Many carnal believers quoting 1 Timothy 5:23 have attempted to justify their unscriptural use of alcohol. Yet, a careful look at the scriptures proves that they wrest (or twist) the scripture to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16). From the passage, we understand that Timothy was plagued by some chronic health problems. Paul specifically mentioned stomach problems, but there were other infirmities that beset him as well. Drinking water was not curing Timothy’s ailments, so Paul, perhaps with doctor Luke’s guidance and recommendation, suggested “a little wine” for Timothy’s often infirmities. What purpose did the wine serve? It was strictly medicinal and not social or pleasurable. In other words, Paul said that Timothy needed some medicine to facilitate his recovery. Paul was not offering Timothy or us an excuse to drink but a prescription of medicine for recovery from debilitating ailments.
Every generation has their own set of ritualistic practices: vegetarianism, the refusal to eat meat, and veganism, the refusal to eat any animal product, are increasingly popular today. The problems arise when proponents of these practices seek to promote the idea that meat eating is evil and should be eliminated. Today’s passage proves that the scriptures teach just the opposite. In fact, any individual preaching or teaching a necessary abstinence from eating meat is preaching a doctrine of devils. Regardless of what the modern doctors, scientists, or latest fad diets prescribe, the Bible clearly states that God does not intend for His people to abstain from eating meat. Much of the modern movement stems from an idolatrous view of the animal kingdom. Yet, God clearly provided animals for man’s survival and continuation.
Throughout mankind’s history, God has placed various dietary restrictions upon people. In the beginning, God gave man herbs and fruit for meat (Genesis 1:29). Under the law, the diet expanded, yet still excluded certain animals that the Lord deemed unclean (Leviticus 11:1-23). The issue was so important that questions concerning dietary restrictions were raised in the early church. In the end, the only restrictions specifically given for the New Testament church were that they should not partake of food knowingly offered to idols, and they should refrain from eating the blood (Acts 15:20, 29; Acts 21:25). 1 Timothy 4:4 confirms these truths by stating that no creature is to be refused based upon some man-made mandate.
The Bible says that God provides food for His people (Matthew 6:26). This God-given provision has been that way since the beginning of man’s existence on earth (Genesis 1:29). Interestingly, the Bible also says that God provides food for the animal kingdom (Psalm 147:9). One might declare that “the animals must go out and search for food to eat” and “men must go to work and earn wages in order to purchase their food.” However, a good response to this mind-set would be to focus on how men and animals are able to get their food: “Who gives the animals the strength and the prowess to find the food?” or “Who gives man the health and ability to work his job, earn his wages, and purchase his food?” With a more objective mind-set, you can see why man owes God thanks for the food that he eats. Every Christian should bow his head and give thanks to God for His provision before partaking of any meal.
The Bible clearly teaches that no believer is sinless. As such, each believer experiences times when he is rebuked of the Lord. It is a natural part of the Christian life. At the same time, there will be circumstances which will bring about rebuke from other believers (Ecclesiastes 7:5). These are healthy elements of Christian growth. Yet, the goal of every believer should be one where he lives a life beyond rebuke. Paul’s desire for the Philippian believers was that they “may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation” (Philippians 2:15). He then admonished Timothy to keep God’s commandment “without spot” and “unrebukeable” (1 Timothy 6:14).
Though the Bible refers to the elder in various contexts, today’s passage refers to the elder as simply an older gentleman. The elder here is contrasted first with the younger men while the next verse contrasts it with the elder women. The issue at hand is one of respect. It is important to note that the scripture does not imply or teach that believers can never question the actions of an older man. However, it does indicate the method of this questioning. An elder is not to be rebuked but intreated “as a father.” To intreat a person is to plead with or earnestly ask them. Intreating reflects approaching him with respect which is the method by which the Lord demands an elder be approached.
Far too few preachers and teachers have taken the time to consider the context of today’s passage. Paul admonished that a rebuke is sometimes unavoidable, but the context reveals that the individual receiving the rebuke is an elder (1 Timothy 5:17-19). It also appears that the rebuke only takes place under specific conditions. Paul informed Timothy that there are times a rebuke must be given in the presence of others. The purpose served to bring fear upon those who witnessed the rebuke so that they too would not repeat the errors of the elder receiving the rebuke. Though a publick rebuke is not a pleasant sight, Proverbs 27:5 says, “Open rebuke is better than secret love.”
