Zikkyy:

There was this fraudster in a church I was attending; he was quite active in the giving department. Always willing to play his part (by giving generously) in any request to give. But that did not stop him from ending up broke. The question I want to ask is this; how come this rule or principle did not apply in his case?

I also know of another anti-tither who tried all his best to stop others from giving. In all his arguments about 'love-driven giving', he remains broke today. Could I also ask you: how come his anti-tithing arguments and rule did not better his life?

But does that imply that our act of charity or display of love neighbor should dependent on the resulting reward?

Did I assert anywhere that anyone's act of love should be 'dependent' on any rewards? What I tried to say was that giving is taught as reciprocal in both the OT and NT. 'Reciprocal' does not run contrary to acts driven by love.

Is the act of charity/love conditional? Is that the message from the Luke chapter? That we give only when there is a reward?

I think you're trying hard to read what does not appear in my posts. Did I argue anywhere that we give only when there is reward? Did I? If I did not, what is bringing you to such a conclusion?

My understanding of charity differs. Christ talked about the reward resulting from our act of Christian acts, but he did not command us to love for the reward.

Again, please show me where I said that Christ commanded anyone to love for the reward. If you can show me, I will gladly consider it. If I did not argue such, then why draw such conclusions?

Giving in anticipation of reward implies that one will not give if there is no reward attached.

Not necessarily. The one who does not want to give will not give even where you qualify it with whatever adjective you please. People give not because they must first attach a reward - whatever such would be. It is just as well for someone to argue that people give in "anticipation" of God to reward the giving as He sees fit based on the giver's so-called "assurance". What is 'assurance' doing in the equation if truly the giver is not expecting anything as a reward?

This type of giving is definitely not driven by love.

No, if you set up a strawman argument to knock down on your own, then your idea is definitely not driven by love.

There is more to giving than just dropping that 10% in the offering box.

There is more to giving than all the cliches that people are manufacturing up and down the street. It is not about 10% or the anti-tithers mantra of 'love-driven' and whatever.

I think you are pushing it too far. I hope you don’t mind zikkyy asking; what exactly is the message in the Luke verse? Was Christ talking about the act of lending or was it a message on charity?

I did not push it too far. I explained in very simple terms what that verse says. It is the tired old song of folks who do not read their Bibles that we hear often misquoting Christ and assuming he said that we should "give, hoping for nothing in return", when actually that verse says "lend, hoping for nothing". There's no confusing between "lend" and "give" - and both occur on the basis of love in His teaching.

Apparently wordtalk doesn't know the difference between a "degree" and ordination.

I was ordained by a pastor of a church not far from where I grew up. That ordination gives me the right to perform marriages, etc. You are stuck on ULC. ALL of my degrees and certificates didn't come from them. However, ULC is, in fact, a local non-denomination church in Modesto, California, which holds services every Sunday. And they teach, as I do, that there is NO tithing in the Christian Church.

Every church I have belonged to recognizes my ordination.

Again, wordtalk criticizes my degrees and certificates but refuses to disclose his own education. What a joke. Always wants to take the focus off of his own education while condemning others! If it doesn't make you ill, wordtalk, look at yourself for a change.

While I actually have a ministry, and actually have many teaching from my material, wordtalk is a wannabe that has nothing to do but condemn others. I feel sorry for wordtalk.

garyarnold:

Apparently wordtalk doesn't know the difference between a "degree" and ordination.

Stop bleating. I know the difference and never for once spoke about your ordination. I was more concerned with your claim of D.D. as part of your Christian "EDUCATION". Using this mechanical device to shift focus is quite lame.

I was ordained by a pastor of a church not far from where I grew up.  That ordination gives me the right to perform marriages, etc.

You're more of a jerk than I supposed. Did I ask about your "ordination"? Are you such a twerp even at the doctorate level? Have you lost your sense of understanding simple issues or you're just talented at being stupid altogether?

Please leave your 'ordination' aside - nobody's advertising for marriage or wedding bells here. Focus on the issue of your acclaimed D.D. as part of your Christian "EDUCATION". I want to know where the California Courts ruled that "degrees issued by the ULC are as valid as any degrees given by any other Christian school". I want to see that ruling, not your lame tales.

You are stuck on ULC.  ALL of my degrees and certificates didn't come from them.

Dunce. I never asked you to stand up for ALL of your degrees. I'm particular about your 'Doctor of Divinity' which you claimed on your paper as part of your Christian "EDUCATION".

However, ULC is, in fact, a local non-denomination church in Modesto, California, which holds services every Sunday.

I know what ULC is, no thanks for the lecture on their services and Modesto. Your excuses are graciously aging, look for something more duplicitous to cover up.

And they teach, as I do, that there is NO tithing in the Christian Church.

So, your anti-tithing hangs on what the ULC teaches, yes? Well, school up, Fresno boy. The ULC also ordains atheists as ministers - the athiest and US attorney Michael Newdow is an ordained minister of the Universal Life Church. I'm sure you also will embrace the ULC's platitude for the teaching that there is no God, not so? Stupid.

Every church I have belonged to recognizes my ordination.

Every fraud you have belonged to recognizes your 'D.D.' sham. That is why you can't find where the California Courts claimed the validity you asserted earlier. I'm waiting.

Again, wordtalk criticizes my degrees and certificates but refuses to disclose his own education.

Degrees and certificates? Are you for real? I am going to repeat just this once:

(a) I'm particular about your 'Doctor of Divinity' which you claimed on your paper as part of your Christian "EDUCATION".

(b) as well, I am particular about your claim that theCalifornia Courts have ruled that degrees issued by the ULC are as valid as any degrees given by any other Christian school.

These two simple requests do not translate to throwing all your degrees and certificates in chaos.

What a joke.

Oh, dude. . . the joke is on you!

Always wants to take the focus off of his own education while condemning others!

I didn't condemn you or anyone else. I noted that you cannot pass off the D.D. issued by the ULC as part of your Christian EDUCATION when in very fact the ULC itself said that the degree does not convey academic standing or achievement.

If it doesn't make you ill, wordtalk, look at yourself for a change.

Look at myself - for not passing off a sham of a D.D. for my "education" to gull the public?

While I actually have a ministry, and actually have many teaching from my material, wordtalk is a wannabe that has nothing to do but condemn others.  I feel sorry for wordtalk.

Hahaha! You don't get it, do you? I don't boast of what I have or don't have, so you can feel sorry all you want.

For those following this blog, you should be able to see the tricks and scam-artist tactics of wordtalk.

Wordtalk, not me, brought up the DD degree. I didn't claim ANY of my degrees on this blog UNTIL wordtalk started condemning me for using them on my own webpages.

Instead of sticking with the issues of this blog, DOES GOD REQUIRE TITHES, wordtalk tries to turn the blog into a condemning exercise against those who don't agree with him.

In my opinion, wordtalk is nothing but talk, and is driven by the devil.

I have given my arguments that God does NOT require Christians to tithe today, and believe I have shown that no one can possibly tithe as God had instructed in the Old Testament. Although not ALL tithing in the Old Testament came from the Holy land, ALL of the tithing COMMANDED BY GOD in the scriptures, did come from the Holy land.

@wordtalk
I think you should take it easy on the abuses as it is not necessary in conveying your position. That aside you are throwing the thread off topic with constant and vehement personal attacks.

Wordtalk, you are not conveying any points by throwing insults at people. Show some decorum, You seem to be arguong blindly, for the sake of arguing.

Pastor Kun and obowunmi,

Thanks for your observation.

I'm not directing insults at others but at the very same troll who thinks it is his birthright to insult me for the sake of his anti-tithing brigade. As far back as post#7 I made my comments in relation to the thread as to the reason why many Christians choose to express their giving in the form of tithes. I don't see where he tried to discuss my comments directly other than starting out with insolence. I have often made it clear to him that if he wishes to discuss, he could do so and leave out his insolence. If he would rather choose otherwise, I would treat his manner of arguments in the way he wants to be served. Proverbs 26:5.

garyarnold:

For those following this blog, you should be able to see the tricks and scam-artist tactics of wordtalk.

Yawn. What tricks? You've been passing off yourself as a D.D. to gullible folks around the world as part of your Christian EDUCATION. Is that not the supreme fraud by someone who claims to have the Holy Spirit, knowing fully well what the ULC disclaimer says? Did the Holy Spirit inspire such fraud in your own tactics?

Wordtalk, not me, brought up the DD degree.  I didn't claim ANY of my degrees on this blog UNTIL wordtalk started condemning me for using them on my own webpages.

I did not condemn you but rather asked that you go and review your PDF paper and remove the misleading title instead of waiting for a gullible soul to email you so that you can "immediately correct" him or her. You know it is scam and fraud, but you wait until they email you so that you can take off the blinds and let them know you were lying through your yellow retired teeth that the D.D. was part of your Christian "Education". Lie again about the California Courts validating such professional scam.

Instead of sticking with the issues of this blog, DOES GOD REQUIRE TITHES, wordtalk tries to turn the blog into a condemning exercise against those who don't agree with him.

My comments in post #7 actually addresses the topic of the thread, so your whining is no water off duck's back. How many people have you not condemned simply because they do not agree with you? Oh, now a small matter about your scam and you're blue in the face? Well done. When you condemn others and accuse them, you should not cry like a puppy when your own scam is being examined.

It was in small print I first warned you to review your paper - 'small print' because I did not consider it the bigger issue of this thread. But as is typical of fraud and sham brigadiers like you, rather than take the warning to mind with its consequences, you came on board and started bragging and boasting to claim it is 'a right' for you to keep perpetrating that fraud to the unsuspecting public.

In my opinion, wordtalk is nothing but talk, and is driven by the devil.

Nice - and your insolence was inspired by the 'holy spirit' you've got inside you? My reaction to that is this: HAHAHAHAHA!! I'm used to your gutter talk, so I won't lose sleep on such.

garyarnold:

I have given my arguments that God does NOT require Christians to tithe today,

Does God "REQUIRE" giving?

. . and believe I have shown that no one can possibly tithe as God had instructed in the Old Testament.

Nobody during Paul's time argued with that he could not use the Law of Moses or any other part of the Old Testament to teach Christian doctrine on the matter in the same way as you legalstically argue. On the contrary, Paul used the same Law of Moses in 1 Corinthians 9:13-14 to instruct the Church, did he not? Is the Law of Moses not part of the "Old Testament"? And did Paul condemn anyone using the Old Testament to derive practical guidelines for how they are led to give?

All the anti-tithing arguments that no one can do this or that "as God had instructed in the Old Testament" shows how illiterate the one making the argument actually is. It is bereft of sound hermeneutics (not even where you claim a doctor of divinity that conveys no academic standing or achievement). There are many doctrines for the Church taught by the apostles which are directly drawn from Judaism and the Law of Moses and even the prophets. Anti-tithers are happy to 'carry over' those other doctrines from the Mosaic Law without arguing that no one can do so "as God had instructed in the Old Testament".

Although not ALL tithing in the Old Testament came from the Holy land, ALL of the tithing COMMANDED BY GOD in the scriptures, did come from the Holy land.

So where does Paul expect your own gifts/giving to come from when he used the Law of Moses and instructed Christians to give "in the same way"? If you want to follow precisely "as God had instructed in the Old Testament", you cannot have a claim on 1 Corinthians 9:13-14 as Christians do today.

Christians recognize that "the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof" (1 Corinthians 10:26). Even Moses in the Law declared that "Behold, to the LORD your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth with all that is in it" (Deut. 10:14). Those anti-tithers who quote Numbers 31 to claim that Israel gave 'tithe' from the spoils often forget that what they gave to God came from Moab, and what they gave was also 'holy', no?

What makes a gift 'holy'? It was not the land or place from which it came, but that which signifies God's presence - the altar - that makes a gift or giving 'holy'. That is why the offerings derived from Moab were also 'holy'. And that is why God gave instruction that Israel should bring their offerings to a specified place where God had chosen for that purpose (Deut. 12:5-6).

Christian giving comes from all places and not only from the land of Israel. Paul used the Law of Moses to teach Christians to give "in the same manner" without asking them to go fetch their offerings from a so-called 'holy land'. Christians who understand that practical living is not a question of legalism do not wait for your anti-tithing legalism before they can express their giving in the form of tithe.

wordtalk:

I also know of another anti-tither who tried all his best to stop others from giving. In all his arguments about 'love-driven giving', he remains broke today. Could I also ask you: how come his anti-tithing arguments and rule did not better his life?

LOL You want to know why his anti-tithing activities did not better his life? it's because his anti-tithing arguments (& love driven giving) is not a 'get rich scheme'. it's not a money making venture, that's why

Zikkyy:

LOL You want to know why his anti-tithing activities did not better his life? it's because his anti-tithing arguments (& love driven giving) is not a 'get rich scheme'. it's not a money making venture, that's why

Lol. Yeah, right. In just the same way, you can derive your answer to your question posed earlier. Whatever adjectives you want to use to qualify that, he remains broke today. You missed that, didn't you?

Let me elaborate. The guy is often borrowing from the very people he has been preaching his anti-tithing arguments to. With all his "freewill offerings" (sorry, 'love-driven' so-and-so), he is reduced to begging borrowing. Worse yet, he has three kids to feed daily. . . and his favourite text of the NT? Luke 6:35 - "give LEND, hoping for nothing again" - he claims it is his Christian right to ask others to give LEND him whatever he needs and expect nothing in return.


So, in a way, I guess you're right. Just as his "anti-tithing arguments" have failed, so also his "love driven giving" have also failed to better his life, so that he remains perpetually broke and goes begging borrowing.

wordtalk:

Did I assert anywhere that anyone's act of love should be 'dependent' on any rewards? What I tried to say was that giving is taught as reciprocal in both the OT and NT. 'Reciprocal' does not run contrary to acts driven by love.

wordtalk:

Did I argue anywhere that we give only when there is reward? Did I? If I did not, what is bringing you to such a conclusion?

Extract from your posts

Quote from: wordtalk

"On the contrary, the form of giving that is 'love-driven' also includes aspects where the giver indeed expects to receive something in return."

"Believers can indeed give and EXPECT to receive."

If my understanding of the above quote is wrong, then my apologies. Maybe you can clarify.

wordtalk:

People give not because they must first attach a reward - whatever such would be.

You say this only because you don't know my people.

wordtalk:

In just the same way, you can derive your answer to your question posed earlier.

I am having problem with this, kindly assist

wordtalk:

Let me elaborate. The guy is often borrowing from the very people he has been preaching his anti-tithing arguments to. With all his "freewill offerings" (sorry, 'love-driven' so-and-so), he is reduced to begging borrowing. Worse yet, he has three kids to feed daily. . . and his favourite text of the NT? Luke 6:35 - "give LEND, hoping for nothing again" - he claims it is his Christian right to ask others to give LEND him whatever he needs and expect nothing in return.

What are you saying? is the chap a giver or a receiver? If he is a receiver, maybe he is not receiving enough, that's why he is broke He needs to work on his begging skillz.

Zikkyy:


If my understanding of the above quote is wrong, then my apologies. Maybe you can clarify.

^^Thank you Zikkky, for the quote. I was just wondering if indeed I asserted anywhere the things you had implied from reading me earlier.

1. No, I did not imply or assert that we give "only when" there is reward.

2. And no, I did not assert or imply anywhere that anyone's act of love should be 'dependent' on any rewards.


That conclusion drawn by you somewhat seems to have implied that belivers cannot give until ONLY WHEN rewards are attached. That was not what I said anywhere, nor was it implied at all in any line of my previous comments. Rather, while observing that giving is underscored by love, it does not therefore mean that the giver expects nothing. He or she does not give "ONLY WHEN" or "just because" there must be rewards or expectation attached. No. Rather, we cannot deny that giving is reciprocal in both the OT and NT.

The point here is this: should reciprocal giving mean therefore that the giver "MUST" demand rewards in expectation from the beneficiaries? No; otherwise that is lending for usury (Exodus 22:25 and Leviticus 25:37). The Lord Jesus instructs us in Luke 6:35 in line with those OT verses just cited.

However, even though the giver does not have any expectations, assurances or trusts in God to reward him/her for giving, that is the giver's personal choice - which again does not deny or negate the fact that giving also includes reciprocality. It does not mean that the giver has to "demand" this reciprocality or make it the foundation of the giving - No. It simply means that God has promised that giving will be blessed, and it is God's promise of blessing that expresses the so-called "expectation" or "assurance" or "trust" in God to 'reward' the giving.

And because the expectation is not the sole-determining factor, a giver should not assume he or she is cursed just because no blessings follow his or her giving. God's promises are not rigid and fixed in stone in a legalistic manner. This is why even those of the OT who had the promises of God are said yet to have "received not the promise" (Heb. 11:39). It does not mean that God never made any promises of blessings - but it does mean that while all the promises of God are "Yes" in Christ, He will fulfil them in the way He determines (2 Cor. 1:20).

Zikkyy:

What are you saying? is the chap a giver or a receiver? If he is a receiver, maybe he is not receiving enough, that's why he is broke He needs to work on his begging skillz.

Hahaha!! You are one very funny fellow!!

wordtalk:

1. No, I did not imply or assert that we give "only when" there is reward.

2. And no, I did not assert or imply anywhere that anyone's act of love should be 'dependent' on any rewards.

Okay, and thanks for the detailed clarification

wordtalk:

Hahaha!! You are one very funny fellow!!

I don't want to mislead anyone. 

I am in the process of revising my website and book to reflect the following:

My Christian education includes:
Successfully completing a correspondence course in Biblical Studies
Successfully completing a course given by Prison Fellowship Ministries
Successfully completing a Christian Mentoring course given by One-by-One Leadership
· Actually mentored several young men under this program
Successfully completing six modules of a course titled "Caring for People God's Way"
Attending regular church services and Bible Study classes
Thousands of hours of self-study

I have never used a DD after my name, nor do I use any title before or after my name other than Certified Money & Finance Minister which is really not a title, but rather a job description.

garyarnold:

I don't want to mislead anyone.

You damn well should not have tried to do so in the first place. I was concerned after a recent incident in another forum: someone who argued so passionately that you held a 'doctor of divinity' degree as part of your Christian Education was so thoroughly embarrassed when he was set right. I had warned him not to put so much faith in his arguing for your title as such, but he didn't listen. I just thought to warn you that the 'D.D.' was misleading a lot of folks.

I am in the process of revising my website and book to reflect the following:

Bless God! I really didn't think you would be moved to do so; but it's a step in the right direction.

If God required the tithe who does HE require for? The Levites? Who are the Levites today, the pastors?

Under the LAW God required the tithe of food and agricultural produce to be given to the Levites (who in turn gave a tithe to the Priests). That LAW was applicable in the theocracy of Israel only under what was termed the Old Covenant. Jesus Christ has since made a New Covenant with Israel thereby abolishing the first and it is through this New Covenant that we who were outside of the Commonwealth of Israel may be grafted into the olive tree. The old temple system has been destroyed and the Aronic priesthood has now been replaced by Jesus Christ. The LAWS of tithing HAVE NOT been carried over to the church. It is foolishness if not downright skullduggery to claim that the church must return to the old laws of tithing and observe them.

In the new covenant we are called to give to those in need including the elders of the church who spent their time teaching and preaching rather than going out to earn money. We are not told how much to give here but if you purpose in your heart to give a tenth of what you have then you are free in Christ to do so. In the early church people did not place limitations on what the laid at the apostles feet - some gave all they had BUT they were not left empty-handed as they all had all things in common and share what they had equally so no one lacked.

Those who teach tithing today however say you must "bring the whole tithe" even if you don't have a meal to eat that day or the next. They fill you with empty words however that the Lord will belss your giving and they send you on your merry way, whilst pastor is assured of his sustenance from the tithes - what they practice is not of Christ but faith without works.

God doesn't need tithe. We are the one that needs to conquer our greed by giving. There are two important things about our givings. They are honour to a God. Man cannot worship a God without giving and sacrifices. The second part of our giving is our ability to deal with greed.

Oga Jo does not approve of the practise of tithing? Or am i wrong by saying so?

Any way here is a little document attached to answer the OP's question.

see as people were shivering on this thread when wordtalk had their time. Most antitithe arguments are only sustained by circular repetition and gang support.

Image123: see as people were shivering on this thread when wordtalk had their time. Most antitithe arguments are only sustained by circular repetition and gang support.

My bro..where is wordtalk sef?

Image123: see as people were shivering on this thread when wordtalk had their time. Most antitithe arguments are only sustained by circular repetition and gang support.

Just like you rely on lies and fabrications on Didache to further the tithe scam.

Garyarnold took his focus off the issue gave word talk leverage. When anybody refuses to be distracted by unimportant things, tithe collectors always scamper like you image123 always does

Bidam: My bro..where is wordtalk sef?

Are you trying to phone a friend to come help you out? Is that the lifeline?

You and image had to go dig up an old thread to receive inspiration.

Very pathetic indeed. Keep looking for more.

Candour:
Very pathetic indeed. Keep looking for more.

Your obsession about the tithe is also pathetic.Leave God's tithe alone and focus on other spiritual issues that will help your life.

Bidam: Your obsession about the tithe is also pathetic.Leave God's tithe alone and focus on other spiritual issues that will help your life.

Good advice coming from someone very happy his friend dug up a thread from 2011 just to get much needed support for his tithe scams. It shows who is obsessed with tithes.

When you stop peddling lies about God's tithe. Then I'll stop seeing lies to refute. I'm actually doing very well with my life. I advice you do same and stop seeing tithe as a get rich scheme.

Candour:



Good advice coming from someone very happy his friend dug up a thread from 2011 just to get much needed support for his tithe scams.

If you were not so fixated,blind and obstinate you would have noticed that it was in response to the filth and dirt you dug from ancient scripts and kelly D.D that Olaa had to bring this tithe thread to the fore..Pls refer to Olaa's thread for clarification.Do you in your wildest imagination think i have time digging up threads? SMH! I am not that fixated as you are.

I'm actually doing very well with my life.

No i don't think you are.Living faith you left was testing ground to know that you weren't so happy with you life

Bidam: If you were not so fixated,blind and obstinate you would have noticed that it was in response to the filth and dirt you dug from ancient scripts and kelly D.D that Olaa had to bring this tithe thread to the fore..Pls refer to Olaa's thread for clarification.Do you in your wildest imagination think i have time digging up threads? SMH! I am not that fixated as you are.

Really?? I didn't know you and Olaa were robotic machines programmed only to react when confronted by truth.

So you admit it was a desperate measure by desperate people to save a dying cause? He had to dig up an old thread for support? You're obviously more serious minded than Olaa hence you didn't dig it up abi? Pls let him know how you feel about people who dig up the past o.

No i don't think you are.Living faith you left was testing ground to know that you weren't so happy with you life

You forget you also left living faith because you were not happy with the focus on money in your own words? Or you forget again that you wrote that in a post on this forum?

If its any consolation to you, then know that I've attended more churches and denominations than I can remember. This makes me able to talk authoritatively on issues like this because I have first hand experience.

Now go ahead and use that new info to slander me

Candour:

Just like you rely on lies and fabrications on Didache to further the tithe scam.

Garyarnold took his focus off the issue gave word talk leverage. When anybody refuses to be distracted by unimportant things, tithe collectors always scamper like you image123 always does

You have to resort to bitterness, false accusations, name calling and being a busy body. You even hoped to turn a thread about death and burial into a tithe-talk thread. You did not use to be like this, you need to take the chill pill. Even your mentors are not carrying it on their head like you. Take a trip to calvary.

Bidam: Your obsession about the tithe is also pathetic.Leave God's tithe alone and focus on other spiritual issues that will help your life.

God's tithe?
Lol
The ones you are remitting to him in heaven, or the ones he asked the tithe fraudsters to spend on his behalf?

Can someone pls tell god to get a job?

plaetton:
God's tithe?
Lol
The ones you are remitting to him in heaven, or the ones he asked the tithe fraudsters to spend on his behalf?

Can someone pls tell god to get a job?

IF you do not know what we are talking about then shut up!!! God doesn't eat tithes.

Even atheist who do not know the bible have to comment.SMH!!