Now please sir, where in any of those versions do you find ASSET?

The word asset is not in any version that I have checked, but neither does many descriptive words we use appear in any version of the Bible.

You use versions of the Bible to show that income was tithed on, but use version not recognized by any Bible scholar.

The crops and animals were NOT assets - unless you are begging to cheat by using dribbling all this under a contemporary usage (aka, your "man-made-definition".

And YOU, wordtalk, are using a man-made definition of tithing. Just look in a modern-day dictionary for the definition of tithe and then compare it with what you teach. Look in a modern-day dictionary for the definition of the word income and compare it to what you teach.

IF the crops and animals were NOT assets, just what were they, wordtalk? Please tell me.

@wordtalk,
its uncalled for to start using such words, please people are meant to learn from what is posted.

@garyarnold,
what will we call the land in which the crops were planted too?
If you say crops and animals are (current) assets, money falls into this category too so I think you are still saying the same thing then. I don't think this helps better the argument.

Snowwy:

@wordtalk,
its uncalled for to start using such words, please people are meant to learn from what is posted.

Noted, thanks.

I see you have avoided commenting on post #25.

Gary, there would be no need for the back and forth. The one thing I see you doing is try to deliberately cheat unequivocally - and that's why I can't let you harangue others for their choice of an appropriate term (income) when yours (asset) is not likely to make sense here except to weaken your arguments.

Anyways. . .

garyarnold:

The word asset is not in any version that I have checked, but neither does many descriptive words we use appear in any version of the Bible.

Not so. The descriptive words such as INCOME appear in connection with the tithes - the Hebrew word TEBUAH is one that is commonly used to express income, and that presents no problem for many people. I have not made that the "ONLY" term to be used in tithing - but it would help to understand that "tebuah" is commonly understood as the expression for income. Again, I did not say anywhere that tithes were from 'ALL' incomes of Israel - but the point is simply that when you look up 'tebuah', it is not difficult to see that is one of the most commonly occuring words in connection with the tithes, as it is the one word I know for now that describes income.

If you know any Hebrew word defined as "asset" in those tithing verses, please share. I will consider and am open to reason with you. You cannot just plaster an assertion like that and run away with it. At least, I remember where you once said something like "an asset is an asset" - and that is surprising for someone who boast a career in accounting! I'm not an accountant, never claimed I was - but even having taken the course as an elective, I know for fact that financiers and accountants do not make such a blatant assertion!

This is why you would need to reason with people, rather than try to argue legalistically and then arrive nowhere. I also said I could help you make a reasonable argument on "assets", but that is only on the basis that we cannot assert that 'an asset is an asset'.

You use versions of the Bible to show that income was tithed on, but use version not recognized by any Bible scholar.

The versions I have used are recognized by scholars - unless those whom you describe as 'scholars' are unknown to theologians in established institutions.  

garyarnold:

I see you have avoided commenting on post #25.

I could comment on it IF you want. The one thing I don't like to do is repeat myself on matters I have already dealt with. There's nothing new in your argument in #25, since your main point was this - "Tithing was never on income or GAIN". That is the same thing I have commented on and left you 3 simple questions that you have categorically evaded:

wordtalk:

Anytime you get off your high horse, just peep over here.

I'm done with you wordtalk. You think you know more than those who translated to the KJV. THEY didn't select the word INCOME, but rather INCREASE, and only in Deut., NOT in Leviticus 27:30-33 where God defined His tithe as crops and animals.

You lack knowledge and I can no longer debate with a know-it-all who actually has shown that he/she knows no where near what he/she thinks he/she knows.

I don't hide behind a name. You change yours frequently, and use different names on different blogs. You hide. I am out in the open.

You remind me of the Pharisees. We will NEVER agree. I honestly believe the devil has taken over your thinking process. May God help you.

I hope those reading this blog can see through your dishonest double standards. May God help you.

garyarnold:

And YOU, wordtalk, are using a man-made definition of tithing.

Oh dear! Relax. I am not a religious hermit or fundy who seeks only definitions that are narrow and calcified. The definitions I have used thus far are those which even your 'scholars' use - nothing new there. If you have another definition that 'scholars' use, please share them with us.

Just look in a modern-day dictionary for the definition of tithe and then compare it with what you teach. Look in a modern-day dictionary for the definition of the word income and compare it to what you teach.

As far as definitions go, there is nothing that has changed in the definition of the word tithe. This phenomenon did not originate in Judaism among the Jews - it has a history far predating them. So, if the "definition" no longer has the one we all know, please show us what it was defined as from its etymology an let's compare notes.

IF the crops and animals were NOT assets, just what were they, wordtalk? Please tell me.

INCOME. In hebrew, tebuah (תּבוּאה).

In the same format, please show us the hebrew word for ASSET.

IF the crops and animals were NOT assets, just what were they, wordtalk? Please tell me.

INCOME. In hebrew, tebuah (תּבוּאה).

Have to reply to that wrong answer.

IF the crops and animals were INCOME, then what do you call the proceeds when the Israelites SOLD and/or barter exchanged their crops and animals? MORE INCOME?

You show a total lack of understanding of what income is.

GOOD BYE.

garyarnold:

I'm done with you wordtalk. You think you know more than those who translated to the KJV. THEY didn't select the word INCOME, but rather INCREASE, and only in Deut., NOT in Leviticus 27:30-33 where God defined His tithe as crops and animals.

I never claimed to know more than anybody. The KJV may not have used the word 'income', but I don't know as yet any other hebrew word than 'tebuah' (תּבוּאה) which is the same as the 'increase'.

And no, the word 'increase' translating the hebrew word 'tebuah' is not "only in Deut" - unless you have not read your Bible carefully enough. The same word is used in Numbers 18:30 as well. The word 'increase' may not appear in Leviticus 27:30-33 - but it does not contradict the other passages in Numbers and Deuteronomy.

You lack knowledge and I can no longer debate with a know-it-all who actually has shown that he/she knows no where near what he/she thinks he/she knows.

I do not know it all; but I know enough to not allow folks like you cheat with pedantic and legalistic arguments which you cannot show from Scripture.

I don't hide behind a name. You change yours frequently, and use different names on different blogs. You hide. I am out in the open.

That takes away nothing from the body of my arguments. Complaining like that is simply the weakness of a jingoist who resorts to argumenttative fallacies.

You remind me of the Pharisees. We will NEVER agree. I honestly believe the devil has taken over your thinking process. May God help you.

Nice. I'll remember that!

I hope those reading this blog can see through your dishonest double standards. May God help you.

Your accusing me falsely reminds me of Proverbs 10:18. If that fits you, you're welcome to continue with the slanders.

garyarnold:

Have to reply to that wrong answer.

You really can't get over yourself, can you? I thought you just complained that you're done with wordtalk?

IF the crops and animals were INCOME, then what do you call the proceeds when the Israelites SOLD and/or barter exchanged their crops and animals? MORE INCOME?

Yes. Surprised? I can imagine. The problem with your mentality is that you only know of one level of 'income'. What you may not realise is that income is not linear but occurs in various ways - it is not restricted to what you obtain in monetray terms, it goes beyond that.

Afterall, you did say a while back that: "Just like the word income describes what you get when you work for wages", and wages among the Biblical peoples occur in various forms as well.

You show a total lack of understanding of what income is.

Is that why you have never been able to show any verse for your "asset"?

GOODBYE.

I won't miss a dot of you.

wordtalk must believe that the Israelite farmers tithed on their original crops and animals, and then again tithed on the proceeds they got when they sold the crops and animals. Now that does create a problem. Since every tenth animal had to be set aside for the tithe, only the ones left could be sold, so now I guess wordtalk thinks that every tenth animal plus a tenth of the proceeds of the sale are the tithe. wordtalk has no common sense.

wordtalk isn't even capable of taking a solid position on voluntary tithing. Just leaves it up to everyone to decide for themselves. Reminds me of someone who wants no one to tell them what to do, and he/she will tell no one what to do. Not much of a teacher. In fact, not a teacher at all.

PLEASE, those following this blog, take the time to study what has been said, and then compare it with scripture. TAKE A STAND. God lets us make our own choices, but we will be held accountable for them. In order to be a good steward, you must know what is being done with the money you give to the church. Don't just give it and say it is out of your hands. That is being a poor steward.

Try to be a good steward of 100% of what God gives to you. Don't fall for false religious doctrines. Give from the heart with NO expectation of getting anything back. IF you expect something back, it doesn't even meet the definition of a gift.

garyarnold:

wordtalk must believe that the Israelite farmers tithed on their original crops and animals, and then again tithed on the proceeds they got when they sold the crops and animals.

Please quote me directly rather than try to advertise your blatant lies. What you're forcing into my comments do not appear in a single line. So show me where I made any such statement of a 'belief' you're carving for yourself in order to put into my post.

Now that does create a problem.

That's your own problem not mine. This is the thing about you and your folks - you make false claims, build strawmen that do not appear in other people's posts, and then attempt to knock them down as if that is what the other person has said! That is not just plain dishonest, but a very illiterate approach to rational discourses that appeals to irrational folks.

Since every tenth animal had to be set aside for the tithe, only the ones left could be sold, so now I guess wordtalk thinks that every tenth animal plus a tenth of the proceeds of the sale are the tithe.

Another red herring and a flat out lie! Continue.

wordtalk has no common sense.

I'm quite used to your use of such as your first-aid, so what's new?

wordtalk isn't even capable of taking a solid position on voluntary tithing.

I did - the difference is that I don't argue voluntary tithes on your caviling premise.

Just leaves it up to everyone to decide for themselves.

True - and no one has complained about that. I do not hold any authoritative hammer over anyone; that is why I share my views and let others draw what is helpful to them from such views. Holding everyone to your narrow view is not the same thing as allowing them the choice of a voluntary exercise.

Reminds me of someone who wants no one to tell them what to do, and he/she will tell no one what to do.

False analogy. I have shared what I do, also made clear that I learn from others; and yet I do not try to force my views on ANYONE! Try another red herring!

Not much of a teacher. In fact, not a teacher at all.

I did not claim any official status - if you're hungry for crowd approval, you will harvest loads of applause here and eslewhere. I'm not seeking your honour, so don't feel threatened.

PLEASE, those following this blog, take the time to study what has been said, and then compare it with scripture. TAKE A STAND. God lets us make our own choices, but we will be held accountable for them.

If you truly believe that God let's people make their own choices, why are you trying to force your own views on others? Why not be satisfied with letting others choose instead of shouting as if your career is all of sudden threatened?

In order to be a good steward, you must know what is being done with the money you give to the church. Don't just give it and say it is out of your hands. That is being a poor steward.

Let people choose to do what they will - refrain from setting up your narrow prerequisites for anyone. I don't imagine any reader being so infantile that they can't reason for themselves and need you to be their PAS in stewardship.

Try to be a good steward of 100% of what God gives to you. Don't fall for false religious doctrines. Give from the heart with NO expectation of getting anything back.

Hmm, mr teacher. . . does the Bible not teach us to actually expect blessings from our giving? What does Luke 6:38 teach for example?

IF you expect something back, it doesn't even meet the definition of a gift.

Hmm, this is how you set up your own fallacious "definitions" all over the place. If you're challenged on them, you begin to see the devil in other people's thinking processes.

IF the crops and animals were INCOME, then what do you call the proceeds when the Israelites SOLD and/or barter exchanged their crops and animals? MORE INCOME?

Yes.

wordtalk needs to get a refund for whatever class in accounting he/she took.

I don't feel my teaching or position is at all threatened. So far today, my free book has been downloaded 26 times. I get email often from pastors, other ministers, Bible-study students, etc. who thank me for my truthful and accurate teaching. I need no endorsement from such losers as wordtalk.

garyarnold:

wordtalk needs to get a refund for whatever class in accounting he/she took.

I didn't take classes from you, so why's my view biting you?

I don't feel my teaching or position is at all threatened. So far today, my free book has been downloaded 26 times. I get email often from pastors, other ministers, Bible-study students, etc. who thank me for my truthful and accurate teaching. I need no endorsement from such losers as wordtalk.

Oh, poor you. You came back only to advertise your self-praise! Nice.
After all your complaints, you only managed to sling mud but showed nothing for your fallacies? Wheesht!

wordtalk:

Leviticus 27:30-32 actually defines tithe as a tenth

Let me clarify my statement. we are looking at practice here, and not dictionary definition of the word tithe. Leviticus 27:30-32 allows for the Israelite to tithe less than 10% for e.g a cattle farmer (even 0% is allowed), it requires the Israelite to tithe at 12% if he is paying cash. According to lev 27:30-32, what is acceptable as tithe range from amount less than 10% to amount as high as 12%. so tell me how the tithe then becomes 10% if God said he will accept a tithe less than or greater than 10%.

is the man paying a cash of 12% actually paying 10%? or is the cattle farmer tithing one of seventeen (1/17) animals he owes tithing at 10%? So if the Israelite tithe system allows for payment lees than 10% or greater than 10%, why would you want to define their tithing practice as payment of 10%?

wordtalk:

And so, shall we conclude that 12% defines the word 'tithe' for you?

and did i define tithe as 12%? please go back and read the post. We are not discussing zikkyy's definition of tithe.

@Zikkyy,

If you are going to put the Levitical tithe in percentages, it can range from 0% to 10% maximum.

The tithe was a tenth of the crops.  That tithe could be bought back, or redeemed, for a 20% (one fifth) penalty.  The TITHE was still the tenth of the crops, not the money.

But your point that the Levitical tithe commanded by God could be less than 10% is absolutely true.  Example:  a herdsman had 19 new born animals in herds and flocks for the year.  ONE of those animals would be the tithe which = 5.26%.  For those who say you can't give 1.9 animals, you are wrong.  The animal could be cut up then the same as they are now at the meat market.

garyarnold:

If you are going to put the Levitical tithe in percentages, it can range from 0% to 10% maximum.

Yes, for Agricultural produce.

garyarnold:

The tithe was a tenth of the crops. 

Yes.

garyarnold:

That tithe could be bought back, or redeemed, for a 20% (one fifth) penalty.  The TITHE was still the tenth of the crops, not the money.

Yes. But some people believe the levitical tithe allowed for cash. So what am trying to say here (without having to argue that tithe was strictly agricultural produce), is when (& if) the option to buy back is exercised, actual cash outflow does not equate to 10% of the tithers produce.

Yes. But some people believe the levitical tithe allowed for cash. So what am trying to say here (without having to argue that tithe was strictly agricultural produce), is when (& if) the option to buy back is exercised, actual cash outflow does not equate to 10% of the tithers produce.

But it must be emphasized that a person would have to have the tenth of the crops to come up with the value before they could add the extra fifth. No one could just come up with money for the tithe. They couldn't sell the crops and then pay a tenth from the income, profit, or gain they received. For those who believe the Levitical tithe allowed cash to be tithed, prove it with scripture.

The following illustrates how the KJV uses the same word translated as increase and also revenue.  Notice the context of each verse and you will see that increase in the tithing verses has nothing to do with revenue (income).

H8393 TEBUAH (increase, revenue)

Genesis 47:24 (KJV)
24And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones.

Leviticus 19:25 (KJV)
25And in the fifth year shall ye eat of the fruit thereof, that it may yield unto you the increase thereof: I am the LORD your God.

Leviticus 25:7 (KJV)
7And for thy cattle, and for the beast that are in thy land, shall all the increase thereof be meat.

Leviticus 25:12 (KJV)
12For it is the jubilee; it shall be holy unto you: ye shall eat the increase thereof out of the field.

Leviticus 25:20 (KJV)
20And if ye shall say, What shall we eat the seventh year? behold, we shall not sow, nor gather in our increase:

Deuteronomy 14:22 (KJV)
22Thou shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed, that the field bringeth forth year by year.

Deuteronomy 14:28 (KJV)
28At the end of three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates:

2 Chronicles 31:5 (KJV)
5And as soon as the commandment came abroad, the children of Israel brought in abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil, and honey, and of all the increase of the field; and the tithe of all things brought they in abundantly.

2 Chronicles 32:28 (KJV)
28Storehouses also for the increase of corn, and wine, and oil; and stalls for all manner of beasts, and cotes for flocks.

NOTE:  In the following verse, which is talking about gold and silver (money), the same word is translated as REVENUE.
Proverbs 8:19 (KJV)
19My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver.

NOTE:  Notice also in this verse the same word is translated as REVENUES.
Proverbs 16:8 (KJV)
8Better is a little with righteousness than great revenues without right.

This should make it perfectly clear to anyone studying this topic in depth that increase does not mean revenue, or gain, or profit, or income where the KJV uses the word increase, in the verses I have shown.  The KJV, unlike some other translations, was careful to choose the proper translation of the Greek word in each of those verses.  You can't exchanged increase for revenue or revenue for increase without distorting the true meaning.

^^^
But you of all people should know that the whole tithing scam is derived from the distortion of scripture.

garyarnold:

The following illustrates how the KJV uses the same word translated as increase and also revenue.  Notice the context of each verse and you will see that increase in the tithing verses has nothing to do with revenue (income).

It all depends on your meaning and understanding of income and revenue. If you think of income and revenue only in terms of cash and monetary exchanges as is used in contemporary times, you're narrowing the meanings of those terms while trying to excuse the meaning of 'asset'. It then remains for you to please find a verse - any verse - in the KJV that shows the hebrew word for 'asset'.

H8393 TEBUAH (increase, revenue)

Nice. You should have given the full definition of H8393 TEBUAH, as in the following dictionaries -

    STRONG'S HEBREW AND GREEK DICTIONARIES
    H8393
    תּבוּאה
    tebû'âh
    teb-oo-aw'
    From H935; income, that is, produce (literally or figuratively): - fruit, gain, increase, revenue.

    BROWN-DRIVER-BRIGGS HEBREW DEFINITIONS
    H8393
    תּבוּאה
    tebû'âh
    BDB Definition:
    1) produce, product, revenue
    1a) product, yield, crops (of the earth usually)
    1b) income, revenue
    1c) gain (of wisdom) (figuratively)
    1d) product of lips (figuratively)
    Part of Speech: noun feminine
    A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H935

The basic understanding of 'tebuah' is income, because it derives from another hebrew word (H935), as Strong's cited above:

    From H935; income, that is, produce (literally or figuratively): - fruit, gain, increase, revenue.

So, while 'tebuah' points to their income, it is the contents of that income that are explained to be the produce of farming activities. There are various types of income, and H8393 is one type of income that involves farm produce. The whole point is simply this: TEBUAH is INCOME.

This should make it perfectly clear to anyone studying this topic in depth that increase does not mean revenue, or gain, or profit, or income where the KJV uses the word increase, in the verses I have shown.  The KJV, unlike some other translations, was careful to choose the proper translation of the Greek word in each of those verses.

In all that, none of the translations I cited earlier (click here) gives the meaning of tebuah as 'asset'. Have you wondered why?

There are other hebrew words that specify the yield from farming activities - such as:

(a) 'harvest' (qâtsıyr - H7105). We find this, for example, in Leviticus 23:22 - 'when ye reap the harvest of your land,' and '. .  'any gleaning of thy harvest''

(b) 'increase' (yebûl - H2981). This is defined as -

          - 'produce, that is, a crop or (figuratively) wealth: - fruit, increase' (STRONG'S)

          - 'produce, fruit, produce (of the soil)' (BROWN-DRIVER-BRIGGS)

You can see indeed that "increase" can more specifically be called by another hebrew word as in (b) above; but the basic word that points to 'income' is tebuah.

This is why I have asked you 3 basic questions, and I'll try and make them simple here again -

  - (a) where in the Bible (your own favourite KJV) have you read of the word "ASSET"?

  - (b) what hebrew word do you know in the Bible that is used for INCOME?

  - (c) what hebrew word do you know in the Bible that is used for "ASSET"?

As always, you have forever evaded those simple questions. I've outlined them in simple terms and used other terms to expatiate for clarity. It would have helped both you and your readers if you have tried, at the very least, to show the hebrew word for 'asset'.

You can't exchanged increase for revenue or revenue for increase without distorting the true meaning.

You actually CAN exchange increase for revenue or revenue for increase without distorting the meaning.

What you can't do is exchange increase for 'asset' - because dribbling in 'asset' for 'increase' will distort the "true meaning". This is why I have asked you to bring out the etymology (word origin) of 'asset' so we can see the "true meaning" of that word. Why is that a hard thing to do?

[size=13pt]Luke 21:1
International Standard Version
Now Jesus looked up and saw rich people dropping their gifts into the offering box.

Bible in Basic English
And looking up, he saw the men of wealth putting their offerings in the money-box.

Gifts or offerings were dropped in the money-box or offering box, but tithes were not dropped in the offering box.[/size]

It all depends on your meaning and understanding of income and revenue. If you think of income and revenue only in terms of cash and monetary exchanges as is used in contemporary times, you're narrowing the meanings of those terms while trying to excuse the meaning of 'asset'. It then remains for you to please find a verse - any verse - in the KJV that shows the hebrew word for 'asset'.

Isn't it amazing how wordtalk ignores all my talk about income - that it can be in ANY form.  Money, services, or merchandise.  I have said over and over again that the Israelite farmers had income from the sale AND/OR barter-exchange of the crops and animals.

Isn't it odd that wordtalk can't seem to understand that I am using the term asset as a description of the items.  I don't need to use the word asset at all.  The Levitical tithe was a tenth of the crops and every tenth animal, NOT a tenth of what was received from the sale and/or barter-exchange of the crops and animals.

Wordtalk obviously has an agenda other than accuracy and truth.

I believe I have proven my position by DEFINITION, not interpretation.  Wordtalk is so narrow minded that he/she can't see the difference between an increase in the seed and an income from a sale.

Wordtalk obviously thinks he/she is smarter than those who translated the Word into the KJV of the Holy Bible.

The words revenue, profit, and gain are all used in the KJV but NEVER in conjunction with the tithe.

The word vegetable is also not in the KJV.  Doesn't mean we can't describe some of the herbs as vegetables.

The following is quoted from
http://carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/word-trinity-not-bible

, there are many biblical concepts that people believe in that don't have a specific word describing them used in the Bible.  For example, the word "bible" is not found in the Bible, but we use it anyway to describe the Bible.  Likewise, "omniscience" which means "all-knowing," "omnipotence" which means "all-powerful," and "omnipresence" which means "present everywhere," are words not found in the Bible either, but we use them to describe the attributes of God.  We don't have to see a specific word in the Bible in order for the concept it describes to be true.

Following are other words that the Bible does not use but the concepts are mentioned:

        Atheism is the teaching that there is no God.  "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Psalm 14:1).
        Divinity which means divine quality or godlike character.  Yet, we speak of the godlike quality of the Lord God. See Psalm 139.
        Incarnation which means the word (God) who became flesh.  Yet, this is definitely taught in the Bible (John 1:1,14).
        Monotheism is the teaching that there is only one God (Isaiah 43:10; 44:.
        Rapture is the teaching that the Christians who are alive when Jesus returns will be caught up to meet Him in the air (1 Thess. 4:16-18).

The fact that the word asset doesn't appear in the Bible doesn't mean the concept or description doesn't appear in the Bible.

Seriously is there more to Wordtalk than we know?
I wonder how you expect others to take a stand with you when you keep shifting,
You have said you will not have a dialogue with him anymore because he is this and that, yet you keep surrounding your conversations around him.
Pls make a post without mentioning him, you are acting petulant.

I wonder how you expect others to take a stand with you when you keep shifting,

I have not shifted. I will no longer dialogue with wordtalk on this blog. That doesn't mean I won't explain to others how I believe wordtalk is being dishonest and purposely, in my opinion, injecting confusion and lies by constantly misquoting what others say.

wordtalk has shown the world that he/she has absolutely no accounting background but continues to define what the accounting term income means.

Those who can see through lies and dishonest debating will see through this type of manipulation. However, most church goers seem to be influenced by whatever they are told at church and fail to do their own in-dept Bible study.

garyarnold:

I have not shifted. I will no longer dialogue with wordtalk on this blog. That doesn't mean I won't explain to others how I believe wordtalk is being dishonest and purposely, in my opinion, injecting confusion and lies by constantly misquoting what others say.

If I have lied to you, please quote me directly.
if I have injected confusion purposely, please quote me directly.
If I have misquoted you, please quote me directly to show the original quote(s) and the misquotes.

As Snowwy has observed, you don't have to make 'wordtalk' the reason for your discontent/restlessness.

wordtalk has shown the world that he/she has absolutely no accounting background but continues to define what the accounting term income means.

How many authors of Bible Dictionaries needed to take accounting classes in order to define the word 'tebuah' as including INCOME and REVENUE? How many translators had to wait to sit accounting classes in order to have translated the Bible? Who has ever concluded that a good knowledge of the Bible has to be based on accounting classes?

I find your complaints here absolutely idiotic, as it is becoming such a caricature of your boasted accounting career! You often grumble about people having or not having accounting background when discussing Biblical subjects - yet you of all people that should have known better just cannot compute the 'total giving' in Numbers 31! And yet you claim to be teaching others "financial planning" without budgeting - a most risible claim for any 'accountant' to make!

Those who can see through lies and dishonest debating will see through this type of manipulation.

Yes, your type of manipulation! That is why you have quibbled long and hard and asserted things which you can't defend from Scripture. You manipulate others around your 'asset' until you're the one now abandoning that term - in search for another excuse, no?

However, most church goers seem to be influenced by whatever they are told at church and fail to do their own in-dept Bible study.

It is because we can do our own Bible study, that's why you're left sobbing all by yourself!

garyarnold:

Isn't it amazing how wordtalk ignores all my talk about income - that it can be in ANY form.

I didn't ignore all your talk about income. The issue was for you to please find a verse - any verse - in the KJV that shows the hebrew word for 'asset'.

Money, services, or merchandise.

Please be specific - do people tithe services? Do they tithe merchandise? If you're saying that your meaning of income includes all those, does that mean you agree that tithes included money in Scripture? If not, why do you include it as income in this case?

I have said over and over again that the Israelite farmers had income from the sale AND/OR barter-exchange of the crops and animals.

Did I argue against that? I have reiterated that there were various types of income in Israel, and that the commonly understood term for income was tebuah. That is a fact which you find very difficult to controvert other than denying without substance. What hebrew word do you know of in Scripture that points to 'asset'?

Isn't it odd that wordtalk can't seem to understand that I am using the term asset as a description of the items.

Oh don't be silly. I can understand how you're trying to cheat repeatedly by using 'asset' for your own description while rigidly opposing others who use the term 'income' as descriptive as well. If you're begging to use 'asset' as descriptive, I can allow that as long as you also allow others the use of a more appropriate term 'income' on the same basis as you want for your own arguments. Denying others the appropriate use of 'income' (tebuah) which is found in Scripture in the hebrew form, while you take the liberty to dribble in 'asset' is just cheating.

I don't need to use the word asset at all.

No problem - find another excuse.

The Levitical tithe was a tenth of the crops and every tenth animal, NOT a tenth of what was received from the sale and/or barter-exchange of the crops and animals.

Red herring. Nobody I know of in this forum has argued about tithes from "sale" - so your point here is mute. I have maintained indeed that tithes in Judaism was from 'tebuah', a hebrew word which Bible dictionaries define as including INCOME. I never once said that 'tebuah' was "sale".

Wordtalk obviously has an agenda other than accuracy and truth.

If 'tebuah' does not satisfy you, please show us the hebrew word for 'asset' so we can see your own agenda and define for ourselves how "accurate" and "truth" you claim to be.

I believe I have proven my position by DEFINITION, not interpretation.

Pleasee give us the "definition" based on ANY VERSE in the Bible, and then you can rest your head while we interpret. You can believe all you want by prevarications - it happens often in your arguments. You just make assertions which you can't provide proof for, then attack others who challenge your assertions, while at the same time being unable to refute or controvert the challenge! Nice.

Wordtalk is so narrow minded that he/she can't see the difference between an increase in the seed and an income from a sale.

Thanks for making things easier for yourself by resorting to ad hominem fallacies - that is always the first-aid you hide behind when you can't reason issues calmly and sensibly. If I tried to argue tithes from defining 'tebuah' as "sale", please quote me directly! Don't come down to the level of plainly lying on top of your failure to persuade yourself!

Wordtalk obviously thinks he/she is smarter than those who translated the Word into the KJV of the Holy Bible.

Another red herring. I used the words which Bible dictionaries define from hebrew words which occur in the Bible. WHERE is your own 'asset' from the same KJV of the Holy Bible?

The words revenue, profit, and gain are all used in the KJV but NEVER in conjunction with the tithe.

Whereas, tebuah which is defined as 'income' among other things is found in connection with tithes; your own word 'asset' does not even appear once in any verse of the KJV - and you can't even find the hebrew word that could be defined as 'asset'. The best you do now is altogether abandon your own "asset" and pick a quarrel with 'tebuah'.

The word vegetable is also not in the KJV. Doesn't mean we can't describe some of the herbs as vegetables.

The KJV of the Holy Bible is NOT the only or the most accurate of English translations - that much we know. Only fundamentalists believers make a lot of noise about the KJV and end up making assertions which they can't defend from the same KJV! This is why you have always had problems with other translations/versions - and yet you can't find the word 'asset' in those which I cited for you.

The following is quoted from
http://carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/word-trinity-not-bible

, there are many biblical concepts that people believe in that don't have a specific word describing them used in the Bible. For example, the word "bible" is not found in the Bible, but we use it anyway to describe the Bible. Likewise, "omniscience" which means "all-knowing," "omnipotence" which means "all-powerful," and "omnipresence" which means "present everywhere," are words not found in the Bible either, but we use them to describe the attributes of God. We don't have to see a specific word in the Bible in order for the concept it describes to be true.

First off, you can't claim that a certain word is not in the Bible by simply holding unto only one particular English version (KJV) - you have to understand that the Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek: NOT in English. If, therefore, the translators of a certain version like the KJV do not use a specific word which other translators in OTHER VERSIONS have used, that does not mean therefore that the KJV is the most accurate - which it is NOT.

Take, for example, the word Bible. We can consult other Bible sources to determine HOW we got the word 'Bible' -

Bible
The English form of the Greek name Biblia, meaning “books,” the name which in the fifth century began to be given to the entire collection of sacred books, the “Library of Divine Revelation.” The name Bible was adopted by Wickliffe, and came gradually into use in our English language. ~~ Easton Bible Dictionary.

The point here is that, when a certain English word is used, we should look for two things: the basic definition (from Bible dictionaries) and their applications (from various other sources).

However, if you use the word 'asset', you should be able at the very least to find either the Hebrew or Greek words that define the concept(s) you're forcing into a text! You did not provide any verse nor hebrew/greek words for your 'asset' other than make so much noise for several pages and from other threads about the same thing you are unable to prove!

I hinted you at one time that I could help you make a good argument for 'asset' even though there is no hebrew word I could find in the Bible for that term. But when you argued that "asset is asset", I felt you were the most unreasonable person to discuss anything helpful with. This is why I would rather help you make a complete mess of your own unsubstantiated arguments until you come to a place where you begin to shy away from your 'asset'.

Do you know why you can't get away with all this? Because the moment you try to define 'asset' in its etymology, all your redundant arguments will collapse momentarily. This, PERHAPS, is the reason you don't want to man up to seek ot the etymology of 'asset', and you are desperate to cover the eyes of your readers with an evolved usage of the term 'asset'.

Following are other words that the Bible does not use but the concepts are mentioned:

Atheism is the teaching that there is no God. "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Psalm 14:1).

That is not the definition or meaning of atheism for many atheists themselves - rather, that is just a convenient definition that theists like to use when seeking meaningless arguments with fundamentalist believers. Go and find out for yourself what atheism actually is, and you will see that Psalm 14:1 is not particularly defining atheism: that verse is actually talking about people who behave foolishly in ungodly manners - and that (surprise! surprise!!) includes those who claim to be believers and yet act in that same manner!

Divinity which means divine quality or godlike character. Yet, we speak of the godlike quality of the Lord God. See Psalm 139.
Incarnation which means the word (God) who became flesh. Yet, this is definitely taught in the Bible (John 1:1,14).
Monotheism is the teaching that there is only one God (Isaiah 43:10; 44:.
Rapture is the teaching that the Christians who are alive when Jesus returns will be caught up to meet Him in the air (1 Thess. 4:16-18).

The same principle as above.

The fact that the word asset doesn't appear in the Bible doesn't mean the concept or description doesn't appear in the Bible.

That is why you need to show us what verses describe such use of the term "asset". Afterall, the CARM quotes you cited also gave their own verses to show wat they meant by the various terms and concepts they were arguing. WHERE in the KJV did you find any hebrew word that defines 'asset'?

Snowwy:

You have said you will not have a dialogue with him anymore because he is this and that, yet you keep surrounding your conversations around him.
Pls make a post without mentioning him, you are acting petulant.

Just leave him alone - he can't help himself. I don't have any issues with him; but if he desires to be rubbished in his silly assertions, I could very well help him achieve just that.