66

1), and twice literally, in They are in all respects

three times-once figuratively (Wars, b. ii. c. 12, s. reference to the priests (Antiq. b. iii. c. 12, s. 2) :pure and abstinent (neephalioi), being forbidden to drink wine while they wear the priestly robe❞—i. e. when officially on duty, doing God's work. So (Wars, b. v. c. 5, s. 1), in referring to the temple, when restored by Herod, he states that the priests who were permitted to go up into the inner temple (naos) were without bodily blemish, and were clothed in linen, and "especially were abstainers from unmixed wine (apo akratou neephontes), so that they might not at all transgress in their ministerial service."

Philo is equally explicit in his treatise on 'Drunkenness' (sec. 32). "The truly wise man," he says, "aims to offer abstemious sacrifices, steadfastly setting himself, in the firmness of his mind, against wine and every cause of folly (neephalia thuein, oinou kai pantos tou leerein aitou bebaioteeti dianoian).” In section 37 he refers to the regenerate soul as denying "that it has made use of wine and strong drink, boasting that it abstains (neephein) continually and during the whole of its life." He goes on further to speak of such a soul as "surcharged with unmixed sobriety (neepseōs akratou emphoreetheuta), and both being in itself, and poured out as, an undivided libation to God."

(3) The texts cited from the Lxx. establish the abstinent meaning of neepho in combination with ek.

(4) There are numerous passages in the classical authors where neepho and its derivatives are used in contrast with a state of drunkenness; some of these are cited in a note; but they are chiefly valuable as showing that when an antithesis to heavy drinking was desired, it was found in the word already in use to designate the absence of intoxicating fluids. A further use of neepho occurs in ancient authors as indicating the cool, self-possessed state of a person who has not been drinking;† and such a figurative usage is obviously dependent for all its propriety and force upon the primary and radical signification of the word as separation from wine.

3. The foregoing excursus will cast light upon the apostolic use of neepho and neephalios. It cannot be supposed that St Paul and St Peter employed these specific terms without a knowledge of their primary sense; and it devolves upon the wine-drinker to show, if he is able, that as used by the sacred writers these terms mean something short of abstinence from intoxicating liquors.

Dean Alford takes up the position, as a last resort, that, in the apostles' days, the proper etymological sense of the words neepho and neephalios had become obsolete! But it is demonstrated above that this statement is very far from the truth. The exact contrary is the case. Professor Jowett, and literary history itself, have been cited to prove that, from the times of Daniel and Pythagoras to that of the Essenes and Therapeutæ, the practice and opinion expressed by the word had become more pervading and popular, and more closely associated with conceptions

Theognis, in his Maxims (1. 478), has 'I am neither quite sober (neephō) nor yet very drunk '(lieen methub). In 1. 482, he alludes to scandalous words which to the sober (neephosi) are disgraceful: and in 1. 627 he affirms it 'disgraceful for the tippler (methuonta) to be among sober men (neephosin), and for the sober man to be among tipplers.' Plutarch quotes the proverb that what is in the heart of the sober man (neephontos) is on the tongue of the tippler (methuontos).

Plato, in his Laws' (books i. ii.), discusses the question whether drinking-parties might not be regulated to advantage if put under the control of wise and sober men. Carystius is cited by Athenæus for a saying of Philip of Macedon,- Let us drink; it's enough for Antipatrus to be sober' (neephein). In the Anthology an epigram is preserved to the effect that while Okindunos, among all the tipplers, wished to be sober (neephein), he was the only one who seemed to the others to be drunk.

↑ Epicharmus's epigram is famous, naphe kai memnas' apistein, 'be cool, and don't believe too fast. Longinus describes a writer who exercises great restraint in the midst of much ardor-en bakcheumasi neephein. Nero, when urging himself to suicide, exclaimed, Neephein dei er tois toioutois, 'it behooves thee to be self-possessed in these critical circumstances.'

of moral purity and religious duty. The extraordinary and philological position of the Dean, therefore is, that as the fact and faith expressed by the words became more definite and distinct to the mind, the phrases grew more lax and vague in their signification! In other words, it is gravely contended, that when known Greek abstainers used the very words which 'no doubt primarily referred' to abstinence, those words failed to express the fact ! "The force of prejudice can no farther go.'

Long after the apostles' days, excellent Greek writers used the word in the primary and proper sense of abstinence. For example, Porphyry (De Abst. i. 27) has to de neephaleon men kai aoinon to poton, but to be sober, and drink no wine.’ The Latin paraphrast translates, 'But sobriety will be needful to one who has to keep much awake, potus sine vino, a drink without wine.' Even Dean Alford does not deny the facts, for he concedes that 'the words neephōn, neephaleos, etc., primarily refer, no doubt, to abstinence from wine.'*

Were it even granted that they bear in the New Testament the sense of strict sobriety and perfect self-possession, the apostolic meaning would be, ‘Be as sober and self-possessed as those who do not touch wine'-a distinguished compliment to total abstinence. It will then remain for those who profess to be doers of the word in its spirit as well as letter, to explain how they can be said to take heed to such counsel, if they regularly consume alcoholic liquors of a potency entirely unknown in apostolic times. The practice of the modern abstainer does not exceed the legitimate import of these ancient words. He is a neephalist, whoever else is not, and is, in consequence, fully prepared to realize all the moral advantages with which the habit of abstinence has been associated, in all ages and climes. As a Christian, he has good reason to expect that his neephalism will increase his ability to appropriate all the blessings of the Christian dispensation, while he works out his salvation with fear and trembling, but without any vinous hindrance to the effectual co-operation of the Holy Spirit of God.

CHAPTER V. VERSE 21.

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

PROVE ALL THINGS] Panta dokimazete, 'make proof of all things.'

Here is a warning against prejudiced and hasty rejection of what is novel or opposed to previous sentiment and practice. All things should be proved-candidly, fairly, freely; and the method of proof must be adapted to the thing under examination. If experimental proof be possible, to rest content with theoretical reasoning is exceedingly unwise: hence the importance of giving total abstinence a trial rather than arguing about it, and nothing more, as so many do. The principle reduced to practice becomes its own most powerful advocate, whenever its practice is adopted in good faith and for a sufficiently long term. The trial should also be judicious,—not associated, for example, with other changes of diet which may prove injurious, and bring discredit on the disuse of intoxicating drinks. Had abstinence been impartially tried, and held fast when found to be good, it would long ere this have superseded those drinking habits and usages by which

The Dean, in the same controversial letter, says, 'Dr Lees is bound to prove that abstinence means total abstinence'! Now the abstainer is no more bound to prove that neepho means a little drinking than that neestis, 'fasting,' means 'a little eating '(Matt. xv. 32).

the most enlightened nations of the world are at once corrupted, scourged, and enslaved.

CHAPTER V. VERSE 22.

Abstain from all appearance of evil.

The Greek reads, apo pantos eidous poneerou apechesthe, 'from every aspect of evil hold yourselves aloof.'

This precept is commonly quoted as if by 'appearance' (cidos) were meant the semblance of evil as well as the reality,—the sense being 'abstain from everything that not only is evil, but that looks like evil.' Dean Alford has strongly condemned this construction; but Webster and Wilkinson, in their Greek edition of the Testament, remark, "Eidos in New Test. has its primary signification, 'that which is an object of sight,' 'visible,' 'appearance,'-'keep aloof from everything that has an evil appearance,' that looks like evil, 'from all suspicious things' (Tyndale). The primary object of the injunction probably is to restrain any unseemly or suspicious exhibitions at the public services of the church, in doctrine and precept, and in the mode of delivering both; and hence, of course, in their practice generally, they are to avoid everything that might bring a reproach upon the name of Christ."

It may be allowed that the apostle is not referring to apparent evil as opposed to actual evil, yet he evidently means more than evil generically considered, else he might have omitted eidos altogether. He conceives of evil as having many forms or aspects, some gross and repellant, others subtle and seductive; and he enjoins upon Christians that they should hold off from evil, whatever guise it may assume. Satan may clothe himself as an angel of light, but he is none the less to be shunned as the prince of darkness. Owing to the tendency of men to mistake evil for good, the exhortation is never out of season "to prove all things, hold fast the good, and to hold aloof from every form of evil, however little of evil that form may directly express." Possibly some things that look like evil are not so, and therefore should not be avoided; yet it is safest to exercise extreme caution in avoiding what seems evil, rather than rashly to assume that evil is really absent where it is apparently present. In morals this adage is pertinent,—'Where there's smoke there's fire.' Of persons we should judge charitably and hope the best, but of habits we cannot be too suspicious and circumspect. It is an unquestionable Christian duty to avoid not only every form of evil, but even whatever is a cause of evil to ourselves or others, wherever its avoidance is consistent with the claims and purposes of life. Scientific experiment proves that alcoholic liquor is evil as a beverage, and universal experience shows that, as a cause of evil-physical, moral, and religious, domestic, social, and national,-it is altogether unequalled by any other instrument of mischief ever known to man. It is an article all the more to be dreaded, because, while generally impressing mankind with confidence in its virtue, in its potency as a formative element of evil it can be compared to nothing short of the mysterious and terrible agency ascribed to the powers of the air' and 'spiritual wickednesses in high places.' Is it possible, then, to keep aloof from it too remotely and too persistently?

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF

ST PAUL TO

TIMOTHY.

2

CHAPTER III. VERSES 2, 3.

A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous.

V. 2. VIGILANT] Neephaleon, abstinent'; Wiclif and Tyndale have 'sober'; the Vulgate has sobrium. There can be no reason to give to neephaleon here a figurative sense; and if such a sense were supposed, it would be more suitably expressed by 'self-collected' than by 'vigilant.' Codices Aleph, A, and D read neephalion (i instead of e), a mere orthographic difference.

SOBER] Sophrona, ‘of sound mind' = sober-minded. The order of terms is instructive. The Christian overseer is to be neephaleon, 'abstinent'-strictly sober in body, in order that he may be sober in mind. Wiclif has 'prudent'; Tyndale 'discrete'; the Vulgate has prudentem.

V. 3. NOT GIVEN TO WINE] Mee paroinon, not near wine' =a banqueter. The composition of this word is para, 'near,' and oinos, 'wine'; and the ancient paroinos was a man accustomed to attend drinking-parties, and, as a consequence, to become intimately associated with strong drink, As the Christian bishop (= overseer) had been previously enjoined to be neephalion, it is probable that the apostle intended by this word paroinos not so much the absence of personal insobriety, as absence from convivial entertainments where drinking was systematically practiced, frequently terminating in quarrels and blows. The Christian minister must not only be himself sober, but he must withhold his presence and sanction from places and associations dangerous to the sobriety of himself and others.

Section 54 of the Law Book of the Ante-Nicene Church' has the following canon:-"If any one of the clergy be taken (even) eating in a tavern, let him be suspended, unless he is forced to bait at an inn upon the road." [See Note on parallel passage, Titus i. 7, 8.]

CHAPTER III. VERSE 8.

Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre.

NOT GIVEN TO MUCH WINE] Mee oinō pollō prosechontas, 'not addicted to much wine.' The previous Note on ver. 3 will show that the apparent distinction in the counsel to bishops 'not given to wine,' and to deacons 'not given to much wine,' has no foundation in the terms of the original.

The inference that some use of intoxicating liquor is sanctioned by this interdiction of 'much wine' will be found, on examination, premature and illusive.

1. Excessive drinking, even of uninebriating drinks, was a vice prevalent in the days of St Paul, and corresponded to gluttony, also common,-the excessive use of food, but not of an intoxicating kind. Prizes were often offered with the object, not of producing inebriation, but of testing the powers of incontinent imbibition to the utmost. Not a few of the early officers of Christian churches were, probably, selected from men who had been notorious for such practices (called methusoi, 'topers,' by St Paul in writing to the Corinthians, 1st Epistle, vi. 10, and such were some of you,' ver. 11); and the apostle here reminds them that such conduct is inconsistent with their 'high calling' as faithful servants of the Lord Jesus. He is directing his exhortation against a common vice, and is not pronouncing any opinion upon the nature of intoxicating liquors.

2. To argue that by forbidding 'much wine' St Paul approves some use of wine of any and every sort, is to adopt a mode of interpretation exceedingly dangerous, and wholly inconsistent with common usage. (1) It is highly dangerous; for once lay it down that what is not forbidden is approved, and the Bible becomes a book of the wildest license: Thou shalt do no murder' becomes a permission to do violence short of murder; and 'Let not the sun go down upon thy wrath' is a reason for indulging in anger of any kind from sunrise to sunset! (2) It is inconsistent with usage. When the apostle Peter says that the enemies of Christ wondered that believers did not go to the same excess of riot' as themselves, he did not mean that Christians might indulge in any minor excess. The next clause in this verse illustrates the same point,-mee aischrokerdeis, not greedy-of-filthy-lucre,' or 'not meanly-avaricious,' says the apostle, but without any intention of justifying avarice or trade craftiness in the smallest degree. So in the present day a Christian may condemn some excess, without implying that a less indulgence would be commendable; nay, times without number, teetotalers have blamed men for going 'so much' to the public-house, without signifying any approval of occasional visits. Besides, it is morally impossible that St Paul could have intended to approve of some use of all sorts of wine then made and used. Many wines were drugged; did he recommend these? In his day, also, even sober heathens disapproved of the use of fermented wine unless considerably diluted with water,—was the Christian moralist less indifferent than pagans to sobriety? Various wines, too, were so nauseous to a modern taste, that no apostolic patronage, however explicit, would have induced English wine-drinkers to swallow them.

3. If it is asked why St Paul did not directly forbid all use of wine?—both a special and a general answer may be returned. (1) The particular answer is, that the term oinos (wine) included a great variety of drinks made from the juice of the grape; and as many of these were free from an intoxicating quality, and others were so weakened by water as to be practically non-inebriating unless voraciously consumed, a universal proscription would have ignored important distinctions that were well known to exist. (2) The general answer is, that, for wisest ends, the apostle refrained from condemning by name much which the development of Christian light and the operation of Christian love would hereafter show to be inconsistent with the principles of the Christian system; and which, therefore, would be renounced by true and enlightened disciples. Slave-holding, arbitrary