DOUBTFUL DRUNKS

There are three places in the Bible where someone is wrongly accused of being drunk. Each of these contains a lesson for us today. But before that, a few words are in order concerning the ancient Jews' attitude toward alcoholic beverages, primarily wine. We must put to rest the well-meaning, but scientifically and historically false, notion that the ancient practice was to carefully store grape juice in cold caves so that it would not ferment.

On the other hand, one should certainly not picture the Israelites as a nation of alcoholics just because they made it a practice of drinking wine with their meals. As most commentaries will point out, the wine was usually diluted with water before drinking, and the alcoholic content helped to counteract some of the impurities in the water at that time. But there was widespread disapproval of those who drank their wine straight and to excess. The Proverbs are especially critical of that practice.

Keep in mind that Jesus' first miracle was to turn water to wine at the wedding in Cana, and one of his last acts on earth was to institute the Lord's supper with wine. Also, note Paul's advice to Timothy: “Take a little wine for your stomach's sake (I Timothy 5:23).

I Samuel 1

The Book of I Samuel begins with the story of Hannah, a childless woman who went to the temple to pray to God for a child. The priest Eli is sitting beside the doorpost observing her. First she prays out loud but then continues silently with her lips moving. At this point (v. 14), Eli says to her, “How long will you make a drunken spectacle of yourself? Put away your wine.” A point of clarification is needed at this point to explain why in the world Eli came to the conclusion that Hannah was drunk. The reason was that, unlike today's usual practice in private prayer, the normal custom was to pray to God out loud. As Tsumura says, “Eli misread her quivering mouth as the mild derangement of a drunk.”

Hannah completely exonerates herself to Eli and explains what she had been praying for. Eli doesn't exactly apologize for his mistake, but he does go as far as telling her, “Go in peace, the God of Israel grant the petition you have made to him.” Of course, the petition is granted, and the result is the birth of Samuel who eventually ends up displacing Eli as the priest.

This incident takes on a new significance when we learn in Chapter 2 that is was the regular practice of Eli's own sons, who officiated in the temple, to force worshipers to give them the best portions of the animals that were supposed to be devoted to God instead. Here we see that Eli was quite astute in finding out the supposed sins of others by eavesdropping on them, but he apparently turned a blind eye to the outrageous and God-dishonoring behavior of his own sins. It is only when others report to him that his sons are also having sex with the women who served at the entrance to the tabernacle that he gives them a mild rebuke and lets them apparently continue in their immoral actions (I Samuel 2:22-25).

We see here the common practice of some Christians to always be on the lookout for the hint of sin in others and rush to judgment while totally ignoring much worse behavior in the lives of ourselves and those who are part of our own group. This is why Jesus, and James after him, had some strong words to say concerning those who love to judge others.

The early Christian leader John Chrysostom had a slightly different take on this event. As F. Murphy explains: “Eli speaks sharply to Hannah because in her urgency, Hannah had importunately shunted aside his role of ensuring that communication between God and people transverses the official channels.” In this manner, “Hannah is a pioneer, leading the religious spirit of her times into new territory.”

Matthew 10:18-19 // Luke 7:33-34

Speaking of judging others unfairly, this next example comes from the New Testament and is found in two of the Synoptic Gospels. The context is that Jesus is addressing the crowds regarding John the Baptist. He says, “John came neither eating or drinking, and they say, 'He has a demon'; the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'See, he is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'” In other words, when critics want to dismiss someone or their teachings, it doesn't matter if that person lives an ascetic lifestyle such as John did or whether he associates with known sinners over meals. In the first place, they will say that there must be something mentally wrong with the person; and in the second situation, they will criticize him for the company he keeps and assume that he is just as sinful as they are. With such critics, you just can't win however much you try.

I attended a Christian retreat years ago in which one of the speakers gave us a lecture on the necessity of totally abstaining from alcoholic beverages. When he opened it up for questions, one person in the audience asked, “How much drinking qualifies you as a drunkard?” The response was, “One sip.” At that point I piped up and said to the speaker, “You have just called my Savior a drunkard.” The speaker promptly shut down the questioning.

But shouldn't Jesus have been more careful in choosing his meal companions? After all, we are taught in I Thessalonians 5:22 to “abstain from all appearance of evil.” Unfortunately, the KJV translation of this passage, which was endlessly drummed into us at the church in which I was raised, is not an especially accurate one. Witness some more recent English renderings:

    NIV: “Avoid every kind of evil.”

    NEB: Avoid the bad of whatever kind.”

    J.B. Phillips: “Steer clear of evil in any form.”

    NRSV: “Abstain from every form of evil.”

So the point is not to be continually worrying about what people might say if they see you in the company of those of whom they do not approve. The point is to avoid doing anything evil yourself. And this is the very lesson Jesus is teaching in this passage.

Our own pastor began an initiative recently to reach out to others by instituting a Bible study right within a tavern in town. The logistics turned out not to work in the long term, but the encouraging thing was that our church was firmly behind the idea even though we are a fairly conservative congregation within a very conservative denomination. I cannot even imagine any of the previous churches I have attended over the years even considering such an attempt.

On the other hand, Craddock explains, “What we have to keep in mind is that table fellowship and Sabbath observance were identification marks for a community struggling to maintain identity among many foreign and some hostile influences. What was eaten and with whom one ate it were critical questions.” So the bottom line concerning the appropriateness of Jesus' actions boils down to the final statement made by him in this regard. Matthew's version reads, “Wisdom is justified by her deeds.” Luke replaces “deeds” with “children,” but the basic meaning is the same in both. The question is, What is that meaning?

    Nixon says, “Justified seems to mean 'proved right', though this may only be in the long term.” And Marshall states that wisdom may be another way of saying the name of God. If they is correct, then we could say, “Jesus as God Incarnate will be eventually be proved correct in His actions in reaching out to sinners.”

    Hendricksen elaborates on this point: “ The wisdom of John the Baptist, when he insisted on repentance, and of Jesus, when he held out the hope of salvation even to those with whom many in Israel would have nothing to do, was shown to have been fully justified by what it actually accomplished in the hearts and lives of those, who by sovereign grace, gave the proper response to both of these preachers.”

Acts 2:13-15

Lastly, we come to the events on the Day of Pentecost. When the apostles stand up and begin speaking in tongues that are understandable to all the diverse crowd from different parts of the Near East and Mediterranean, “All were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, 'What does this mean?' But others sneered and said, 'They are filled with new wine.” In response, Peter replies, “Indeed, these are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o'clock in the morning.”

That comment by Peter would probably not carry much weight today since one can visit any skid row today at any time of day or night and find your share of those who are obviously inebriated. But in the society of the time, as Paul points out in I Thessalonians 5:7: “For those who sleep sleep at night, and those who are drunk get drunk at night.”

It seems as if only some of the audience present understood the words of the apostles on this occasion. Therefore Lincoln deduces, “The comment of some within the narrative about the disciples' drunkenness makes sense as a reaction to ecstatic speech (see also I Cor 14:23) but not as a response to hearing foreign languages. Some scholars have therefore proposed that originally the disciples spoke glossolalia but that some hearers recognized phrases as their native language.” The situation, however, is not that clear-cut, and there are competing theories regarding the languages in which they were speaking and whether the miracle was one of hearing or one of speaking. See my post on “Tongue Speaking (Pentecost)” for more on this subject. But the bottom line is that communication was possible to those native speakers of various languages.

In terms of theological significance, Davids says, “Pentecost appears to reverse Babel. In Genesis 11:1,6 it is underlined that humanity was monolingual; the confusion of language in Genesis 11:7 leads to the scattering of the nations (Gen 11:8-9)...the list in Acts 2:9-11 appears to parallel deliberately the geographic spread of the table of nations in Gen 10:1.”

This same issue concerning the appropriateness of speaking in tongues within a church setting comes up later in church history. “If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that your are out of your mind?” (I Corinthians 14:23) Paul could have equally said to the Corinthians, “Will they not say that you are all drunk?” I must admit, coming from a non-Pentecostal background, that when I hear of people being slain in the Spirit, moaning and groaning on the ground, barking like dogs, etc. that my initial impression is much like the skeptics at the Day of Pentecost. I discuss this verse in I Corinthians in more detail in the post “Tongue-Speaking (Congregational).”

As a closing note, you may have realized that in each of these three cases, there was an adequate response to those who had been critical, rather than just letting the issue go without comment. Perhaps these are examples of what Paul had in mind when he said in Romans 14:16, “So do not let your good be spoken of as evil.”