Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-04-04
TO THE EDITOR.
IKrrKRs DISCUSSING MATTERS OF IN
TRREsT TO THE PUBLIC.
sone Points Bearing Upon the question
Of wet or Dry"-Labcr
and Capital.


To ne Editor fthe Dispatch:
You have lately shown that you are
willing to insert in your widely-circu-
lated paper full discussion on both sides
Of the "burning question which is
now moving our community, and on
which q vote will soon be taken. This
is right. and will enable all really fair
men who are open TO The logic OF facts
and Of legitimate inference from facts to
decide how they ought TO vote. The
friends OF " no license have absolutely
nothing to fear from honest discussion.
A very intelligent and competent reader
Of all that has lately appeared in print
on the subject said in my hearing to-
day that thus far the argument produced
an overwhelming impression favorable
to the dry side Of the question.
One OF the articles. signed - Phis,"
in your issue Of March 2Sth Tread by
me Monday the Goth undertakes to
deal with the teachings of Holy Scrip
ture on the subject, and reaches the
conclusion that they are favorable to
The granting Of license to sell intoxi-
eating liquors--in other words. to the
wet side of the question. | shall not
make any conjectures as to the person
Atty Of "Phis," but shall deal simply
with his attempt TO deduce from the
inspired Word Of God his teachings on
this deeply-inieres,ing subject. Evil.
IDENTIFY "Phis" has not studied the
rules OF Interpretation founded on the
analogy Of faith" and which have
long been recognized by sound diyines
as the only safe rules for sscertaining
the mind Of the Holy Spirit from the
inspired Scriptures. These rules for
bid us to rely on any isolated texts or
passages on any moral or doctrinal
question when other texts or passages
conflict with OF modify them. These
rules require us carefully and prayer
fully 10 examine all that the Holy Spirit
has caused to be recorded in the canon
ical Scriptures on any moral OF doc
trinal question, and to make our
examination in the light of all the
facts OF history, archaeology, and
science definitely ascertained to be facts
by adequate evidence, and then to adopt
only such Interpretation as will be con-
sisient with all these texts, passages,
and facts. Adopting these enlightened
rules, the lesson from Holy Scripture
becomes potent, whitening, overwhelm-
Ing against the net side of the question
now before US. The very first mention
OF wine that we have in the Bible is in
the description in Genesis tx, 20-27,
where We are told that Noah planted a
vineyard and made fermented wine aud
drank Of it and got into state Of
beastly intoxication and stripped him
self to shameless nakedsess in his tent;
and that one of his own sons, who had
been with him in the ark, and had seen
the rainbow Of promise, and had seen
the typical lamb offered on Mount Ara
rat, nevertheless, now when he
saw his old father drunk from the
leverage Of wine, laughed at him and
derided him, and told his brothers of it,
doubtless with the expectation that
they would join in his impious and un-
filial merriment. Thus the wine from
Noah's whey ard led to his own degra-
dation and TO a curse on his own son
and his posterity, which is felt to the
present day. Such is the introduction
10 us of wine as beverage in the
Word Of God God did not intend
that it should be used as beverage
any more than He intended arsenic,
which is one Of the primitive chemical
elements in nature, to be used as food.
lie intended both wine and arsenic for
good purposes, but not either for bev-
eroge or for food.
God in His holy Word highly COM
mends the Nazarites who, according to
their vow, wholly abstained from the
use of wine as beverage. Numbers,
vi, 2-2l; Judges, xiii, So, xvi, lG,
L. p; Lamentations, w., 7; Amos, Ill,
IL, II. And concerning wine as a bey-
ersge, God uses the following words
which are commended to the special
attention Of " Pills." that he may seek
to reconcile them with his theory that
God authorizes and encourages us to
use wine as a common beyerage-to
Aaron and his sons, in reference to re-
lieious service in the tabernacle Of the
congregation :" DO not drink wine nor
strong drink lest We die il shall
be statute forever throughout your
generations" If the mere act Of drink
ing the smallest quantity Of wine las a
beyerage) was in priest Of the taber-
nacle so grave an offence as to bring the
death-penalty upon him, is it at all pro-
babe that in private person God en-
tirely approved similar act? | think
not. Leyiticus, X, 9.
Again: God in His Holy Word says;
"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is
raging, and whatsoever is deceived there
by is not WISE" And Of all the decep'
tions that they practice none has been
more fatal than that a man can safely
use them as habitual beverage.
Proverbs xx., |. Again " lie that
loye,h wine and oil shall not be rich"
Proverbs xxi, Il. Again: Who
hath woe? Who hath sorrow: Who
hath contentious? Who hath babbling?
Who hath wounds without cause: Who
hath redness Of eyes: They that tarry
long at the wine; they that 60 to seek
mixed wine. Look not thou upon the
wine when it is red, when it giyeth his
color in the cup, when it moveth itself
Alright. At last it biteth like serpent
and stingeth like an adder. "--Proverbs
xiii, 1882. Again: " II is not for
kings TO drink wine nor for princes
strong drink. "-Ib. XXI, 4. II kings
and princes ought not to use wine as
beverage because it will disturb the
reason and deaden the conscience aud
peryert the affections and enslave the
will, why should private people be ex-
empt from this heavenly rule? Again:
"Woe unto him that giveth his neigh
Dor drink, that puttest thy bottle to
him, and makest him drunken also, that
thou mayest look on their nasedness !"
Habakkuk H., !. Saloon-keepers and
bsr-keepers and liquor-sellers will find
q fearful deluge Of woes awaiting them
in the next world If the Word OF God
be true. BY the way. is il q fact that
msnv of the large liouor-dealers in