@anonimi
Good point there, I am yet to see one single person condenm giving of tithes, what we collectively condenm is the wrong, manipulative, deceptive and greedy teaching of mandatory tithing from monetary income as it is fraudulently taught in most churches today. This I believe all christians who have knowledge of the truth(including wordtalk) should stand and fight against. I wonder how a supposed christian can tolerate fraud on a massive scale in the church that is supposed to be the epitome of good morals.

Pastor Kun:

This I believe all christians who have knowledge of the truth(including wordtalk) should stand and fight against. I wonder how a supposed christian can tolerate fraud on a massive scale in the church that is supposed to be the epitome of good morals.

Please carefully examine what someone has said rather than jumping to unfounded conclusions by default. I do not tolerate "fraud on a massive scale" - I have shown this both on this forum and in several articles on my blog - an example: How Christians Think About Tithing, where I do not share Adeboye's teaching on compulsory tithing.

For anti-tithers to say that they have not seen 'one single person condemn giving of tithes' is not the same thing as anti-tithers encouraging voluntary tithes among Christians. Many have already and always concluded that Christians CANNOT express their giving in the form of tithes and should consequently say NO to tithing - that is why they use all sorts of fallacious arguments to fight tooth and nail against any hint of any type of tithing in the Body of Christ. When these fallacies are closely examined, the same anti-tithers become irrational in discussing issues.

wordtalk:

For anti-tithers to say that they have not seen 'one single person condemn giving of tithes' is not the same thing as anti-tithers encouraging voluntary tithes among Christians. Many have already and always concluded that Christians CANNOT express their giving in the form of tithes and should consequently say NO to tithing

What exactly are you preaching here? that voluntary tithes be encouraged? i need clarification. Thanks

Zikkyy:

What exactly are you preaching here? that voluntary tithes be encouraged? i need clarification. Thanks

That was in answer to Kun who says he had not seen 'one single person condemn giving of tithes' - I don't think that is true. This is what I've said - "Let others do as they have determined to do after praying - and if that includes expressing their giving in the form of tithes". This does not make an argument for compulsory tithes by any means.

Pastor Kun:

@anonimi
Good point there, I am yet to see one single person condenm giving of tithes,

Pastor Kun, We both know that this is not true. You are very against anything that has a hint of 'tithe' mentioned in it ('voluntary or not). I am surprised you are even saying this now after our previous discourses.
However, it is possible you have had a change of heart. I take you by your word, once again.

wordtalk:

That was in answer to Kun who says he had not seen 'one single person condemn giving of tithes' - I don't think that is true. This is what I've said - "Let others do as they have determined to do after praying - and if that includes expressing their giving in the form of tithes". This does not make an argument for compulsory tithes by any means.

Thanks for the clarification I read you clearly now. Thanks

I've shown you the difference, and you could not counter a dot in my rejoinder - posts #118 and #122. So stop summersaulting on the same page and move on.

Wordtalk's answers in all posts still confirms she doesn't know the difference between increase, income, assets, and income-producing assets.

She uses the Greek word for increase to show that it (can) also means income, and then finds versions of the Bible that uses the word income instead of increase. But the KJV didn't choose the word income. They chose the word increase. Increase does not mean income.

Yet wordtalk insists that Abram "tithed" because the KJV uses the word "tithe." But the Greek word translated into tithe also means tenth, and many versions of the Bible chose the word tenth instead of tithe for Abram/Abraham; i.e. the NIV. Therefore, if we can select whatever version of the Bible to make our case, as does wordtalk, then we can choose the NIV to show that Abram did NOT tithe - he gave a tenth.

Wordtalk is playing games with God's Word.

The fact is, there is no scripture to show that God required, commanded, or requested a tithe from anyone before the law. All three tithes commanded by God were on FOOD from crops, and the Levitical tithe also included animals in herds and flocks. God, Himself, NEVER sanctioned, in His Word, anything other than FOOD from crops and animals to be used for His tithe. God NEVER sanctioned, in His Word, anyone other than the Levites to receive His tithe (Levitical tithe), and made very clear what was to be done with the other two tithes.

Now we are under grace, not the law. We are free to give as we please. Calling it "tithing" is INFERRING that it somehow relates to what God called tithing, and it does NOT. Therefore, it is misleading and causes confusion, if not insulting God, Himself.

No one I know is against GIVING. But what would the reason be for calling your giving, "tithing," other than for your ego, or to broadcast what percent you are giving? Now IF there was a word for those giving 5%, or 15%, or 50%, etc., then it would make more sense. Otherwise, it serves no purpose other than to keep the confusion going. It is nothing but another trick of satan.

@snowwy
I have never condemned voluntary giving of tithes, what I consistently condemn is the evil, greedy, self serving, manipulative and false doctrine of mandatory/compulsory tithing taught by a lot of preachers today. If preachers were honest enough to admit to their congregation that tithing is not a christian requirement but only taught is has a voluntary practise, I won't have any problem with them. It is the fraudulent way tithes is preached that I am against and not the act of giving tithes itself.

@garyarnold,

When someone keeps going over arguments that they cannot counter such as you're doing, it is a sign of intellectual weakness. I have shown you the difference and even outlined for you the etymology of asset - there's nothing you have shown to counter what you read in my rejoinders in posts #118 and #122 - so what are you yapping and yelping all about for? Do you enjoy grumbling so miserably when you can't defend your shallow assertions?

garyarnold:

He uses the Greek word for increase to show that it (can) also means income, and then finds versions of the Bible that uses the word income instead of increase.

And what is wrong with that? WHERE have you shown that tebuah means 'asset' in ANY of those tithing verses? Which version has translated tebuah as 'asset'? WHERE? You always grumble and panic when you can't show anything for your arguments and then twist and turn to blame your loss on my comments? I can't laugh!

But the KJV didn't choose the word income. They chose the word increase.

Please for the umpteenth time, get done with your hugging of the KJV - it is NOT the most accurate nor is it the only English translation available. Only fundamentalist Christians in California argue long and hard about the KJV and yet cannot find what they are looking for in any verse of that version!

Increase does not mean income.

Lie again - I've shown the meaning of 'tebuah' in post #54 as including INCOME, both from the STRONG's and BROWN-DRIVER-BRIGGS Bible Dictionaries. Neither of those dictionaries defined 'tebuah' as asset.

When you tried to wave another fallacy in post #64 that the word 'asset' may not have existed at the time, I asked you to check its etymology. You just kept evading that single request until I showed in post #118 that the word was first used in 1531 - nearly a century BEFORE the KJV emerged in 1611!

When you no longer have bandages to cover your fallacies, you turn then make your case even worse by resorting to deliberate and cowardly lies in a fresh page!

Yet wordtalk insists that Abram "tithed" because the KJV uses the word "tithe."

Sorry for your loss! I'm sure if the KJV did not use the word "TITHE" for Abraham, you would have argued another ten pages to deny that he did! Indeed, I insist that what Abraham gave to Melchizedek are called TITHES in both the Old Testament (Gen. 14:20) and the New Testament (Hebrews 7:6) - there's no arguing against that! Only your tendency to prevaricate would try so hard to deny the fact!

But the Greek word translated into tithe also means tenth, and many versions of the Bible chose the word tenth instead of tithe for Abram/Abraham; i.e. the NIV.

Okay, you're warming up to other versions now, aren't you? Nice.
So, what is the difference between the 'tithes' of the KJV and the 'tenth' of the NIV? Build another 40 pages of meaningless argument on that.

Therefore, if we can select whatever version of the Bible to make our case, as does wordtalk, then we can choose the NIV to show that Abram did NOT tithe - he gave a tenth.

Lol, red herring and strawman!
Even YOU have just asserted that "the Greek word translated into tithe also means tenth"  - so, anyone who quotes either the KJV or the NIV would be spot on! No quibbles on that! If you're looking for a backdoor to dribble in 'asset', sorry for your loss - neither the KJV nor the NIV uses the word 'asset' in ANY verses on tithing. You will have to look hard for another strawman!

garyarnold:

Wordtalk is playing games with God's Word.

Weak and baseless allegation! You have tried to play games at your hardest in smuggling in 'asset' into your KJV - it didn't work for you. Next you tried your strawman on the NIV. . . it went puff with smoke spiralling all over the place! Having exhausted yourself on your fallacies, you now blame me for your own games? 

The fact is, there is no scripture to show that God required, commanded, or requested a tithe from anyone before the law.

This is the most stupid argument ever on the net! You're waiting for God to have "commanded" Abraham before you can rest your heart, no? Dunce! Who "commanded" Abel to bring offerings in Genesis 4? No, we don't read any verse about God "commanding" him, but in Hebrews 11:4 we read that "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh."

No, we also did not read any verse in Genesis that uses the word "faith" for Abel - but Hebrews 11 says he offered "by faith" - WITHOUT any command from God, yes? And God "testified" of his gift - even though there was no "commandment" to the gentleman to bring "a more excellent sacrifice".

You see the rubbish that trails your arguments? Just because you don't see "command" in Genesis 14, you will look for loopholes to prevaricate - and then what? This is why you often swell and cry all by yourself after making fallacies you can't stand up for!

All three tithes commanded by God were on FOOD from crops, and the Levitical tithe also included animals in herds and flocks. God, Himself, NEVER sanctioned, in His Word, anything other than FOOD from crops and animals to be used for His tithe. God NEVER sanctioned, in His Word, anyone other than the Levites to receive His tithe (Levitical tithe), and made very clear what was to be done with the other two tithes.

Deceive yourself as much as you can. Hebrews 7 shows that the Levitical tithes did not supercede Abraham's tithes (Heb. 7:7-9). It is because you can't read that is why you will also look for a verse in Genesis 14 that spells out in A-B-C fashion that Abraham's tithes were an act of worship. Deny that one as well and come back with cardiac arrest about 'wordtalk'.

Now we are under grace, not the law. We are free to give as we please. Calling it "tithing" is INFERRING that it somehow relates to what God called tithing, and it does NOT. Therefore, it is misleading and causes confusion, if not insulting God, Himself.

Now we are under grace. But when anti-tithers prefer their own "freewill offerings", they do so without realising that it does not occur even once in the New Testament, and all references to that cliche appear in the Old Testament with regards to Judaism.

No one I know is against GIVING. But what would the reason be for calling your giving, "tithing," other than for your ego, or to broadcast what percent you are giving?

Was it not your own ego that made you brag about giving between 25-30% of your total income - and you're "retired"?? Did you not broadcast your own giving as "far, far, far, far, far more than" what others give - so you can sleep with a tight conscience?

Now IF there was a word for those giving 5%, or 15%, or 50%, etc., then it would make more sense.

So, what word is there for those who broadcast their giving of "25-30% of total income"? What word is there for your braggadocio of "far, far, far, far, far more than" others? Since you did not find a suitable New Testament word for your own broadcast, you then turn to heckle others, not so?

Otherwise, it serves no purpose other than to keep the confusion going. It is nothing but another trick of satan.

Your own "25-30%" is whose trick?

wordtalk's reply has proven my point. She is playing games here.

Some words have many meanings. You can't just pick the one to fit what you want it to say.

Anyway, arguing with wordtalk is a waste of time because she is so narrow minded she can't see the truth. Her mind is made up, and she will continue to claim she has proven others wrong when the fact is, she has been proven wrong but can't see it.

I am sure that many on this blog see her manipulation of the Word by using whatever version of the Bible supports her position, and also sees how she manipulates what others say.

Fact is, wordtalk doesn't know the difference between increase, income, assets, and income-producing assets. Those of us with knowledge of these terms DO understand the difference and can easily see that the Biblical tithe was NEVER on income. But wordtalk will continue to "claim" she is right and the rest of us are wrong. One day wordtalk is going to wake up in the morning and say - oh! NOW I get it!

Nothing like a fiery discussion on tithes can bring out the 'Mr Hyde' outta otherwise gentle christians.

I wonder who will be first to lay down their ego and wave a white flag of apologetic humility . . . the sacrosanct charge of 'glorifying God in our interactions & speech - especially with one another - has sadly departed from this thread a long time ago.

garyarnold:

wordtalk's reply has proven my point. He is playing games here.

Strawman! Only you see games by reading your misadventures into my comments. Fail.

Some words have many meanings. You can't just pick the one to fit what you want it to say.

Yada-yada. Of all the words that have several meanings, which one has the meaning and definition of 'asset' in any tithing verse in Scripture? You want to cheat forever by picking and choosing words which do not appear in any such verses - yet it is taking you forever to show any verse for your 'asset'. Ain't you such a player?

Anyway, arguing with wordtalk is a waste of time because he is so narrow minded he can't see the truth.

I can see through your deliberate and cowardly lies - that is why you have not been able to counter anything I have shown using even the same Bible dictionaries which your non-existent "scholars" also use.

His mind is made up, and he will continue to claim he has proven others wrong when the fact is, he has been proven wrong but can't see it.

Tell stories to fill in the gaps when you can't prove your case - it's your global anthem.

I am sure that many on this blog see his manipulation of the Word by using whatever version of the Bible supports his position, and also sees how he manipulates what others say.

Aren't you sobbing miserably for your failing to twist the KJV in support of your fallacies? 

Fact is, wordtalk doesn't know the difference between increase, income, assets, and income-producing assets.

You can shout it a billion times till you're blue in the face - propagandists and jingoists use such argumentative devices as first-aid to cover up for their fallacies. What did you show about posts #118 and #122?

Those of us with knowledge of these terms DO understand the difference and can easily see that the Biblical tithe was NEVER on income.

Rephrase: Those of you with pretentions try to dribble in words which you can't find to cover your fallacies in the KJV. No tithing verse in Scripture shows any reference to 'asset' - that is why it's taking you till 'thy-kingdom-come' to show the hebrew words for 'asset' in ANY tithing verse. Fundamentalist cheats like you will always pretend you have "knowledge" so you can congratulate yourselves on arguments you can't show from your beloved KJV.

But wordtalk will continue to "claim" he is right and the rest of us are wrong. One day wordtalk is going to wake up in the morning and say - oh! NOW I get it!

I already GET IT - you've been slaving yourself cheating others with your claims which you can't show in your KJV. . . yes, I GOT IT the first time, I still do GET IT. 

Bump (considering the ongoing) "tithes" thread. 

I'd be particularly interested to see people who believe that "tithes must be paid into church" give their reasons for that belief.

Please remember no winner and no loser and even if you don't want to give an explanation, still vote nevertheless,