Smyrna times., 1856-10-01

The reasons here assigned for the enactment
of such statute, clearly states that the use of
wine and strong drink is contrary to the moral
law. That law, it will be conceded, is the only
correct standard of right and wrong, of hOli-
ness and unholiness of cleanness and unclean-
ness. This statute was enacted, or rather ap-
piled to the priestly office, when the priests
were officiating; because they were at that
time brought into more immediate contact with
the people than at any other time: and for the
two-fold purpose of setting forth the difference
between holy and unholy, and teaching the peo-
pie by force of example the statutes of the
Lord. Two things are plainly taught US by the
whole passage-1st: the use of these things as
beverage is "unholy and unclean," and the alb
stnence from them is {" holy and clean ~ and, Cd:
that the "statutes ofthe Lord" are opposed to the
use OF them for the abstinence ofthe priest fromI
theiruse was to teach those statutes to the peo-
pie, to impress them upon the minds of the con-
gregation to show them how to live; for the priest
then, as the minister now, was to give practi-
cal examplifcation of the law-he was to live
the law. If our conclusion is not correct, there
would be no sense nor appropriateness In the
. reasons assigned for the observance of the sta
tute, nor in the coupling of holiness and clean
ness, unholiness and uncleanness, and the teach
ing of the people, the statutes of the Lord with
such an injunction. The use of wine and
strong drink, then, must have been contrary to
the moral law.
This view is sustained by many other pas
sages OF Scripture. The Scriptures generally,
I in their preceptive part, are calculations, am
q plications and applications of the moral law.
). AS proof of the application of this law to the
use of wine and strong drink, though they were
q generally used, we cite Prov. 81, =" Wine
q is mocker, strong drink is raging and who
g soever is deceived thereby is not wise" Here
q is an important caution, telling men at the very
,t beginning of course of drinking, that the
. habit is notwithstanding /; that A." wine is I
n mocker," and will deceive them that slron.
r drink" will inAame their angry passions; dn'
that the tendency of the habit is to increase
II and the result will be drunkenness and ruin.-
,e Proverbs, 23d ch., contains many admoniton
n. similar to the above, some of them stronger
a
nt eaters of flesh for the drunkard and the gluI
.r ton shall come to poverty; and drowsiness sha
r clothe a man with rags" This seems to sa!
or that drunkenness is the result of associatin
lis with wine bibbers, and will bring man
to poverty. They are coupled together-the OF
"A. following in the train of the other, as a cons
n qnence,. "Who hath woe! who hath SORROW
ca who hath contentious! who hath babbling
"a who hath wounds without cause? who ha
en- redness of eyes! They that tarry long at Il
DC. wine, they that 60 to seek mixed wine." He
or we have a certain state described, and the eau
inn given. Then follows an admonition: Lo
90 not upon the wine when it is red, when 1t q
eth his color in the cup, when it moveth its
,l Alright at the last it biteth like a serpent,
ID. stngeth like an adder" Is not this sufhcieI
nh ly strong and clear to establish the point
j, We are admonished not even to look upon
-, wine. If this is not total abstinence, it wol
ino be difficult to prove anything to be. The p
. al verbs of Solomon are allowed to be based up
ono the moral law, and to contain truthful ex
ber sition of it--they are an application of the |
of to the conduct of the life. If this be SO "a
ore our opponent cannot prove TO the contrar
. !, Solomon understood the moral law of the Et
nal to be prohibitory in its application to
= M use of wine and strong drink. "'" ~ =
,uso In our next we shall examine the law it
uct. in its bearing upon the subject of prohibitio
not $3.50 ..@af F.'''. r.-3N EccLEsiAsrious
u & 80 y i Ii