Alcohol: The Poison of Serpents, the Venom of Cobras
Exploding the Myth of Moderate Use
By Randy Blackaby

Television commercials and movies depict drinking as sophisticated. Wine connoisseurs fulfill the picture painted in Proverbs 23:31 as they swirl it in the cup, watch it sparkle, and sniff its "bouquet." But Proverbs declares that once drunk, the wine's sparkle turns "and at the last it bites like a serpent and stings like a viper."

The consumption of alcoholic beverages has cursed the lives of millions (maybe billions) of people. It is at the root of a high percentage of divorces, the cause of much spousal and child abuse and crimes of every sort, a factor in more than half of fatal auto accidents, and the lubricant that loosens men's and women's morals and leads to nearly unimaginable degradation.

Teenagers are faced with the temptation to "just try it," and adults with the compulsion to be "sociable." No one sets out to be a drunkard. Like all sin, it attracts as a means of relaxing and "loosening up" after a hard day. But it becomes the gateway to virtually every sort of sin and misery.

Despite these facts, there are Christians who defend moderate drinking. They acknowledge that the Bible condemns drunkenness and that drunkards will not be a part of the kingdom of heaven (Galatians 5:19-21; 1 Corinthians 6:9,10). They agree that drunkenness denotes a lack of wisdom and dissipation (Ephesians 5:15-18). They know that drunkenness is a "work of darkness" (Romans 13:12-14) and that spiritual leaders in the Lord's church can't be "given to wine" (1 Timothy 3:2,3; Titus 1:7-8). They know that alcoholic beverages are described as "poisonous" (Deuteronomy 32:33) and that this is true both literally and physically. They have read that alcohol possesses the characteristics of a sedative, a hypnotic, an analgesic, and a narcotic. They know it is a habit-forming anesthetic. But, they promote its moderate use. They see little or nothing wrong with controlled social drinking.

How do these people justify drinking? They note the Bible passages, including Jesus' own creation of wine from water (John 2), that mention acceptable wine drinking. They note that deacons and older women are only forbidden to drink "much" wine (1 Timothy 3:8; Titus 2:3).

And some of these assertions are correct, to a point. In the Old Testament (Exodus 29:38-41; Numbers 18:12; Nehemiah 10:37, 13:5,12) wine was used as part of an offering to God. Ten percent of the first fruits, including the "new wine," belonged to the Lord. Such wine also was viewed as one of the blessings and comforts of life (Genesis 27:28,37; Deuteronomy 7:13, 11:14).

Besides creating wine at the Cana marriage feast, at the last supper, Jesus used the fruit of the vine as the emblem to represent his blood. The Good Samaritan used wine externally as a medicine (Luke 10:34), and Paul advised Timothy to drink it for his stomach's sake (1 Timothy 5:23).

Every Bible student who has faith in God knows the Bible doesn't contradict itself. So, how do we explain these apparent contradictions? Two views have been generally set forth:

1. That "good wine" in the Bible is unfermented, while the condemned type is fermented.

2. That the wine approved for use was so low in alcoholic content that moderate use was possible.

Let's begin with the second view and learn that the potency of ancient wines was nowhere near that of today' s distilled beverages. The wines in ancient times were naturally fermented. New wine had no alcohol, but as the wine aged, the sugars naturally converted to alcohol. But fermented grape juice's alcohol content can't naturally exceed half the percentage of sugar in the juice. If the alcohol content rises above about 10 percent, the yeast cells die and fermentation ceases.

Most alcoholic wine in ancient times contained no more than five to eight percent alcohol, according to "Archeology and Bible History." Further, the ancients typically diluted their wine with water. Only drunkards drank unmixed or uncut alcoholic wine. Sometimes, wine was cut as much as 20:1 with water. Wine that was cut 3:1 or 3:2 was considered to be a powerful mixture. To consume the alcohol in two modern martinis the drinker would have to consume about 22 glasses of ancient alcoholic wine.

Remember that when the Bible speaks of "wine," it refers to all forms--alcoholic or just plain grape juice--of "fruit of the vine." The King James Version translates nearly all Hebrew and Greek words for grape products as "wine." But there are six Hebrew words and four Greek words that describe grape products in different stages, including "new wine," which was unfermented. Since Jesus created wine from water, it clearly could have been new wine or grape juice.

So, Bible references to approved "wine" do not necessarily refer to alcoholic versions. And, if fermented, it was typically cut with water so that excessive drinking had to occur before drunkenness resulted. And grape juice could be preserved. During Roman times, it could be preserved in sealed jars for up to a year. Grape juice also could be boiled to syrup to nearly stop fermentation, and water was then added to make a drink called "sweet wine." The sugar did not change to alcohol, thus preserving the sweet taste.

Like all exegesis of scripture, we must interpret what we read about wine in context and in view of the overall teaching in God's word.

Let's think rationally and use the minds that God gave us. In light of what scripture tells us about it being a poison and biting like a serpent, when Jesus was at Cana, would He have miraculously created 120 to 180 gallons of strong drink?

Would Jesus have used "the poison of serpents" to represent the saving blood of the New Covenant?

Would Jesus have compared himself or his kingdom to wine's intoxicating properties? It seems bizarre and contradictory that Jesus would command the perpetual use of a product against which His own word warns and condemns.

Would the Son of God, who taught men to pray "lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil" by direct command, put such a deadly temptation in our paths?

In 1 Corinthians 10:16, Paul calls the communion drink a "cup of blessing." Yet, it is certain that modern alcoholic beverages are "cups of curses." Can this be the same drink? Can this "cup of blessing" be filled with the same material described at least four times in the book of Revelation as "the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His (God's) wrath."

Brethren sometimes seek to justify moderate drinking because an evil world has convinced them that it is all right. Sometimes, we want to think it is okay because some of our now-gone, but beloved, relatives "sipped" just a little. I am told that my grandfather began his drinking with "just a little nip" on Sunday afternoons, out behind the barn. Before too long, however, he had beaten my grandmother many times, abused his children, and drunk up his meager livelihood in bars. He abandoned my grandmother and left her to raise their remaining children. He abandoned the truth, the gospel, and the Lord's church. As you might guess, I'm a hard sell on moderate drinking.

As a newspaper reporter in the 1970s and 1980s, I covered police, courts, government, and social service organizations. Alcohol abuse and its after-effects dominated the agendas of each. Alcohol is the most commonly abused drug in America.

Statistics show that up to 10 percent of those who take their first drink become alcoholics. Is the misery and degradation of alcoholism worth the risk? Only a fool can affirm such a premise.

If you still approve drinking in moderation, perhaps you'd like to try moderate crack cocaine or heroin use, or perhaps you would enjoy Russian roulette. As for me, I believe I'll simply listen to Paul's admonition in Ephesians 5:8-21. In love, I urge you to do the same and not wrest the scriptures to your own destruction.


Brother Blackaby had done a masterful job of presenting the vain effort in which many brethren engage to defend something as destructive as drinking alcohol.

While I lived in Las Vegas, one of our members (from whom we later withdrew) tried to keep me from preaching on this subject. He told me he could go into a bar after work, sit down with a cold beer, and talk with an alien sinner about the need for God in his life. The sinner would laugh him to scorn! Even sinners understand that a professed Christian has no business in a bar, drinking any type of alcohol!

My first meeting was in California. The congregation is one I had not previously attended. One of the lessons dealt with drinking alcohol. Some of the members yelled from the audience-"what about Bud Light? What about Mogan David Wine?" It appears that this particular congregation believed in and practiced the "moderation theory." I spent two nights in discussion with members, taking the scriptures and showing the error of their arguments. Oh yes, we discussed John 2. How can one of God's children believe that God's Son, who came to seek and save the lost, provided 180 gallons of wine to use at a rip-roaring drinking party? Would Jesus, who came to save the sinner, now lead him further down the path of sin! Who can believe such reasoning?

Honestly, my brethren are going to have to show me one good thing drinking has done for mankind. Brethren who want to hold onto the world will attempt to prove such false theories.

Sadly, many manmade religions see no problem with drinking alcohol. Over the years, we've attended a few wedding receptions where the one who performed the wedding ceremony was one of many who got drunk at the reception! What a sad commentary on one who professes to be a man of God! How can we expect people to do better when those who set such examples claim to be God's servants? Drinking (except for medicinal purpose) is sinful-period. Please read 1 Peter 4:1-4. All forms of drinking are condemned! (KMG)