I’m on a bit of a prohibition-era research fix. Since I live near Windsor, which is location with a very rich prohibition-era history of its own, this research is infused with a lot of interesting local history.

In my view, government laws prohibiting alcohol were bad

1. because it restricted a legitimate liberty (potential for abuse, no doubt, but still legitimate)
2. it was ineffective – it did not reduce use or abuse of alcohol
3. it mislead people to look to the wrong solution for vices–the government not the gospel
4.  it created an environment that was infested with cartels and violent crime.

Did Prohibition Work?

Before getting to statistics regarding the effectiveness of prohibition, I would like to note that its been demonstrated that the alcohol available during prohibition was of lower quality (and more dangerous) than the alcohol before and after prohibition. Some have placed the difference at around 20%. The death rate from liquor was over 4 times higher in 1925 than it was in 1920 (before prohibition). One researcher also said that “The typical beer, wine, or whiskey contained a higher percentage of alcohol by volume during Prohibition than it did before or after”.

Here is a chart showing the per capita use of alcohol in the U.S. measured in gallons of pure alcohol from 1910-1929. Prohibition was enacted in 1922 and continued past the end of the range of time showed in this chart.

Source: Clark Warburton: The Economic Results of Prohibition (Columbia University Press, 1932)

I think this shows that prohibition really didn’t make any really substantial change to the drinking habits of Americans, especially not after it was around for a few years and people got used to the laws.

Well, one might say, that doesn’t look so bad. But a look at expenditures on distilled spirits ( as a % of total alcohol sales) is far more clear in showing how ineffective prohibition is in stopping the more potent forms of alcohol. It also gives us an idea of how prohibition actually encouraged harder forms of drinking. Evidence shows that the use of beer (as opposed to harder forms of alcohol) declined quite a bit during prohibition. Here is what percentage of alcohol sales were harder spirits:

Source: Clark Warburton: The Economic Results of Prohibition (Columbia University Press, 1932)

But most relevant to this post, is the fact that the murder rate clearly shows that in the prohibition-era there was an increased rate of murders and the repeal of prohibition brought it back to its old rates.

Source: Clark Warburton: The Economic Results of Prohibition (Columbia University Press, 1932)

Homicide rates reached their peak in 1933 (the year of prohibition repeal) and fell dramatically by 1940.  Of course, other factors may have been occurring. But fundamentally prohibition was accompanied by an increase of various types of crime.

I’m sure more extensive statistics could be shown, but this is just a brief look at the general trends.

A Repeatedly Proven Way To End Cartel Violence: Case In Point, The Purple Gang

Street executions are not an invention of Mexican cartels.  They are using, albeit more regularly and effectively, the tactics that alcohol prohibition era gangsters used many years ago. The Purple Gang, a Michigan based gang during the prohibition era, was gruesome. If you crossed them back then, this is what happened to you:

The Purple Gang is said to be behind some 500 or so murders. Hijackings and public executions were a common strategy of theirs. They operated with near immunity from police action.

While the state was supposedly protecting society from alcohol, The Purple Gang flourished and perpetrated its violence. However, as soon as the police stopped arresting people for alcohol related “crimes”, a move which many at the time claimed would be the downfall of society, in actual fact, was a major reason why the Purple Gang lost its steam.

“what really signaled the end of the Purple Gang was the abolition of Prohibition…On April 3, 1933, Michigan became the first state to vote for the repeal of the federal Prohibition law. On April 7, Prohibition was officially over in Michigan. There was no longer any need for bootleggers and whiskey smugglers. The millions of dollars in liquid profits that had made the…thugs one of the most feared and powerful gangs in Detroit’s history dried up overnight.  The Purple Gang’s bloody bootlegging, dynasty had come to an abrupt end.” – Mobsters & Rumrunners of Canada: Crossing the Line by Gord Steinke

Some Conclusions Which Seem Reasonable

1. It is a bit odd to complain about gang violence while simultaneously advocating stricter and stricter measures of prohibition. It has been repeatedly proven (through historical analysis, statistics, and loads of anecdotal evidence) that the more prohibition you have the more gang violence you have. They go almost strictly hand in hand, and history has shown this repeatedly. While they don’t like being given trouble the police, every organized crime boss knows that his business is intimately dependent on the prohibition of the goods he is dealing. However, it seems that when prohibitionistic laws are instituted, it appears that this factor does not enter the analysis. Much attention is paid to the benefit this sort of law “could” bring, while it is ignored that that sort of law has never been show to actually bring that benefit and it also brings the disadvantage of creating a market for dangerous cartels.
2. Not only do illegal things become more “cool” to certain type of people, the more risky it is to distribute and the more scarcity, the more incentive there is to get into the business (and to try to attain a monopoly on it via very violent means). You can see this very vividly illustrated in the Mexican cartel situation.
3. From a Christian worldview, whatever you think of prohibition, you must at the very least acknowledge that prohibition only attempts to reform behavior externally and can’t be a satisfying solution to the problem. Any form of substance abuse is tied to human sinfulness, and while laws are designed to prevent human sinfulness from hurting others, it can’t reform people or eliminate human sinfulness. Until hearts change, people will always be seeking to abuse things. And if you outlaw one thing, they will either find a way to get it illegally or find another thing to abuse that is legal and available. So even supposing alcohol prohibition were necessary (which I would vigorously contest), the “social gospelers” and others who put their hopes in prohibition were totally wrong and off base in their belief that this was the way to transform society. A particularly despicable testimony to this is the quote from Billy Sunday when he bombastically said that because of the institution of prohibition “[t]he reign of tears is over. The slums will soon be a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and corn cribs. Men will walk upright now, women will smile and children will laugh. Hell will be forever for rent.”    Billy Sunday was ignorant not only of the ineffectiveness of prohibition, but also the Biblical teaching about evil not coming from outside towards the inside, but rather from the inside towards the outside. He was ignorant as to what it is that transforms the heart.
4. As a Christian, I maintain that only the Gospel could transform society in a way that eliminates vices. And so, while the state restrains people from crimes, vices are best addressed by the preaching of (and transformation rooted in) the gospel. And so it is dangerous (and self defeating) to put hopes in prohibitionistic laws (even if we were to grant that they should be in place, we should not confuse necessity with effectiveness). One could dispute over the necessity of prohibition (and argue back and forth about the evidence), but it is clear and indisputable that it is ineffective. Only the Gospel is effective. Billy Sunday was dangerously taking that transformations that can only occur by the grace of God and wrongly applying them to a political vote to enact a law.  In the Biblical view, the law of God almighty doesn’t even transform people’s hearts in that way (let alone the law of sinful politicians). No, prohibition didn’t wipe away anyone’s tears (in fact it added many new ones), only the gospel can do that, and even with the gospel, it is not until heaven that the Christian worldview claims all tears will be finally and totally wiped away.
5. While there is a heavy cost to widespread abuse of dangerous things, there is also a heavy cost to turning these potentially dangerous things into scarce commodity by making them illegal. So a relevant question would be: If we know making something illegal is going to have the fairly certain result of X extra murders and Y additional public safety risk (due to cartel activity), at what point would society have to say “enough is enough, maybe making it illegal would help in some ways, but its not worth the extra gang activity”?   Just to put this in concrete terms: if prohibition of alcohol in the 1920′s was geared towards saving the public from the bad affects of alcohol abuse, how many cold-blooded murders related to alcohol-smuggling gangs would have to happen where it gets to the point where any positive societal gain from the law becomes a moot point compared to the societal loss due to the ills of the pronounced presence of violent cartels which make their living off the law?
6. Connected to #5, people making laws about substances should realize that a law will not stop these substances, it will just drive them underground. And they should factor into their thought process an analysis which accounts for the fact that, given that no law will stop the abuse of this substance, how will my making of a law change the nature of the use of the substance and the conditions connected to it. Ignoring this was a major blunder of the prohibition-era law makers. They were so enthralled by the negative effects of alcohol abuse that they forgot that a law would not stop alcohol abuse–it would merely change the ways in which it was used, the ways in which it was distributed, the ways in which it was made. And many of those changes were extremely negative.

I greatly respect John, but I must also respectfully disagree with his emphasis. Now, I have no quibble with those who chose to abstain. It is a noble thing to decide to do so for one reason or another. But, in the Biblical view it is also noble, for those who can, to drink in moderation.

Back in January 2009, I made a series of posts that  thoroughly demonstrated that prohibitionism and mandatory abstention being enforced on others is neither in line with the Scriptures nor the Reformed theological tradition. However, those posts are no longer online. So here I re-post them. Here is part three.

–

Witness Seventeen: Susanna Wesley (1669-1974)

The mother of Charles and John Wesley.

• At dinner their little tables and chairs were set by ours, where they would be overlooked; and they were suffered to eat and drink [small beer] as much as they would (from Charles Wesley: The First Methodist, by Fredrick Gill)

Witness Eighteen: John Gill (1767-1770)

John Gill was a Calvinistic Baptist expositor.

• The wine is another part of this ordinance, and of the matter of it, and one of the outward elements of it, a symbol of the blood of Christ…It is also a question, whether the wine used was mixed or pure; since it was usual with the Jews, whose wines were generous, to mix them, Prov. 9:2. But there is no need to dilute them in our climates; and as the quantity is so small drank at the ordinance, there is no danger of intoxication in those who are least used to it (A Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity; p. 918)

Witness Nineteen: G.I. Williamson

G.I. Williamson is a Reformed theologian, retired pastor, and author

• The result of our survey is this: wine is clearly shown to be an intoxicating drink in the Bible. It is a thing  that man can easily abuse to his own destruction. Yet Scripture says it is also a blessing when it is properly used by those who understand and believe the truth. (from Wine in the Bible & the Church, p15)

Witness Twenty: Charles Wesley (1707-1788)

Charles Wesley was a great hymn author and leader of Methodism.

• Charles  also drank ale (Drinking with Luther and Calvin, Jim West, p102)

Witness Twenty-One: John Elliot (1604-1690)

Puritan missionary to the American Indians

• Wine, ’tis a noble, generous liquor, and we should be humbly thankful for it. (from Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West)

Witness Twenty-Two: Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892)

Charles Spurgeon was a great Baptist preacher and evangelist, known as “the prince of preachers”

Charles Spurgeon was clearly a drinker, so much so that Charles Spurgeon biographer Arnold Dallimore says the following regarding Spurgeon’s drinking:

• I have reported these matters regarding Spurgeon with much reluctance. They seem sadly regrettable in the life of so righteous a man” (from Dallimore’s excellent biography of Spurgeon)

Witness Twenty-Three: Gresham Machen (1881-1937)

Gresham Machen is best known for his fights against liberalism in the early 1900’s.

• When the vote was taken, Machen voted against the Presbytery’s resolution. As a result of his dissent, Machen was pilloried by his liberal enemies as both “loose” and sympathetic toward drunkenness. (Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p114)

Witness Twenty-Four: Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987)

Cornelius Van Til was a Reformed theologian, philosopher, and apologist.

• Rousas J. Rushdoony reports that he and Dr. Cornelius Van Till would meet to discuss theology and philosophy over beer (Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p114)

Witness Twenty-Five: The Scottish Book of Discipline (1566)

• “breid and wyne aucht to be thair” (speaking of the Lord’s supper)

Witness Twenty-Six: The Geneva Bible (1599)

• We drink well when we drink to the glory of God and when our drinking does not exceed the limits of moderation (notes in the Geneva Bible for John 2:10)

Witness Twenty-Seven: D.A. Carson

D.A. Carson is a noted Canadian New Testament scholar.

• The wine was not grape juice, though it was customary to cut the wine with a double or triple quantity of water (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 1984)

Witness Twenty-Eight: Cyprian (200-258AD)

Cyprian was the bishop of Carthrage and a profilic writer.

• But when the blood of grapes is mentioned, what else is shewn than the wine of the Cup of the Blood of the Lord? (The Epistles of St. Cyprian; Epistle 63.4)

Witness Twenty Nine: Philip Schaff (1819-1893)

Philip Schaeff is a noted Protestant Christian History.

• The expression the “fruit of the vine” is employed by our Savior in the synoptical Gospels to denote the element contained in the cup of the Holy Supper. The fruit of the vine is literally the grape. But the Jews from time immemorial have used this phrase to designate the wine partaken of on sacred occasions, as at the Passover and on the evening of the Sabbath. The Mishna (De. Bened, cap. 6, pars I) expressly states, that, in pronouncing blessings, “the fruit of the vine” is the consecrated expression for yayin… The Christian Fathers, as well as the Jewish rabbis, have understood “the fruit of the vine” to mean wine in the proper sense. Our Lord, in instituting the Supper after the Passover, availed himself of the expression invariably employed by his countrymen in speaking of the wine of the Passover. On other occasions, when employing the language of common life, he calls wine by its ordinary name (A Religious Encyclopedia of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal and Practical Theology, 1887., p.2537-2538)

Witness Thirty: George Whitefield (1714-1770)

George Whitefield was a famous preacher and evangelist.

• Give my thanks to that friendly brewer for the keg of rum he sent us. (from one of his letters, Drinking With Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p106))

Witness Thirty-One: Charles Hodge (1797-1878)

Charles Hodge was a great theologian and principal of Princeton.

• The wine of the Bible was a manufactured article. It was not the juice of the grape as it exists in the fruit, but that juice submitted to such a process of fermentation as secured its preservation and gave it the qualities ascribed to it in Scripture. That oinos in the Bible when unqualified by such terms as new, or sweet, means the fermented juice of the grape, is hardly an open question. It has never been questioned in the Church, if we except a few Christians of the present day (Systematic Theology, Vol3, p616)

Witness Thirty-Two: London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689)

• The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine

(Chap.30,sect.3)

Witness Thirty-Three: Westminster Confession of Faith (1647)

• The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed His ministers to declare His word of institution to the people; to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine(29:3)

Witness Thirty-Four: Southern Baptist Abstract of Principles (1859)

• The Lord’s Supper is an ordinance of Jesus Christ to be administered with the elements of bread and wine, and to be observed by His churches till the end of the world

Witness Thirty-Five: A.A. Hodge (1823 – 1886)

A.A. Hodge was a theologian and Princeton principal.

• It is evident from the usage of this word in the New Testament that it was designed by the sacred writers to designate the fermented juice of the grape – Matt. 9:17; John 2:3-10; Rom. 14:21; Eph. 5:18; 1 Tim. 3:8; 5:23; Titus 2:3. This is established by the unanimous testimony of all competent scholars and missionary residents in the East… That wine and no other liquid is to be used is clear from the record of the institution, Matt. 26:26-29, and from the usage of the apostles

(Outlines of Theology, p633-634)

Witness Thirty-Six: William W. Stevens

William W. Stevens is a Southern Baptist theologian.

• The bread used by Jesus was doubtless the unleavened bread of the Passover meal, as the wine he used was doubtless the fermented juice of the grape (Doctrines of the Christian Religion, 1967, p. 344)

Witness Thirty-Seven: Philipp Melanchton (1497-1560)

Philipp Melanchton was a German professor and theologian. He was Luther’s successor.

• ..was his custom to have a glass of wine before retiring..before his death..was given soup made from Hamburg beer (Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p45)

Witness Thirty-Eight: Cotton Mather (1663-1728)

Cotton Mather was a puritan minister.

• It is an honest and a lawful, though it may not be a very desirable employment, that you have undertaken: you may glorify God in your employment, if you will, and benefit the town considerably. (Here Cotton is speaking of the owner of an ale house, Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p95)

Witness Thirty-Nine: Thomas Shepherd (1605-1649)

I greatly respect John, but I must also respectfully disagree with his emphasis. Now, I have no quibble with those who chose to abstain. It is a noble thing to decide to do so for one reason or another. But, in the Biblical view it is also noble, for those who can, to drink in moderation.

Back in January 2009, I made a series of posts that  thoroughly demonstrated that prohibitionism and mandatory abstention being enforced on others is neither in line with the Scriptures nor the Reformed theological tradition. However, those posts are no longer online. So here I re-post them. Here is part two.

–

Witness One: John Chrysostom (347-407 AD)

John Chrysostom was the archbishop of Constantinople, and perhaps one of the most eloquent preachers.

• wine is the work of God, but drunkenness is the work of the devil. Wine makes not drunkenness; but intemperance produces it. Do not accuse that which is the workmanship of God, but accuse the madness of a fellow mortal (from First Homily on the Statutes)

Witness Two: Justin Martyr (100-165AD)

Justin Martyr was an early Christian apologist.

• “There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he, taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at his hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying ‘Amen.’ This word ‘Amen’ is the Hebrew for ‘so be it.’ And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those of us who are called deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and the wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion” (The First Apology; 65)

Witness Three: John Calvin (1509-1564)

John Calvin was a great French/Swiss Protestant reformer, and an excellent Bible expositor.

• We are nowhere forbidden to laugh, or to be satisfied with food…or to be delighted with music, or to drink wine (from Institutes of Christian Religion)

• Nature would certainly be satisfied with water to drink; and therefore the addition of wine is owing to God’s superabundant liberality…we gather from his words that it is lawful to use wine not only in cases of necessity, but also thereby to make us merry. This mirth must however be tempered with sobriety, first, that men may not forget themselves, drown their senses, and destroy their strength, but rejoice before their God (from John Calvin’s commentary on Psalm 104:15)

• Calvin so enjoyed God’s wine that he was given barrels for a sallary allowance!..”the substantial annual salary of 500 florins, together with twelve measures of wheat and two bassets (perhaps 250 gallons) of wine” (from Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p53)

Witness Four: Clement of Alexandria (150-215AD)

Clement was a distinguished teacher and church member in Alexandria.

• The Scripture, accordingly, has named wine the symbol of the sacred blood (The Instructor; Book II, ch. II)

Witness Five: Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Martin Luther was a great German theologian known for being the “father of protestantism”.

• “Do you suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused? Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women? The sun, the moon, and the stars have been worshipped. Shall we then pluck them out of the sky?

• “while I sat still and drank beer with Phillip and Amsdorf, God dealt the papacy a might blow”

Witness Six: William Farel (1489-1565)

William Farel was a great French evangelist.

• When William Farel was in Switzerland, a Catholic friarappeared at Aigle against him to beg in behalf of his convent some barrels of what the Church historian Merle D’ Aubigne calls “the most exquisite wine in all Switzerland.” (Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p68)

Witness Seven:John Murray (1898-1975)

John Murray was a Scottish theologian and preacher, who helped to found Westminster Theological Seminary.

• On one occasion, Westminster Professor John Murray attended a conference of ministers..and debated a Dr. Clarence Bounma who argued that demon alcohol was mastering, if not killing, thousands. Murray countered that abstinence was a lawful choice, but that moderation was also a lawful choice. When the discussion ended, the aggressive Dutchman determined to test Murray’s sincerity. Would he then and now receive a glass of wine or whiskey?  The purpose may have been to pin down and embarass the great exegete. Murray’s poker-faced answer is classic: “Yes, if it’s good stuff”. Van Til reported that the audience howled, but that “John blinked nary an eye”. (Drinking with Calvin and Luther, Jim West, p115)

Witness Eight: Increase Mather (1639-1723)

Increase Mather was an early American Puritan minister, and the father of Cotton Mather.

• Drink is in itself a good creature of God, and to be received with thankfulness, but the abuse of drink is from Satan; the wine is from God, but the drunkard is from the Devil.(In Woe to Drunkards – 1673)

Witness Nine: Richard Baxter (1615-1691)

Richard Baxter was a Puritan leader and writer, perhaps best know for writing “The Saints Everlasting Rest” and “Reformed Pastor”. He’s known as “the chief of English Protestant Schoolmen”

•  “beer as hot as my throat will endure, drunk all at once, to make me sweat” (Baxter commenting on one of his remedies, from Reliquiae Baxterinae)

Witness Ten: Hugh Latimer (1485-1555)

Hugh Latimer was one of the best known English Protestant martyrs.

• Hugh Latimer had a goblet of spiced ale with his supper before he was burned alive (From The Secret Life of Beer, Alan D. Eames)

Witness Eleven: Mark Driscoll

Mark Driscoll is the pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church.

• Historically, God’s people have greatly enjoyed alcohol. In the European world one of the most Christian drinks was beer. (Mark Driscoll on Mars Hill Bible Churce’s Website)

Witness Twelve: Abraham Kuyper (1509-1564)

Abraham Kuyper was a great dutch Reformed theologian. He is most well-known for developing the idea of “common grace” within the Reformed world-view.

• Uilenspiegel, rarely proper, says of banqueting that the Reformed are not the sort to water down their wine. That’s true. From the chocolate kettle and the milk and water bottle arises no race of bold Calvinists.” (Quoted in J. de Bruijin, Abraham Kuyper: leven en werk in beeld)

Witness Thirteen: Ken Gentry

Ken Gentry is a Reformed theologian, best known for his views on theonomy and eschatology.

• It would seem abundantly clear, then, that the Scriptures do allow the moderate partaking of alcoholic beverages. There is no hesitancy in Scripture in commending wine, or embarrassment in portraying its consumption among the righteous of Biblical days. Wine is set before the saints as blessing and gladness (from an article by Ken Gentry)

Witness Fourteen: Gerhard Kittel (1888-1948)

Gerhard Kittel was the editor of the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.

• It is obvious … that according to custom Jesus was proffering wine in the cup over which He pronounced the blessing; this may be seen especially from the solemn genema tes ampelou [fruit of the vine] … which was borrowed from Judaism (from Vol. V, p. 164)

Witness Fifteen: Leon Morris (1914-2006)

Leon Morris was a widely respected New Testament scholar

• Jesus took a cup, and though Matthew does not mention the contents specifically … the meaning is a cup containing wine (From The Gospel of Matthew, 1992, p.660)

Witness Sixteen: William Hendrikson

William Hendrikson..

• By speaking of ‘the fruit of the vine’ Jesus undoubtedly refers to wine. Note close relation between ‘vine’ and ‘wine’ in Isa. 24:7. See also Num. 6:4; Hab. 3:17. At this time of the year (April), and under conditions then prevailing in Judea, it is hard to think of anything but fermented grape juice, that is, wine, the kind of wine used at Passover; hence, diluted or paschal wine (The Gospel of Matthew, 1973, p.991)

I greatly respect John, but I must also respectfully disagree with his emphasis. Now, I have no quibble with those who chose to abstain. It is a noble thing to decide to do so for one reason or another. But, in the Biblical view it is also noble, for those who can, to drink in moderation.

Back in January 2009, I made a series of posts that  thoroughly demonstrated that prohibitionism and mandatory abstention being enforced on others is neither in line with the Scriptures nor the Reformed theological tradition. However, those posts are no longer online. So here I re-post them. Here is part one.

–

Witness One: The LORD

• “..you shall offer for the drink offering half a hin of wine, as a food offering, a pleasing aroma to the Lord” (The LORD to Moses in Numbers 15:10, ESV)

• “But the vine said to them, “Shall I leave my new wine, which cheers  God and men, and go to wave over the trees?” (Judges 9:13, ESV)

• “Behold the days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when the plowman will overtake the reaper and the treader of grapes him who sows seed; when the mountains will drip sweet wine, and all the hills will be dissolved. Also I will restore the captivity of my people Israel, and they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them, they will also plant vineyards and drink their wine, and make gardens and eat their fruit” (The LORD in Amos 9:13-14)

Witness Two: Melchizidek (and Abraham by implication)

• And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine (Moses in Genesis 14:18, ESV)

Witness Three: Isaac

• May God give you of the dew of heaven and of the fatness of the earth and plenty of grain and wine. (Isaac to his son Jacob, Genesis 27:28, ESV)

Witness Four: Moses

• and spend the money for whatever you desire—oxen or sheep or wine or strong drink (Moses in Deuteronomy 14:26, ESV)

• …you drank foaming wine made from the blood of the grape (The Song of Moses, enumerating God’s blessings towards Israel, Deuteronomy 32:14, ESV)

• He will love you, bless you, and multiply you. He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground, your grain and your wine and your oil, the increase of your herds and the young of your flock, in the land that he swore to your fathers to give you. (Deuternomy 7:13, ESV)

• But if you will not obey the voice of the Lord your God or be careful to do all his commandments and his statutes that I command you today, then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you….You shall plant vineyards and dress them, but you shall neither drink of the wine nor gather the grapes, for the worm shall eat them. (Moses describing the absence of wine as a curse, Deuteronomy 28:15-39, ESV)

Witness Five: Ruth and Boaz

• Come here and eat some bread and dip your morsel in the wine (Boaz to Ruth in Ruth 2:14, ESV)

Witness Six: King David

• And they were there with David for three days, eating and drinking, for their brothers had made preparation for them. And also their relatives, from as far as Issachar and Zebulun and Naphtali, came bringing food on donkeys and on camels and on mules and on oxen, abundant provisions of flour, cakes of figs, clusters of raisins, and wine and oil, oxen and sheep, for there was joy in Israel. (I Chronicals 12:39-40, ESV)

• You cause the grass to grow for the livestock and plants for man to cultivate, that he may bring forth food from the earth and wine to gladden the heart of man, oil to make his face shine and bread to strengthen man’s heart. (Psalm 104:14-15, ESV)

Witness Seven: King Solomon

• Honor the Lord from your wealth, and from the first of all your produce; so your barns will be filled with plenty, and your vats will overflow with new wine (Solomon in Proverbs 3:9-10)

• Give strong drink to the one who is perishing, and wine to those in bitter distress (Solomon in Proverbs 31:6, ESV)

• Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do (Ecclesiastes 9:7, ESV)

• Bread is made for laughter, and wine gladdens life (Ecclesiastes 10:19, ESV)

Witness Eight: Isaiah

• On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine, of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined. And he will swallow up on this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken. (Isaiah’s description of the new heaven and new earth, Isaiah 25:6, ESV)

Witness Nine: Nehemiah

• And Nehemiah, who was the governor, and Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people, “This day is holy to the Lord your God; do not mourn or weep.” For all the people wept as they heard the words of the Law.  Then he said to them, “Go your way. Eat the fat and drink sweet wine and send portions to anyone who has nothing ready, for this day is holy to our Lord. And do not be grieved, for the joy of the Lord is your strength. (Nehemiah 8:9-10, ESV)

Witness Ten: Jesus Christ, Son of God

• For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’  The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!” (Jesus Christ in Luke 7:33-34, ESV)

• Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now (The master of the feast to Jesus Christ in John 2:10, ESV)

• Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” (A narrative from Matthew 26:26-29, ESV)

Witness Eleven: Apostle Paul

• No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments (Apostle Paul to Timothy, a Christian elder, I Timothy 5:23, ESV)

• The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (Apostle Paul to the Corinthians in I Corinthians 10:16, ESV)

Witness Twelve: Apostle Peter

• witnesses, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead (A speech by Peter, Acts 10:41, ESV)

In the next part, we will look at references from church history after the Biblical period.

This ordination feast consisted of all kinds of New England fare, all the mysterious compounds and concoctions of Indian corn and “pompions,” all sorts of roast meats, “turces” cooked in various ways, gingerbread and “cacks,” and–an inevitable feature at the time of every gathering of people, from a corn-husking or apple-bee to a funeral–a liberal amount of cider, punch, and grog was also supplied, which latter compound beverages were often mixed on the meeting-house green or even in punch-bowls on the very door-steps of the church. Beer, too, was specially brewed to honor the feast. Rev. Mr. Thatcher, of Boston, wrote in his diary on the twentieth of May, 1681, “This daye the Ordination Beare was brewed.” Portable bars were sometimes established at the church-door, and strong drinks were distributed free of charge to the entire assemblage.

– from The Sabbath in Puritan New England by Alice Morse Earle

“The enduring image of Calvin as an unyielding, moralistic and stone-faced tyrant who rejected all the pleasures of life has been his opponents greatest victory…which casts him to look like some forgotten figure of Middle Earth. His sermons reveal a man whose attitudes towards material things were far more interesting and textured than his reputation suggests. The fruits of the world, according to Calvin, are not simply for substinence, but rather to be enjoyed: good wine, good food, conversation, friendship, the pleasures of children and of marital relations. He was fond of wine and, indeed, when the nobleman Jaques de Bourgogne was preparing to come to Geneva Calvin purchased a barrel of fine wine for him in anticipation of his arrival. The drinking of a glass of wine was, for him, associated with the most pleasurable things of life – laughing with friends, sharing a meal with intimates, music, and art. Naturally, he preached against gross consumption of worldly goods and immodesty; his own sense of style, however, allowed him ot admire clean lines and simplicity. He liked what was tasteful. In his correspondence he could let drop a line that indicated an eye for beautiful buildings and a well-dressed woman. His painted portraits reveal his modest yet evident elegance – a good-quality cloak or gown with fur collar, nothing ostentatious or extravagant. The fine things of life point to a gracious God. Through the eyes of faith the elect enjoy these things not as momentary pleasures but as the revelation of God’s love. The Christian life is not just about suffering, though there was enough of that…The wonders of creation and the joys of life, when viewed through the lens of faith, sustain and nourish the pilgrim through the journey.”

– Bruce Gordon in Calvin, p.147

All the cider made by the New England elders did not tend to gloom, and they were celebrated for their fine cider. The best cider in Massachusetts–that which brought the highest price–was known as the Arminian cider, because the minister who furnished it to the market was suspected of having Arminian tendencies.

– from The Sabbath in Puritan New England by Alice Morse Earle

A very telling compliment to the cider of one of the first New England ministers is thus recorded: “Mr. Whiting had a score of appill-trees from which he made delicious cyder. And it hath been said yt an Indyan once coming to hys house and Mistress Whiting giving him a drink of ye cyder, he did sett down ye pot and smaking his lips say yt Adam and Eve were rightlie damned for eating ye appills in ye garden of Eden, they should have made them into cyder.”

– also from The Sabbath in Puritan New England by Alice Morse Earle

one honest soul did not hesitate to thank the Lord in the pulpit for the “many barrels of cider vouchsafed to us this year.”

– also from The Sabbath in Puritan New England by Alice Morse Earle

“There was a law that existed at that time that you couldn’t have a drink unless you had traveled five miles and so my case officer, being a true Scotsman, interpreted the law that you had to stop and have a drink every five miles. The last few miles of that journey to Edinburgh was probably the most dangerous time I had in the whole world war.”

– W.W.II double agent Dushko Popov, quoted in Codename Tricycle, p.60