WINE AND WOWSERS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16846, 23 September 1922, Page 8

WINE AND WOWSERS.

TO THE EDITOR. l< Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees I for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear beautiful, but inwardly are full of dead men’s bones.”—Matt, xxiii, 27 (R.V.) Sir,—l perceive that your correspondent “ B. Frank,” is far from being frank. His “ knowledge ” of the Bible does not rank with that of a “ dud ” parson. He is under the impression that the Biblical wine was similar to water. By no means 1 In Gen x, 24 ; t is stated that Noah, by reason of the fumes of the wine, lav sleeping in his tent, and when he awoke, started to curse. The far-seeing prophet Isaiah likens wickedness to wine mixed with water 1 (Is. i, 22). In Matt ix, 17, the brand of liquor referred to is sufficiently strong to burst a bottle I Drunkards and drunkenness, as may be seen from even a casual perusal of the Holy Scriptures, must have been quite common in Biblical times. “ B. Frank ” (1) says that the “ evolution of mankind hag entirely changed ” since Christ’s time (’struth!). What does he mean? How came there sruch a miraculous and cyclonic change ? Kvolutionists tell us that the time elapsed since man was a fish runs into millions of years I Your correspondent had better read an elementary treatise on evolution; man is substantially the same to-day as he was in the time of our Lord. Man has progressed slightly in learning and in science, but he has still a lot to learn. His heart has not changed during the past two thousand years; prohibition will not change it either. We need only turn to the American “ Saharae ” and we are greeted with murders and cairnes of all descriptions. The aim of Christ’s teachings is not prohibition but spiritual salvation, which brings a multitude of blessings with it. Compiling canons on prohibition is a poor substitute for the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Instead of being bored every Sabbath with dry conventional sermons • —regular cures for insomnia—should we not be privileged to hear the Gospel, the whole Gospel and nothing but the Gospel ? It is a significant fact that when the Gospel of Christ is really preached large crowds, who are hungry and thirsty for the Word, assemble to hear it. Where the Gospel i 6 preached there is no vacant look which characterises most churches; souls are saved, drunkards become dry, sinners become saints I More persons escape damnation in five minutes than in five years of conventional pulpit oratory! Gospel preaching has not only closed hotels, but it has transformed the 'hearts of men—a thing which mere legislation cannot do. What an opportunity for our religions “leaders!” The prohibition ministers to-dav are tjie exact counterparts of the Pharisees of old They make clean the outside of the cup, -while dirt exists inside. They are the blind leading the blind and instead of bread they offer us stone. The Founder of Christianity denounced the bigot and religious dictator of His day. He passed no resolutions to abolish wine, did not recommend the woman taken in adultery to /be stoned as did the Pharisees, nor order the cessation of the sports and amusements of His time. When performing his work he did not adorn Himself In fine linen or the “ parsonic garb ” of those days, and did next take cheques for saving souls. He went among the publicana and sinners and wrought incalculable good by shedding His abounding love. But for all this the Pharisees dubbed Him a wine-bibber i-nd blasphemer.—l .am. etc., OLD PORT. TO THE EDITOR. ** Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging, and whoever is deceived thereby is not wise.”—Prov. xx. 1. ~Sir, —Your correspondent, “ Old Port,” would have your readers believe that all churches are un-Christian that support the prohibition cause. And, as usual with this type of writer, he camouflages his real aim by a smoke screen of pious lament and false assertions anent the alleged spiritual • decline of the churches, for which he pretends to make their prohibition 1 advocacy responsible. For instance, he alleges, “ our prohibition ministers make God’s house not one of Gospel i teaching, but one of prohibition,” l which, of course, is utterly untrue. I * challenge u Old Port ” to prove also his unsupported statement that the | “ churches have degenerated so far as l to become a medium for political propaganda.” Then, regarding his method of quoting Scripture to bolster hia case, “ Old Port ” asserts that

Christ made and drank alcoholic wine, in proof of which there is not a word of truth. For instance, he cites the Cana miracle and quotes Christ’s statement in Matt. xi ; 19. But who were “ they ” who said, “ Behold a man gluttonous and a winebibber? ” Were they His friends or His enemies? To be thus slandered is the lot of all religious and social re- • formers and that experience is by no means unknown nowadays. Then your correspondent declares that “ our pro- j hibition ministers aim at abolishing liquor by force—force which is totally opposed to principles given forth by Christ.” Is it? What about His ejection of the money-changers from the Temple, saying as He did so “Ye have made it a den of thieves.” Surely, according to “ Old Port,” the great Teacher ought to have lovingly preached the Gospel to those sinners. Instead, our Exemplar chose to use one of his methods of “ casting out devils ” in dealing with the greatest curse of His age. And methinks, He would today show a similar righteously indignant attitude towards the liquor traffic were He at present blessing the world with His bodily presence. Now, view th© Scriptures as a whole and what do we find ? That there are about 130 warnings and prohibitions against alcoholic wines as compared with only twenty words of approval for them. For example, in Prov. xxiii, 31, we read thus : “ Look not on the wine when it is red. . . for at the last it biteth like a serpent and stingeth like an adder.” Isn’t that a divine prohibition ? It may be a fond belief amongst that Christ made a large quantity of intoxicating wine at a marriage feast; but the sooner that preposterous fallacy is scouted the better. Grape juice in its unfermented state was largely used in both New and Old Testament times. Professor Keil, in his “ Biblical Archaeology,” says :—‘ * The juice thus pressed was put partly into skins, partly into large earthen jars; either to be drunk fresh, or left to ferment or to be cooked to syrup as grape jejly.” Grape juice, then, in Bible times, was used in various ways. As pure unfermented wine it was drunk freelj’, and also as debash or The essential point to be noted is, the general use of unfermented grape-juice as a beverage. That Christ, of necessity, made or favoured intoxicants, is absolutely without proof. I note that “ Old Port ** quotes Shakespeare in praise of wine, but it is very gratifying to find that in “ Othello,” Shakespeare also draws the other side of the picture in Cassio’s terrible remorse when lago, the one insidious man fiend whom the immortal bard delineates, has tempted him into drunkenness, and makes him cry: “O thou invisible spirit of wine! If thou hast no name to be known by, let us call thee devil.”—l am, etc. GRAPE-JUICE.