₦airaland Forum

The edos call Yam- iyan. could possibly have come from there

[quote author=tpia. link=topic=341625.msg4782302#msg4782302 date=1256245844]do you guys welcome visitors abi na tiwantiwa

The Irunmole- is it a forest? (Igbo Irunmole)[/quote]Irunmole is not the forest they are the 'spirits of the forest'.

Igbo Irunmole as ably translated by the 'kongi Lion himself' wole soyinka is the 'forest of a thousand demons'.

Ife is the cradle of the yoruba race and therefore it jealously guards that heritage.

Hello guys,

Am from Igueben and my mom is from Ekpoma. In my mom's dialect

Pepper is Esin, i dont know if we have a different word for tomato.
Door is Ukhuede in Ekpoma and Ode in Benin/igueben. I cant remember the word for window

@viaro

We could go on and on and on, but as i said earlier a lot of it would be trying to split the hair, but this is a summary of my idea on it.

People can tithe voluntarily or give voluntary, no percentage is binding except you decide to make it a vow for yourself. I dont think people you call 'anti-tithers' would argue against this.

Most Christians still believe still teach and believe that Tithes are Binding on Christians (I just did a quick survey in the office, 5 out of 5 said it was binding, of course in a bigger sampling, there would be others who would say no but they would still be in a smaller %).

When we talk in broad terms, its because we want to talk about what is generally prevailing around us and it does not mean everyone is doing it. There are a lot of verses where the Bible condemn the nation of Israel and in fact prophesied doom on them for their unfaithfulness, but it is on records that there were sincere believers at any given time amongst the people. Jesus called the people a faithless generation, but what about hundreds of others doing that generation who demonstrated a outstanding faith. So my railing against institutionalized corruption (not really about individuals who enrich themselves, but a church system that allows and condones it) in the church is not with a failure to recognize those few who are not involved.

The pentecostal churches have even become worse. Those ones don't go to extremes to collect money from you, But they use hynotism and psychology to prompt people to give all they have to God, claiming if you want God to bless you massively you have to donate massively. They preach financial freedom and tell you if you serve God, you cant be poor financially, your business cant go bad, that is an outright lie and a heresy. They tell you God is not a God of thousand nairas but of millions and billions.
They shamefully display their siphoned wealth and tell you, they bought their suits in designer shops, their shoes are specially made, one said God has blessed him so much, he does not wear a shirt twice.

when you consider all these with their grandiose reverential titles which they wear like a toga, you would want to throw up.

viaro:
Second, my discussions have never been based on making anything "binding" on anyone. People who promote an anti-tithing argument on the basis of whether it is 'binding' or not are simply wasting their time. Nobody made it "binding" upon Abraham in the first place; so why do people often resort to this mistake every time in discussing the topic?

Anti-tithers have always been argueing the binding issue because the church has preached that it is binding on us for centuries and they are still preaching it. Some churches have rosters where they tick those who have paid their tithes and those who have not. Marriages and burials have been refused to a lot of people in the east because their parents were owing tithes, the kids have to pay or the church would not officiate, use the church hall nor the church cemetary until the kids pay what is owed the church, all this on a lie that the tithe is binding not just on the dead parents but on their children (what nonsense). The catholic church has confiscated people's properties for reneging to pay a ten percent, they evaluate the estates of nobles/rich men etc and determine the tithe for them which becomes binding or else you lose much more when the might of the church descends on you.

So it is not a mistake, it is an attempt to correct wrong teachings.

viaro:
There were no store houses commanded by the Law of Moses to be built for tithes. The store houses was not part of the Mosaic Law; but several anti-tithing theologians miss that point and miscalculate other arguments against Malachi 3.

Like i said in my earlier post, there was little in the wilderness for the Israelites to store, they had little to tithe, definitely not manna. When they became prosperous in the promise land, it became necessary to build stores.

The mosaic did not have to tell them to build stores, common sense would tell them to do so, the law acknowleges that the tithes be collected, so  where it is collected, whether jars, barns, sacks, rooms or storehouses is of little consequence, it does not have to be pointedly stated.

Just by the way, am a guy. So you wont have to spend extra time typing he/she, lol

I only oppose those who say tithing is compulsory for Christians, who teach that as if it is a duty they must perform. If anyone decides to voluntarily donate tenth part of his whatever to God, let him do that of his own volition. Not because he sees it as an obligation.

And honestly that is what most christians believe, because their Pastors did not tell them the truth? They have an Obligation to teach the truth, even if it would affect their purse.

If you agree with what i said above, then all else would just be straining the gnat and splitting the hair.

regards

It is true that by virtue of conquering a people, the conqueror can lay claim of what is conquered.

But by virtue of Abraham's statements himself, he did not see the goods as spoils that are worthy of him, he saw them properties that were recovered back for the King of Sodom. They were taken by force from him from the invasion and most of what was recovered were still from Sodom, except for the provisions which the invading army brought with them, which would most likely have been depleted.

So Abraham did not see them as something he could take, or own even if he could lay a claim to them.

The British took artifacts by way of conquer from here, but the Benin people still wants them back, and the British could not dare say, it is rightfully theirs, their argument is that, we cant provide security for them.

So i still say they were not his own. He only went to war to recover those spoils to those who it originally belongs.

naijaking1:
Sanusi's background as an "Islamic scholar" is the only putative reason for not only his falsely puritan approach to banking reformation in Nigeria, but the main reason why he can't even wait for the accussed CEOs to be tried and convicted before taking them to the shooting range to be executed.

For someone that ask us all to shut up and wait for the courts to decide, have you not also decided that Sanusi is wrong, that he has committed a wrong in the way he went about the way show, are you not aware that the cases are also in court.

Guy don't pretend as if you are the only homosapien around and the rest of us are just jungle monkeys,have you waited for the court o decide before you jump ship, is justice always served in courts especially in Nigeria, have you heard about the syndicate that releases prisoners enroute to the prison.

Are you a shrink and even if you are how can you be so sure that islamic scholarship is the ONLY reason why he took those steps, and even if it is, who cares, Obama was almost thrown out because of 'islamic' reasons.

Those who lynch thieves routinely in Lagos must surely be doing this solely because of islamic reasons.

Guy, go sit don somewhere, and wait for the courts (like say den no fit do magomago, am not saying they will), and let people express their feelings.

Am personally aware of some of these shady deals by a relative of a CEO, and don't ask for documents cause i don't have them.

Giving of a tenth-part otherwise known as tithing has been on before the time of Abraham, it was an akkadian/sumerian custom, which can be exacted by the King and often times is given to demon gods.

Now the tithe given by Abraham was voluntary (which is not the case with the israelites), it was not agricultural in fact it included humans, it was spoils of war (which is not a tithe in Israel, in fact they were to devote most spoils of war to destruction). Then they were not even Abrahams own, he did not keep any part to himself, he gave tenth-part to King MZK, and the remaining he gave back to the King of Sodom, He pointedly said the spoils were not his.

(Genesis 14:21-24) 21 After that the king of Sod′om said to A′bram: “Give me the souls, but take the goods for yourself.” 22 At this A′bram said to the king of Sod′om: “I do lift up my hand [in an oath] to Jehovah the Most High God, Producer of heaven and earth, 23 that, from a thread to a sandal lace, no, I shall take nothing from anything that is yours, in order that you may not say, ‘It was I who made A′bram rich.’ 24 Nothing for me! Only what the young men have already eaten, and the share of the men who went with me, A′ner, Esh′col and Mam′re—let them take their share.”

So Abraham did not give a tenth of his belongings or earnings to MZK but rather out of what was anothers (mind you this is the only reference to of Abraham giving any tithe), and he did keep any nine parts for himself. Can we not then infer from what is written in the scriptures that Abraham gives to God out of his personal belongings whatever his heart moves him to give (voluntary Giving).

(Gen 28:20-22)In the case of Isaac, he gave a condition for giving God the tenth-part, he said 'if' God did ABC, then he would give a tenth part of evrything to God, that is definitely not a precursor or an antecedent to the Israelite Tithes, the israelites don't give a tithe of everything, also there was no 'if' condition for the Israelites.
In fact for the first 40 years of their existence as a nation, the Israelites could give no tithe, because they had next to nothing, all they had was manner, they did very little farming, and the levites do not have to be sustained by tithes because they were all fed manner and meat by God and their clothes did not wear out. So the tithing arrangement really came into full application when they got to the promise land.

The Israelites had a lot of Gold when they just got out of Israel, but this was not tithed, rather when the tabernacle was to be built, moses asked them to give voluntarily and they did until it was too much and Moses had to stop them. Instead of tithing the gold which they had or could acquire, it was actually the farm produce which they did not have in abundance in the wilderness that was tithe.

Hired hands, labourers or slaves who earn money do not pay tithes, because tithes were on farm produce, rather they would give voluntarily to the temple any % their hearts moved them to give. So the tithing of income today cannot even be derived from the mosaic law, income earnings were never tithed.

Tithes were never deemed to be too much, if there were surplus, they were stored in store houses built specifically for such purpose.

Well i guess i did not bother to go thru all your arguments and i dont know where you are argueing from.

Now this is what i am saying maybe we can start from there.

The thithing law was strictly an israelite thing which was part of the constitution of the Israelites and therefore a duty for them to keep and when they renege from keeping the law Nehemiah castigated them for neglecting their duties, Malachi said they were robbing God for not paying their tithes. This paying of a fixed amount, a tenth part of their agricultural produce was meant to keep the levites and priests who had to be cared for during their service at the temple. Then there is another tithe which they share with levites, widows, and orphans, which everybody joins in eating. These arrangements of fixed payment or tithing were for an Israelite setup and should not be extended to our time.

An individual can choose to pay a tenth of his salary to God, or 5% or 50%, that should be a voluntary contribution and cannot be enforced and should not even be called a tithe but rather free-giving. Tithes were strictly for agricultural produce of the Israelites and was enforced by the Law. It would be gross negligence if an Israelite refuse to pay his tithe.

The tenth-part given by Abraham and the one offered by Isaac were not the same with the one prescribed by the law.
You said it was incorporated into the law, from where was it incorporated into the law and how is this binding on Christians. Let me know your viewpoint, so we can see where our thots converge or diverge and then we can pick it from there.


Cheers

well i

viaro:
Allow me to highlight the several mistakes anti-tithers make:

(1) somehow I anticipated that you would not find any verse that states that Christians are asked to stop tithing. Although some may argue otherwise, any sane and careful study would show there is not a single verse where it was ever 'stated' that people should stop tithing.

(2) the Law did not originate, but rather incorporated, tithing. Therefore, to argue the "purpose" of tithing from the mosaic Law is skewed, because it ignores what was revealed before the Law.

(3) tithing in the whole Bible is not taught everywhere as an "obligation". To often draw in this sentimentality about "obligation" would necessitate the question I asked earlier: 'what type of giving is a "Christian obligation"?' One does not have to see our giving as "obligatory" before we can discern the anti-tithing argument is a farce.

I like the way you put that statement across. Abuses are not the reason why tithing is irrelevant or heretical or whatever anti-tithers make of it. Indeed, we have noted the abuses on several counts; but it is undeniable that even if tithes were never mentioned once in the Bible, abusers would always find means and ways to carry on their adventures. One should not therefore be "annoyed" by tithing itself simply because some people have abused its spiritual meaning - it would be the same thing as being "annoyed" at the Name of Christ because people have abused the glory of that Name and enriched themselves thereby.

Lol, I like your 'salted' to be 'oiled' expression; and it would be great to see if you have anything fresh to quote that we have not seen, read, argued, and retired. Enjoy.

There are no laws that says Christians should not travel to the temple in Jerusalem three times in a year to worship, there are no laws that states Christians should stop paying the temple tax (exo 30: 11-16, 2Cor:6-10), there is no law that says when Christians touch a dead body they should not remain unclean for 3 or 7 days, there is no law that says Christians should stop putting fringes at the edge of their garments, there is no law that says we should not have city of refuge for unintentional manslayers, i could go on for ages. The Big question is why did we stop?

Did law clearly originated tithing to God, it was never a religious obligation before the coming of the mosaic law. Please furnish me with examples that are Pre-moses.

Well where are those places where it is not an obligation and let us discuss them together. I know there are different forms of tithes, but give such examples so the 'oiling' can begin.

cheers.

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=307798.msg4803985#msg4803985 date=1256576002]Who says? show me where it was stated in the bible

Ok so is that the reason why you say it is not relevant?

what scriptures Sir?[/quote]It does not have to be stated, but looking at all references, looking at the purpose for which tithing was instituted and also the fact that we are clearly no longer under the mosaic law, which was a constitution for the physical nation of Israel, then it could be clearly discerned that it is not a Christian Obligation.

Pastors abusing it is not the reason why it is not relevant, the fact that joyfully revel in collecting (with so much force) what is not obligatory and become shamefully enriched by it, makes it annoying and worthy of mention.

I would start quoting scriptures when the conversation is well salted enough to be oiled.

Regards

Hello guys, i just discovered this post, but this thread is so cranked up, that am scared to join. Well in answer to the question in thread, I say Tithing is not new testamental.

It has no place in the christian congregation and more so it has been serially abused by dubious pastors, but going strictly by the scriptures, tithing is not part of christian obligation.

I think a lot of Nigerians and Nairalanders are sufferring from a form of stockholm syndrome.

When Tafa Balogun was arrested, people were screaming he was manhandled, he should not have been hand-cuffed etc, do you know how many millions of Nigerians are manhandled and summarily shot everyday by the police, how many people were manhandled so that Tafa can amass his wealth. Nobody screamed rule of law and all those trash for the poor masses, the rich could not be rough handled because they have the power to shield themselves, now when they are getting a little bit of such treatment for blatant robbery, the poor nairalanders, my colleagues at work, and people who cant even buy papers at the newspaper stands are screaming foul play.

Ribadu was arresting thieves and fraudsters in political garbs, a lot of defrauded Nigerians, whose future has been mortgaged by these same politicians were saying he is arresting Obasanjo's enemies, and so what, i dont care, if you are guilty, you are guilty.

Now Sanusi said they should be shot, should he have said it NO, why? because people like some of us here who have a chance to come after him. The only reason why political office holders and the likes don't give vent to their emotions while talking even when they are right is because people would have a chance to attack them. So its not the statement, that is mostly wrong, but its the vultures that are waiting to pounce that make people talk in cheek.

These thieving CEOs, jack up their banks shares with people like Ololo (am sure sanusi did not invent him, he is real and he virtually manipulated the Nation's SEC), make us invest all our lives savings on their dubious public offers, delay the Shares certificate indefinitely, so that they can reap all the gains and then crash the market leaving us with crumbs. Millions of Nigerians were ruined, a lot have committed suicides.

A lot of Nigerians have been lynched for far less, so let us not scream as if we are strangers to jungle justice, if a thief have murdered your wife and raped all your daughters, you would probably clap if he is lynched, or get some form of relief, either wrongly or not, its just human nature.

So if this is an outburst from Sanusi out of anger, then it should not cause too much drama.

The bastards deserve whatever they get, if the constitution says they should be shot, or if an angry investor get a chance to lynch one of them, am not gonna cry nor will i miss them.

9jaganja:
Did you have to put "Yoruba Muslims" in the heading? Damn!!!! Yourbas are going no where. We've lost all good things to religion. Retards.
Yorubas are not Muslims our founding fathers weren't Muslims and they didn't come from Saudi Barbaria. Our ancestors were farmers, Logicians, Metallurgists, sculpturists, stone masons and inventors. Not some Quran thumbing, Turban wearing, allah screaming mofos!!!! Just change the thread name to The lost Yoruba tribe of sierra Leone. Whether they are Muslims or Christians, they are Yorubas first. I didn't even read the article cause the Heading was annoying.

Guy why u dey vex reach like this, this people were stating their uniqueness in a culture were they are possibly minorities, the fact that they are mostly muslims and also descendants of yoruba slaves. By the time they got to SL, their fathers were still farmers, logicians, sculturists and also muslims. So wetin dey vex u.

Ttalks,

Thanks is good to know there are others following this discussion with an open mind.

Image123:
And you did praise the corinthians. For heaven's sake,you said the corinthians were CLEAR EXAMPLES.(What is praise? To admire,complement).

Well, i have shared my thoughts on this topic and anyone who read thru my posts would know i was not encouraging drunkeness in anyway. From the onset we have repeatedly said that drunkenness, alcoholism, tarrying a long time with wine are sins the Bible condemned. the issue we have been flogging is and which is the question raised is that whther taking alcohol in whatever form is a sin. I still say NO.

Image123, this is my post about the corinthians below:

1 Corinthians 11:20-22 (English Standard Version)
20When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. 21For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry,(A) another gets drunk. 22What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise(B) the church of God and(C) humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.

why did paul say this if people were not getting drink at the passover, he said they have houses were they can indulge in eating and drinking if they want, why defile the house of God. This is clear example that the wine used for passover can intoxicate, paul did not condemn the wine or the type of wine but the attitude, the action the gluttony and drunkeness.

Image123, how you can read the above post and conclude that i am praising, encouraging, complementing the corinthians is still very strange to me, maybe you can just give it to someone else to read and ask for an opinion. It was not an example of Good behavior, rmember i quoted the scripture in full to where paul condemned them, i only said it was a clear example of that the wine used by the christians (be it erroneously or not) was not an intoxicating wine, how on earth does that show that am praising them, i was only talking about the nature of the wine used.

Yes, millions of people drink everyday and they dont get drunk evrytime to take alcohol, and many never do get drunk, some take it they dont like the taste and they stop, others take it rarely only on occasions and moderately. These are facts, just ask anybody.That Noah took it and got drunk or that Lots daughters got him drunk does not mean nobody else cant, or were the only Good people that took wine in the Bible.
And the 15 yrs i mentioned was in reference to me and not to billions of people (those are the subtle ways you twist my words, what is ur motive of doing this? show me an example of where i did same to you, you were 'suppose' to be the good christian here sebi).

This twisting of what i write and blatantly imputing wrong motives into my posts is what makes me say you are being mischievious, and that was in reaction to a post that from you that was insulting and which i said was uncalled for, before the post from you, i never used such terms.

And saying that i called you a pharisee,mischievous,condemner,sarcastic,demonizer is wrong. If i say let us not demonize those who drinks moderately, or i say your post was sarcastic or being mischievous (which you started first), that does not mean i label you that. I was only referring to how you sounded like in the post, i did not say it was your way of life or that it defines your personality.

while we are strictly talking about the issue, you are always asking why do we want to stumble weak people, and saying we are using negative scriptures, we are accusing Jesus, and also claiming Jesus for urself as if we are not a part of him. Read ur posts and see how you have been sounding, as if i was a tax collector that needed deliverance. All you need to do is quote scriptures, references, make expanations etc, not inferring badness in others.

KunleOshob:
@rabzy
keep up the good work, i am solidly behind you it is actually more sinful to be deluded than to get drunk on alcohol.

Hello Kunle, thanks for your message, i should have said hi before now, but i get so wrapped up with replying image123, that i could hardly think of saying hello. I hope you are fine, do you honestly discussed tithe issue with image123 for months, men una try o. I dont think i can continue this beyond a few more days, i have virtually gone thru the whole bible checking out where it mentioned wine/sweet wine etc, just to find our the context and the message behind it.
Tithing has become a big scam for pastors and to think that it was a mosaic law arrangement meant for non-working levites, who dont become stupendously rich from the proceeds, except those that the Bible condemn for stealing such in the temple, and to know that the apostles never asked any christian to bring tithes to them, in fact many of them work for themselves and fend for themselves. They only sometinmes accept voluntary contributions for their daily needs, whenever they are unable to provide such for themselves or someone just wants to show appreciation to them. Not these men that amass so much wealth that a thieving bank director would even envy.

I dont think you get drunk too, so its not as if we are justifying our debauchery.
Cheers man

Image123:
Forget dico and co, you'll see lees/remains settled in the cup. If you insist anyway that the wines on the lees Must be alcoholic, well the Isaiah 25v6 passage says WELL REFINED. The wine is refined/purified/treated. i.e it's the purest thing around. I don't see even the remotest possibility of drunkeness adver Jesus comes. It's Jesus we're talking about here,not Mo'. I'll say more on that later though

Like i said in my earlier posts, that is not lees, lees have specific usage, not just when you squeezed grape juice into a cup, seeds will settle, unbroken juice will settle, orange fibre will settle. Lees is the settlement after hours of storage as a result of fermentation, it has to do with settlements that occur after the irreversible chemical change caused by fermentaion.

Isaiah 25:6 also call it well-aged wine, which tallys perfectly with the lees or dregs under the well aged wine. Well-refined is qualifying the well-aged wine, i.e the fermented wine is decanted or drained out of their jars, and all sediments/lees or other particles are then refined, drained. filtered out leaving the clear, fine choice wine, nobody wants to take dregs/nor wood particles from the jar or stones along with their wine, or can you filter the alcohol out of the well-aged wine. Its just the impurities that could have been a product of fermentation/harvesting/particles from the environment that are filtered or refined from it.

Please be real, brother.

Image123:
Why is it that you people build your alcohol points on negatives. Now you're quoting 1Cor 11 to support you!, that's funny. The Spirit of God through Paul was correcting the corinthians and condemning their actions, but here you are, using their condemned actions to support alcohol. You want to lay your foundations on the carnal corinthians, who couldn't receive spiritual meat, who were committing fornication with their in.laws? Whose actions usually suprised the Spirit. What?
Look at it again, 1Cor11 v17 says 'I praise you NOT'. Why is it that rabzy is the one praising them and saying it is a clear example of 'wine used for passover.' v20 said they were NOT eating the Lord's supper, v21 says his own supper. They were eating their own supper, not the Lord's. v22 says the suprised WHAT?

I have consistently scriptures several time more than you do and i have quoted thru the whole sections of the Bible and from different translations.
The verses that put alcohol in a good light, you conveniently said it is non-alcoholic grape juice/sweet wine and not fermented wines,
The verses that put alcohol in bad light is actually talking about excesses with wine, not wine in itself.

I said it would have been far easier for the Bible to categorically say dont take old wine or fermented wine, but it didnt, rather it says God would give us well-aged wine.
Remember God specifcally forbade some meat for the israelites, giving examples species by species, types by type, even saying you can eat this specie but dont eat the one that has this particular feature, if he could go into details for birds and animals, why did he not say 'wine after fermentation should not be taken, simple as ABC). Have you thot about that?

oladeegbu said the bible was condemning excesses with non-alcoholic sweet wine/new wine/grape juice and i quoted several scriptures where it show sweet wine/new wine and grape juice (yes, because it can be partially fermented after 6 hours and well fermented after days, you dont honestly think everybody has access to it in hours, or the farmers that store their 'fruit of wine' after harvesting dont take them after it is a day old/ or partially fermented), no comments from you.

Where paul said 'take a little wine (note it did not say new wine) for your stomach' would that be putting wine in a negative light or positive.

I think you are the one being mischievous, am not a drunk and i have never being drunk, but i know the truth and it sets people free from pharisee-like rigidity, who put unnecessary burden on the common man and created their own set of rigid rules about fasting, sabbath, tithes, dedication of gifts to God as against taking care of ones parents etc.

Well am going to list some other verses and ask you to ponder on them?

5Wake up, you drunkards, and weep! Wail, all you drinkers of wine; wail because of the new wine, for it has been snatched from your lips

5Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine; for it is cut off from your mouth.
King James Version (KJV)
5Awake, ye drunkards, and weep, And howl all drinking wine, because of the juice, For it hath been cut off from your mouth.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

Also i want you to consider this, the levites in Israel dont have farmland, they were not given any land inheritance, so the whole nation has to feed the levites by giving them a tenth of what God has blessed them with, grains, oil, sweet wine etc. Then the levites are also to take a tenth of what they were given and give this to God.
(2 Chronicles 31:4-5) 4 Furthermore, he said to the people, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to give the portion of the priests and of the Levites, in order that they might adhere strictly to the law of Jehovah. 5 And as soon as the word broke forth, the sons of Israel increased the firstfruits of the grain, new wine, and oil and honey and all the produce of the field, and the tenth of everything they brought in abundantly. . .

Are the israelites allowed to rest after a hard day of harvesting their crops and grape juice, before they embark on the journey to the temple or wherever they were to present their tithes or are day to rush down so as to prevent the grape juice from being fermented.
How many days do you think it would take for the israelites to bring their produce from the farm, travel from their cities to where they could present these gifts to the priests, then for the priests in charge to share these to the whole tribe of Levi?
What kind of Wine do levites, who get their wine from those brought by the rest of the nations take, is it fresh grape juice or fermented grape juice?
Can the levites take the new wine to their wives and children at home, would the ones taken home also be fresh grape juice? (am finding it really hard not to laugh if your answer would be 'yes fresh grape juice/unfermented sweet wine/miraculous grape juice that dont get fermented)
How long do you think the grape Juice/new wine would remain unfermented? would the levites throw away their now fermented grape juice?
The remaining nine parts that were not presented to the levites, are they to consume them immediately on the farm or drink it immediately they get home so that it wont ferment, can they offer a visitor the wine after some days, can't they sell part of it days or weeks later at the market or are these thrown away?.

The israelites of course brought new wines from their vineyards, but they were in varying states of fermentation.

Nehemiah 10
37And the beginning of our dough, and our heave-offerings, and the fruit of every tree, of new wine, and of oil, we bring in to the priests, unto the chambers of the house of our God, and the tithe of our ground to the Levites; and they -- the Levites -- have the tithes in all the cities of our tillage;
38and the priest, son of Aaron, hath been with the Levites in the tithing of the Levites, and the Levites bring up the tithe of the tithe to the house of our God unto the chambers, to the treasure-house;
Young's Literal Translation (YLT

37 Moreover, we will bring to the storerooms of the house of our God, to the priests, the first of our ground meal, of our grain offerings, of the fruit of all our trees and of our new wine and oil. And we will bring a tithe of our crops to the Levites, for it is the Levites who collect the tithes in all the towns where we work.
38 A priest descended from Aaron is to accompany the Levites when they receive the tithes, and the Levites are to bring a tenth of the tithes up to the house of our God, to the storerooms of the treasury.
New International Version - UK (NIVUK.

Nehemiah 13:12
All Judah brought the tithes of grain, new wine and oil into the storerooms.
New International Version - UK (NIVUK)

Lets assume the Israelites could bring the fresh wine/grape juice from their vineyard straight to the temple, present it to the priests, collect into jars and finally being put into store houses. HOW LONG WOULD THE FRESH WINE REMAIN UNFERMENTED IN THE STORE HOUSES OF THE LORD. WHY WOULD THE LORD ALLOW SUCH 'an appearance of evil or outright evil in his house'.

From all obvious reasons, fresh totally unfermented grape juice is a rarity, would be very scarce, for a commodity that is sold in the market, it would be hard to find any in the market. Of course you could get partially fermented grape juice or even if you get really fresh unfermented wine, what does the merchant do to the wine the next day or some days after, would they throw it away, after all the effort of planting, harvesting.
Did the law tell them to throw away their wine after a few days, like they do when their garments, utensils become unclean from touching unclean things.

Brother it is beyond sense, and totally absurd to think, it was a sin for the israelites and the early christians to take wine/fermented grape juice. Ans in any case they never said they don't.

Have a wonderful day, image123.

The use of alcohol for passover was practise that was later introduced long before Jesus came, even the grape juice you were talking about was not there at the begining, so dont harp about that, Jesus could as well have left it out then, so he was following a general custom which was not wrong. The case of drunkeness during the passover meal was a proper opportunity for paul to admonish the christians to stop taking alcohol outrightly buy he did not. The accusation of drunkeness that peter refuted was a perfect opportunity to declare ALCOHOL IS A SIN, but he did not, The Scriptures keep warning and condemning the effects of drunkeness, i have asked you again and again why talk about EXCESS when even a little is a SIN.

To say that am praising them is a lie, which you did on purpose to malign me, the discussion was about the substance used not on their conduct,well i forgive you.

Then I don’t know where you found out that lees refer to any deposit/residue, (petrol residue, paint residue, Juice residue) No it is used for residues that are left during the aging of wine. Grape juice cannot have such residue except it is undergoing fermentation, if you squeeze out grape juice or orange juice, those things that immediately go to the bottom are just the seed particles or the fibres, when it is referred to as lees it connotes fermentation. That is why the Bible verses also use well-aged wine.
Lees refers to deposits of dead yeast or residual yeast and other particles that precipitate, or are carried by the action of "fining", to the bottom of a vat of wine after fermentation and aging. The yeast deposits in beer brewing are known as trub. However, yeast deposits from secondary fermentation of beer are referred to as lees.

Normally the wine is transferred to another container (racking), leaving this sediment behind. Some wines, (notably Muscadet), are sometimes aged for a time on the lees (a process known as sur lie), leading to a distinctive yeasty aroma and taste. The lees may be stirred (batonnage in French) in order to promote uptake of the lees flavor.
[LEEZ] The heavy, coarse sediment that accumulates during fermentation and aging. Lees primarily consists of dead yeast cells and small grape particles that fall to the bottom of the fermentation tank or barrel. In most cases, this sediment is separated from the wine through racking. Sometimes the wine is left in contact with the lees in an attempt to develop more flavor. See also sur lie

I agree that grape Juice when harvested does not intoxicate, but do you know how long it takes for fermentation to start? SIX HOURS. How many people do you think would have access to such unfermented grape juice? Most probably just the harvester and then he would have to drink all he has harvested that same day, he wont be able to sell. How would the whole nation of Israel be able to have access to fresh grape juice constantly, that means they cant buy such at the market, how long do you think harvesting the juice, transporting them home, putiing them in jars, transporting to the market and selling all your grape juice would take. SIX Hours, 24 Hours, days perhaps weeks, answer that yourself.

When you say fresh grape juice, remember you are talking about time which is relative, therefore relative to what, of course relative to well preserved wines/well aged wines that could be kept for months. So a day old wine could be fresh, a three day old wine could also be fresh, if it has not lost the sweet taste of grape. But it does not mean it cant intoxicate, and that is why the Bible warned against taking excess of both the old wine and the sweet wine/new wine in the following verses

Hosea 4:11 (New King James Version)
The Idolatry of Israel
    11 “ Harlotry, wine, and new wine enslave the heart.
Hosea 4:11 (English Standard Version)
11whoredom, wine, and new wine,
   which(A) take away the understanding.
11 to prostitution;
       old wine and new wine
       take away their understanding. (Today’s new international version)
Hosea 4:11 (King James Version)
11Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart.

You need to ask yourself why was new wine also specifically mentioned, how does new wine take away understanding just like 'wine' or old wine as you say.

Why did the scriptures say it was going to give us well-oiled dishes and well-aged wine. Maybe not Billions (and you dont have to be sarcastic about the numbers, or implying whether i meant animals, you are insultive and you don't have to be) of people take alcohol everyday, but am sure millions worldwide take alcohol and we dont pick millions on the street, so there must have some self control in some people if not most. Brother (i dont think you really see me as a brother, am sure am more like someone condemn to you), people can take alcohol without getting tipsy or drunk. my secondary school biology even teaches that our food finally turns to alcohol before it is absorbed (am not an expert on that, but i think i remember that).

Oladeegbu, the man in charge of the feast was not refering to the crowd in the marriage feast, he was just referring to what people would normally do.
why would Jesus even give wine or grape juice to people who are already drunk, why did he not just ask them to go home in the drunken state, they would need sleep more than anything.
Whatever number of gallons that were provided, do you know the number of people at the feast, do you know the alcohol content of the wine, do you know how many days the feast lasted.
would you say your the drink you provided at a feast is not enough when a considerable number of your guests are drunk, Would Mary have said the wine was not enough if people have already drank to stupor, does that not imply that there were several people or considerable number of people would have had nothing to drink.

Think brother, think for yourself and search the scriptures, answer these questions honestly and answers the ones i asked in my previous posts?

Image123:
Rabzy,
Talking about wine, you said that the scriptures 'IN SO MANY PLACES' is talking about avoiding excesses. No sir, most places wine is referred to in the negative. Unfortunately, you've failed to see that the word wine(/its equivalent in other languages) was used to describe both fermented and unfermented drinks. The juice of the grape(commonly called wine in scripture) could be taken but not in excess. These people were not as scientifically inclined as many are today. Unfermented wine wasn't full proof immune to fermentation. There was a thin line and ALl jews were careful not to take wine in excess. They were obviously learning from mistakes of others before them. They were not presumptous and their history had no respect for old wine,which was widely agreed to be intoxicating. It's the same lesson you should learn. Don't desire alcohol, abstain from all appearances of evil.

Bros, did you read my post, no respect for old wine? God is giving you aged wine, the url i sent brilliantly answered the issue of grape juice, God said 'pour that appearance of evil on my altar as a drink offering' are you condemning God? are they to keep the 'appearance of evil' in their house. Why cant the 'juice of grape' not be taken in excess if its okay, why cant the scriptures ask us not to take water in excess too, (a woman died from a drinking water contest in the US.

“Who has woe? Who has uneasiness? Who has contentions? Who has concern? Who has wounds for no reason? Who has dullness of eyes? Those staying a long time with the wine?

Proverbs 23:29-31 (Young's Literal Translation)

29Who hath wo? who hath sorrow? Who hath contentions? who hath plaint? Who hath wounds without cause? Who hath redness of eyes?

30Those tarrying by the wine, Those going in to search out mixed wine.

31See not wine when it showeth itself red, When it giveth in the cup its colour, It goeth up and down through the upright.
                 
       that place is talking about excess, is it the non-alcoholic juice of grape that causes that?,

New world translation
20 Do not come to be among heavy drinkers of wine, among those who are gluttonous eaters of flesh. 21 For a drunkard and a glutton will come to poverty, and drowsiness will clothe one with mere rags.

Proverbs 23:20-23 (New International Version)

20 Do not join those who drink too much wine
      or gorge themselves on meat,

21 for drunkards and gluttons become poor,
      and drowsiness clothes them in rags.

Is it the non-alcoholic grape of juice taken in excess that makes someone become a drunkard, is it what makes one become addicted and spend all his money on it until he becomes poor?

29 Who has woe? Who has sorrow?
      Who has strife? Who has complaints?
      Who has needless bruises? Who has bloodshot eyes?

30 Those who linger over wine,
      who go to sample bowls of mixed wine.

31 Do not gaze at wine when it is red,
      when it sparkles in the cup,
      when it goes down smoothly!

32 In the end it bites like a snake
      and poisons like a viper.

33 Your eyes will see strange sights
      and your mind imagine confusing things.

34 You will be like one sleeping on the high seas,
      lying on top of the rigging.

35 "They hit me," you will say, "but I'm not hurt!
      They beat me, but I don't feel it!
      When will I wake up
      so I can find another drink?"

is it the non-alcoholic grape of juice that makes you not know where you are or makes you numb to pain, does it make you addicted, such that you seek for more.

Proverbs 20:1 (New International Version)

Proverbs 20
1 Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler;
      whoever is led astray by them is not wise
Proverbs 20:1 (New American Standard Bible)

Proverbs 20
On Life and Conduct
   1(A)Wine is a mocker, (B)strong drink a brawler,
 
Proverbs 20
1Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.
      And whoever is intoxicated by it is not wise
Proverbs 20
1 Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler; whoever is led astray by them is not wise
Proverbs 20:1 (Contemporary English Version)
Proverbs 20
1It isn't smart to get drunk!
  Drinking makes a fool of you
  and leads to fights
Proverbs 20:1 (New Living Translation)
Proverbs 20
1 Wine produces mockers; alcohol leads to brawls.
     Those led astray by drink cannot be wise

Note that it did not say, whoever takes it is a fool or not wise, but who ever is foolish to be led astray/deceived by it, and it is not evryone that is led astray. why did it not just say Whoever takes it.

Titus 2:2-3 (New Living Translation)
3 Similarly, teach the older women to live in a way that honors God. They must not slander others or be heavy drinkers.[a] Instead, they should teach others what is good
Titus 2:3 (New Century Version)
3 In the same way, teach older women to be holy in their behavior, not speaking against others or enslaved to too much wine, but teaching what is good.
Titus 2:3 (King James Version)
3The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things

does the juice of grape also enslave, what exactly in it enslaves people?

Please my brother, thank God we can search the scriptures ourselves and see the truth for ourselves.
Do you know that william tyndale was burned at the stake by the church, because he wanted common men to read the scriptures for themselves and not just what the clergy dishes out. Even all their titles, senior pastor, most senior pastor, arch bishop, father, revrend father, his eminence, his holiness, Daddy, where did all that come from? They have placed themselves on a pedestal of Highness and have become 'semigods' 'man of God' even if you air a diferent opinion or contest what they say, its the laymen that would scream 'dont commit sin o' its the man of God, you are doubting'. Even Jeremiah, Hosea, Habakuk, they questioned God, they doubted him. Pls these are just my other thots lets stick to the topic.

Pls i want sincere honest answers and not a condescending, holier-than-thou preacher's message. I am not, i repeat i am not a slave to alcohol, so pls dont ask me to shun all 'appearance of evil'. i know the evils God ask us to avoid very well and i do my best to avoid them, not the unecessary burdens some wants to place on us. Stick to the scriptures.

Image123:
What do you want me to comment about in Numbers 28v7, that place says 'drink offering' twice. You wan chop drink offering or burnt offering? Some people have tried to knowingly/unknowingly mislead us to think Jesus was an alcoholic, a winebiber, one who loved intoxicating wine. That's why we've talked about wine NOT ALWAYS refering to intoxication.
That Jesus took ALCOHOL is based on shaky dreamy probability. Do you have an idea of the volume of wine that was to be taken at passover/Supper? Do you have an idea of the volume of wine that was produced in cana. Common, Jesus is the Holy Son of God, not nigerian breweries. He will never 'lead others into temptation', it's not in Him. It is blasphemy to assert so.
I just loaded and saved your page rabzy, I'll read it. It's good if you went through the previous link as well and the 'Jesus and wine' chapter link. Regards

do you have an idea of the number of people in attendance at the wedding? do you have an idea of the alcoholic content of the wine? do you have an idea how many days the feast lasted? do you have an idea if all the wine was drunk at the wedding and on a single day?

1 Corinthians 11:20-22 (American Standard Version)

20 When therefore ye assemble yourselves together, it is not possible to eat the Lord's supper:

21 for in your eating each one taketh before other his own supper; and one is hungry, and another is drunken.

22 What, have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you? In this I praise you not

1 Corinthians 11:20-22 (English Standard Version)
20When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. 21For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry,(A) another gets drunk. 22What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise(B) the church of God and(C) humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.

why did paul say this if people were not getting drink at the passover, he said they have houses were they can indulge in eating and drinking if they want, why defile the house of God. This is clear example that the wine used for passover can intoxicate, paul did not condemn the wine or the type of wine but the attitude, the action the gluttony and drunkeness

Num 28:7
The one male lamb you will render up in the morning, and the other male lamb you will render up between the two evenings, 5 together with the tenth of an e′phah of fine flour as a grain offering moistened with the fourth of a hin of beaten oil; 6 the constant burnt offering, which was rendered up at Mount Si′nai as a restful odor, an offering made by fire to Jehovah, 7 along with its drink offering, the fourth of a hin to each male lamb. Pour out in the holy place the drink offering of intoxicating liquor to Jehovah.
Numbers 28:4-7 (New International Version)
4 Prepare one lamb in the morning and the other at twilight, 5 together with a grain offering of a tenth of an ephah [a] of fine flour mixed with a quarter of a hin [b] of oil from pressed olives. 6 This is the regular burnt offering instituted at Mount Sinai as a pleasing aroma, an offering made to the LORD by fire. 7 The accompanying drink offering is to be a quarter of a hin of fermented drink with each lamb. Pour out the drink offering to the LORD at the sanctuary.

God demanded from the israelites a portion of what he gave them to symbolize their thankfulness. He demanded for part of their daily provisions, he wants them to share their menu with him, what they eat, their oil, grain, their meat and their drink (fermented), its as if he was joining them at the table. How would he ask them to give him something that is sinful and give it to him, he always demand of the best e.g their firstborn, the finest calve, the finest devotion etc. Your url said Jesus could not offer alcoholic drink when alcoholics can be tempted to indulge by just the scent, thats interesting, while the israelites are bringing fermented drink/beer/wine  to the temple could alcoholics not be tempted, while pouring this fermented drink to God, do the Israelites close their nose and perhaps their eyes.

Why ask the high priest not to take wine while officiating, if by default they are not suppose to take or even sniff it, Its like saying dont swear/lie or fight while officiating, when by default these had already been condemned.
And please dont just pick a tiny piece of what i have written and attack that, so is lees still shelter, look at the whole body of mesage i have been posting on this issue, look again at my recent posts. Before i replied yesterday i went thru the url you qouted before posting and i commented on several of the points raised and i provided another url that answered some points raised.

I have never felt a craving for wine/beer or have i ever been tipsy for over 15 years that i first took beer, i rarely take them and i have never taken excess. And i am not unique, there are billions like me, who dont get drunk, who use alcohol moderately or occasionally.

Image123:
First, there is nothing like alcohol 'in the Bible', lets not forget that. That's settled. I want to believe that what you refer to as alcohol is the man-made, fermented yeast induced wine i.e 'in the Bible'. We other 'wines' outside like stout, harp, shepe and co.
What I see in 'so many places in scripture' is condemnation of wine because it makes one drunk, not condemnation of drunkeness only,sparing the wine. Wine is a mocker, never forget that.
It's funny that people run to the OT for permission of their indulgences, but when real issues come up, they claim freedom from law and OT (kunle is a strong example of that fickle nature).
Lee is shelter, what are you infering/implying from Isaiah 25v6? Try to check commentaries on it or read it in other versions. Abi the other versions kill your inference?

Lees not lee, according to encarta dictionary lee is sediment that settles in wine or other alcoholic beverages during fermentation
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Sediment settling during fermentation, especially in wine; dregs. [Middle English lies, pl. of lie, from Old French, from Medieval Latin lia, ,
www.thefreedictionary.com/lees

Now let me show you the Isaiah 25:6 from other translations.

Isaiah 25:6 (New King James Version)
6 And in this mountain
The LORD of hosts will make for all people
A feast of choice pieces,
A feast of wines on the lees,
Of fat things full of marrow,
Of well-refined wines on the lees.
Isaiah 25:6 (American Standard Version)
6 And in this mountain will Jehovah of hosts make unto all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined.
Isaiah 25:6 (New Living Translation)

6 In Jerusalem,[a] the Lord of Heaven’s Armies
will spread a wonderful feast
for all the people of the world.
It will be a delicious banquet
with clear, well-aged wine and choice meat.

Isaiah 25:6 (English Standard Version)

6(A) On this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all peoples
a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine,
(B) of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined.

Isaiah 25:6 (Young's Literal Translation)
6And made hath Jehovah of Hosts, For all the peoples in this mount, A banquet of fat things, a banquet of preserved things, Fat things full of marrow, preserved things refined.
Isaiah 25:6 (New International Version)
6 On this mountain the LORD Almighty will prepare
a feast of rich food for all peoples,
a banquet of aged wine—
the best of meats and the finest of wines
New World translation
And Jehovah of armies will certainly make for all the peoples, in this mountain, a banquet of well-oiled dishes, a banquet of [wine kept on] the dregs, of well-oiled dishes filled with marrow, of [wine kept on] the dregs, filtered.

Now What does that tell us, or would refuse to take from God wine kept on the dregs, wine on lees, aged wine, or would you like peter call what God has cleaned unclean. i would not and i pray i am worthy to take such fine wine from him.

Well, someone could choose not to drink wine, fine and good but it would be wrong to condemn those who do except they abuse it, which the bible warn against. Paul in fact said we should not allow anyone to judge us on what we drink, Jesus said it is what comes out of a mouth that defiles it not what goes in. Paul practised celibacy and he encouraged others who wants do plenty in god's world to be like him, because they would not be distracted by their spouse and we know how dangerous that can be, but he never said we must be celibate, he cant.

When the apostles were accused of being drunk why did peter went thru the round about way and said, well it is not drinking time, its an odd hour to drink and so how can we be drunk, vis-avis well you cant find sellers of wine/beer at this odd hour so we are not drunk when he could easily say we DONT DRINk, Its a sin and you all know christians dont drink .

Please this is a simple truth, Alcohol/beer/wine in excess is bad, biblically, medically, but moderate drinking is okay, also biblically, medically. Billions of people drink Most dont get drunk or else we would be picking them up by the dozens on the streets and in social functions, a lot of people are social drinkers, they drink in social gatherings and take a little, i strongly believe Jesus was of this category. Even if you watch a beer parlor, how many people walk out tipsy or drunk, do a survey, what percentage takes excess alcohol in those places, a lot of them go their with friends take a bottle or two with pepper soup and fish, chat and talk and leave.

So why are some demonizing it, so as to feel good.

Image123:
First, there is nothing like alcohol 'in the Bible', lets not forget that. That's settled. I want to believe that what you refer to as alcohol is the man-made, fermented yeast induced wine i.e 'in the Bible'. We other 'wines' outside like stout, harp, shepe and co.
What I see in 'so many places in scripture' is condemnation of wine because it makes one drunk, not condemnation of drunkeness only,sparing the wine. Wine is a mocker, never forget that.
It's funny that people run to the OT for permission of their indulgences, but when real issues come up, they claim freedom from law and OT (kunle is a strong example of that fickle nature).
Lee is shelter, what are you infering/implying from Isaiah 25v6? Try to check commentaries on it or read it in other versions. Abi the other versions kill your inference?

'What I see in 'so many places in scripture' is condemnation of wine because it makes one drunk, not condemnation of drunkeness only,sparing the wine. Wine is a mocker, never forget that'.

Well consider the following verses in the NT, and tell me honestly it condemns the wine.
1 Peter 4:3 (King James Version)
3For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
1 Peter 4:3 (New International Version - UK)
3 For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do— living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry
1 Peter 4:3 (American Standard Version)

3 For the time past may suffice to have wrought the desire of the Gentiles, and to have walked in lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revellings, carousings, and abominable idolatries:
1 Peter 4:3 (New Living Translation)
3 You have had enough in the past of the evil things that godless people enjoy—their immorality and lust, their feasting and drunkenness and wild parties, and their terrible worship of idols
New world translation
. 3 For the time that has passed by is sufficient for YOU to have worked out the will of the nations when YOU proceeded in deeds of loose conduct, lusts, excesses with wine, revelries, drinking matches, and illegal idolatries.
Galatians 5:21 (New Living Translation)
21 envy, drunkenness, wild parties, and other sins like these. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:21 (New International Version - UK)
21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:21 (King James Version)
21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Corinthians 5:11 (King James Version)
11But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
1 Corinthians 5:11 (Contemporary English Version)
11I was talking about your own people who are immoral or greedy or worship idols or curse others or get drunk or cheat. Don't even eat with them.

How can the scriptures be talking about excesses with wine or drunkenness, when you are not suppose to touch it at all. its like scriptures saying dont lie too much so that you wont be caught, when it meant dont lie, or saying dont commit too much iilicit sex so that you would not spoil yor reputation/get AIDS or hurt your wife when it actually meant dont lie. that would be absurd and that is why the scriptures said 'thou shall not lie' thou shall not commit adultery'. why cant it say 'thou shall not drink' which is very very available and can be easily abuse.












If you look at the verses, you can see that it condemns partying in excess, feasting in excess and drinking in excess.

OLAADEGBU:
Thanks for bringing Image123's referenced url to my attention. I have briefly perused it and found out that it has done a brilliant scholarly work when it comes to the kind of wine Christ supernaturally created. I will refer to some excerpts from the site that I very much agree with below:

http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/wine_in_the_bible/4.html

Well olaadegbu, there is another url i think you should check, that i believe is far more scholarstic and in fact is a reply to the person who composed your URL. it is also a very interesting article.

http://www.ccg.org/english/s/p188.html.