Be Not Drunk with Wine, Part 3

Ephesians 5:18

We're studying the book of Ephesians and having a wonderful time doing it. As we've come to the fifth chapter, the eighteenth verse of the worthy walk of the believer, we have stopped for a brief digression because so many people have posed the question, regarding the drinking of wine. In verse 18 we read, "Be not drunk with wine, in which is excess, but be filled with the Spirit." Now we studied that in the context but it raised the question we know we're not supposed to be drunk, we know the Bible forbids us to be drunkards, that is a sin, that is part of our past life, the words of Peter come ringing back, for you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do. He then goes on talking about living in debauchery, drunkenness, orgies, carousings and detestable idolatry, we know that's a part of the past life, we know that drunkenness is a forbidden thing and we know that we are to be filled with the Spirit. But the question that arises is this; we agree that drunkenness is a sin but what about drinking wine at all. What is to be the Christian's position in regard to drinking alcoholic beverages? Since this is such a major issue today and such a current, needed discussion, we have digressed from the text itself to discuss that very issue. Should a Christian drink or what does the Bible say about the Christian and alcoholic beverages?

Now you'll remember that we tried to share with you last time some principles that we have to use as checkpoints in this discussion. The Bible does not say you cannot drink wine. I told you last time if it did, I'd read the verse and we'd go home. It doesn't say that. And so we have to get some other principles to determine whether it's right or wrong and if it is, when it is and when it isn't and so forth. Should a Christian drink alcoholic beverages? This is a very important issue. 81% of the Catholics and 64% of the Protestants in America now drink alcoholic beverages. So if the word of God has something to say about it there then should be a wide audience of people out there listening.

Now we told you there would be 8 principles or checkpoints we need to pass through to arrive at an answer. We went through the first two last time. Let me remind you of them.

The first question we asked was Is it the same? In other words is the wine today the same as the wine consumed in Bible times? And the reason we need to deal with that issue is because people will invariably say, that is Christian people, if they drink wine or alcoholic beverages‑that they did it in Bible times. So if they did it in Bible times, Old Testament times, New Testament times then it's certainly alright to do it today. So the question is, is the drinking of the Bible times the same as today, was the product the same, was the wine the same? We went into that in great detail last Sunday and we found the answer was no. The wine consumed in Bible times was not the same 9 to 11% alcoholic content that people drink today. I shared with you that there were 3 kinds of wine; really, there was the glukos, which had to do with the new wine, fresh wine.

The Old Testament word is tirosh, and that would be very much like grape juice, of course, it could ferment very rapidly and so it could cause drunkenness so it was mixed with water and the lowest dilution would be 3 parts of water with 1 part wine, reducing any alcoholic content to a very low, negligible alcoholic percentage so it wouldn't be classified as an alcoholic drink, you would have to sit there and drink and drink and drink and drink until you were bloated to get drunk. Then there was oinos that word is simply wine in general and it's liquid form and we saw that wine was always mixed with water. In the new testament the normal wine that stood for a long time in a large container would then be mixed with water as high as 10 to 15 parts to 1, as low as 3 parts to 1 so that it would not present an alcoholic content and cause drunkenness. You had the fresh wine which was also mixed with water, you had the fermented wine which was also mixed with water and then you had that wine that was a thick boiled paste. They would take the new wine; boil it evaporating all the water, killing all the bacteria, consequently it could not ferment, storing it in wine skins, then when they wanted to drink it, they would squeeze it out, it would come out like a thick paste honey, mix it again with water. Plyme, the Roman historian said as much as 20 parts to 1 because it was a thick concentrate and drink it at that point and then it would be unfermented.

So the wine of the Bible was either the unfermented, pasty grape mixed with water or it was mixed with water from a liquid base. The straight stuff as we know it today with a 9 to 11% alcohol content would be classified as shakar in the old testament, sikera in the new. It can be translated strong drink. We showed you that both the historians, pagans and the scriptures saw it as a barbarian drink. So that straight wine as we know it today, with a 9 to 11% alcohol content was not consumed as the norm by the people of the Bible to say nothing of the other liquor today which is from 15% to 50% alcohol which is the content of a 100 proof. So it was different and we have to make that statement because we don't want to base our drinking today on the Bible people drinking if it were not the same.

The second question we asked, the second checkpoint, not only is it the same, is it necessary? We pointed out for that most people in the Old Testament, it was sort of necessary for them to drink wine, they had little choice between water, milk from a goat or a cow and wine. There may have been some other things they concocted but basically that was about it and, normally it was pretty necessary to drink wine of some sorts. As I say, it was diluted for the normal course of life and if you wanted to drink strong drink just to get drunk or as a sedative for some severe illness. But in the Bible day they had a problem with choice, they had a limited amount of choices. But today we don't have that problem, so we would say, secondly, is it necessary. The answer is no, it is not necessary to drink wine. It then falls into the category of an option, it falls into the category of a preference, it falls into the category of a want. I've heard some people say, "Well, I just like the taste of it," That's fine, that's a like or a preference or want but not a necessity. We are not like some cultures and, by the way, there may be some people in some cultures of the world who will listen to this tape and in their particular situation they are very limited, they just have no choice whatsoever.

Now under a certain circumstance at a certain point of time it may be a different case but in our society for the most part, clear around the world it is no necessary thing. I would venture to say that every place I've been, every language, every culture and in every climate, somewhere there is Coca Cola. And in addition to Coca Cola even in the Arab countries right out in the middle of the pyramids, there was a guy selling soda pop. You had to check out your soda pop to see what was swimming in it but nonetheless it was soda pop.

So it really isn't a necessity today. We have sophistication in terms of producing drinks; we have refrigeration and things like that to bypass fermentation. We're not in the same category. So first question then, is it the same? No. Second question, is it necessary? No. So we come to the fact that it is a choice. You choose to drink because you choose to drink. It's a choice and people will say, "Well, I have liberty in Christ, I'm free, all things are lawful it says in I Cor. 6:12, all things are lawful, I'm not bound, I'm not under the Law, food is no more sacred, there are no more clean and the unclean food, Acts chapter 10, Romans chapter 14, so there's no need for me to fear my drinking. My liberty allows me that prerogative. So it is a choice so I may choose or not to choose." Let me ask you the third question then, is it the best choice?

Is it the best choice? There are a lot of things that are a choice. The Bible doesn't say you can't stick leaves in your mouth and light them on fire. The Bible doesn't say that. If you want to put leaves in your mouth and light them on fire and blow smoke through your nose, you have a right to do that. It is not forbidden in the Bible. Of course somebody said if God meant you to smoke He would have built you with a chimney. That may not be true but that is not forbidden in the Bible. It's a choice you make and some people tell you that's not the best choice. You have a choice to drink coffee or not to drink coffee so some people think coffee is wonderful some people think the caffeine has a negative effect and it might not be the best choice although you have the liberty to drink coffee, burn plants in your mouth and also to drink wine if you choose that liberty. So it a matter of choice but is it the best choice? And let's deal in that category for a minute. I want to show you some progression of biblical truths to help you to see the best choice, alright? Let's go back to Leviticus chapter 10. 1 think you'll find this to be fascinating, provided I can keep you alerted to it.

Now in God's basic economy in Israel, there was a separation among the people. There were higher standards for people with greater responsibilities. I don't know if you really know that but it's true. That can be illustrated a lot of ways, take for example a sin offering. Remember certain people had to come, well everybody had to come and make a sin offering, but if it were a sin of the congregation it would be a bullock, if it were a sin of the high priest it would be a bullock, if it were the sin of a ruler it would be a male goat, if it were a sin of only a lay individual it could be two turtle doves, it could be a young pigeon, it could even be flour.

In other words, it seems the higher you go the higher the requirement for a sacrifice. The higher the theocratic rank the more costly was the offering. And since the congregation itself was a priestly nation it needed to have an offering that was equivalent of a high priest. The high priest had to give the highest offering, a bullock. Under him the rulers had to give a goat under them the people could give doves and things like that cause the higher the rank the more serious the responsibility and the greater the guilt. You see, that's what it says in James 3:1, stop being so many teachers for theirs is the greater condemnation. That's the reason the Lord, said, "Too much is given, too much is required." The higher the theocratic rank the higher the responsibility and consequently the more severe the sin. The sin bears more guilt the higher the position. Because when you sin in a high position its ramifications are far reaching, aren't they? A sin on the part of a high priest or a ruler or king had a tremendous response among the people, far reaching. So it is by God's standard.

Now God has established standards for His people but in Old Testament times He called certain people above those standards and He said I'm setting a higher standard for you. The first illustration of that is Leviticus 10 verse 8, God is giving the requirements for the priesthood here and they're most interesting. He says to Aaron‑who was a high priest, "Do not drink wine or strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die."

Now that's a pretty strong requirement, no wine or strong drink, now do you see what's happening? Whereas the people drank wine which was mixed with water or the paste out of the wineskin, where the people would drink this and some profligate people who would even drink strong drink, the priests were called to a higher level. You are not to do this ... When you enter into the tabernacle of the congregation or you'll die and this shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations: And that you may put difference between holy and unholy, and between clean and unclean. In other words you are called apart to a separation, consecration to a higher level of devotion, to a higher level of commitment to God. And some commentators say that it has to do only when they ministered in the tabernacle, only when they ministered to the Lord and some say it has to do with their whole life long. Well either way the point is when they did minister for the Lord, they were called to minister to God and they had to be totally abstainers. Why? Lest their judgment or their priestly functions be clouded taking in any alcoholic drink. God wanted their minds clean and clear and pure. So they were forbidden to do that as if God were elevating them to another standard, another level above the people.

Proverbs 31, last chapter of the book in verse 4, and here you see the same standard again not only for the priests but for the kings and. the princes. Verse 4 of Proverbs 31 says, "It is not for kings, 0 Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine, nor for princes strong drink." Why? "Lest they drink, and forget the law and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted." In other words, not only were the priests called to an abstaining position but so were the kings and the princes. God did not want their judgment clouded. God did not want their thinking fuzzy or hazy. God wanted them set apart. God wanted them consecrated. God wanted them apart and different from the people. And verse 6 says if you're going to give strong drink to somebody, strong drink should be given only to people ready to perish. In other words anybody else drinking it was barbaric. Strong drink which would be the straight unmixed wine should be given to somebody who is perishing. In other words, as a sedative for someone in pain of death.

Now the wine which was the normal wine, mixed, should be given to those with heavy hearts. Let them drink and forget their poverty and their misery. Let the warmth and the joy that comes from the wine be for those with problems, with deep problems or let the strong drink for those who are dying but for kings or princes or priests, if we can add Leviticus to that thought, be total abstainers. So there was a level of consecration in the leadership which demanded a higher standard.

Now let's look at Numbers chapter 6 and I'll show you that not only the kings and the princes and the priests and the high priests but there were certain people in the congregation of Israel that chose this standard too. Anybody could choose to step up to this standard, this was the highest standard. And you'll remember in Numbers chapter 6, verse 1, "The Lord spoke to Moses saying, speak to the children of Israel and say unto them, when either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the Lord."

Now stop there for a minute. Anybody in the congregation of Israel could say, "I want to consecrate my whole life to God, I want to devote my whole life to the Lord, I want to set myself apart unto God, I want to say 'no' to the things of this life and 'yes' to the things of God, I want to be different, I want to be consecrated." So God said I hereby institute the highest act of consecration and it is called a Nazarite vow and it comes to us from the word nazir. And nazir means the consecrated one. A Nazarite is a consecrated one. In fact the Greek equivalent nazar means holiness or devotion. So when a Jew wanted to come apart and really commit himself, you know we talk about dedicating your life to God after you become a Christian, taking that second step, committing yourself and consecrating, well that's a Nazarite vow. The Nazarite would take a vow of separation.

The end of verse 2 says it. "To separate themselves unto the Lord." A vow of holiness, a vow of consecration to come apart. And what would be the character of it, verse 3, "He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes nor eat moist grapes or dried. All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from the kernels even to the husk. All the days of the vow of his separation there shall no razor come upon his head." So there was the Nazarite vow. You don't cut your hair and you don't touch any wine. The highest level of consecration involved abstinence. It was as if they were stepping up to another level, and identifying with the kings and the princes and the priests and those who were set apart most unto God.

Now, they could take a Nazarite vow for 30 days, 60 days, 90 days or even for life. And there were three people in the Bible who were Nazarites for life, Samuel, Samson and John the Baptist. And it's most fascinating, not only were they Nazarites for life but in the case of Samuel and Samson, both of their mothers, when their mothers were told by God they were going to have them for sons had the same vow of abstinence. I'm sure it wouldn't be just to avoid the alcoholic poisoning of the infant rather it was that same level of consecration. Hannah says that she drank neither wine nor strong drink in I Samuel 1:14 & 15 and the wife of Manoah, the mother of Samson says the same thing, the angel came to her and said you're neither to drink wine or strong drink even as the child you're bearing. So here, for special times whether priests or kings or princes or Judges like Samson or great men of God like Samuel or as great men of God as the prophet John the Baptist there was another level of consecration another level of devotion, a higher vow than was asked of the common people. And by the way, this was not simply common to those leaders. Anybody could do that and there were many Nazarites in Israel. I don't think we realize that but we really don't know how many there were but that there were many.

For example, in Amos chapter 2 it says in verse 11, "God says and I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazarites. Is it not even thus, 0 ye children of Israel? Thus saith the Lord". In other words, God says I raised up prophets and I also raised up Nazarites. I raised up some that were set apart, some who took a higher vow, some who had a higher standard of life among you. And of course he goes on to say how they had corrupted them. Amos says to the people, "But you gave the Nazarites wine to drink and you commanded the prophets saying, Prophesy not." They desecrated those Nazarites, those who God had set apart and consecrated to Himself by total abstinence the people of God had actually desecrated and they gave them wine. Back in Judges chapter 13 and verse 4 we read the statement regarding the mother of Samson, just so you'll know where it is. She says, "I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing. For lo, thou shalt conceive." Then in verse 7 the last part of verse 7, "for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death."

Now it seems to me that many of these in Amos 2, that God had established as Nazarites may well have been Nazarites for life who were desecrated or really forced or enticed into disobedience by the rest of the people. So God has established this vow of consecration and there were many people who took it.

I want you to notice Lamentations chapter 4, verse 7 because this goes right along with it. By the time you get to Jeremiah's day, and Jeremiah wrote Lamentations, the Nazarites have been corrupted. God established. this beautiful vow, this wonderful act of consecration and as time goes on it corrupts more and more and you find a tremendous statement in Lamentations right after the book of Jeremiah, chapter 4 verse 7.

Listen to what it says, "Her Nazarites" now versions will say nobles or leaders or rulers but the Hebrew is Nazarites, "Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire." Now there's something about abstaining and something about Nazarites devoted to God that had a result in your own life. You looked different, apparently, it did something for you. And here were these tremendous Nazarites, purer than snow, whiter than milk, more ruddy in body than rubies; their polishing was like sapphire but what happened? As they were desecrated and as they were tempted and as they fell as the people enticed them their visage became blacker than coal, they are not known in the streets anymore, you can't tell them from the people, their skin clings to their bones, it is withered and they become like a stick. They that be slain with the sword are better than they that be slain with hunger. In other words the Nazarites had become destitute and put down and put out, stricken and so forth. What an amazing thing.

God had established this high vow and He had raised up people to live at this level, priests, kings rulers and special prophets and judges and special men like Samson and others that he had lifted to that level and for some strange reason people felt they needed. to pull them down to their level. You know it's a funny thing about people, instead of attaining the highest level they want to grab the people at the highest level and yank them down to their level. That's what happened in Israel. And Jeremiah, bless his heart, when he saw what was going on with that, God used him to speak on that issue and he said to Judah, "You're disobedient, Judah".

In chapter 35 of Jeremiah he said you're disobedient; let me give you a contrast. In chapter 35 of Jeremiah he says, do you remember the Rechabites? The Rechabites the son of Jonadab? Do you remember that Jonadab said to the Rechabites you will neither drink wine or strong drink, you, your sons, your daughters, your wives or anybody in your family forever. In other words, a whole family took the vow of abstinence. The whole family stepped up to the highest level and God says when I even put bowls of wine in front of the Rechabites, they wouldn't drink it. Jeremiah 35, verses 2 to 6. 1 put bowls of wine in front of them and they wouldn't drink it and he goes all the way through that chapter and he finally sums up in saying, look at the temptations they had to drink wine and they never broke their temptations but you have been disobedient to me. You have been disobedient to me. Here was a group of p