DRINKING AND THE SCRIPTURES

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Kerry

Guest

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned