|
|
|
Tonye-t (m)
|
Tonye-t
how come you don't offer burnt offering since it also precede the law.Also tell me why St Paul condemned compulsory circumcision even when it precede the law.
This is heresy from the very pit of hell,it neither found in the bible nor the writings of the church fathers
My dear friend Chukwudi44 You and your funny questions and assertions, i wonder where you are getting them from 
you barely have done anything so far regarding this subject of tithing, so far all you do here is to wait for someone to quote and then you counter or oppose without even thinking or reflecting in the scriptures if what you are opposing is right or wrong. 
Answer to your question:
It appears you do not understand th significance of the burnt offering you have been shouting here althrough, for your information or if you care to know, burnt offering was offered even b4 Abraham and its significance meant GIVING UP A LIFE IN EXCHANGE FOR SOMETHING for 4 basic reasons APPEASEMENT,APPRECIATION, CONSECRATION and WORSHIP (TEST for true love)( i choose not to give greek nor hebrew meanings as it appears it could mean a waste here), now ask yourself this,
whom and whom offered BURNT OFFERINGS in the bible and what did they offer it for (purpose for offering), I aint feeling happy explaining this to you but i will though you appear too adamant as all you've been doing so far are raining ABUSES, INSULTS with a wrong craving and not teaching nor contributing.
- When Abraham was commanded to offer a BURNT OFFERING it was to offer a LIVING THING (Man or animal) Isaac was the object for the subject
why: Gen.22:2 said . . .take Isaac whom you love . . . offer him as a burnt offering (WORSHIP -test for love)
- When Japhther gave too, it was his daughter but this time for APPRECIATION
and the list goes on and on,
Now when God gave up Jesus Christ, bible called christ the SACRIFICIAL LAMB, now ask you self, was this sacrificial lamb (Jesus Christ) not used as the same sacrificial lamb used by the High priests to offer sacrifice for appeasements. Now was that not BURNT OFFERING?
To cut it short my dear friend, all the customs that shewed in the OT were also prevailent on the NT, but with different names and contrast/modifications.
Hint: pick up a good grk/heb. bible, check the terms and words as used in the OT, and check to see if you'll find them in the NT, bet you you will find it and reasons will be given for why the names changed
TITHE in the OT
TAX in the NT, The romans diverted what was supposed to be given to the church leaders to their own economy because they were the power house, and not the sanhedrins.
Gooosh i cant imagine i am even going this long
Bye Bro and God bless you |
|
|
|
|
|
Tonye-t (m)
|
There is no 'levite after the order of Christ' - the bible tells us we are a royal priesthood, ALL OF US Christians. Good day Mr.Moderator,
I feel amazed at the kind of questions or posts you unleash here, lest you've forgotten this is religion section, why implies that one must have a good knowledge of what you are standing for b4 asking
you are saying that there aint no levites today that we are all royal priesthood, now i ask you, why do we have BISHOPS, TEACHERS, PASTORS, DEACONS in the bible, what are there called to do, afterall we are all royal priesthood
Before you asked this question did you take the time to find out if
PRIESTHOOD means the same thing as PRIEST  , goosh, you guys just talk without giving a thought, that's not right you know. i was actually waiting for one person to say this thing of priesthood all the while and unfortunately it came from MR MODERATOR  the funniest part is that b4 you guys come up with a question i seem to think your thought b4 you |
|
|
|
|
|
Tonye-t (m)
|
Intermediaries for what? receiving and pocketing tithes? come on Tonye-t give it up. Let me quote an example of how we remits to Christ below. I see that's the only problem you have and nothing, Zikky you seem to be contradicting yourself, One moment you are saying you approve of the custom the next moment you are crying foul, na wa o. be matured and choose a side bro, this topic is not WHO SAYS TITHING SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN TO MOGs, rather WHO SAYS TITHING IS NOT NEW TESTAMENTAL,
if you have a problem with the MOGs, then come up with a topic in that regards and i'll contribute believe me i will
because its funny to see someone come up to say that THE REASON WHY HE FEELS AGBADA IS NOT GOOD IS because OF THE WAY SLIM PERSON WEAR IT. now thats a perfect scenario with you and your debates Let me quote an example of how we remits to Christ below.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' (NIV)  is that all that there is to giving to God, giizzzzz , Zikkyy whatever happened to the gifts and help Paul enjoyed of the gentile christians, at least he would have told them to go and only give it all to the poor and widow and then they'll be certified as giving all and all. Men this is not funny at all |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tonye-t (m)
|
Kunleoshod,
pls can u give me a tentative explanation of the passage i am about to quote and pls
- Who made the statement?
- And from which testament did he pick the scriptures he quoted to butrees his point , was it the mosaic law. if not where else
1 Tim 5:17-18:
>>17 Pastors who do their work well should be paid well and should be highly appreciated, especially those who work hard at both preaching and teaching.
>>18 For the Scriptures say, "Never tie up the mouth of an ox when it is treading out the grain-let him eat as he goes along!" And in another place, "Those who work deserve their pay!"
TLB
And pls answer this questions and again did verse 17 sound like Pastors should be giving contributions ? pls lets quote scriptures and digest them when we see them explain themselves explicitly and not come up arguing baseless things
|
|
|
|
|
|
KunleOshob (m)
|
@tonye-twister And what has that passage got to do with my assertions  Or does it tell you Apostle Paul was shamelessly soliciting for tights like our mordern day charlatans. No one as ever disputed that pastors should not be paid by the church but there is NO teaching in the bible wether from OT or NT that they should be paid from tights as we all know that tights in the bible was not money but agricultural produce  . There is evidence of temple tax though as there is a record of Jesus and the disciples paying it once, and if i remember well it was a very tiny inconsequencial amount and not tights which was agricultural produce. So in my opinion pastors should be paid from the free will offerings members contribute and they shouldd be content with it as paul admonished in [1 timothy6:5-12] instead of twisting scriptures in their greed to make more money by inventing false doctrine and twisting the biblcal tights from agricultural produce to money. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tonye-t (m)
|
No one as ever disputed that pastors should not be paid by the church but there is NO teaching in the bible wether from OT or NT that they should be paid from tights KunleOshod, did i read you just saying NO teaching in the bible whether they should be paid from tithes .hmmmmmm you are beginning to sound heretic you know as we all know that tights in the bible was not money but agricultural produce . There is evidence of temple tax though as there is a record of Jesus and the disciples paying it once, and if i remember well it was a very tiny inconsequencial amount and not tights which was agricultural produce. Thank you very much, today i choose to agree with you, now ask yourself from where did this romans get the concept from? and why did JESUS HIMSELF EVEN GIVE THEM, at least he would have resisted them if the practise was bad *shakes head* and again, has anyone said it should be eveyday or anyday,rather IT STILL STANDS, thats all So in my opinion pastors should be paid from the free will offerings members contribute and they shouldd be content with it as paul admonished in [1 timothy6:5-12] instead of twisting scriptures in their greed to make more money by inventing false doctrine and twisting the biblcal tights from agricultural produce to money. - giiiiizzzzzzzz KunleOshod, what is the original concept of FREEWILL OFFERING? was it not made to be only used for building the temple? while other offerings have their roles?
- And also KunleOshod, the freewill offering you are quoting, pls where did it emanate from, was it not from the same OT i thought i heard you saying was abolished? goooosh, you are beginning to confuse yourself, and all your COs 
-Lest i forget, pls try and explain to me the concept of freewill offering, and also that passage you quoted WAS WRONG, there aint nothing relating this subject there, at least quote it for all to read here
- Brother, you know what, your posts are beginning to look too dry, pls add some grease ok? lest a baby would come up here and beat a thousand of your type and also, maybe the reason for the dryness is because YOUR CHURCH DOESNT EVEN TAKE OFFERINGS SO YOU BARELY EVEN KNOW LITTLE OR NOTHING ABOUT THE SUBJECT
May God bless you! |
|
|
|
|
|
KunleOshob (m)
|
So you've agreed they should be paid, ok so from where should they get the monies to pay them? [/color][/font] They can be paid from voluntary offerings donated freelly by church members after the primary people [the needy] that the bible says church collections are meant for have been taken care of. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ttalks (m)
|
Quote from: Zikkyy on October 31, 2009, 05:38 PMLet me quote an example of how we remits to Christ below.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' (NIV) is that all that there is to giving to God, giizzzzz , Zikkyy whatever happened to the gifts and help Paul enjoyed of the gentile christians, at least he would have told them to go and only give it all to the poor and widow and then they'll be certified as giving all and all. Men this is not funny at all It astonishes me that Tonye-t cannot see that the two instances given here compliment each other properly. The passage posted by Zikky was talking about giving to people who had need(not exclusively the poor and widows and orphans;but anybody who had need at any point in time). The gifts and help Paul got/enjoyed of the gentile Christians met his needs when he was in need didn't they? Paul had needs and who ever gave to take care of his needs when they came up definitely was doing what was being pointed out in the passage Zikky quoted. I wonder why Tonye-T sees them as different things *The length at which people go sef  * |
|
|
|
|
|
Zikkyy (m)
|
@Tonye-t
From your response to my posts, its obvious you dont read a post before responding or you choose to interprete what you read in a manner that suits your objective. Any sane and rational reader of this thread can easily see the desperation in your posts. You cant justify what is not right Tonye-t. You can be sure i will not allow you spread confusion with your theories on tithing, but i won't go into uneccesary arguments with you. Its not worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ogajim (m)
|
Calvary greetings to everyone.
We must never forget who we serve and the fact that we were warned of these FAKE/FALSE teachers, MOGs, Prophets or what have you:
1 John 4
1Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1 Timothy 4
1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
We must refuse counsel from the un-Godly : Psa.1:1, 26:4-5
I could go on but what's the need? We can't just believe everything we hear, this tithe/money thing started here stateside, folks like Idahosa brought it to Nigeria and the rest is history. I don't know that a lavish lifestyle is what a "pastor" is supposed to live or drive in a convoy of the latest SUVs, Private jets, etc. I don't come to Nigeria often enough and a lot of these guys started after "man don check out". That doesn't stop them from coming over here to "collect" from the gullible zombies that don't see a need to question these Pimps in a free society. They remind me of those "naija" musicians that used to announce a "tour" of the USA only to see them playing house parties, halls and what have you. How can you "export" something to "your own" people who happen to live in a different country?
"He who have ears, let him hear"
|
|
|
|
|
|
chukwudi44
|
Now when God gave up Jesus Christ, bible called christ the SACRIFICIAL LAMB, now ask you self, was this sacrificial lamb (Jesus Christ) not used as the same sacrificial lamb used by the High priests to offer sacrifice for appeasements. Now was that not BURNT OFFERING? are you by any way trying to say that offering of burnt offerings is till valid under christianity? why don't you go on and twist another bible passage to to explain why st Paul condemed compulsory tithing ,even when it preceded the law.I really feel sorry for you,my advice for you is to repent and give your life to christ b4 it is too late.I will advise you to go and look for sth useful and start doing since it is now obvious that you are only fighting to protect your source of livelyhood .Earning a living by twisting the scripture to fleece your gullible church members is not a decent way to survive, you might get away with it here on earth but what about the life to come. Your sins are two fold 1. stealing from your innocent and gullible church members in the name of tithing 2.Rejecting the sacrificial death of christ on the cross and holding on to the jewish law,thus severing urself from the grace of christ as plainly stated in Gal 5:4. You also run the risk of incuring the curse of the law since obviously you are not complying with the other non-lucrative portions of the law as stated in gal 3 :10 |
|
|
|
|
|
viaro
|
2.Rejecting the sacrificial death of christ on the cross and holding on to the jewish law,thus severing urself from the grace of christ as plainly stated in Gal 5:4. How does giving tithes sever any Christian from the grace of Christ? Did the Law originate tithes, or are tithes bound only by the Law such that everything in the Bible about tithes have to be interpreted on that Law? You also run the risk of incuring the curse of the law since obviously you are not complying with the other non-lucrative portions of the law as stated in gal 3 :10 That's just carping and cheating. No Gentile runs the risk of not complying with any non-lucrative parts of it - because the Word makes clear right from the OT that God did not desire those things. Using Paul's epistle in Galatians for what you can't defend is not sound reasoning. . please retire it. That kind of interlocution reminds me of people who want to send other Christians to hell simply because your anti-tither wishes are not fulfilled. |
|
|
|
|
|
debosky (m)
|
I should have simply said that the anti-tithing argumentations are simply rubbish and leave it there. It baffles me that so many people who are too glad to argue against tithing are waiting to see it as a "practice" before they get afoot on tithing themselves. So, if they see others tithing, they immediately get so disturbed that the whole strain of their anti-tithing arguments peters off on very unspiritual dogmatism. Again, that may be a valid observation but is not the current subject of discourse, which deals with whether tithing as practiced today is a new testament practice. I could care any less. Like I often said, I really don't care two scoobies what anyone wants to call me (and I have loads in return) nor do I care two rats behind what they call themselves. I do not mean by that to inflame passions indiscriminately, but this argument that polarises people to such divides in the Body of Christ is really unnecessary. That said, I repeat that I don't make you into anything that you don't identify as - I have stated that point so clearly. Let it be for those who have taken it as a career to be categorically called "ant-tithers". Glad we've cleared that up. When trying to clarify a particular subject it always helps to leave out the 'classifications' and deal with the issue itself. I have not discussed tithes or giving as mandatory. Anti-tithers (in my experience) are too quick to guilt-trip themselves and others in their bid to wage a war against anyone tithing! That is simply an adventure on the wrong footing. On either side, the argument about and against guilts should not be cast as if one is arguing that 'my guilt trip is better than yours' - rather, it may do us far better deals to share truths with our brethren and encourage them to tithe. We many times stand as anti-tithers because we do not want to see other people tithe, not because we think that tithing is okay. If anti-tithers believe that it is good for people to tithe at all, then where's the argument in the first place? Again, you are talking about a general 'anti tither' versus 'tither' matter and that is not the subject of discourse - can we please focus on the matter at hand? Lol, where have I argued along such lines? What I stated was my opposition to the claims made on this thread, not a direct reference to you. I see. Let others enjoy that personal preference as much without requiring them to produce scripture for their own preferences where you do not want to do so. The best arguments they may have may not measure up - that's fine: and then we can help them see things in a better perspective. So far what I see is the adventure of anti-tithers to stamp out tithing altogether - that is just what is dubious about this whole affair. If you do not see how dangerous this unspiritual dogmatism of anti-tithing arguments are, I should not be surprised. Someone has noted earlier that one of the things about my discussions is that I resent the way that anti-tithers go about trying to establish their misgivings on the subject - not that I could care any less whatever anyone wants to make of themselves about it. Where have I attempted to stop people from enjoying a personal preference? What the discourse focuses on is the validity of a claim that the practice as done today is new testamental. I don't begrudge people from personal preferences, but I cannot agree a deliberate distortion of the gospel for example someone claiming that that MOG are a levitical priesthood after the order of Christ. I sense the same irritable and riscible self-importance there again. You sense wrong - this matter is simple. I give according to 2 Cor 9:7 and i believe this is fully self explanatory. Your decision is thinly laced, not fully backed for your "10% every month". Thinly laced? By what estimation? I have decided according to what lies in my heart and I do it - what more 'lacing' is required? WHY then do you do it? The simple thing you're struggling with here is an inclination to make your own argument sound like law for others while still suffering from the same malady. I suffer from no such malady and have NEVER attempted to make my practice binding on anyone. I do not claim tithing, defined here as a continuation of the old testament practice is MANDATED. Simply giving 10% in that regard is obviously not the same thing as claiming I am doing the same as the Israelites did. Please pardon my tone, I do not mean to be accusative at all - but I often shake my head at reading people who think of their own self-importance more than others: and that applies to me as well, if you have noticed. There is no self importance here - you asked a direct question and I answered it. You will do well to note that prior to your questions I have made no reference to my personal practices (a distraction from the question at hand) and focused on the validity of the claim that what is claimed by tonye-t is a new testament practice. What you have been doing is straying from the core of the discussion into a wider debate that ends up all over the place. Kindly set aside a separate thread if you choose to discuss my motivations and lets focus on the matter at hand. You cannot DEMAND anything. Nada, nothing, zilch. You can ask for references, not demand for them. It is this attitude of demanding things from people that you cannot yourself give that muddies the waters. Demand, request - a matter of semantics and nothing more. If I request such references and someone is not able to give them, I do not assume therefore that my arguments should be overwhelming upon that person. I could share with them why I think they're mistaking without trying to "demand" anything from them. If they assume that it should be a "MUST" in our lives, all we need do is leave them to their own persuasions and see how far they carry on that idea. Sooner than later, they soon begin to see what they never considered in the first place. Where have I claimed my arguments are 'overwhelming' on anyone? Someone makes a claim that an act is new testament based/evidenced and I have asked for evidence. Again, please stop inferring things that are not there. A proposition has been made and it is clear that the issue here is to examine the validity of that claim. Now, the twist here is that many people in their over-reactive zeal begin to argue unnecessary and then start demanding what they themselves cannot deliver when queried. To make their concerns more dramatic, they begin to stretch things far too wide and then muddy the waters by illations of this and that MOG did so and thus, therefore x. y. z. Again, that is a distraction with references to MOG doing so and so - the issue as I have kept it is based on the claim that the act is from the NEW TESTAMENT. Surely a claim from the new testament without being backed with evidence is nothing but a waste of time? Lol, did I read you say "examples"? What "examples" - drawn from where? From Christians in the NT? That is good news. Bro, I'm not antagonizing you; but suppose an anti-tither came along and "DEMAND" that you show the examples where Christians gave 10%, what would you say? I said examples in the bible, of people freely deciding what to give to God. Where did I say from Christians in the NT? Again, you come with your labels of 'tither' and 'anti-tither' which again are not useful in this discourse. As the NT is not PRESCRIPTIVE on how much to give, I can give as I purpose and that amount can be 0.1% or 100% as I choose. Now that is completely different from the subject at hand (I must remind you again before you go off on a tangent) which states that today's practice as described by tonye-t is a fulfillment of a command or instruction that this MUST be done, specifically that 10% MUST be given, AND is New Testamental. Again, it is tonye-t who has put forward an argument that it IS New Testamental, so the burden of proof is on him not myself as I have not come out to make any claims regarding why everyone must do what I do. If the above distinction is lost on you, then I don't have more to say on that matter. I would like for you to see why I put you on spot: it's simply because what I've read from yours is the same mistake that anti-tithers make. You're doing a good thing by even giving at all; and 10% is not an easy feat - I know, because I do the same periodically. But if you have ever been in forums, blogs, or social networking sites where you try to argue this with "anti-tithers", you would come off simply sad and blistered. I know, because I have been there, argued with them, blasted their empty threats, and done all that. What surprises me is that most of these anti-tithers never ever try to be reasonable. For them, it is just one thing: they are ANTI-tithers in any form or shape - and nothing you say about 10% (whether voluntary or obligatorily) would ever appeal to them. The reason why I try to engage you is so you don't trail off making the very same damning anti-tithing mistake that many of them make. Thanks for the warning, afterall we are encouraged to keep ourselves in line. For the umpteenth time, I have no interest in such debates and I am focused on examining the validity of tonye-t's claim and not any condemnation of 'tithers' or 'anti-tithers'. My purpose is clear,this issue is about the validity of a claim and we need to thoroughly test that claim, hence the 'request' or 'demand' for evidence. Thank heavens for you; and no, I do not disparage you on that. I have other references that persuade me to tithe - and that verse does not stipulate any tithes at all. You can base your 10% everytime on that verse; but how many anti-tithers would you convince about tithing on that verse? Again, imputing motives - what makes you think I am trying to 'convince' antitithers as you call them? As far as I am concerned, the issue is examining a claim and seeing if it has basis in the NT and if not, clearly stating it doesn't or otherwise. I hope you see where I'm coming from? Anti-tithers often "DEMAND" people to prove from the NT that Christians should tithe at all. That has been the question that is at the center of their argument. Use 2 Cor. 9:7 and they would simply laugh at your attempt as being lame. For me, even though one can argue out that verse as not supporting tithing, I yet can appreciate that as worthy of note for your own persuasion - and I don't have to demand anything from you thereto. Again I have not claimed I am tithing in following on from the OT practice into the NT. As such I do not have to prove anything beyond having to give - the percentage is immaterial. Now, if Tonye-t had used those same references (2 Corinthians 9:7) to discuss his reason for tithing under the topic of "Who Says Tithing Is Not New Testamental?" do you think anti-tithers would have been happy to applaud that? I don't know, neither is it of importance to me (the anti-tithers applause that is ) BUT if tonye-t did use 2 cor 9:7, then we can have a discussion as to how he arrived at that. To claim that the MOG are doing so according to a priesthood of Christ is another matter altogether. Even if he did not argue from that verse that it is a "MUST", do you think that anti-tithers would have encouraged the use of that verse for tithing in the NT? *sigh* Can we get off this anti-tither thing and focus on the matter at hand? Leave the prior discussions you've had and let us focus on a particular subject matter - tonye-t's claims. What the 'anti-tithers' encourage is not the issue here, it may be in other discussions but not here. No, they would NOT. I know, because I've used it elsewhere many times, and anti-tithers have always argued to the contrary, even
though I tried to reason with them that my discussions are not making any type of giving a mandatory thing. What we often fail to realise is that every time we think we're damn too smart in our own backyards than other Christians, there's always a point along the road where our own superiority get wasted. You don't get it, do you? One minute you're drawing 2 Corinthians 9:7 to argue for your own tithing; and then you don't believe there is any scriptural evidence in the NT for that. Good man - but such inconsistencies are the very things I had already highlighted in your style of argumentations; and no one needs tell you that is a waste of time and space. It would be the same for me to argue that I have scripture for my "23% every month" (that is tithing for some theologians), and then turn round to argue that I don't believe there is any scriptural support for that same thing! This is why I'd rather look at the way we Christians shout at one another and wonder what use there really is in this adventures that are going nowhere? There is no inconsistency - giving a percentage, whatever percentage is entirely permissible in the NT, stipulating that a PARTICULAR percentage must be given is a different matter - can you not see the distinction? That's not the only thing to "disprove" - we should also disprove those rubbish that anti-tithers have repeatedly peddled for their career to pat themselves on the back as they divide the Body of Christ on false alarms. I did that a couple of times with the deliberate falsehood of Ernest L. Martin who is as much an anti-tither as any comes in grey colours. My point is that if we are going to sit here all day trying to disprove this and that, it should cover all platforms, including those deliberate falsehoods peddled by anti-tithers themselves. The finger should not always and only be on those who would like to tithe - and if you cannot recognize that the falsehood of anti-tithers are equally hideous, what really can you understand? I am not debating the falsehood of anti-tithers, I am focusing on tonye-t's argument, can't we look at that without going off discussing the wider issues? Have I called you an anti-tither, debosky? What is all this pity-party you often sound out? Is it too much to examine your own "10% every month" if you believe that you're right and others are necessarily wrong? What kind of dancing around am I reading from you? I am not initiating a discussion on the basis of my giving, what we are discussing is whether a PARTICULAR percentage of giving is mandated in the NT. There is no need to examine my own giving on this thread as that is simply a distraction - it does nothing to shed light on the impression that a PARTICULAR percentage of giving is STIPULATED in the NT. The only reference by Christ is NOT the "only" reference to tithing in the Bible. I was on course to make that point clear; so what is this tangential counter you see in my statement that you necessarily have to highlight and yet fail to see the fact in my statement? Was the reference in Christ's statement the ONLY Biblical tithing you read in the entire Scripture? Are dill and cummin the only types of TITHES in the Bible? What is so big a deal that you want to see tangent on that and fail to see that is a clear point in line with the same topic being discussed? We are discussing tithing in the NT - can you please show me what Jesus' teachings on giving (which was the initial question) talks about tithing about from the dill and cummin? Please focus on that. I await any other over zealous reaction you may be delighted to produce - and I shall be too glad to waste their non-qualitative utility.
Another lovely label - my reactions are now 'overzealous' . I also await your rebuttal of this particular bit of name calling. |
|
|
|
|
|
viaro
|
Hehehe, debosky. . I'm tempted to scold you badly because you're still returning with the same non-essentials and have said nothing new. But life is not like that, and reason has the better of me these days, that's why I'd leave off drilling you on these useless exchanges. Rather, I would just like to make something clear to you: Again, that may be a valid observation but is not the current subject of discourse, which deals with whether tithing as practiced today is a new testament practice. Here is the main problem I have with smart asse.s who like to question every other person and yet fail to see their own cancer. (I make that statement generally, so please don't fly over third mainland bridge complaining about whether I was calling you names again - no I am not). My guy, you may question "tithing as practiced today" because it is convenient to question others. But if someone were to ask you why YOU tithe, what would be your own answer? A quick reference to 2 Corinthians 9:7? Does that verse mention tithes at all? The main strain of the typical anti-tithing argument is that "it is done away with" (and somewhere in your rejoinder you made that same mistake). Now if it was done away with as a practice, why then are you giving "10% every month", my guy? Please don't try to impress me with recycled excuses, because theres nothing new there. You practise what you affirmed has been done away with, and yet never consider that your arguments are simply wasted and unjustified. If you can question others on it and yet not be able to show where you find it in the NT, you're simply wasting your time on a convenient personal travelogue. You should not be doing the very same thing you affirm is done away with while demanding others to prove anything to you where you have proved none yourself! It is for this reason that I laugh at some of us Christians who are too busy chasing nonsensical arguments with slim muscles to debate intelligently. The arguments are simply unnecessary because we have failed to see the real issue that should be dealt with. It is not a question of struggling to justify it from 2 Corinthians 9 or any other verse, nor is it a matter of percentage. If you think that is one of the most serious issues, you really have no clue what the arguments beyond your locality has been. Sometime soon in the coming months, I hope to address the real issue in these matters and invite others to table their concerns. That is when we shall all get to see the essential issues people have been missing. So, at this time, I would just let you be. If you're not satisfied, then I shall come back and grow you up a little, trust me. Demand, request - a matter of semantics and nothing more. Simply laughable. If they are indistinguishable for you, I'm not surprised. |
|
|
|
|
|
TV01 (m)
|
"If a Blind man lead another the both will fall into a dish" Not content with butchering scripture, Tonye-t then attempts to murder the queens English. Dayuum ! Apa! |
|
|
|
|
|
ogajim (m)
|
Not content with butchering scripture, Tonye-t then attempts to murder the queens English. Dayuum ! Apa! I was wondering how a ditch became a "dish" , it is hard to spell check when you're too busy looking for justification for the tithing scam in old Greek scrolls???(maybe I need to check with my Greek buddies and down some uzos too) I don't see a need to hate tithers but those who deliberately twist the Scriptures to make it mandatory needs to be exposed for the scam they are perpetuating, simple as that maybe but you know scammers don't give up easily. Anyone of us can give any % they feel in their hearts to give to those in need, not necessarily an MOG to decide what to do with the cash, giving doesn't have to be always MONEY but these know-it-all MOGs would beg to differ on that. We have to know who we serve and cross check everything we hear from some of these PIMPS/Scamming turncoats because it is clear not all of them serve the same God we believe in. God help us all in our quest for the unadulterated truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
chukwudi44
|
:4. How does giving tithes sever any Christian from the grace of Christ? Did the Law originate tithes, or are tithes bound only by the Law such that everything in the Bible about tithes have to be interpreted on that Law
Did circumcision particularly mentioned by St Paul in the book of galatians originate from moses ? The fact remains that they all became part of the law,mind you what paul condemed was not really circumcision itself but compulsory circumcision in respect of the law ,the same way your criminal Pastors preach compulsory tithing in respect of the law by quoting the book of malachi.
Giving the tithe as a mandatory requirement of the law severes a christian from the grace of christ ,it is clearly stated in gal 5:4,anyone who pays tithe because her pastor quotes the law of tithe and chioses to fulfil the requirement stated in malachi 3 is no longer a christian.
Pilgrim 1 whether you like it or not ,the game is up,the truth is already being exposed in the developed nations it is comming to africa,it might be a bit delayedd because of poverty and illiteracy,but I bet you in the next 50 years this scam will be over
|
|
|
|
|
|
viaro
|
Did circumcision particularly mentioned by St Paul in the book of galatians originate from moses ? The fact remains that they all became part of the law,mind you what paul condemed was not really circumcision itself but compulsory circumcision in respect of the law ,the same way your criminal Pastors preach compulsory tithing in respect of the law by quoting the book of malachi. chukwudi, I've addressed the question of your miserable ideas about circumcision; but don't you ever get tired of being a retard? I asked a simple question - " How does giving tithes sever any Christian from the grace of Christ?" That was all I had hoped you would demonstrate, so that we can all see that anyone who has been giving any tithe is actually severed from Christ! HOW in the world does that happen? This is why you retards are a good laugh any day. You can't give, can't address simple questions, can't read or understand a jot of what's in front of your eyes. . and yet you take it upon yourself to try and join issues with people who have not asked you for a dime! Man, you suck with arrant nonsense. . . which is not surprising to say the least: because I didn't expect you would attempt to answer that question since you never know a jot of anything anyways. Giving the tithe as a mandatory requirement of the law severes a christian from the grace of christ ,it is clearly stated in gal 5:4, You schmuck. . lying is not a virtue, did you never know? First, Galatians 5:4 does not mention ANYTHING about tithes! Idiot! You have started this idiocy of Ernest L. Martin who shamelessly went about yapping out lies for gullible folks who are darn too illiterate to think for themselves. Please show me where that verse in any version mentions anything about TITHES! Don't try to cut corners, just show it plainly. Shameless retard and liar! anyone who pays tithe because her pastor quotes the law of tithe and chioses to fulfil the requirement stated in malachi 3 is no longer a christian. Dunce! In your cult, you can damn people because they give tithes by believing in the principles of Malachi 3 - which is not new, because I have come across the same stupidity of desperate anti-tithing theologians who damn souls and pretend they are trying to save them! Lying is not going to redeem you in this hole you dug for yourself! Pilgrim 1 whether you like it or not ,the game is up,the truth is already being exposed in the developed nations it is comming to africa,it might be a bit delayedd because of poverty and illiteracy,but I bet you in the next 50 years this scam will be over First it was 20 years. . now it is 50 years. . next will be what? You're a consummate fool. The idiots who have spent their lives shouting against tithes are suddenly waking up to see that they've been lying to the world in their mega-zeal to condemn tithing in all forms! That is why you can sit back and mis-address me for pilgrim, make stupid statements that are entirely illiterate, strategically confirm your place among those of the "poverty and illiterate" base line, and hope that your delayed prophecy will come from developed world to your tiny cubicle! Humongous dunce! Next time you want to discuss, I'd be glad to dialogue; but as long as you wake up every now and often to spew your gutted crass verbosity, you get planked until you grow up. |
|
|
|
|
|
debosky (m)
|
Here is the main problem I have with smart asse.s who like to question every other person and yet fail to see their own cancer. (I make that statement generally, so please don't fly over third mainland bridge complaining about whether I was calling you names again - no I am not). Hehehe - I like to think my ass is smart so no offence taken. My guy, you may question "tithing as practiced today" because it is convenient to question others. I don't question others - again, this is all about someone making an assertion and being asked to back it up. I didn't get up and say 'oh I will question anyone who tithes'. Someone made a claim and I am looking at it critically and (in my opinion) seeing variances with the NT and saying so. As I've said a number of times, I don't usually engage in the wider debate, but if claims are made that interest me, I will look at them and comment accordingly. But if someone were to ask you why YOU tithe, what would be your own answer? A quick reference to 2 Corinthians 9:7? Does that verse mention tithes at all? This is why the distinction is important - I don't 'tithe' in the sense of the obligatory requirement as some people describe it, but out of a completely different persuasion that is wholly personal and nothing more. In that regard, the exact percentage I give is immaterial and only happens to be 10%. As I mentioned in my previous post, what I do is not to 'tithe' as it were, but to set aside a portion of my income for regular giving, which (for now) happens to be 10%. The main strain of the typical anti-tithing argument is that "it is done away with" (and somewhere in your rejoinder you made that same mistake). Now if it was done away with as a practice, why then are you giving "10% every month", my guy? Please don't try to impress me with recycled excuses, because theres nothing new there. I do not practise what has been done away with - giving has not been done away with. What HAS been done away with in my opinion, is the tithe of the dill and cummin to an earthly Levitical Priesthood whose function as such as ceased with Jesus' assumption of the role as our High Priest. There is no physical temple, there is no priesthood requiring my tithes of dill and cummin (agricultural produce & livestock) as a result of a lack of inheritance and as such that has been done away with, or more pertinently, never applied to me as a Christian in the first place. You practise what you affirmed has been done away with, and yet never consider that your arguments are simply wasted and unjustified. See above - as far as I'm concerned, deciding on what to do without compulsion as stated in 2 Cor 9:7 has not been done away with. If you can question others on it and yet not be able to show where you find it in the NT, you're simply wasting your time on a convenient personal travelogue. You should not be doing the very same thing you affirm is done away with while demanding others to prove anything to you where you have proved none yourself! The distinction is clear - if you cannot see it, again, refer to my answer above. I am not claiming giving, regardless of what percentage you decide has been done away with, but it is merely coincidental that my giving is 10% of my income, and nothing more - it is in no way a continuation of a practise which was based on agricultural goods. It is for this reason that I laugh at some of us Christians who are too busy chasing nonsensical arguments with slim muscles to debate intelligently. The arguments are simply unnecessary because we have failed to see the real issue that should be dealt with. It is not a question of struggling to justify it from 2 Corinthians 9 or any other verse, nor is it a matter of percentage. If you think that is one of the most serious issues, you really have no clue what the arguments beyond your locality has been. Sometime soon in the coming months, I hope to address the real issue in these matters and invite others to table their concerns. That is when we shall all get to see the essential issues people have been missing. Kindly do so - as I have affirmed about 100 times now, my argument is also NOT about percentage, but a wrong belief in a mandatory system existing when it doesn't - surely if Paul found it necessary to confront any such teaching of mandatory requirements it is still pertinent to do so today. Yes there might be a 'real issue' to be dealt with, but that takes nothing away from the merit of examining a claim and determining it's veracity. So, at this time, I would just let you be. If you're not satisfied, then I shall come back and grow you up a little, trust me. Aha! So I am now 'not grown' . Are you a taxonomist by profession by any chance? You do have a penchant for culling new titles all the time, or maybe you're just following the divine instruction given to Adam to name the creation. Simply laughable. If they are indistinguishable for you, I'm not surprised.
They are distinguishable, but in the scheme of things very minor. Whether 'requested' or 'demanded', we are admonished to always be ready to explain our faith and I have not 'asked' for anything more. I know you are more learned than myself, but pardon my simple comprehension. |
|
|
|
|
|
viaro
|
@debosky, Glad to read from you again. Unfortunately, it appears you're beginning to sound desperate to defend non-essentials, so I'll keep you on that page if that's what you're given to. Hehehe - I like to think my ass is smart so no offence taken. Fine. I don't question others - again, this is all about someone making an assertion and being asked to back it up. I didn't get up and say 'oh I will question anyone who tithes'. Someone made a claim and I am looking at it critically and (in my opinion) seeing variances with the NT and saying so. As I've said a number of times, I don't usually engage in the wider debate, but if claims are made that interest me, I will look at them and comment accordingly. Fine. This is why the distinction is important - I don't 'tithe' in the sense of the obligatory requirement as some people describe it, but out of a completely different persuasion that is wholly personal and nothing more. In that regard, the exact percentage I give is immaterial and only happens to be 10%. As I mentioned in my previous post, what I do is not to 'tithe' as it were, but to set aside a portion of my income for regular giving, which (for now) happens to be 10%. Let's stop all this childish balderdash. We all know that 10% every month is nothing other than tithing. Period. Anyone can cry from now till gollom, it doesn't change the fact. You tithe out of a completely different persuasion - not because you can find any place in the NT to lay your eggs on that! After all said an done, your "10% every month" is still tithing and has nothing to do with an argument about 'obligatory' or 'mandatory'. If you haven't noticed, I have not been discussing any such inferences about obligated or mandated tithes for anyone here - please go through all my posts in this thread. You have asked that I concern myself with your own concerns and not the wider discussions - and yet you don't seem to be able to do that same thing when you try to reply to my comments! It is because of these zig-zag idea in your style that I didn't bother to listen to your protests about not broadening the scope of the discourses - and consequently, I called your attention to other matters you have strategically pretended not to have noticed. The question now is whether you would keep playing this game or you would drop the convenient ego and face up to a real discussion. I did not choose to engage you on whether you choose not to call your 10% a "tithe" or any such excuses. Rather, I find your arguments quite immature - which was why I raised some concern right from post #599 - "Why do you talk like this, debosky?" Even afterwards, I addressed that very concern back then and thought you would rather have seen this simple point there. But no - you did not, and rather tried to propound theories for a tithe in your case but cannot deliver when it comes to showing where in the NT such a thing is mentioned categorically. Anyone can come up with all kinds of things and and claim that they are doing so on their own personal assumptions and interpretations. Do I care one or two scoobies? Nope. But when the same people try to put others on spot with all sorts of childish excuses where even they cannot deliver on the same matter, that is something that makes me shake my head in pity for such people. I do not disparage you for any percentage you may have chosen to give - that is not the issue at all. Your arguments just don't have any substance to them, and after how many pages? I do not practise what has been done away with - giving has not been done away with. What HAS been done away with in my opinion, is the tithe of the dill and cummin to an earthly Levitical Priesthood whose function as such as ceased with Jesus' assumption of the role as our High Priest. There is no physical temple, there is no priesthood requiring my tithes of dill and cummin (agricultural produce & livestock) as a result of a lack of inheritance and as such that has been done away with, or more pertinently, never applied to me as a Christian in the first place. There goes the yapping again. Please stop fooling yourself. Your 10% every month is categorically tithing - nothing more, nothing less. Call it any name under the sun you may imagine, it changes nothing! Zilch! I did not ask you whether your tithing is on dill and cummin - if you even take anything on board in that regard, I asked rather whether the tithing you interpreted from Jesus' words are THE ONLY tithes in the entire Bible! If I thought you tithed dill and cummin, I could see your sense in even straining on that same point! Your arguments about tithes and temple and all that are a waste and only makes me wonder if you have anything more refreshing to discuss than spewing the same retired arguments from theologians who are not worth their degrees! Dude, tithing is not constrained to temples - if you knew, you should have been one of the first to have seen that very point! Why do you guys like recycling the stupid arguments of illiterate ministers? Where was the temple in the case of Abraham's tithing to Melchizedek? Or of Jacob's? Or of Levi while he was still in the loins of Abraham? Just where were temples mentioned in those examples? besides, dude. . even within the Law, not all tithes were take to the Temple! How come this silly beggarly argument about tithes and temple keeps resurfacing on issues like this? Your 10% every month - do you give it to a physical temple? Goodness gracious! Look debosky, I need to ask your pardon, but many times you bring up sheer unintelligent rants for arguments. Was that tithing-cum-temple issue a desperate curve on your graph to dramatise why you cannot deliver on simple issues up until now? Please er, please. . next time, when you choose to discuss this topic with me, do not make the mistake of recycling retired arguments often thrown about from the likes of Ernest Martin or Russell Kelly! The former is late; but the latter is a dunce! This argument on this issue is a non-starter and has never proven intelligent for his anti-tithing camp. See above - as far as I'm concerned, deciding on what to do without compulsion as stated in 2 Cor 9:7 has not been done away with. Dude, you're missing the point! Your arguments are a waste - I have not seen you defend it half-intelligently other than nice little quips for your convenience. 2 Corinthians 9:7 does not point to tithes, and using that verse as first-aid is not helping your case at all. The whole point, you should have noticed, is that I have never discussed this issue on the basis of cohesion or obligation! If you knew that all along, you would not have mentioned it in your replies to mine at all. But since you want to prove what cannot be proven, please be my guest and keep making vacant assertions. Mister, your 10% every month is a tithe - period! WHERE you find a principle for that is not in 2 Corinthians 9:7 - that is a verse that is not novel to NT believers, because even those under the Law were given that same principle without hanging it on any form of tithe! You're only conveniently ducking under that verse as if those in the OT did not know anything about that same principle! Oh c'mon! The distinction is clear - if you cannot see it, again, refer to my answer above. I am not claiming giving, regardless of what percentage you decide has been done away with, but it is merely coincidental that my giving is 10% of my income, and nothing more - it is in no way a continuation of a practise which was based on agricultural goods. This is even more comical. In the first place, I did not claim any percentage to have been done away - you made a statement about something having been done away! I drew from that and brought it up to your attention for intelligent address and defence - you failed to deliver on that and have been hooting on that same thing as if it was the best thing since slice bread! Puh-leeeze! Second, your 10% is now reduced to the level of a . . what? "Coincidence"? Oh, I just heard a new one tonight! Of all reasons that anyone has for tithing, yours is a "coincidence". . !! Oh heavens! That takes the icing on the cake! Look dude, please close shop - immature comical standups like yours are not even worth discussing! 'Coincidence' indeed! >viaro hisses<Kindly do so - as I have affirmed about 100 times now, my argument is also NOT about percentage, but a wrong belief in a mandatory system existing when it doesn't - surely if Paul found it necessary to confront any such teaching of mandatory requirements it is still pertinent to do so today. Yes there might be a 'real issue' to be dealt with, but that takes nothing away from the merit of examining a claim and determining it's veracity. Please don't make these antique exaggerations. . unless you counted 100 times. In just the same way, I may have affirmed 10,000 times that I have never based my discussion about giving or tithes on the idea of a mandatory system or an obligation! Your come backs are vacant and strawman! Aha! So I am now 'not grown' . Are you a taxonomist by profession by any chance? Er . . no, thanks for asking! I applied once and found there was something higher for me! You do have a penchant for culling new titles all the time, or maybe you're just following the divine instruction given to Adam to name the creation. Ooohh debosky! Please . . please, I do wanna laff! They are distinguishable, but in the scheme of things very minor. Whether 'requested' or 'demanded', we are admonished to always be ready to explain our faith and I have not 'asked' for anything more. I know you are more learned than myself, but pardon my simple comprehension. Huh? Me. . more learned? Where did you get that from? Chapter and verse. .?? Okay, bottomline: I get your drift, but I'd rather we try not to show an air of superiority when discussing with our brethren. No matter how far off the lane we might think Tonye-t has driven, we could be ready to discuss with him about the way we see things, not in an overbearing manner, but calmly, consistently, and humbly. We may not win arguments at all - either way - but at least we should not beggar our integrity to the level of almost losing the persons. Blessings. |
|
|
|
|
|
ogajim (m)
|
We need to refrain from LABELS and profanity in a Christian discourse no matter how off track we may think someone Else's point of view might be. This is different from the kind of argument one might have in a Peckham pub or beer parlor, we can't give them enemy victory by becoming "unchristian" in our fellowship with one another. Whatever you call your "giving" is fine with me as long as you know it is our duty or responsibility to help the less privileged among us but we are not under any mandate (I know I am not) to give to any particular "church" or "MOG" to decide what to do with it as we can also do that ourselves, there is no middleman between me and my God and if folks choose to have one, I will look at it just as I would someone stuffing their face with food or ice cream (yuck!) Some folks might just want to argue for the sake of having an argument but we need to remember we serve a mighty God and let the LOVE preached by Christ reign supreme. The Church does not make the Christian, the Christian makes the church. that's my 2 cents and it's free |
|
|
|
|
|
viaro
|
. . if folks choose to have one, I will look at it just as I would someone stuffing their face with food or ice cream (yuck!) Why would you react that way because some people choose what is different from yours? Is that not the same discrimination that you're trying to discourage and yet displaying at the same time? Why the 'yuck' simply because some people choose to give in a different manner than your preferred manner of giving? Folks, please let's try to stop this finger pointing. It's particularly hideous to do so and yet not recognize it in ourselves. You don't have to look down on ANYBODY who chooses freely to give in a manner that is different from yours - that sort of thinking is what poisons the well. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tonye-t (m)
|
Good day All,
They say two wrongs can never make a right, so far it appears we all are arguing unnecessarily, now pls i want everyone to come up and write a full post about everything you know about TITHE and why you feel its irrelevant today or otherwise
Rules: do not quote another's post and try not to borrow concepts from another, simply write all you know as though you're called up to speak to a congregation on the subject, no naming names nor blaming blames. write unbiased
starting in this order KunleOshod, Viaro, Zikkyy, Ogajim(the same person as one of us), Debosky,Tonye-t, Chukwudi44, and then we all can contrast maturedly or leave honorably. aight
God bless ya'll
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zikkyy (m)
|
starting in this order KunleOshod, Viaro, Zikkyy, Ogajim(the same person as one of us), Debosky,Tonye-t, Chukwudi44, and then we all can contrast maturedly or leave honorably. aight I suggest you open the floor. After all you started this wahala. Lets hear you, and please speak english (my greek is very poor). |
|
|
|
|
|
viaro
|
I suggest you open the floor. After all you started this wahala. Lets hear you, and please speak english (my greek is very poor). Allow me the honour of opening the floor by saying: "I don't give 2 scoobies!" Hahaha! Okay folks, that was just a teaser. . no offence meant.
starting in this order KunleOshod, Viaro, Zikkyy, Ogajim(the same person as one of us), Debosky,Tonye-t, Chukwudi44, and then we all can contrast maturedly or leave honorably. aight
God bless ya'llYou've spoken well, and I think you have brought us back to a sensible way of looking at the subject. I'd been thinking of doing that same thing sometime when less busy in the coming months, as I hinted earlier: Sometime soon in the coming months, I hope to address the real issue in these matters and invite others to table their concerns. That is when we shall all get to see the essential issues people have been missing. My discussions won't be the usual way people have argued hard and long about the Law; but God helping me, I'd be looking at things from a different perspective and try to mirror these arguments against what is happening in many places today. Keep this in mind. Cheers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rockamon
|
That people say they are born into christianity, have read the Bibe all their lives and still believe in paying tithes have a problem. please I advice them to forget what their greedy pastors have taught them and go back and study, their bible. The human mind can be made to believe anything, if not how do you explain that 'Mr. Boko Haram' who drives around in flashy cars, owns handsets saying education is evil. How are tithe believing christians any different
|
|
|
|
|
|
![Nairaland [Nigerian Forum] Home](http://www.nairaland.com/Themes/default/images/english/home.gif)
Poll
Author
