The command to be ‘not covetous’ has been neglected by the churches of Jesus Christ in this land over the centuries to the church's peril and loss. It has been customary to appoint to office people of substance and station, who live well, who are rich and full of self-consideration. Sometimes the churches have reasoned in a very carnal way, and they have said, ‘Obviously these are men of stature who have succeeded in public life, in business life. These are the natural leaders.’ But were they not morally qualified? While they may have been strong in some qualities, they were weak men in others. They were men who pampered themselves. They loved money and needed what money could buy in order to give them happiness, so they were spiritually weak men who compromised their lives. Not surprisingly with weak leaders the churches of Christ have collapsed over the last hundred years when faced with the tide of higher criticism and Darwinism and modernism, theological decadence and the Charismatic movement. They may have been people of strong personality and strong business success, but as spiritual men they have been weak men who depended upon worldly crutches and wealth. We always ignore the instructions of the word at our peril.
The context obviously conditions the word ‘patient’. What is meant here is patience in relation to circumstances, patience not restless. It's the opposite of covetous in a sense: not ambitious, not dissatisfied, not always wanting. We are to be impatient in one sense. It is a noble and Scriptural thing to be impatient for blessing, impatient with one's own poor progress in the spiritual life, impatient about how little one accomplishes. Patient here is the opposite of striker, brawler, and even of greedy of filthy lucre. You want an elder to be someone who is going to be loyal and true and have stickability. If people don't appreciate him that much, because the particular roles he has are relatively unseen ones, then he remains a patient man. He is not going to say, ‘I want to do something else. I am not appreciated.’
The main reason why we today do not drink alcoholic drinks is because we feel obliged to obey the Scriptures to have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness. Activities and practices may change categories. From being acceptable, they may become bad and unacceptable. In Bible times the alcohol industry was of an altogether different nature from what it became in the unfolding centuries, especially after the invention of the still. In Bible times it was a cottage industry and wine was not plentiful. You could run out of it even at a festive occasion such as the wedding in Cana in Galilee. And we know from Scripture that the wine in ancient times was generally diluted with water. If you lived in luxury you might dilute it with milk, says the Scriptures. What has happened since Bible times is that this industry now operates on a massive scale, and inebriating drinks are widely available. They are vastly more attractive than ever they were in ancient times. They are vastly more potent, and they are vastly more expensive. The Old Testament sanitary drink has moved from the category of that which is acceptable into the category of that which is positively damaging. Timothy was an abstainer and the great thing about Timothy is that he copied everything the apostle did, and it was the Apostle Paul who had to instruct him to take a little wine for medicinal purposes. The law forbade any alcohol to priests on duty; priests and Hebrew kings were actually forbidden from touching alcohol while they were in the temple, and of course the teaching of the New Testament is we are now kings and priests unto God. We are always on duty.