Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 4

Increase Mather is quoted: “Drink is in itself a good creature of God… the abuse of drink is from Satan”; how should Christians evaluate a statement like that when the “good creature” was mass-produced to fuel alcoholism in Africa and fund the slave trade—what does this expose about how we separate “personal moderation” from the social consequences of an industry?

Another way to ask: How should Christians judge the claim that alcohol is “good,” and only its “abuse” is evil, if the whole industry helped cause alcoholism and paid for slavery? What does this show about separating personal choices from the harm an industry causes?

Direct Answer The transcript suggests that even a “moderation” theology can become a cover for evil when it ignores what an industry is actually doing to people; separating private use from public impact can dull moral responsibility.

Support from Transcript:

Bercot says many conservative Christians are surprised the Puritans “approved of drinking alcoholic beverages in moderation.”
Increase Mather’s quote frames drink as “a good creature of God,” while “the abuse… is from Satan.”
Yet Bercot shows New England produced “millions of gallons” of cheap rum and shipped “most New England rum… to Africa.”
He states this rum “contributed to severe alcoholism throughout that continent,” connecting the product to widespread harm.
The rum was then “traded for slaves,” meaning the “good creature” was part of a machine that financed human trafficking.

Discussion Follow-ups What kinds of moral reasoning let Christians feel personally innocent while participating in systems that cause large-scale damage?

Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 4 of 10