New national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1870-1874, 1871-04-13


should subject me to be classed by the Doctor
among the enemies of the adorable Saviour"
The Doctor will doubtless expect me to try,
at least, to extricste myself and my temperance
friends, who have such mistaken zeal in the
subject" from the dilemma in which he evil
IDENTIFY sspposes be has placed us, by referring
us to the example of Christ as manufacturer
of intoxicating wine. Now, admit if it could
be proved that the wine that Christ made on
the occasion referred to was intoxicating, 1t
would be very strong point in the Doctors
argument to sustain his position, viz, that the
traffic in Intoxicating liquors or drinks is not a
crime in itself. But this is the very point that
all true Christian temperance men, so tar as
know, dispute: and affirm, on the other hand,
that there are the best evidences, both from
Scripture and reason to believe that the wine
made by the Saviour on the occasion referred
to was not intoxicating and, if so, then the
Doctors argument, based on that example Of
Christ, must entirely fail. After referring me
to the above example. the Doctor then adds:
"What Mr.. Finney is prepared to do, with
his views Of the subject, remains for him to
show"
/ am now prepared to give my views on this
important subject. First, as derived from
Scripture, that in the days of our Saviour on
earth, as now. there were two kinds Of wine-one
always spoken of as blessing, and the other
as curse or, in other words, one intoxicating
and the other not. Let us now see whether
the Scripture will sustain the above view.
will now quote from Proverbs, chapter xiii,
3lst and 32d verses Look not thou upon the
wine when it is red, when it giveth its color in
the cup, when it moveth itself Alright at the
last it biteth like serpent and stingeth like
an adder Here we are commanded not even
to look upon this kind of wine which think
means that we should not drink it. feel sure
that no intelligent person can fail to understand
what is meant by the above description of the
wine, that it is intoxicating in its properties,
and differs from the wine that Christ made and
used. If this view of the subject is not true,
then we have the Scriptures plainly and una
voidably contradicting one passage the other
on the same question or subject.
will not take up any more time in quoting
Scripture to prove the absurdity of the Doc.
tors position, that Christs first miracle was
performed to manufacture intoxicating wine
argument drawn from resson-namely, that, as
all Christ's other miracles were performed not
only to prove His divinity, but for the purpose
OF showing mercy and benevolence to His chill
dren, by relieving their wants, and thus making
them more happy and, if this is correct, is it
not a dictate of the soundest reason, which
carries conviction with it, that Christ's first
miracle was of the same character with all the
rest, and, instead of manufacturing wine that
would intoxicate, and thus create an appetite
for such drinks, by which all drunkards are
made, that he would, on the contrary, use His
divine power to create drink or beverage
that was absolutely good" as it was declared
to be, and not of that intoxicating quality
which bites like serpent and stings like an
adder ?'
am now prepared to say to the Doctor and
to all the ministers of the Gospel that sympa.
thise with him (if there are any in his views
in regard to Christ's example as a manufac-
turer of intoxicating wine that the above views
which have expressed, and in which I think
all true temperance men concur, will show the
Doctor and his friends how / dispose of this
example to which he has called my attention.
And in concluding the remarks which have
to submit on this occasion, that however much
| may esteem the Doctor, or any other minister
who takes the position that he does on the
above example, must be allowed to say, as at
present advised by Scripture and reas son. that
such position, if generally accepted by the
Church, land pray that it may not be- will do
more to dshonor Christ and his cause, and to
impede the progress of true temperance, than
all the infdel advocates of the traffic and use
of intoxicating drinks throughout this great
Republic. l will now conclude this reply by
most respectfully requesting the Doctor not to
avoid any longer the true issue by trying to
make distinction between intoxicating drinks
and intoxicating liquors. distinction without
a difference. But / think the Doctors last
argument, drawn from Christs example, will
settle this matter of difference, as the wine
which he made was not for medical purposes,
but for drinking as common beverage, and
he must be satisfied with his own examples.
WIZ. G. FINNEr