The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1909-11-13
SALOON ARGUMENT
IS QUCNCHED

IS QUCNCHED
We notice in a recent issue of the
Boise Statesman that some high Off
cial in the ranks of the saloon apollo
gists has an article which claims that
the Bible is against prohibition, and
that Christ himself partook of wine
and encouraged it's use. We believe
that that official speaks truly; in
fact we believe that pretty nearly any
old thing can be proven by the Bible if
one were of a mind to set about the
matter, gather his texts and marshal
them Alright. Slavery sanctioned
by it; likewise polygamy. An argu-
ment might be formulated making
it favor atheism, and texts be gath
cred for proof. But it is really imma-
terial nowadays to any argument
what the Bible has to say for or
against a thing. The Bible is the
handiwork of many men seeking to
probe to the depths the secrets of
Infinity. Like other men, these men
had their faults and their limitations,
and with soul-stirring truths, keen
and sometimes subtitle guesses, they
incorporated much that was error
and much that will not stand the test
of modern reason and enlightenment.
And what is truth and what is error
in the Bible must stand or fall as the
light of reason and intention de-
termines.
Christ, if His apologists correctly
report Him, used and encouraged the
use of wine. And side by side with
Christ stands Paul and all the other
apostles. But it is far cry from
Christ and His apostles to the modern
saloon. And we are of the opinion
that it would have received no en-
couragement from any one of them,
not even Judas. When we make this
assertion, we are simply making these
good people accept our conclusions
without so much as consulting them
or giving them any opportunity for
defense.
If we make these ancient gentlemen
define wine, we must quote Paul as
favoring its use from the medicinal
standpoint, and Christ and His apos-
ties must be quoted as favoring it as
a beverage at marriage feasts and at
social gatherings. DR.. McGiffert in his
investigations into the sacrament of
the communion seems to come to the
conclusion that that in it's earliest
stages was simply method of calling
to remembrance of a former com.
panion and friend as We should pledge
the memory Of absent friends in the
social glass And we are rather in
clined to the belief that the good doc
tor has the right of it.
Now, considering the matter of the
saloon. We have no love for it as
an institution. 1t seems to us to be
wholly and radically wrong institu-
ton. We oppose it and have opposed
it and until we are convinced that we
are wrong, will continue to oppose it.
Our Judgment may be wrong, our
view point narrow and our attitude
fanatical. But with our present
light we can't take any other stand.
We have tried to view the matter i'm
partially and that is our conclusion
in the matter. That is not temper
ance and we do not pretend to call it
such.
Now with respect to alcoholic stimu-
lants: We are not altogether decided
with respect to this point. Stimu-
lants may do some good, and as Paul's
advice to Timothy indicates, may be
a tonic to the stomach. If such be the
case we certainly could not favor any
radical measures that would prevent
their use for this purpose. Again,
there are men who use alcoholic slim
ulants in moderation and have used
them all their lives and never abused
the use of them. It is a question in
our mind whether these should be
deprived because we can not use
stimulants without abusing our privi-
leges. The stock quotation from Paul
with the respect to the use of meats
offered to idols does not apply. We
may deprive ourselves Of a pleasure
or a necessity should we be con-
WINGED that our example will benefit