There is a number of articles by this title, why should it be necessary for another? The answer is that there is an ever-recurring attempt to justify one’s desire to drink alcohol, and there are several reasons why this writer cannot believe Jesus drank it.

First, the apostle Paul declared, "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak." (Romans 14:21) By so saying, he makes the issue to be not one of law, but one of love. Paul chose to be governed by the quality of love that made him willing to deny himself even that which is lawful if it might cause his brother to stumble, be offended or rendered weak. "All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence." (20) And, "if thy brother be grieved with thy meat...(thou} walkest not charitably. (15)

Matthew Henry states, "(Christian prudence and humility teach us in many cases to recede from our right rather than give offence by insisting upon it." Paul told the Corinthians, "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." And to the Romans he counseled, "Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put it stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way." (I Corinthians 8:13; Romans 14:13) If this is the attitude of the apostle, what must have been the attitude of the apostle’s Lord? It is certain that Paul could not have been a better "Christian" than was our Lord Jesus Christ Himself!

Second, wine has a defiling affect; and Daniel Purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portions of the king’s meat, nor with the wine which he drank. (Daniel 1:8) If Daniel would not defile himself with wine, can you think our Lord would?

Third, "It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine, nor for princes strong drink: lest they drink and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted." (Proverbs 31:4,5)

God threatened Old Testament priests with death if they or their sons imbibed wine or strong drink when they went into the Tabernacle. He made it a perpetual decree in order that they be able to distinguish between the holy and the unholy, and between the clean and the unclean. (Leviticus 10:9,10) And did our Saviour imbibe?

Peter calls New Testament believers "kings and priests unto God." Is it any more fitting that New Testament saints should drink than their Old Testament counter-parts? And, they who do, are they not susceptible to forgetting the difference between the holy and the unholy? Is it any more commendable or praiseworthy for New Testament believers to drink?

Isaiah declared, "The priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment." (28:7) Undoubtedly the perverting judgment among present-day "evangelicals" and their inability to distinguish between the holy and the profane, between the clean and the common can often be blamed upon their imbibing.

Fourth, if a Godly man does not ask what is tolerable, but what is commendable and praiseworthy, then Jesus did not drink wine.

"Wine" is a word used to speak of things other than an intoxicating drink: it is also used to speak of juice and is used to symbolize blood as in Isaiah 63:1-3; Revelation 14:20; 19:15. The illustrations in the first two passages are very graphic. Isaiah asks, "Wherefore art Thou red in Thine apparel, and Thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine-fat? ‘I have trodden the winepress alone: ...for I will tread them in Mine anger, and trample them in My fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon My garments, and I will stain all My raiment." And John declares, "And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress even unto the horse bridles, by the space of 600 furlongs."

In both these passages the illustration is of one who treads the grapes and whose garments are dyed with the juice of the grapes. The place where the grapes are trodden is called the "winepress" but what it yields is the juice of the grape. In fact, in Deuteronomy 32:14, "wine" is called the "blood of the grape." (Gk. "He drank wine, the blood of the grape.") On account of the color, it is from ancient times a picture of blood, but this "wine" is not intoxicating. And, in Revelation 6:6, the word "wine" speaks of vineyards, and certainly a vineyard is not intoxicating.

Fifth, when Jesus turned the water into "wine", there are some good reasons why this could not have been alcoholic. 1st, the guests at this marriage feast found in John chapter two were a holy company such as our Lord and Mary would attend. This was no blaspheming rabble. 2nd, it is not even hinted that these guests were at all intoxicated. 3rd, the words, "Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse" (verse 10) show what was the common custom. 4th, the words, "Thou hast kept the good wine until now" (10) mean no more than the wine our Lord had made was perfect, pure and wholesome, and not that it was inebriating. 5th, these guests obviously had to have possession of their senses, or they would not have been able to distinguish the difference.

It is a grievous, yet interesting truth that throughout history, men who have learned they should be Godly and holy in their conduct have generally cared little about doctrine and learning Christ aright. Yet other men who learned and labored to retain orthodoxy very often did not learn Christ aright either, for they were prone to live carelessly and to trumpet Antinomianism under the banner of Christian liberty. History graphically shows that when men veer off the "straight

and narrow" God raises up an "equalizer."

For instance, the reformation was a period of tremendous revival. Hymns were sung in city streets and in the countryside. It was a time when miners whose talk had once been as black as the coal they mined met for prayer and praise before assuming the day’s toil.

Within 80 years, however, the sin of drunkenness cast a shadow over the Lutheran ministry. It is clear from Scripture that people who are characterized by drunkenness shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (I Corinthians 6:9,10; Galatians 5:19-21) While these pastors may have faithfully expounded the doctrine of Scripture, and even professed to know the Lord yet in works they denied Him, and showed themselves to be the children of Disobedience.

It was at this precise time in history that God raised up the Pietistic movement. Instead of keeping alive the principles of Godliness through the vital and proper application of the newly recovered Biblical doctrines, the reformation had lapsed into Antinomianism. While the pietistic movement leaned away from Biblical doctrine, it was a return to the Biblical practice of obedience and righteous living.

There is no reasoning with them who are determined to find justification for their imbibing. But, it would seem that a substance that is capable of causing its user to "behold strange women," to "utter perverse things" (Proverbs 23:33), to become insensitive to feeling (verse 35), to lose ability to discriminate between what is holy and what is profane (31:5), and capable of becoming habit-forming (23:35) ought not to be toyed with, but rather should be removed out of our reach. "Whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." (20:1)

back to top

Part I --From Colonial Times Until The Second War for American Independence, Otherwise Known As The War Between The States, Or The Civil War

Text: "Thou shalt have a perfect and Just weight, a perfect and Just measure shall thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." (Deuteronomy 25:15)

The year 1690 was momentous in the history of America for in that year the colony of Massachusetts printed the first paper money this continent had ever seen. It was issued to pay the soldiers returning from Quebec after fighting the French. Other colonies followed her example, and began printing their own currency. But in 1751, the British forbade the practice declaring all such money was unlawful because it was not backed by gold or silver.

The vestiges of the Reformation still lingered in the hearts of Englishman and the thought of being governed by a foreign king chafed their spirits until they chose to ignore Britain’s prohibition. The colonies resumed the ungodly practice, and continued to print paper money that did not have "a Just weight and Just measure" lacking it. Such paper money that lacks the backing of gold or silver has its value established solely on the promise of the issuing institution to "make it good." For this reason, such notes are known as "promissory" notes.

God said. "Thou shalt have a perfect and a just weight." When, therefore, a person, a state, or a nation elects to ignore the righteous Law of God, they must be punished, and God chastised the colonies with crushing inflation.

On January 14, 1779, a silver, Spanish-milled dollar could purchase what 8 paper dollars in Continental Currency could purchase. On April 2, it required 17 dollars in currency to purchase what one silver dollar could purchase. On May 5, a silver dollar was equal to 24 paper dollars. By January, 1781 one hundred (100) dollars in paper was required to purchase what one silver dollar could buy; and by May of that year, a person could exchange a silver dollar for 500 to 1000 dollars in Continental Currency. Sailors made suits with the worthless paper, and a barber in Philadelphia wallpapered his shop with them.

In 1787 the infant Republic was drafting its Constitution. On August 16th, discussion arose over the wording of Article I, Section 8 – "The Legislature shall have the power to... coin money...and "emit bills on the credit of the United States." The controversy was over the words, "emit bills of credit" which would have allowed. Congress to issue paper money. The words were struck out denying Congress the power.

On August 28th debate erupted regarding the wording of Article 1, Section 10 --"No state shall coin money..." Roger Sherman stood and declared the words should be, "No state shall make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts." The wording stands. Article 1, Section 10 prohibits states from making paper money tender in payment of debts. God established "a just weight, and a just measure" as part of the moral law, and the Constitutional convention obeyed the righteous law of God.

James Madison testified the Constitution of the United States cut off "the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making bills tender either for public or private debts." And, in his 8th Annual Message to Congress on December 5, 1836, Andrew Jackson declared, "It is apparent from the whole context of the Constitution as well as the history of the times, which gave birth to it, that it was the purpose of the Convention to establish a currency consisting of the precious metals, these were made by a permanent rule ..."

In spite of this, in 1701, the Federalists established the First Bank of the United States with a capital of $10,000,000. The Anti-Federalists argued the Constitution gave Congress no authority, to establish a central bank. No matter, the thing was done, and the bank was given a 20-year charter that expired in 1811. The paper money printed by the bank often exceeded its capital, and the Republicans did not renew its charter.

War broke out in the following year. When a slight depression occurred, many Americans were given to believe this could have been averted had the charter of the, First Bank been renewed, Therefore, a charter for the Second Bank of the United States was made, and it too was granted for a period of 20 years beginning in 1816. While its vaults contained $35 million dollars in specie, and it was supported by the Congress, it became more careless than the First Bank, and freely printed paper money at one time the Second Bank issued 9 times its gold and silver assets.

In 1816, however, a new form of state banking emerged. In that year, Missouri issued certificates of legal tender as a bounty for killing wolves, panthers and wildcats. For this reason, it was called "wildcat" currency. The term, however, came to be applied to all notes of questionable value; for not only did banks print paper money, but so did states themselves, as well as counties, parishes, municipalities, schools, hotels, turnpikes, bridges, canals, railroads, lumber companies, insurance companies, mining companies, fishing companies, soap companies, glass companies, etc. In theory, at least, paper money issued by states, and that issued by state banks was backed by the state of issuance, but such "backing" amounted to little more than a promise to stand behind it.

Wildcat banking was everywhere prevalent. Between 1829 and 1837, the number of banks doubled, and the paper money in circulation rose from $48,000,000 to $149,000,000. While much of it was worthless, the currency was some of the most beautiful ever printed. Magnificent works of art featuring elaborate detail provided the themes for much of the paper money. The Second Bank of the United States, however, had bitterly denounced the state banks, and for that reason it was very unpopular in New England.

Andrew Jackson became the champion of the state banks, and made it a platform issue in the 1832 election. His veto of the bill that would have renewed the charter of the Second Bank for 4 more years was considered political suicide; nevertheless, Jackson won the election. Believing he had won the Presidency on account of his fight against the Second Bank, he continued to work for the destruction of the hated monopoly, and ordered that no more money be placed in the Bank.

He directed instead that it be given to certain specified state banks. These banks came to be known as "pet" banks. The Second Bank of the United States survived its charter that ended in 1886. It continued a few additional years under a charter granted by the state of Pennsylvania.

In 1837, President Martin Van Buren ordered government inspectors to investigate the backing of the nation’s banks. Since many of these banks were either totally or nearly totally lacking in specie backing, unconscionable bankers hired people who went from bank to bank with a wagon filled with kegs of specie, --or so it appeared, for in actuality the kegs contained only a thin "frosting" of specie, and underneath were nails.

People began to lose confidence in banks, and to demand gold and silver in place of paper money. Like a limb that has "gone to sleep" is often painful when it is "awakened", so reality is often realized at the expense of great pain. Bank after bank failed, and tile "panic" or depression of 1837 resulted. These were the days of "saddlebag" banking. The currency of defunct banks was treasured by the unprincipled for they would enter frontier towns with their saddlebags bulging with worthless currency. Their purpose was to exchange their worthless paper money for good money. To do this they would open an office and rent their money, and leave town before anyone was the wiser.

God commanded, "Thou shall not steal," and James comforts the oppressed who have been defrauded declaring the cries of the dispossessed have entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth --the Lord of Hosts, or the Lord of the Armies of Heaven. He will vindicate them. The Constitution of the United States had foreseen the evil of inflation and crime that results from worthless paper and had provided for a stable currency. However, the Constitution was progressively ignored as Americans abandoned the Law of God. "Thou shall have a perfect and a just weight." This rejection of God’s Law led to many kinds of dishonesty.

For instance, Pennsylvania, like many other states borrowed from abroad to open up roads and to construct canals. However, Pennsylvania was the first of many states to repudiate their debts. Rev. Sydney Smith wrote of the loss of his life’s savings-- savings "made with difficulty and privation." "The Americans who boast to have improved the institutions of the Old World have at least equaled its crimes. A great nation, after trampling underfoot all earthly tyranny has been guilty of fraud as enormous as ever disgraced the worst king of the most degraded nation of Europe.

In Illinois, however, a convention met at Springfield, and the repudiation ordinance was offered. Every householder would have a vote, and they who were dishonest were willing to vote its passing. It was about to be adopted when Stephen A. Douglas, lying sick in his hotel, asked to be taken to the convention. He was carried on a mattress. Lying on his bed he wrote, "Resolved, that Illinois will be honest although she never pays a cent." It was enthusiastically received, and dealt a deathblow to the system of repudiation. Canal bonds immediately rose. Capital flowed into the state. In a matter of a few years, Illinois became so prosperous that she led every other state in the number of miles of rail.

When a society disregards the Laws of God, God causes them to lose their ability to reason. No sooner had the Panic of 1837 subsided, than Americans revived "wildcat banking" practices. The National Banking Act of 1865 placed a 10 percent tax upon all state bank notes. By 1866, the practice had ended -- for the moment.

* THE ANGELUS is supported by free will offerings. Would the Lord have you help support this work?