adultery, therefore, “contrary to revealed religion” ? There were no women at the Last Supper
We admit them to it. Is this “contrary to revealed religion” ? We see, therefore, that Christians may, in altered circumstances, do some things Jesus never actually did, and that their so doing does not necessarily contravene his example; nor, unless it violates the principles
he taught, does it tend to undermine Christianity.
But the learned lecturer will perhaps urge: “I did not mean exactly what I said.
I meant to point out that the means you use — methods with which you urge and support the Total-abstinence theory — are contrary to revealed religion.
You strain and pervert the Bible
to get the example of Jesus on your side, and so undermine the authority of the Scriptures.”
It would have been better if Dr. Crosby
had originally said exactly what he meant, and on so grave a subject we had a right to claim that a trained and scholarly man should do so. But, waiving that, let us allow him, as the courts do, to amend his declaration.
The Total-abstinence system is “contrary to revealed religion,” because we strain and distort the Scriptures and wrest them to serve our purpose; and the chief instance upon which the Doctor
mainly dwells is our assertion that wherever drinking wine is referred to in the Bible
with approbation, unfermented
wine is meant.
Upon this claim the Doctor
pours out his hottest indignation, indulging in a wealth of abusive epithets, and returning to it again and again, ringing changes on it, and turning it like a specially sweet morsel under his tongue.
Indeed, this may be considered the chief thing he came to Boston
Now, there is a class of Biblical scholars and interpreters who do assert that wherever wine is referred to in the Bible
with approbation, it is unfermented wine.