Dining and Wining

It has recently been brought to my attention that the Catholics have yet another thing right (no offense intended). Some of my brothers have been discussing the drink of the day for the Baptist Lord's Supper service:

"In this corner, weighing in with centuries of use and biblical fidelity--its 20 proof wine!"

"And in this corner, the challenger from the modern post-temperance era US Bible Belt--its Wellllches Graaape Juuuuuice!"

Ah yes, I wish this debate was this fun. In actuality, it is not. This scriptural discussion is one issue keeping a person from joining my church, being that we t-total for the Lord's Supper. So we must ask the question: Was it wine in John 2 in the Bible or not? Every book I have on the subject I have says "yes, wine," save my set of commentaries by Fundamentalist preacher Oliver B. Green. So I can't disagree that it is OK for the element to consist of wine, and that the early church used it much. This is the crux of the argument of the person who won't join my church--they always used wine in the Bible....

However, a thought just occurred to me: What did Paul say to Timothy?

"No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for your stomach's sake and your frequent infirmities." I Tim. 5:23

This text throws a big question mark on the wine question:

1. Why would Timothy abstain from wine if he knew it was the prescribed drink?
2. Wait! Wasn't Timothy a pastor who should've been drinking wine in the Lord's Supper anyways?
3. Hmmmm....seems Timothy was an abstainer...and a pastor to boot...hmmmm, maybe they didn't use wine all the time after all!

I realize that my argument can be critiqued on the grounds that Timothy may have used a small amount of wine with communion and not other times, but hey, who says that was the case? Suppose he was abstaining for other reasons...maybe some of the same reasons that some Christians are wary of social drinking: wine is potentially addictive and a possible detriment to your witness in some cultures.

I consider drinking alcohol a matter of Christian liberty (without drunkeness). However, based on my above thoughts on this text, it seems Paul was not rebuking Timothy for not using wine as an element, but instead was gently explaining its medicinal qualities to ease Timothy's conscience and to allow him to drink a little wine "for his stomach's sake." This means that Timothy had probably been avoiding using wine in the Lord's Supper too. This seems to speak against the aforementioned church member's demand of wine on the grounds of biblical authority, and seems to say that in our modern era where stomach bugs from water are less common, that wine is fine, but so is the NA fruit of the vine.