garyarnold:

I tried, but this blog won't print it. So I will try it this way. You are an I D I O T.

Applause! Is that all you can do in bearing out your frustration?
Just take it easy - this is not a do-or-die affair. More to the point would be that you try and reason things through - which is what I have done in posts #118 and #122. Relax, dude.

And like I said, IF increase meant income under God's tithing commands, the definition of income has changed.

Everyone who reasons sees that 'tebuah' is INCOME; and the source I showed earlier says the same thing: "He gave a tithe of his income, not of his property" (Robertson's Word Pictures, Luke 18:12). If it was the case of tithing from "asset", there would definitely have been a hebrew word or equivalent in those tithing verses in Scripture - you have not found any such, nor have I.

The only word in reference to tithing that I know of at present is 'tebuah' which is defined as INCOME - for INCOME was of two types: partly produce and partly money. This is not even a "modern" definition, and that was why I posted all those other references to show what it actually was.

There are other words in the Old Testament that the KJV translates in English which do not have a bearing on tithes - these include property/properties. But they do not have the sense of "asset" in its etymology. So, the best you can do is IGNORE Scripture and then keep hooting about on "asset" in its modern definitions (which renders your assertion that 'an asset is an asset' to be meaningless).

Nowhere in the KJV does it associate the word income or revenue with wages or interest.

If you want to keep on like this, you're damagin your arguments even further. First, we have seen that the KJV is NOT the most accurate translation - as a vast majority of scholars do not use it to argue in a fundamentalist manner as you're doing.

Second, to get an understanding of an issue, look at the background - its etymology, etc - and that can be got from sources outside the Bible (e.g., Dictionaries and Encyclopedias). It is in this manner you will find that 'tebuah' is INCOME, and scholars already acknowledge that. But I have not found any scholar which argues that tithes were from "assets" - which is so obvious as none of your sources shows tithes from "asset".

Your only escape hatch is to resort to a so-called "modern" definition of "asset" to force your own ideology. In scripture, "tebuah" is NOT 'asset' and nobody I know has ever made the argument to define 'tebuah' as 'asset'.

If you know of any scholarly material that has defined 'tebuah' as 'asset' in those tithing verses, please share them - that may help you and others you're trying to impress.

garyarnold:

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Numbers 18:20-32
When the Levites had thus paid the tenth of their income,

Since the Levites received the tithe as compensation for the work they performed, when they tithed, it was actually from their income.

Agreed. Their INCOME was what? Money? Nope. What was it?

HOWEVER,
Numbers 18:27 (KJV)  “And this your heave offering shall be reckoned unto you, as though it were the corn of the threshingfloor, and as the fulness of the winepress.”

Therefore, Numbers 18:27 means that it will not be treated as from their income (since income was not tithable)

You're playing some weak magic trick here, garyarnold. Look above - it is clear that the Levites tithed from their income. Everyone knows this. All this brouhaha about "however-therefore" is bilgewater. You can't play fast and loose to twist the simple things that people can read here, y'know.

. .  but rather from their assets.  That's the meaning in plain English.

Nope, neither Matthew Henry nor the verses cited say anything about tithing from 'asset'. Please refrain from cheating like this - it's weak and childish.

Now shut up for a change.  I am sick of your broken record and crap.

The broken record and crap is coming from you - you just shut up and your peace will return.

Common sense - when the scriptures were translated into English, the words were translated into words that people would understand.

Again, the KJV uses increase, and that is only for the three-year tithe.

The KJV does NOT uses the word increase in Leviticus 27:30-33 / Numbers 18 where God defines His tithe and gives his instructions for that tithe. It is the Levitical tithe that pastor's use to pattern their teaching of tithing today, NOT the festival tithe or the three-year tithe.

The Holy Bible, King James Version


Leviticus 27:30 (KJV)
30And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD’S: it is holy unto the LORD.
Leviticus 27:31 (KJV)
31And if a man will at all redeem ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof.
Leviticus 27:32 (KJV)
32And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD.
Leviticus 27:33 (KJV)
33He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed.

Says nothing about increase (or income) in the above scriptures. You only find the word increase in connection with the three-year tithe.

garyarnold:

However, the vast majority of Bible scholars and Christians reject all these objections as being based on faulty facts and reasoning, and they do not consider the KJV to be more accurate or more sacred than other translations.

And that same source also says:

Yep, I saw what it "also says". the point there was that anyone who is arguing that the KJV is "the only" accurate version or translation is arguing like a fundamentalist/fundy Christian - the other source tells us that these fundy-type of Christians are "mostly in the United States" . . . would you like to relocate from California now?

Dude, the argument of the KJV 'most accurate' and 'only' this or that is not an intelligent argument to make - you should grow with the times, as a VAST MAJORITY of scholars already know that such an argument cannot stand up in the arena of intelligent discources.

- most aspects of the Old Testament Law do not apply to Christians.
- Christians still look to the Old Testament scripture for moral and spiritual guidance (2 Timothy 3:16-17). But when there seems to be a conflict between Old Testament laws and New Testament principles, we must follow the New Testament because it represents the most recent and most perfect revelation from God (Hebrews 8:13, 2 Corinthians 3:1-18, Galatians 2:15-20).
- The tithing rules in the Bible were based on the religious and social system of ancient Israel and on an agricultural economy. Modern day questions about what percentage we should give and whether it should be computed on gross income, net income or wealth are not answered in the Bible.

And . . . does that all argue at all that Christians cannot tithe from their income? Does that argue that tithing is from asset?

Nor does the Bible tell us how much of our giving should go to the Church and how much to help the needy. In today's world, we must pray and listen to our consciences when deciding how much to give and to which organizations or individuals.

Sweet. Is that not the same thing I have tried to maintain? Let Christians DO AS THEY WISH - do try to heckle them to define their giving to fit your own narrow 'asset' this or that. If people want to give a tenth/tithe of their RESOURCES, let them do so: let each one pray and listen and act on their own convictions. I have said many times: God has not apponted you or me to be His personal secretaries in these matters.

Luke 18:12
I fast twice a week, and I give a tenth of my entire income.

Do you not know that they were bragging about what they did BEYOND the law? There was no law to fast twice a week or to give a tenth of their entire income. They were trying to show their superiority, just like some so-called tithers do today.

If you feel that there is a version of the Bible more accurate than the KJV, then you should use it consistently. If you change versions depending on the topic, you are merely shopping for a version to back your own position.

The SDA use the KJV for everything EXCEPT tithing. They choose another version to support their own teaching, but won't let you use that version for any other topic. That is what you do, also.

wordtalk = pick and choose

garyarnold:

Common sense - when the scriptures were translated into English, the words were translated into words that people would understand.

We know - that is why we find some English translations that simple use the word INCOME. That is simple enough for the hebrew 'tebuah' in those tithing verses. See Numbers 18:28 for example in the God's WORD version - this simple English version is using words that people would understand. If that is the case, would you come back and make it more complicated? I trust you will.

Again, the KJV uses increase, and that is only for the three-year tithe.

Again, the word INCREASE is from the hebrew 'tebuah' which in Bible dictionaries is defined as INCOME - not 'asset'.

The KJV does NOT uses the word increase in Leviticus 27:30-33 / Numbers 18 where God defines His tithe and gives his instructions for that tithe.

The KJV does not use the word 'asset' because it cannot do so from the hebrew 'tebuah'; but other versions use the word 'income' because that is what the hebrew word 'tebuah' means. The KJV is NOT the only or most accurate translation - only fundamentalist Christians argue hard and long on KJV and get defeated on their weak arguments every single time. Nice.

It is the Levitical tithe that pastor's use to pattern their teaching of tithing today, NOT the festival tithe or the three-year tithe.

No problem. Which one do you use to pattern your '25-30% of your total income'?

The Holy Bible, King James Version

Leviticus 27:30 (KJV)
. . . .

Says nothing about increase (or income) in the above scriptures. You only find the word increase in connection with the three-year tithe.

No 'asset' there either.

garyarnold:

Luke 18:12
I fast twice a week, and I give a tenth of my entire income.

Do you not know that they were bragging about what they did BEYOND the law? There was no law to fast twice a week or to give a tenth of their entire income.

The man was not condemned for either fasting or tithing beyond the Law, but rather for his self-righteousness.

[list][li]Robertson's Word Pictures, Luke 18:12
He gave a tithe of his income, not of his property.[/li][/list]

[list][li]The FOUR-FOLD GOSPEL, 1914
Luke 18:9-14
I give tithes of all that I get. [I give the tenth part of my income. The law required that tithes be given from the corn, wine, oil, and cattle (Deut. xiv. 22, 23), but the Pharisees took account of the humblest herbs of the garden, and gave a tenth of their mint, anise, and cummin (Matt. xxiii. 23). Thus he confessed his virtues rather than his sins.][/li][/list]

They were trying to show their superiority, just like some so-called tithers do today.

Were you not doing the same thing when you bragged about giving "25 - 30% of your total income"? Were you not doing precisely the same thing when you bragged about giving "far, far, far, far, far more than" a tenth? If the man could be apprised/reprimanded for his self-righteousness on the tenth of his entire income, what do you think would be your own case in bragging about "far, far, far, far, far more than" that man?

Romans 2:3 - "And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? "

The KJV does NOT uses the word increase in Leviticus 27:30-33 / Numbers 18 where God defines His tithe and gives his instructions for that tithe.

The KJV does not use the word 'asset' because it cannot do so from the hebrew 'tebuah'; but other versions use the word 'income' because that is what the hebrew word 'tebuah' means. The KJV is NOT the only or most accurate translation - only fundamentalist Christians argue hard and long on KJV and get defeated on their weak arguments every single time. Nice. Smiley

You seem to have missed the point. The word TEBUAH is only used for the 3-year tithe, not the tithe that pastor's refer to. The 3-year tithe was kept within thy gates and was used to feed the Levites, widows, orphans, etc. There is no TEBUAH used in any other tithe. Since you are following any so-called "spirit of the law" of the 3-year tithe, then stick to the so-called "spirit of the law" for the tithe you are following, which was NOT on any TEBUAH.

garyarnold:

If you feel that there is a version of the Bible more accurate than the KJV, then you should use it consistently. If you change versions depending on the topic, you are merely shopping for a version to back your own position.

No. I'm not a hermit like you recommend for yourself - that is why I don't stick to just one translation or version. This is the reason why you will find a vast majority of scholars in Biblical exegesis or hermeneutics who use a variety of translations/versions for their work rather than stick to only one version. So, there's nothing wrong in using a few complementary resources to arrive at a better understand - which is why I've recommended you consult such sources and see that 'tebuah' is NOT the same as 'asset'.

The SDA use the KJV for everything EXCEPT tithing. They choose another version to support their own teaching, but won't let you use that version for any other topic. That is what you do, also.

That's their problem and it's not what I do. I have used a variety of resources instead of sticking to only the KJV - since you have been hooting alone for the KJV, you may as well try and make your case as long as you don't cheat. Afterall, did I not say in post #69 that "by all means stop trying to cheat yourself and your plaudits by making assertions about concepts which you cannot defend from the Bible - KJV or any other"?

wordtalk = pick and choose

I don't pick and choose; but if that is your style of releasing fart to sit comfy, nice try.

garyarnold:

You seem to have missed the point. The word TEBUAH is only used for the 3-year tithe, not the tithe that pastor's refer to. The 3-year tithe was kept within thy gates and was used to feed the Levites, widows, orphans, etc. There is no TEBUAH used in any other tithe. Since you are following any so-called "spirit of the law" of the 3-year tithe, then stick to the so-called "spirit of the law" for the tithe you are following, which was NOT on any TEBUAH.

Okay, just to allow you sleep well: your argument is that I miss the point. Now please show me where tebuah = 'asset' in ANY tithing verse.

There is no TEBUAH mentioned in Abram's tenth.

There is no TEBUAH mentioned in the Levitical tithe (Leviticus 27:30-33 / Numbers 18).

TEBUAH is only used for the Festival tithe and the 3-year tithe, neither of which would be a principle for giving a tenth of anyone's income to the church.  There is no so-called "spirit of the law" that would even closely resemble giving a tenth to a church.

So the ONE AND ONLY tithe that God said belonged to Him is the one in Leviticus 27:30-33, Numbers 18.  And there is no TEBUAH mentioned.  So you have NO scripture to back up saying the tithe paid by the Israelite farmers had anything to do with income.  The tithe given to the Levites was their income, so even if you want to argue that the Levites tithed on their income, they were tithing on the tithe.

There is no logical way to see some principle or so-call spirit of the law in the Levitical tithe and come up with a tenth of income to the church.

I, personally, use the KJV as the best translation available. That doesn't mean I don't also use others to compare wording. But when the wording changes the meaning, I stick to the KJV. And the word increase does not mean income even if TEBUAH can be translated into either word. But since TEBUAH is not used for the one and only tithe the Israelites paid to God, we don't need to translate TEBUAH for that tithe.

garyarnold:

There is no TEBUAH mentioned in Abram's tenth.

Red herring!
Did I argue that TEBUAH was mentioned in Abraham's/Abram's tithes?
Why are you using that as an excuse?

There is no TEBUAH mentioned in the Levitical tithe (Leviticus 27:30-33 / Numbers 18).

TEBUAH is only used for the Festival tithe and the 3-year tithe, neither of which would be a principle for giving a tenth of anyone's income to the church.  There is no so-called "spirit of the law" that would even closely resemble giving a tenth to a church.

So the ONE AND ONLY tithe that God said belonged to Him is the one in Leviticus 27:30-33, Numbers 18.  And there is no TEBUAH mentioned.

Again: Now please show me where tebuah = 'asset' in ANY tithing verse.

So you have NO scripture to back up saying the tithe paid by the Israelite farmers had anything to do with income.

So, are you saying that the Israelite farmers had nothing to do with TEBUAH in their tithes? I just want to know.

The tithe given to the Levites was their income, so even if you want to argue that the Levites tithed on their income, they were tithing on the tithe.

Yes, I already said that the Levites were tithing from their income - as in:

[list][li]Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Numbers 18:20-32
When the Levites had thus paid the tenth of their income, as a heave-offering to the Lord, they had themselves the comfortable enjoyment of the other nine parts[/li][/list]

In all of this, please again: show me where tebuah = 'asset' in ANY tithing verse.

There is no logical way to see some principle or so-call spirit of the law in the Levitical tithe and come up with a tenth of income to the church.

Please again: show me where tebuah = 'asset' in ANY tithing verse.

garyarnold:

I, personally, use the KJV as the best translation available. That doesn't mean I don't also use others to compare wording. But when the wording changes the meaning, I stick to the KJV.

I do not begrudge you whatever you may believe about the KJV. Fact is: a vast majority of scholars know that the KJV is not the "only" or even the "most accurate" of translations.

And the word increase does not mean income even if TEBUAH can be translated into either word.

Does the word 'increase' mean 'asset? Please show me what hebrew word in ANY tithing verse translates 'tebuah' into 'asset'.

But since TEBUAH is not used for the one and only tithe the Israelites paid to God, we don't need to translate TEBUAH for that tithe.

Did the hebrew use a word translated as 'asset'? What word is that?

Please drop the asset thing.  I am not using it now because it isn't needed.  The fact is, scripture does not use the word TEBUAH for any tithe that you claim you are doing "in the spirit of."  

Which of all the tithes in the Bible do you claim to be following "in the spirit of the law?"  Are you using the festival tithe or the 3-year tithe?  NO.  That only leaves Abram's tithe and the Levitical tithe, neither of which does scripture say anything about assets or TEBUAH.  You won't accept assets for those tithes, and I won't accept income.  Since I don't tithe, I don't need to substantiate assets.  But since you are "giving tithes" and doing so using the "spirit of the law," I'd like to know exactly which laws you are basing your tithing on.  The Levitical tithe is spelled out.  No TEBUAH, just a tenth of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, and every tenth animal.  Forget assets.  Now, show me where that is INCOME in the scriptures?

You have dug yourself a hole you can't get out of now.  You keep insisting that TEBUAH means income, but TEBUAH isn't used for the tithe you are basing your tithing on.  If I am wrong, GIVE THE SCRIPTURE YOU ARE BASING YOUR SPIRIT OF THE LAW ON.

garyarnold:

Please drop the asset thing. I am not using it now because it isn't needed.

This is the second time you are begging to stop using your own word "asset". Nice.

The fact is, scripture does not use the word TEBUAH for any tithe that you claim you are doing "in the spirit of."

Scripture does not use the word 'tebuah' for ANY TITHE? You will find 'tebuah' (תּבוּאה) in connection with tithes in Numbers 18:30 and Deuteronomy 14:22. Just say you are now trying even harder to IGNORE Scripture and we can then soundly and roundly ignore you for your fundamentalist arguments.

Which of all the tithes in the Bible do you claim to be following "in the spirit of the law?" Are you using the festival tithe or the 3-year tithe? NO. That only leaves Abram's tithe and the Levitical tithe, neither of which does scripture say anything about assets or TEBUAH. You won't accept assets for those tithes, and I won't accept income.

I am not a legalist who seeks only the letter of the Law (oh, I forgot - you don't read and only limit yourself to the KJV). Paul was not concerned about which of the 3-year tithes were applicable before he quoted from the Law of Moses in 1 Corinthians 9. My point? This: you can use the OT scriptures for present applications as long as you do not seek a the "letter" only.

Since I don't tithe, I don't need to substantiate assets.

That's fine. Since I'm not the one bragging about 25-30% of my total income, I don't need to substantiate where tht is coming from. The one thing I have consistently maintained is that you should allow others the freedom to choose what makes meaning for them rather than try to heckle them in the typical spirit of a fundamentalist.

Those who tithe know what they are doing - let them be. They do not need you and your redundant "asset" manufactured accounting-without-budget to get in their way, especially where you have tried to cheat repeatedly with zero success on your "modern" definition of asset.

But since you are "giving tithes" and doing so using the "spirit of the law," I'd like to know exactly which laws you are basing your tithing on.

I've said it before - you missed it because you are not interested in dialogue. So, you tell me what law you find for your "25-30% of your total income", then I will once again show you what I do.

The Levitical tithe is spelled out. No TEBUAH, just a tenth of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, and every tenth animal. Forget assets. Now, show me where that is INCOME in the scriptures?

I've shown you plenty of times. Since you refuse to see it, all I ask is for you to show me ANY VERSE for tithing from 'asset'.

You have dug yourself a hole you can't get out of now.

Rubbish! What hole? The one you're still struggling to hop out of?

You keep insisting that TEBUAH means income, but TEBUAH isn't used for the tithe you are basing your tithing on.

Look again at the verses I cited, check the STRONG's for the wordings there - and see if you can still DENY the fact!

If I am wrong, GIVE THE SCRIPTURE YOU ARE BASING YOUR SPIRIT OF THE LAW ON.

I did - you ignored it. So please show us your "asset" from ANY VERSE on tithing.

Those who tithe know what they are doing - let them be. They do not need you and your redundant "asset" manufactured accounting-without-budget to get in their way, especially where you have tried to cheat repeatedly with zero success on your "modern" definition of asset.

Zero success?  There are pastors and ministers in the US, Canada, Australia, and East Africa that I know of teaching the income vs asset argument from my material, and they email and thank me for bringing this out.  Christian accountants have also told me that they to saw that the Biblical tithe was on assets.  Zero success?  Not at all.  YOU are the one rejecting the asset argument.

The more people like you who keep the argument going, the more downloads of my book.  THANK YOU!

Can anyone give even ONE example in the scriptures were any woman/women tithed?

Since during the laws of Moses property went to the oldest son, the women never owned any property. ONLY MEN TITHED.

garyarnold:

Those who tithe know what they are doing - let them be. They do not need you and your redundant "asset" manufactured accounting-without-budget to get in their way, especially where you have tried to cheat repeatedly with zero success on your "modern" definition of asset.

Zero success?  There are pastors and ministers in the US, Canada, Australia, and East Africa that I know of teaching the income vs asset argument from my material, and they email and thank me for bringing this out.

Dude, you've been giving them some concoction that you have not been able to ascertain. That they are thanking you is because they don't know any better. If they knew that nobody tithed from 'asset', would they thank you for the stories you're telling now? Please pass.

Christian accountants have also told me that they to saw that the Biblical tithe was on assets.  Zero success?  Not at all.  YOU are the one rejecting the asset argument.

How many of those Christian 'accountants' actually find any hebrew word for 'asset' in ANY tithing verse in Scripture? Indeed, I reject it because there is no verse I can find to buttress such an argument. I said earlier that I know the hebrew word you are looking for - but it is NOT in connection with tithing. If those dudes knew that tithing was from 'asset', how come you their defender are falling flat on your face when asked to show it in the Bible?

The more people like you who keep the argument going, the more downloads of my book.  THANK YOU!

Story-telling . . . that is what you do best to feel good about your braggadocio.

garyarnold:

Can anyone give even ONE example in the scriptures were any woman/women tithed?

Since during the laws of Moses property went to the oldest son, the women never owned any property. ONLY MEN TITHED.

And what did they tithe from - "asset"? WHERE?

And what did they tithe from - "asset"? WHERE?

A real smart a s s, aren't you!

They tithed crops and animals.  Men tithed ALL three tithes.  No example of any woman tithing anything to anyone.  Period.

And by definition, they tithed from assets whether you accept it or not.  Just because you aren't smart enough to know the difference between assets and income doesn't mean the rest of us have to be dumb also.

matthew 5:17" Think not that i am come to destroy the law or the prophets: i am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

@God2man

what does it mean to fulfil a contract or deal?
simple question that I hope you can also provide a simple answer.

garyarnold:

They tithed crops and animals.  Men tithed ALL three tithes.  No example of any woman tithing anything to anyone.  Period.

Strawman! I didn't argue anything about the gender of those who gave tithes, so please don't try to create another 10 pages of your fundamentalist drama on that one.

And by definition, they tithed from assets whether you accept it or not.

Nobody tithed from 'asset' in Scripture, no matter how hard you try to jam that into the text.

Just because you aren't smart enough to know the difference between assets and income doesn't mean the rest of us have to be dumb also.

The rest of you can be as dumb as you want to, and for as long as you want to be - voluntarily, of course!

Look, dude, I've explained what you need to know - posts #118 and #122. The etymology of 'asset' does not indicate that anyone in Scripture tithed from 'asset'.

anonimi:

@God2man

what does it mean to fulfil a contract or deal?
simple question that I hope you can also provide a simple answer.

A simple question: how did Jesus 'fulfil' the tithes?

what does it mean to fulfil a contract or deal?
simple question that I hope you can also provide a simple answer.

To complete. To bring it to an end. It means that all conditions of the contract have been satisfied. There is nothing left to do.

garyarnold:

what does it mean to fulfil a contract or deal?
simple question that I hope you can also provide a simple answer.
To complete. To bring it to an end. It means that all conditions of the contract have been satisfied. There is nothing left to do.

[size=13pt]And the last words of Jesus on the cross was "It Is Finish" but tithe collectors will not accept that Jesus has completed the Law, even though the law was for Jews only.[/size]

@garyarnold, i searched mathew henry's bible commentary's, i searched Dake annotated refrence bible, i searched strong' s exhaustive concordance bible. I have not seen any negative meaning to "fulfil". Let assume, i am wrong. What is the meaning of destroy? You know that, right. Then, if christ had not come to destroy the law and the prophet. It means paying of tithe is still in place. Jesus said in the book of Act of apostle(Act 20:35) that it is more blessed to give than to receive. If i obey all other ways of giving and i did not pay tithe, it means, i am missing out some blessings, according to what Jesus said that it is more blessed to give than to receive. Anyway, @ garyarnold, you have a goal, and that is, you want your book to sell, more downloads. Misrepresentation and misinterpreting of scripture is so terrible. @ pastor kun. You want me to be doing burnt offering now, what about the veil of the temple that was torn? Jesus had finished every thing on the cross. Jesus made the law perfect, complete, "plerosai". He did not destroy the law, he established the law. Well, i pray that God will open your eyes. For your information, i do not only pay tithe because Jesus said so, it is because God had warned me in the night dream that i should pay my tithe, it is still valid. Please, Think. God bless you. God2man. that it is more blessed to give than to receive. Anyway, @ garyarnold, you have a goal, and that is, you want your book to sell, more downloads. Misrepresentation and misinterpreting of scripture is so terrible. @ pastor kun. You want me to be doing burnt offering now, what about the veil of the temple that was torn? Jesus had finished every thing on the cross. Jesus made the law perfect, complete, "plerosai". He did not destroy the law, he established the law. Well, i pray that God will open your eyes. For your information, i do not only pay tithe because Jesus said so, it is because God had warned me in the night dream that i should pay my tithe, it is still valid. Please, Think. God bless you. God2man.

A contract is not destroyed when it is completed.  It is fulfilled.  Everything has been done that was required.  The Bible does not contradict itself.  If you are right and the law is still valid today, then please explain how you choose which of the 613 Old Testament laws are valid today, and please explain what the following verses mean.  However, if I am right, the following verses speak for themselves.

Hebrews 8:13 (KJV) - In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Colossians 2:14 (KJV) - Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Galatians 5:18 (KJV) - But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Galatians 3:19 (KJV) - Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. In other words, until Jesus came and fulfilled the law.

Galatians 3:23-25 (KJV)
23But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Galatians 3:10-14 (KJV)
10For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

garyarnold:

If you are right and the law is still valid today, then please explain how you choose which of the 613 Old Testaments are valid today, and please explain what the following verses mean. However, if I am right, the following verses speak for themselves.

There's only 1 'Old Testament', not '613 Old Testament[b]s[/b]' - maybe a typo, no bother.

This should not be a matter of whether you are right and the other person wrong. Basically, your arguments are based on faulty premises - the so-called '613 Old Testament' commandments are arbitrary and you cannot be using that as an argument. 613 is just a number conveniently chosen: it is not that there are only 613 commandments in the Old Testament.

I'm curious, though: (a) how do YOU determine which of the said 613 commandments are valid today; and (b) how many of the 613 commandments do you think are valid today?

Until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. In other words, until Jesus came and fulfilled the law.

We know Jesus fulfilled the Law; but the New Testament does not argue that faith in Christ overthrows the Law - see Romans 3:31.

11But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Tithes and other types of giving are not taught in the Bible as a matter of justification. This is why I have noted that neither Abraham, nor Jacob, nor Israel were said to have given tithes in order to be justified.

I'm curious, though: (a) how do YOU determine which of the said 613 commandments are valid today; and (b) how many of the 613 commandments do you think are valid today?

Must I repeat myself?  Haven't you already criticized my answer to that question?  Is it that you want to criticize my answer again?  Is that how you get your pleasure out of life?  Do you just sit at your computer waiting for me to post something so that you can criticize what I write?  Have you nothing better to do?

garyarnold:

Must I repeat myself? Haven't you already criticized my answer to that question? Is it that you want to criticize my answer again? Is that how you get your pleasure out of life? Do you just sit at your computer waiting for me to post something so that you can criticize what I write? Have you nothing better to do?

Don't get so rattled - relax. You seem to also wait for someone to post something and then you jump at the chance to criticize what they say as if you have nothing better in life than hugging your keyboard!

I was curious that you always wave that blether of '613 Old Testaments' whenever issues like this come up - that was why I thought you could take the time to explain. . . voluntarily, of course.

But if you're unsettled by that request, no pains - just relax. The so-called "613" whatever is an old hat-trick people often use to hide their ignorance of the Law and the Old Testament. Just saying.