The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1891-06-05
A BIBLICAL ARGUMENT.

How Defenders OF the KUN ROVER Com
tort Scripture to Help Their Cause.
1t has long been one of the favorite
arguments of those who support and
defend the rum power and the saloon,
to say that if the use of intoXicants had
been considered sinful, it would have
been prohibited in express terms in the
Scriptures. They point to the fact
that the denunciations of the Bible are
against those who abuse intoXicants;
that woes are denounced upon drunk
ards, but nothing is said about those
who use wine in moderation. They
also point to the miracle at Cana of
Galilee, the first of the wondrous works
of Christ, where He turned water into
wine for the wedding feast, and they
claim that if the use of wine were
wrong He certainly would not have ex-
ercised His miraculous power to furnish
it. Again, they point to the historic
fact that wine in all those countries
was then a common beverage, and it is
to-day; and triumphantly sum up their
argument by saying that because one
man cannot control his appetite and
becomes drunkard, it does not follow
that all other men, especially those
who do possess this power of self-con-
troll, Shall be deprived of the privilege
Of drinking in moderation.
This sounds well, but it does not
bear close analysis. 1t would be
fairly good argument if the intoXicants
of Biblical days were the same as those
we have now; but they were not. The
| &c ,,nif 1a Of h,a
ing or of distilling; they knew nothing
of alcohol: it had never been separated
from the wine in which it was pro-
duced by fermentation. There proba-
bly, was not wine produced in Pales-
| tine, or in any o; the warm countries
of the ancient world, which contained
over twelve per cent. of alcohol, and it
is more than probable that the usual
proportion was but five or six per cent.
| They had nothing of the nature of
whisky or brandy, or any other dis
titled liquors, in those days.
The argument has been made, and it
has much proba bility, that in the hot
summers of Palestine-and the grape
ripens there during very warm
weather-to express the juice and at
tempt to ferment it it would pass at once
from the alcoholic to the acetic stage
of fermentation with the result of pro-
ducing vinegar instead of alcohol.
Hence it is probable that after the
grape juice was expressed it was
boiled, and then inclosed in skins or
earthen jars, and the air shut out, by
which means it was preserved sweet.
Snoh wilma Hyn,11H rorn1,a hl1r fnrponnf b1,+
very slowly; and if the boiling were
continued to the point of a sirup, this
of itself would prevent fermentation,
and the sirup would have to be diluted
| with water before the process could
begin.
1t is undoubtedly true that in the
ancient world wine was fermented,
and possessed Intoxicating qualities
| when drank to excess. This needs no
argument, for the Bible is full of refer
| elcc to drunkenness and drunkards.
| The evidence that Bible wines were
never Intoxicating is very weak, and
| will not stand the test of thorough eX-
animation; though we believe it to be
| fact that the great bulk of the wine
CONSUMED ordinarily was a sweet grape
| juice, preserved by boiling, with per-
haps a very small per cent. of alcohol,
| and which would require the drinking
of immense quantities within a. short
time to produce intoXication.
The difficulty with those who argue
as quoted above is that they assume
that the conditions existing at that day
regarding intoXicantS We're practical
| ly the same as now. We have shown
that there were neither malt nor dis
titled liquors at that time; drunken
ness was by no means the prevailing
vice it is to-day; in fact, it is safe to
say that drunkenness was very rare
then as compared with the present
time. The only safe way of Judging is
to take the tenor of the teachings of
the Bible, apply it to present conditions,
and see what would have been the
judgment of the inspired penmcn on
modern alcoholism.
No argument can be valid that as
slImes the modern status as prevail
ing at the time the Bible was written
Even if the drinking of the mild Wines
the larger proportion of which were
certainly notwithstanding, is permitted
|
means gives the sanction of their au-
thority to the drinking of whisky,
brandy, beer and the other highly in
toxicating drinks of modern times
which were then unknown: nor does it
render respectable saloon, nor give
any authority for allowing this demon
aIi2ing institution to continue to curse
humanity. Had we in this day and
generation nothing more Intoxicating
than such wine as they made in Pales-
tine in the days of Christ, the evils of
the drink habit would be infinitely less
than they are now.
There can be no valid argument drawn
from the Scriptures to support either
drunkenness or the occupation of MAX
ing men drunkards; and the latter is
the mission OF the saloon. 1t is the
school wherein men are trained in this
debasing vice. The question of its sup
preston is not 20 much religious one