What is the difference between not given [addicted] to wine and not given [addicted] to much wine (1 Timothy 3:3, 8), and does the latter justify social drinking?

      One of the qualifications of an overseer is “not given to wine” (NKJV), “not addicted to wine” (NASB), “not a drunkard” (ESV) (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). The word Paul uses is pároinos (from para [near, beside] and oinos [wine]), which means pertaining to wine; given to wine, prone to intemperance, drunken.¹ 

     For a man to qualify as a deacon he is “not given to much wine” (NKJV), “not addicted to much wine” (ESV) (1 Tim. 3:8). The operable word here is proséchō, meaning to bring near to, be attentive, apply oneself to, be given or addicted to.² A comparable admonition is stated in Titus 2:3 concerning older women, who are “not given to much wine” (NKJV), “not enslaved to much wine” (NASB), “not … slaves to much wine” (ESV). The verb doulóō simply means to be enslaved or in bondage.

     In the very same epistles Paul gives stern warnings against being proséchō [given to] the leavening influence of false teachers and false doctrines (1 Tim. 1:4; 4:1; Tit. 1:14; cf. Matt. 7:15; 16:6, 11), yet few would suggest that moderate involvement with these is being encouraged. The Bible also alludes to the non-Christian life as being doulóō [enslaved] under the sinful elements of the world (Gal. 4:3) and doulóō [enslaved] to corruption or depravity (2 Pet. 2:19), but does this implicitly support a moderate amount of worldliness and depravity in a person’s life?

      The present controversy is over Paul’s use of the word “much” [polus]. Some have inferred from these passages that deacons, older women, and all other Christians are given permission to drink alcoholic beverages in moderation as long as “much” is not consumed at one time. But is this inference necessary or even valid? Is it reasonable to conclude that a Christian must not be addicted or enslaved to much wine, but to be addicted or enslaved to a moderate amount of wine is permissible? The word “much” is an appropriate descriptive term in the context of addiction, obsession, or distraction, but it does not automatically suggest the acceptability of a little.³

     Later Paul mentions Alexander who had done him much [polus] harm (2 Tim. 4:14). Is it reasonable to suggest that Alexander would have been justified in only doing a little harm to Paul? When the LORD told Israel that their sins could not be washed away with much soap (Jer. 2:22), would it be valid to infer that they could have been spiritually cleansed with a moderate amount of soap? When the Bible says that a mighty man is not delivered by much strength (Psa. 33:16), does this imply that he is delivered by a little strength? Was Ahab exonerated because he only served Baal a little in comparison to Jehu who served him much (2 Kings 10:18)? Since Manasseh was condemned for shedding much innocent blood (2 Kings 21:16), would it have been okay for him to shed a moderate amount of innocent blood? Manasseh also did much evil in the sight of the LORD (2 Chron. 33:6), but would a smaller amount of evil have been permissible?⁴

     The bottom line is, what is the intent of the respective passages? A man addicted to or distracted by much wine is not to be a public servant in the church, and a woman enslaved to much wine cannot be a teacher of good things. Surely it was not Paul’s purpose in 1 Tim. 3:3, 8 and Titus 1:7; 2:2 to legitimize alcohol consumption, and to appeal to these prohibitions in an attempt to draw out a positive affirmation is to go beyond what the texts actually say.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ H. K Moulton, Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised 310. Some have suggested that it might be permissible for an overseer to drink wine moderately as long as he is not addicted to it. However, he is also required to be temperate (1 Tim. 3:2), something expected of other Christians as well (1 Tim. 3:11; Tit. 2:2). This word is translated from nēphalios, which means temperate in the use of alcoholic beverages, sober, clear-headed, self controlled” (BAGD 538); … abstinent in respect to wine … (H. K. Moulton 277). Josephus (Antiquities 3,12,2) and Philo (De Specialibus Legibus 4,183) used this word for abstaining from wine entirely. Since elders are to be examples to the flock (1 Pet. 5:3) and have a good testimony among those who are outside (1 Tim. 3:7), surely this would be sufficient reason for total abstinence. Furthermore, Christians are called upon to be sober or watchful [nēphō] (1 Thess. 5:6, 8; 2 Tim. 4:5; 1 Pet. 1:13; 4:7; 5:8), which literally means to abstain from wine (The New Englishmans Greek Concordance and Lexicon 592); to be free from the influence of intoxicants (Vines Expository Dictionary of NT Words 1067).

     ² H. K. Moulton, Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised 349.

     ³ If cocaine had been a problem in the first century and Paul had made similar statements concerning it, would it be sensible to assume that a casual or recreational use of this drug is proper for the child of God?

     ⁴ An additional consideration is that Paul may have been warning against the prevalent vice of his day of drinking excessive amounts of unfermented oinos – a vice corresponding to gluttony. In Smith’s Greek and Roman Antiquities, it is stated: “The use of the saccus (filter), it was believed, diminished the strength of the liquor. For this reason it was employed by the dissipated in order that they might be able to swallow a greater quantity without becoming intoxicated” (cf. Patton, Bible Wines 30). Pliny [b. AD 61] affirms that various incentives were practiced to increase thirst and that wines were filtered to break their spirit so that more could be consumed (ibid.). “The most useful wine is that which has all its strength broken by the filter [saccus]” (Pliny, Natural History 23.1).

Addendum: Biblically, as Aubrey Johnson notes, there are two things we know for certain about the consumption of inebriants: (a) alcohol is dangerous (Prov. 20:1; 23:29-32), and (b) drunkenness is condemned (1 Cor. 5:11; Gal. 5:21). “If the Bible said nothing else on the subject, these passages provide ample information for a deacon to make an intelligent decision whether to partake or abstain…. an observant person can see plenty of reasons to steer clear…. The minimal benefits are offset by devastating risks” (Dynamic Deacons 22, 23). Johnson also proposes these questions: “Will drinking make me a better deacon? Will it improve my thinking? Will it strengthen my character? Will it expand my influence? Will it add value to my ministry?” (24).

Related Posts: Here's Why I Don't Drink Beverage Alcohol

Image credit: http://www.sunleafmedical.com/gallery/Alcohol-Abuse-A-Few-Interesting-Crime-and-Treatment-Statistics/Alcohol-Abuse-A-Few-Interesting-Crime-and-Treatment-Statistics1.jpg

Premarital Decisions About Non-Optional Matters

     Marrying someone other than a faithful member of the Lord’s church was never a personal option for me. I couldn’t imagine spending my life with someone with whom I wasn’t going to spend eternity. Neither did I want to marry a person with whom I couldn’t pray. If God ever blessed me with children, I didn’t want them growing up in a religiously divided home and likely influenced to take the wrong spiritual path. I determined that if my future wife and I couldn’t go to church together and serve the Lord together, I’d rather be single. And the kind of woman I wanted to marry had to have the same high expectations.

     I’m thankful that I eventually found my prospective bride, and during our courtship she and I discussed other fundamental convictions we needed to share. We both agreed that we ought not wait until after the “I do’s” were said to sort out critical issues. Decisions were mutually reached and set in granite before making such a monumental commitment. Here are some of the things we have never allowed to be optional in our marriage.

1. Divorce. We promised each other that the word “divorce” would not be part of our vocabulary. Our wedding vows included a lifelong devotion to God and to each other, which we have taken very seriously. “Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate” (Matthew 19:6b NKJV). Despite the not-so-enjoyable rough patches we have encountered along the way, even when divorce may have seemed like a tempting solution, it has never been considered. We have thus been compelled to work through challenging setbacks, ultimately making our marriage stronger.

2. Dishonesty. Trust is the foundation of any healthy relationship. From the beginning we both agreed to always be honest with each other. If one is caught off guard by the other and asked a pointed question, there is no pause to think about whether or not to be truthful. Even when it might seem unpleasant, there is no automatic switch into lying mode. Honesty really is the best policy, and the tangled web of deceit is thereby precluded. Love “rejoices in the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6b).

3. Secrets. Keeping secrets from one another is not something my wife and I do, birthday surprises notwithstanding. We share the same bank account and checkbooks, we know each other’s personal identification numbers and passwords, and we have access to each other’s cellphones and computers. If anyone (especially a woman) wants to confide in me in the strictest of confidence, I let this person know from the start that I don’t hide anything from my wife. If she can’t know about it, then I shouldn’t be told. I can keep a secret from anyone but her. “Who can find a virtuous wife?
 For her worth is far above rubies. The heart of her husband safely trusts her” (Proverbs 31:10-11a).

4. Infidelity. While I can’t imagine being unfaithful to my wife and vice versa, I am not so naïve to think that our marriage is uniquely immune from the evil allurements of this world that attack other couples. “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Corinthians 10:12). Making a big difference for us in avoiding this terrible pitfall are the precautions we have deliberately taken, particularly the first three non-optional matters listed above.

5. Consuming Intoxicants. I realize this is a non-issue for a lot of people, but in our premarital conversations it was a deal breaker. We have witnessed too many evils associated with beverage alcohol, and we didn’t want our family plagued by something so easily avoided. Why would we allow anything into our home that has so much destructive potential? If we have to depend on a dangerous synthetic stimulant to enjoy or improve or maintain our marriage and social life, there are deeper problems to address. “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise” (Proverbs 20:1).

6. Not Going to Church. It’s all about priorities. I want my family to be together forever. I want to help my wife and children go to heaven, I want them to help me go to heaven, and we want to take as many souls with us as we can. “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching” (Hebrews 10:23-25). In our family, attending the assemblies of the church is not questioned, negotiated, or debated. It’s simply what we do. God is first, and our extended church family has always been and continues to be such a blessing.

     The above list will unlikely be adopted by the romance novel industry or find its way into many “happily-ever-after” self-help books. But these basic principles have significantly helped our marriage and have provided a solid basis for a healthy and stable home.

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Preventing Divorce, Here's Why I Don't Drink Beverage Alcohol

Related Articles: Richard Parr's A Successful Marriage, Wes McAdams' Open Letter About Dating, What the Bible Says About Marriage, Dave Miller, When Does Marriage Occur?

Image credit: http://cdn.tinybuddha.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Holding-Hands.jpg

Here's Why I Don't Drink Beverage Alcohol

    I’ll just go ahead and admit from the start my extreme personal bias against alcohol consumption. And it has little to do with what the Bible directly says on the subject. Don’t get me wrong ... I believe a strong biblical case can be made against social drinking,¹ and I have found eager attempts to justify the practice to be rather shallow and misleading.² Nevertheless, my strong disdain is largely based on personal experience. I am all too familiar with how alcohol has negatively affected me and members of my family, and I have seen its devastating effects on the lives and families of so many others. The bottom line is, I have yet to find anything good that comes from beverage alcohol, while I am painfully aware of a whole lot of evil associated with it.

Here are a few reasons I choose to completely abstain from alcoholic beverages.

1. If I refuse to take even a single drink, my actions will never influence my spouse or my children to drink. I take very seriously my God-given family responsibilities, including my position of leadership in the home and my role as a husband and father. As I seek to provide for my family, inclusive of their physical, emotional, and spiritual needs (1 Timothy 5:8), being a good example is of far greater value than providing incentive or opportunity to consume intoxicants.

2. If I refuse to take a single drink, my actions will never influence anyone else to drink. Even if I believed I could occasionally drink alcohol with no ill effects, I can never say with assurance that no one else will be adversely affected. This is especially true with respect to my brothers and sisters in Christ who are recovering alcoholics (cf. 1 Cor. 6:9-11). It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a giant millstone tied around my neck than to lead an innocent soul into sin (Mark 9:42; cf. Prov. 20:1).

3. If I refuse to take a single drink, I will never get drunk. Most Bible-believers concede that drunkenness is sinful, but what constitutes drunkenness? Is methuskō (Eph. 5:18) an inceptive verb, marking the initial stages of the process,³ or is drunkenness to be equated only with full-blown inebriation? Who decides? Science uses blood alcohol content (the percentage of alcohol in the blood) as a measurement of intoxication for legal and medical purposes. While variables such as gender, weight, and food consumption determine the extent of alcohol’s effects, here are the scientific standards.⁴

     To be considered legally drunk in the USA (as well as countries like Malta, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Panama, and Singapore), the limit for those over 21 years of age is 0.08. However, in Costa Rica it is 0.075, while 0.07 is the limit in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Honduras. For Sri Lankans the threshold is 0.06, and in countries like Austria, Belgium, Denmark and France it is 0.05. Togo sets the limit at 0.042, and in Columbia it is 0.04. The benchmark in Jamaica is 0.035, and in India, Japan, and Uruguay it is 0.03. In Belarus blood alcohol concentration is not to exceed 0.029, while the maximum in China, Mongolia, Norway and Poland is 0.02. In Algeria, Albania, and Guyana the legal limit is as low as 0.01.

     Is it reasonable to conclude that a person is drunk in Albania and Guyana but not drunk when the same amount of liquor is consumed in New Zealand or the United States? How many social drinkers are in the habit of testing their blood alcohol concentration to see whether or not they have reached the legal limit, and if God has set his own legal limit, how would that be determined?

     It takes about 30 minutes to feel the effects of alcohol,⁵ which include (as per blood alcohol levels) slight mood changes (0.02), lowered inhibitions and impaired judgment (0.06), deterioration of reaction time and control (0.08), impaired balance and coordination (0.15), decreased sensation and erratic emotions (0.20), diminished reflexes and semi-consciousness (0.30), loss of consciousness (0.40), and death (0.50).⁶ Yet “the absence of symptoms does not guarantee safe or low blood alcohol levels. With regular drinking a person develops a tolerance to alcohol that will reduce the outward appearance of high blood alcohol levels.”⁷

4. If I refuse to take a single drink, I will never become an alcoholic. The type of alcohol one drinks is not a factor in determining if there is a problem.⁸ While there are those who seem to have a physiological predisposition for alcoholism, anyone has about a 12% chance of becoming an alcoholic.⁹ It doesn’t matter whether my chances are any greater or not if I am committed to total abstinence. I can easily live without it. For anyone to say otherwise is to acknowledge there is a problem.

5. If I refuse to take a single drink, I will never alienate myself from so many good people who are troubled by it. On multiple occasions I have been offered a drink, and by respectfully declining I have never offended anyone. But the thought of a professing Christian knowingly indulging in intoxicants is disturbing to so many. Ethyl alcohol is a habit-forming drug that routinely divides families, friendships, and churches. If I am to genuinely look out “for the interests of others” (Phil. 2:4) and if love “does not seek its own” (1 Cor. 13:5), how can I conscientiously insist on engaging in such divisive and destructive behavior?

     “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age” (Titus 2:11-12).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See the author’s The Christian and Beverage Alcohol [*unfortunately this article has disappeared from the internet]. All scripture quotations are from the NKJV.

     ² See the author’s Questions & Answers: Beverage Alcohol [*unfortunately this article has disappeared from the internet]. Health benefits? See Natilie O'Neill's A bottle of wine ... , Amy Woodyatt's Drinking any amount of alcohol damages the brain, Kayla Rivas' Any amount of alcohol can harm the brain

     ³ E. W. Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance 238; W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary 343; R. Young, Analytical Concordance 275.

     ⁴ U. S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Digest of Impaired Driving And Selected Beverage Control Laws, 27th ed. (May 27, 2012); also “Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) Limits Worldwide,” <Link>; and “Blood Alcohol Limit by Country,” <Link>.

     ⁵ Bradford Health Articles, “Alcohol 101: Learning new facts and remembering what you forgot,” <Link>.

     ⁶ Note that half the people who attain a blood alcohol level of 0.40 will die, and death has been documented at levels as low as 0.35. See Chris Bigsby, Erin Ratcliff, Letitia Rexrode (Radford University), “R U Aware: Blood Alcohol Levels and Metabolism,” <Link>.

     ⁷ Bigsby, Ratcliff, and Rexrode, op cit.

     ⁸ Bradford Health Articles, op cit.

      ⁹ Bill Arck, M.S. and Julie Hamel, M.S., “Alcoholism: Nature vs. Nurture,” in Higher Education- An Informational Newsletter 54 (Spring 2011): KSU Alcohol and Other Drug Education Service, <Link>.

Related Posts: The Weak & Strong (Rom 14:21)

Related articles: Barry Cameron's Can a Christian Drink?, Jamie Morgan's 50 Reasons I Don't Drink, Wes McAdams' What Does the Bible Say?, & Four Reasons I Don't Drink Alcohol, Neal Pollard's What's So 'Social' About It?, Cliff Boyd's Why I Don't Drink; Tom Hermiz's Biblical Perspective on Drinking Wine; Barbara Krantz, Alcohol is Killing More People than the Opioid Crisis, Melissa Cunningham's Alcohol Causes Most Harm, Olga Khazan, America's Favorite Poison, Ben Giselbach's What's So Bad About a Little Alcohol? , Patrick Swayne's Under the Influence, Glenn Colley, Moderate Drinking & Romans 14

Image credit: http://dbda.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/bottle-and-hand-drink-driving.jpg