Paul's Advice to Timothy.
By H. C. Miller
“Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake, and thine often infirmities.” WHEN we undertake the task of commenting upon the sacred word, we should do so in a spirit of humility. It is with no desire to display self, or for controversy, that I offer a few thoughts. I have never been satisfied with the common interpretation of its meaning, and the use made of it. The old sot will quote it as sanctioning his course, so will the tippler, so does the drug-opathic M. D. as he prescribes his mingled poisons; and of those who have left all other drug-medication, many still cling to wine with a superstitious reverence, (some being very careful to have it home made, so as to be pure, and free from all adulterations,) and point to this text for the reason of the hope that is in them. In all ages men have paid this homage to wine. Laws have been enacted protective of its virtues. High-sounding titles have been given to it. Songs have been sung, and much said and written in its praise. The idea of its possessing wonderful virtues still holds in the minds of the mass, notwithstanding the declaration of Holy Writ, that “wine is a mocker, and strong drink is raging, and he is a fool that is deceived thereby.” It is recorded by Plato that a law was enacted that when men reached their fortieth year they should begin to use wine, “that through this we might acquire a second youth, forget sorrow, and the manners of the mind be rendered softer, as iron is softened by the action of the fire.” After giving the fact that some denied its being remedial, in its nature and operation, he further says: “But we have now shown that it is on the contrary medicine, and was given that the soul might acquire modesty, and the body health and vigor.”—Clarke’s Com. This view is nearly equaled by that of the old toper, who found it amply sufficient for “food, lodging, and raiment.” And many, now, with a veneration almost equal to that of the ancients, look upon it as the sacred blessing to be resorted to when all else fails. Although supposed to possess such powers, yet, this sovereign energizer, this “restorer of vitality,” this stomach strengthener, this balm for every ill, must not be used only in extreme cases. Why so, if it is so efficacious? Why should the slightly-indisposed be compelled to go without the healing draught until nature is almost exhausted before he may avail himself of its mighty virtues? There is something strange in this. Just how the strength is imparted to the weak organs we are not told. This only is known, the sick are very low, wine is given, and some recover therefrom: ergo, the wine cured them. Some who take it die, ergo, the wine killed them. Oh, no! they were so sick wine could not save them! We think the claim is weak. The explanation offered of its operations is something like this: The patient is in an exhausted state, and sinking (so it is said), becoming weaker and weaker; a little wine is given to stimulate, strengthen, or rouse the weak digestive organs to action. When this is supposed to be accomplished, food is given, and the patient is expected to recover. If he does not, his is a mysterious case, or it is a dispensation of Providence. All this arises from ignorance of the laws of vital recognition; from a mistaken idea that the nervous excitement is aroused, and digestive force exerted, instead of vital resistance; from a mistaken idea as to the tendency of alcoholic stimulants. What! says the believer in gentle stimulants, you surely do not class wine, the pure juice of the grape, with rum, gin, and brandy? You do not claim it to be an alcoholic stimulant? Most surely we do claim fermented wine to be such, and nothing more, the difference being only in the amount per cent. of alcohol contained in them. Wine owes its stimulating properties to the alcohol it contains—from 6 to 10 per cent. If it is not such a stimulant, will some one define what kind it is? Is it a narcotic stimulant? or is it a mechanical stimulant, a sort of “thorn in the flesh?” or what is it? What is the tendency of alcoholic stimulants, in their relations to vital structures, and organs? Do they impart strength to, or induce it in, them? Says Dr. Trall (Hyd. Enc. vol. i, p 310,): “Ardent spirits, malt liquors, wine and cider, specially anathematized by name and nature, and deservedly excommunicated from use and fellowship by the total abstinence societies, I need not dwell upon. They are poisonous, in every sense inimical to the human constitution; in fact, deleterious to every organized thing in existence, and are produced only from the decay, destruction, and decomposition of the products of organized matters.” “The tendency of all forms of alcoholized beverages, from soft wines and ales, to small beers and porters, and from hard ciders and rough brandies to harsh rums and strong gins, is to weaken and paralyze the nerves of the stomach.” Thus much on the nature of wine, by way of introduction. Now is it not putting in a very wrong light, the great apostle to the Gentiles, to assume him to have advised his “beloved son,” Timothy, to use any one of these disorganizers, for his “stomach’s sake,” and his “often infirmities?” We think so. We believe him to have been a great and good man, especially inspired by the Holy Spirit, not only a wonderful reformer, but a health reformer in every sense of the word; and that the common use made of these, his words, do injustice to the man, and to the cause he represented. What, then, shall we do with this text, “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine?” &c., or, as another renders, “Be no longer a water-drinker, but use a little wine on account of thy stomach, and thy frequent weaknesses.” The words, “Drink no longer water,” may give us a clue to unravel the whole matter. Why “drink no longer water?” or, be no longer a water-drinker? Because, says one, water is bad for a weak stomach, and wine is better. By no means. If the water is pure and soft, such is the best thing for weak stomachs, if properly used. Nature has provided no other drink for man or animals, nor for vegetables, than pure water. No animal but man seeks any other, either as a drink or as medicine, at any time, or in any condition of health or disease. Man’s drink should be water, and that only which is soft and pure. God never made impure or hard water to be drunk. “As he constitutes this fluid it is free from foreign substances, and, therefore, possesses, in the highest degree possible, the qualities of a solvent. Drunk largely by human beings and by animals, it is a means of promoting health in great degree, and is one of the most valuable in the whole list of hygienic agents known.” We should say he was admonished to be no longer a water-drinker because the kind of water was bad, and surely weakening Timothy’s stomach. We have an idea that Timothy was trying to abstain from all artificial drinks, and use water alone, but being ignorant of the effects of bad water, was hurting himself. The water undoubtedly was bad. A word as to the effect of drinking bad water, and we will proceed to consider some of the evidence from which we infer the above. Says Dr. Trall, “The usual result of drinking very hard waters, and those strongly impregnated with the exuviae of animal and vegetable substances, are severe dysenteries, or protracted diarrheas, and chronic affections of the kidneys.” Now if Timothy, in carrying out his strict temperance views, was using a bad quality of water, his stomach would be a sufferer. In that hot climate, dysentery, protracted diarrheas, with their accompanying pains, with diseased kidneys, would surely cause him “often infirmities,” or frequent weaknesses. Let us then inquire as to the quality of water of those countries. That it needed cleansing in Cana of Galilee is shown by John ii, 6. The people, we understand from this text, found it necessary to employ some means of purifying the water, and this manner was adopted, to let it stand in jars or pots until it “worked itself” pure, as the sailors practice, this was also the Jewish manner, showing that they had bad water too. Also the keeping of it in leathern bottles would soon render it unfit for drinking. In Palestine the rains fall in the spring and fall, and the water is kept in cisterns to supply the wants of the inhabitants during the winter, and long, dry, hot seasons. Now without some means of filtering, of which they may have been ignorant, or at least inattentive to, here would be causes of stomach disorders. Many parts of the East are noted for the miserable waters that prevail, and for lack of better, are drank. And Timothy, as he traveled about, was compelled to use these, and going from place to place in his gospel labors would be subject to constant changes of water, the bad effects of which are so well observed nowadays. All these would combine to cause troubles and disorders in the system of any one who should reject all drinks but water. See accounts in Bible Dict., Relig. Enc., Commentaries, Travels, &c., art. cisterns, wells, &c. Now this we say may have been the case with Timothy, that through using hard, brackish, miasmatic, and other impure waters only as his beverage, his health was failing. Hence the wise counsel of Paul. “Well,” say the advocates for stomach bitters, gentle stimulants, made drinks, &c., “instead of showing that we should not use alcoholic drinks, we think you have shown the very best reasons why we should use them. For if these things were necessary in Timothy’s case, why not in all such cases? It is just why we make and sell them, and advise their use. Paul advised the careful use of them, and we think his advice sound.” But we are not through yet. Timothy must drink something, and as pure water is not to be had at all times, he must take the next best thing to pure water that he can get. And so he is advised to use grape juice,—unfermented wine. No alcohol here. This was plentiful in those eastern countries. Would that those who now use bad water could substitute grape juice in its place; the change would be beneficial. Now some think that whenever wine is mentioned in the Scripture the fermented liquor is intended. We do not so understand it. Two kinds are there set forth. The fermented, alcoholized article, declared by inspiration to be a “mocker,” he being “a fool who is deceived thereby;” which is a poison never to be taken into the system; which, though it may sparkle in the glass, have a beautiful color in the cup, be highly praised, said to contain curative properties, will, in the end, “bite like a serpent, and sting like an adder;” and unfermented wine, declared to be created, or caused to grow by God, “that maketh glad the heart of man.” Ps. civ, 15. New wine, just as expressed from the cluster, having a blessing in it, such as our Saviour drank, the fruit of the vine (not the fruit of decay and decomposition,) of which he has promised, saying, “I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” Matt. xxvi, 29. Blessed promise. There will be no alcoholic controversy there, no deadly healing art; no drunkards, or drunkards’ graves. No, no. Because there will be no decay in that blessed land, “No death, nor decay, nor foul decomposings, Lurk to injure the dwellers in Eden’s fair groves,” where “the mountains drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk.” The same is also mentioned in Prov. iii, 10; Isa. lxv, 8; Hos. iv, 11, where the two are distinguished. Paul was a careful physician, and does not tell Timothy to drink all he desires, but use a little, just as our doctors tell some who have weak stomachs, in regard to using pure water, to use a little, be very careful not to oppress the organ, &c. The pleasant flavor might tempt Timothy to indulge to excess, and his stomach suffer. The deacons is mentioned in this respect, “likewise, the deacons must not be given to much wine,” “the aged women likewise.” Titus ii, 3. Timothy, then, is advised to substitute new wine in the place of bad water. This view seems plausible to me, and to free the apostle of any intention of sanctioning alcoholic medication, drunkenness, or “gentle stimulating,” or the use of poisons as a beverage or as a medicine. Many have filled drunkards’ graves, who, had they taken the above view of this text would not have been so easily persuaded to quaff of the deceitful cup. And if those who think fermented wine better at times than pure water, would only consider that the source of all our weaknesses is some transgression of405law, and that no remedy is provided to do away the results of transgression of physical laws, they, too, will begin to doubt the propriety of advising a “little wine” to be taken “often” for “frequent weaknesses.”