@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:

It seems some one here thought Christianity came out of those electronic organs.
Leaving out catholic means leaving out your authority.

I don't take my spiritual authority from the traditions of the Catholic Church (and in the context you used it, you know very well that refers to the Roman Catholic Church).

Hnd-holder:

What is the meaning of BIBLE?

I hope that is not suggesting that you're averse to Biblical teaching.

Hnd-holder:

Go on tell us why we should continue to give out money in the name of tithe to those who call themselves tithe eaters (stealing in the name of the lord)

I don't give my tithes to those who call themselves tithe eaters; nor am I aware that anyone calls himself or herself by that term! In fair exchange, please tell us why anyone should even give ANY other type of giving to those whom you be call such?

I've made a repeated call to the point that we should try and examine this subject from the broad perspectives given in the Bible. I still don't see that being offered in your rejoinders; and every so often, there's been the same default accusation against others just merely in the name of defending the opposition against tithing. This is not helping this discussion.

Are we still debating this tithe issue? I can't believe it. I'm quite sure it was established that tithing is not for today's body of Christ, and those who do so are walking in error?

That's an allegation, not an established truth.

Come on then give us the "TRUE" story and I shall let you know how wrong you are, may be bari_kade income comes from Tithe.

We have waited so long reading these Defencive mechanism words without a point.

@Hnd-holder,

In due course, you'll be reading from me concerning the points that you guys often miss when discussing this subject. So far, what I've tried to point out to you are these:

1. The arguments often adduced in opposition to tithing are flawed: (a) on almost all points where you guys have assumed a default position to see tithes as mandatory, coerced, forced or compelled, I've been trying to point out to you that such assumptions are not what the Bible teaches; (b) that the same weak assumptions often proffered to militate against tithing are the very same ones that stand to reject other types of giving in the OT and NT; (c) that the question of tithing should be discussed in its broad context viz-a-viz the question of giving in spiritual service in the Bible; (d) that tithing should not be interpreted as TAX, for the Bible does not misconstrue them at all in that way; and (e) that those in opposition should very carefully outline their justification for any other type of giving they read and promote in the NT.

2. When discussing this subject, it would help to share Biblical answers; and not the weak reactive responses from far-fetched articles that are only meant to peppered preconceived notions. Often, these articles substituted for 'answers' have been used derisively to attack the subject, rather than such discussants to have shared what they understood from the Bible itself on the point. How do such derisions answer the question if all that such discussants have to offer is the terse 'stealing in the name of the Lord'; as if the other type of giving can be justified at all? When you arrogantly call tithing 'stealing', you're effectively saying that all other types of giving you read in the Bible are also stealing - and that would simply go to show that those who argue against tithing are themselves unable to understand the reason for any other type of giving mentioned in the Bible.

3. The often weak questions whipped up to argue against tithing should be applied to any other giving you read in the Bible. I've challenged such questions before, and the reaction I got was the very predictable "stay on this topic: to tithe or not to tithe", which clearly shows how narrow such arguments get because those opposed to tithing are simply not presenting a balance in their arguments.

These are the core concerns that I'd like us to deal with before proceeding on to to seeing what exactly tithing is in Biblical teaching. Simply militating against tithes because one feels it is stealing does not answer the question. You would have to allow the same inference by mere feelings to be applied to any other type of giving you approve in your reading the Bible!

Now, it may look as if I've been applying a mechanical device to excuse my arguments. Far from it. I've called TV01's attention to some of the issues that have already been treated, reminding him of how such ideas of "mandatory, coerced, forced tithing" is completely outside the sphere of my concerns. Further, I reminded him of how the idea of seeing tithes as TAX has been soundly debunked by syrup; etc. Thus, it would be needless for me to go round again reproducing the same arguments to show him his flawed assumptions.

Instead, what I have done in entering this debate is to proffer fresh questions; and even you come back have clearly been dramatically flawed yet again! The Church does not replace Israel; tithes are not TAXES; tithes are not only to be seen as agricultural produce; etc. These are the same tired assumptions that people continue to shlep up every so often without even attempting to challenge their preconceived notions that have been shown up for their weakness as far as Biblical teaching is concerned.

I'll be sharing some of these issues further in my subsequent post; and then go on to outline answers to my own questions - especially that of the justification for any type of giving mentioned in the Bible. It is not enough to pretend that 'giving is a response in worship', and then try to argue against that very statement by militatiing against tithes!

Cheers.

I hope you would remember not to be so dogmatic by forgeting that the bible is just not a BOOK but collection of Scriptures written in diffrent languages by inspired authors.
That Christianity met tithe as a practice which Our lord Jesus Christ never spoke about as a way of getting God blessing.

2000 years ago, they wouldn't even dare say the word
God.'  God was distant, remote, terrible.

Today, Jesus gave the  picture of God as kind, like our earthly  father.
Loving.  Forgiving.  Approachable.

That God said people are stealing in terms of TITHE and offering then will not hold today.

"The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
   because he has anointed me
   to preach good news to the poor.
   He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
   and recovery of sight for the blind,
   to release the oppressed,
   to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

Philosophical interpretation of the Bible would be wrong because of the protestants over reacting to issues Just to discredit the Catholics who cleverly preserve the scriptures in scrolls before turning it into a book form in the 14th century when the printing press came.

Mr. bari_kade  you are holding the ball too long than necessary aim at the post and fire the shot.

What a defense  tactics

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:

I hope you would remember not to be so dogmatic by forgeting that the bible is just not a BOOK but collection of Scriptures written in diffrent languages by inspired authors.
That Christianity met tithe as a practice which Our lord Jesus Christ never spoke about as a way of getting God blessing.

Let's look at it this way:

(a) If I was being so dogmatic in my rejoinders, would I even have appealed that that the default position assumed by those who are opposed to tithing be reviewed and possibly challenged? Why would you suppose that I was making that appeal if I was being dogmatic at all? Rather, I've asked that you and our dear friends who applaud your position on the subject should try and look a bit closer at your default persuasions!

(b) The very fact that the Bible IS a book comprising several other books is another strong reason why I asked again that you should please look at the subject of tithing in its BROAD PERSPECTIVES as presented there!

(c) Indeed Jesus spoke about tithing; and He mentioned the principle that giving begets blessings in return (Luke 6:38 and Matt. 6:4).

Hnd-holder:

2000 years ago, they wouldn't even dare say the word
God.' God was distant, remote, terrible.

How does that address the present question?

Hnd-holder:

Today, Jesus gave the picture of God as kind, like our earthly father.
Loving. Forgiving. Approachable.

Yes, Jesus pictured God as Father - loving, forgiving, approachable.

Moses also presented God as loving, forgiving and approachable (Exo. 20:6; 34:7; Deut. 5:10; 7:9,13: 10:15, etc.).

Hnd-holder:

That God said people are stealing in terms of TITHE and offering then will not hold today.

Really? I now understand just how very narrow you guys always wanted to keep shlepping your dogmatic views about tithing. First, please remember that I don't argue in favour of tithing from the LAW. Second, please understand that the OT speaks to us in principle relating this and other subject.

Now, I'd like you to consider this one question in regards to your persuasion against Mal. 3:8. Question: What exactly justifies your giving or not giving any other type of giving you read of in the NT?

Hnd-holder:

"The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

Does preaching the goodnews to the poor mean that the poor should NOT give anything at all? Is that verse telling you that those who receive the Gospel of Jesus Christ are NOT to tithe or offer any other type of giving?

Hnd-holder:

Philosophical interpretation of the Bible would be wrong because of the protestants over reacting to issues Just to discredit the Catholics who cleverly preserve the scriptures in scrolls before turning it into a book form in the 14th century when the printing press came.

Which again is another point I've appealed against: let's look into the Bible for answers, and not the far-fetched (or philosophical quarrels between Protestants and Catholics) on this or other issues.

Hnd-holder:

Mr. bari_kade you are holding the ball too long than necessary aim at the post and fire the shot.

What a defense tactics

You guys have been shlepping this accusation far too long it has become tiresome! Please open the Bible, outline the reasons for ANY TYPE of GIVING you approve of, and then we can take it from there.

I've already offered that you'll read my points in due course - which I'm still drafting to help you easily understand what you've been missing! If anyone has been appealing to and applying defence tactics, it would rather be you guys who have not been able to address the fresh questions I've offered you. There's nothing new in your dogmatic position - and such dogmatic arguments have already been debated and flawed! Why would you suppose that I go back to them and reproduce the very same points?

Could you please offer answers to the fresh questions I've asked?

Thank you.

@Hnd-holder,

Just to soothe your mind on what specifically I'd like to address when I eventually post my points in defence of tithes and other types of giving:

(a) I'd be proffering my answers from the Bible; and not from arguments derived from quarrels between Protestants and Catholics - neither branch of Christianity wrote the Bible!

(b) I'd be outlining why tithes are NOT the same thing as TAXES!

(c) I'd be addressing the question of tithes from the broad perspectives in what I read in the Bible - OT and NT!

(d) I'm not in the least interested in accusations, for I consider such the clear imprint of self-defeated discussions! So, please, please and please: keep the slobbers for small minds!

(e) I'd also be addressing my own questions in terms of the justification of ANY type of giving in the OT and NT!

(f) Consequently, I'd be offering reasons why the default position of ALWAYS assuming that tithes are mandatory, coerced, stealing, compelled, and/of forced are NOT what the Bible teaches!

(g) And then, on the practical side, I'd be looking at what blessings the Bible offers to those who tithe!

If you have any concerns that you think are strong enough to flaw these points, please offer them so that I could also address them in my post. If there's none at the present moment, could you please take some time and go through the Bible on this subject instead of the usual over-reactive responses so far?

Thanks again for your kind understanding.

I think somebody some where is over assuming when he has said nothing he assumed to have flaw a point what a lawyer. If one look at himself as "Great Mind" true self assessment might be lacking and no humility traces that show the characteristic of a true Son of God. Tithe eaters knows that they misinterpret the bible to generate incomes in whatever form once BIBLE is involved.

We are all waiting for those words to support Tithe from the NORMal point of view.

Tithe is never the same as Giving or offering in Todays Churches.
My last line.
Good day.

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:

I think somebody some where is over assuming when he has said nothing he assumed to have flaw a point what a lawyer. If one look at himself as "Great Mind" true self assessment might be lacking and no humility traces that show the characteristic of a true Son of God. Tithe eaters knows that they misinterpret the bible to generate incomes in whatever form once BIBLE is involved.

I don't parade myself as a great mind or scholar; nor do I pride myself as if accusing people will score any point in my inputs. The one thing, however, that I notice from those opposed to tithing is that they are very quick to accuse others while making no point at all from the BIBLE itself!

The attempts you have made to quote the Bible were not in context to the topic; rather, you have used them as pretext to propagate your dogmatic position and continued accusations - and this is what I've challenged and continue to do so. I really don't mind the sly invectives, as again they're simply the imprints of self-defeated discussions or arguments!

Hnd-holder:

We are all waiting for those words to support Tithe from the NORMal point of view.

Please wait patiently rather than quickly react with the invectives. Afterall, I've given you a foretaste of what I intend to treat. If you had any concerns to address in the outline, I'd appreciate if you did just that and save the slobbers, thank you.

Hnd-holder:

Tithe is never the same as Giving or offering in Todays Churches.

Nor are tithes the same as TAXES as you dogmatically assume.

Hnd-holder:

My last line.
Good day.

Don't spend yours in vexations. Enjoy and God bless.

Tithing is like the being vegetarian argument during Paul's time.

Those who say you do not have to tithe are spot on but lets not make a big issue out of this. Tithe says give 10%, the Spirit says give what you would want to be given, give from the heart, give from within you. By all judgments, the Spirit is even deeper and more than tithe so if you run away from tithe because it was mandatory, you face a shocker, because the Spirit would ask you for much more.

Do not let any one force you to make promises, or pledges. Do not let any one burden you with much more commandments, but remember that the leaders and elders in the church deserve part of your finances, seeing that they help to spiritually groom you. Remember the widows, remember the orphans, remember the poor. Remember that whatever you have is not your own anymore but is for the Lord and these ones are your brothers. Remember that as much as it is good to give, it's no use giving or performing charity if you do not have God's love in you.

Stay blessed and let these arguments cease.

Hi Bari_Kade,

I've outlined my position on this severally. It's very simple and not based on any MOG or denominational teaching, just the clear leading of scripture and based on my (admitted not as much as I'd like) knowing Christ.

I won't bother restating what I've summed up several times, or even outlining the broad areas of concensus I think we've all reached.

In fact, this post is not actually about the topic at hand. It's really about your recent attitude on it. I've often had cause to admire the scholarly way you go about stating your position on issues, and the order and conciseness, even in your oft quite lengthy posts. Who could have failed to note your admirable attitude in not really digressing from the topic at hand and keeping firmly away from ad-hominem remarks.

However, over the past week or so on this thread, you've demonstrated personality traits and characteristics that I would never have ascribed to you, and which, if I'd been told about, I don't think I'd have believed or wanted too. I won't bother levelling any accusations or charges, as I think anyone who cares to back-read some of the recent posts will see it for themselves, plus I'm looking beyond this to the growth edification which is the whole point, right?

You have promised to reveal some overlooked, misunderstood or unknown truths around the issue of tithing (and I note your insistance on classifying it, and as a type of giving). No problem, I for one am quite eager to hear and keen for you to do so.

I don't see that the continous back and forthing, denying the claims and decrying the positions of those who have at least been straightforward enough to air them, without proffering alternative readings for discursive comparision and critique avails anyone even a smidgin of edification. Indeed, quite the opposite.

So, could I once again ask you too please share with us. I sure Holy Spirit inspired truth will put an end to all gainsaying. If some of us have been walking in error, it can only be all round beneficial and edifying for us to be corrected in love.

As ever, I look forward to sharing.

Thank you & God bless
TV

Hi TV01,

I understand your concerns. However, in as much as I've tried to outline my core concerns on this debate, it's sad that what I've been repeatedly offered are the very same things you're decrying. That is why I once again gave an outline on what I'm trying to share -- see this link:

        https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.928.html#msg1225127

When I've finished my piece even in the midst of a very busy schedule, then you'd read it.

If there's anyone that should complain that people are not availed any smidgin of edification, it should not even be you; because you can't here try to hide the fact that your posts on the previous page have done precisely the same thing that you decry as well. There are well over 930 posts on this thread, and over the course of two nights, I've been going through every single one of them so as not to make assumptions about the "concensus" that often appealed to.

I'm still asking that if anyone has any concerns strong enough to flaw the outline of my piece delineated above, they could raise them. We're all trying to share and learn; but the idea of referring to others accusatively/perjoratively as "tithe eaters" and "stealing in the name of the Lord" is morally wrong - and I had hoped you would rather have had something to say in that regard. What's the point even discussing this subject if we're more interested in casting aspersion on people than we should be on looking into the Bible for answers?

Cheers.

Hi Children of Most High God. Am inviting you all to my group called the LEGWORK BIBLE COMMENTATORS. If you are good in the scriptures and you know how to interpret verses, kindly join this group. The group uses the Legwork Forum to post topics on Bible Issues and reply them. Let Us grow in the Word by learning form one another

Kindly join now by clicking on the Link below:
http://groups.legwork.com.ng/pages/showgroup.aspx?id=10020&catId=1008

JESUS IS LORD

Hi Children of Most High God. Am inviting you all to my group called the LEGWORK BIBLE COMMENTATORS. If you are good in the scriptures and you know how to interpret verses, kindly join this group. The group uses the Legwork Forum to post topics on Bible Issues and reply them. Let Us grow in the Word by learning form one another

Kindly join now by clicking on the Link below:
http://groups.legwork.com.ng/pages/showgroup.aspx?id=10020&catId=1008

JESUS IS LORD

bari_kade:

I'm still asking that if anyone has any concerns strong enough to flaw the outline of my piece delineated above, they could raise them.

You're not asking for permission to post are you? If so granted .

It's standard for posters to make their submissions, and then for respondents to comment or raise concerns, if any. That kind of initiates discussion themes and sub-themes, sets the tone and lends context.

You appear intent on pre-empting and answering all questions on the one submission? Laudable I'm sure, but it doesn't really seem practical? For one, how will you know if/when every "concern" has been raised?

If anyone feels there is something to raise or add for discursive robustness, or if you later feel you'd like to add, amend or clarify, that will happen as the discussion progresses.

Dude/ette, kindly put us out of our misery and post.

Ta

God bless
TV

Kai @TV01,

How is it that when some of una want to argue issues, you simply can't read and make sense of what others have said? I'm one of those waiting expectantly for bari_kade's interesting highlights; but are you guys deliberately failing to see the challenges he offered in his outlines?

       https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.928.html#msg1225127

I'm still asking that if anyone has any concerns strong enough to flaw the outline of my piece delineated above, they could raise them. We're all trying to share and learn; but the idea of referring to others accusatively/perjoratively as "tithe eaters" and "stealing in the name of the Lord" is morally wrong - and I had hoped you would rather have had something to say in that regard.

What has anyone raised in objection to his outlines? At least, he has offered some points to counter previously held notions, which as yet no one has argued against.

The one reason why I left off the discussion in this thread for a while was because, as bari_kade himself observed, some posts seem to be far more concerned with derision than with calm and objective reasoning from Scripture. I just hope such a trend would not continue so that the discussion can progress.

stimulus:

How is it that when some of una want to argue issues, you simply can't read and make sense of what others have said? I'm one of those waiting expectantly for bari_kade's interesting highlights; but are you guys deliberately failing to see the challenges he offered in his outlines?

I'm not sure what it is that you mean? But here's what I'm asking/saying.

It's fine if someone feels they have something to submit which contributors have hitherto failed to consider or been aware of. It's also fine to advise the themes and areas to be contained within the proposed submission.  But I'm not sure that one can ask for a consensus or try and hold a referendum prior to doing so.

All I said in my post was we are eagerly waiting your submission. Don't wait for all and sundry to comment before you do so, as;

1. You'll never know if all and sundry have commented or even desire too.
2. It makes it sound like an open ended exercise, especially in the absence of a cut-off date.
3. The nature of a forum like this lends itself to continuous input and the discussion is ongoing.
4. So no matter how raw or incomplete a submission it is refined in the course of discussion.

All I'm asking/saying is "please post and lets talk".

What has anyone raised in objection to his outlines? At least, he has offered some points to counter previously held notions, which as yet no one has argued against.

That is my point, it's unlikely that anyone will, as thats not how the discussion flows. Post first and objections, agreements, posers, counters and ripostes will follow. It sounds like Bari_Kade is asking for rejoinders prior to posting. It's counter-intuitive to how public posting discussion forums work?

As to points others have made against tithing (and please be mindful of the nuances), Bari_Kade has not debunked them, only denounced and denied them. It's saying not showing. Claiming not explianing. Bari_Kade has now offered to show, so all we are asking is "please show".

The one reason why I left off the discussion in this thread for a while was because, as bari_kade himself observed, some posts seem to be far more concerned with derision than with calm and objective reasoning from Scripture. I just hope such a trend would not continue so that the discussion can progress.

Please, that's facile at best, and in any event, a charge that can be levelled against anyone. Whilst not denying that some passion has been shown, this thread has been as focused as any. Furthermore, a pertinent posting will serve to focus us all the more.

So once again, please post promised submission and lets discuss.

Thanks & God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

I'm not sure what it is that you mean? But here's what I'm asking/saying.

It's fine if someone feels they have something to submit which contributors have hitherto failed to consider or been aware of. It's also fine to advise the themes and areas to be contained within the proposed submission.  But I'm not sure that one can ask for a consensus or try and hold a referendum prior to doing so.

All I said in my post was we are eagerly waiting your submission. Don't wait for all and sundry to comment before you do so, as;

If "all" you had wanted to say was that you were waiting his submission, you ought to have simply done so. Your tone did not indicate that you were waiting; thus, my concern for the sly invectives.

TV01:

1. You'll never know if all and sundry have commented or even desire too.
2. It makes it sound like an open ended exercise, especially in the absence of a cut-off date.

I'm not aware that there is now a cut-off date for posting on the Forum. Who made one? There have been times when people (including you) have been quite occupied and could not have been able to follow debates on some threads (at least, I know this happens to me in some instances).

TV01:

3. The nature of a forum like this lends itself to continuous input and the discussion is ongoing.
4. So no matter how raw or incomplete a submission it is refined in the course of discussion.

I observe that he has been discussing; as well raising points, offering counter points to correct default opinions previously held by some.

TV01:

All I'm asking/saying is "please post and lets talk".

If it had been stated that simply, I wouldn't have had to raise my concerns.

TV01:

That is my point, it's unlikely that anyone will, as thats not how the discussion flows.

People have different approaches to issues.

TV01:

Post first and objections, agreements, posers, counters and ripostes will follow. It sounds like Bari_Kade is asking for rejoinders prior to posting. It's counter-intuitive to how public posting discussion forums work?

Not at all, unless you wanted to read him so. He raised issues, referred to others as informing his persuasions (4get_me, syrup, et al); and noted that he was not interested in recasting what has already been offered previously. Thus, he went on to outline his concerns and offered that if anyone had issues that were of counter concern to his outlines, they could raise them. What was the point of the invectives if he even went so far to appeal that he was working on his draft, going through the over 930 posts on this thread and asking that you guys be patient with him?

TV01:

As to points others have made against tithing (and please be mindful of the nuances), Bari_Kade has not debunked them, only denounced and denied them.

If you are particular about nuances, I should remind you that he had debunked some default ideas. I don't read anyone offering counter points to issues he debunked. What about the fact that he stated clearly from Scripture that the Church does not replace Israel? And the fact that tithes were not limited to just agricultural produce?

If he was only denying them, would it not have been the simplest thing to do for you guys to have pointed him to Scripture to show how wrong he was? Nope, he did not "deny" points, but first had to deal with the same default issues being held by some before offering an idea of what he would be dealing with.

TV01:

It's saying not showing. Claiming not explianing. Bari_Kade has now offered to show, so all we are asking is "please show".

Please, go read them again. He explained and indeed showed what he was about. And if you have patience enough without the idea of a cut-off time (which is new on me), then perhaps he would do so eventually.

TV01:

Please, that's facile at best, and in any event, a charge that can be levelled against anyone.

Rubbish. Anyone can level any charge at anyone they so wish - and I stated clearly why I left the debate for a while.

TV01:

Whilst not denying that some passion has been shown, this thread has been as focused as any. Furthermore, a pertinent posting will serve to focus us all the more.

Was it too much to ask that the so-called "passion" (please read 'slobbers' - according to bari_kade) be laid aside and we look into Scripture on the subject?

TV01:

So once again, please post promised submission and lets discuss.

Great. I'm sure he would do so when he is ready; and I also indicated that previously:

I'm one of those waiting expectantly for bari_kade's interesting highlights;

over teh years teh issue of tithe has been a bone of contention someon the side of tithing and others on the side of not tithing
well jesus said he has not come to change the old laws or to ammend them so i see that the old laws shud take their course but one thing that is for sure the issue of tithing is a personal thing i do pay but not regularly becos the way its beeen conducted this days makes one wonder if the pastors are after teh money or they are after the word of god if they are after the money then te bible says in the book of 2nd thessasonia that if any would not work then let him not eat so they shud decease from tithing money its meant for gods work on earth
And also my bible made me to understand that wen u give give with ur heart not grudginly so tithe is up to u give if u feel its right but i implore u to give
God bless the poster and all the postees

@Stimulus,

All I've said is that Bari_Kade does not need to solicit rejoinders prior to posting, as they will naturally flow after he does so. As for the cut-off, I  simply said that asking for rejoinders whilst unlikely to work and being counter-intuitive, was made even more difficult by not giving a cut-off time for them.

We are still waiting for Bari-Kade's insight and we all appreciate the size of the task and the time constraints.

Meanwhile, I can respond to 2 questions you touched upon.

What about the fact that he stated clearly from Scripture that the Church does not replace Israel? And the fact that tithes were not limited to just agricultural produce?

1. I never made the claim about "The Church replacing Israel". Nor has it been shown as pivotal to this discussion, so I haven't bothered pursuing that line of discussion.
2. Tithes under the law were exclusively agricultural products (of the land), except in the odd mitigating circumstance. Outside the law, I can see no scriptural imperative or divine command for a tithe, OT or NT.

God Bless
TV

My dear TV01,

TV01:

All I've said is that Bari_Kade does not need to solicit rejoinders prior to posting, as they will naturally flow after he does so.

After my previous rejoinder to yours, I had to go back again and re-read what we all were about. I still don't see that bari_kade was asking for rejoinders. He gave an outline which he (probably) believed were fresh concerns from what he had perused from previous entries; and he made that outline offer pursuant to Hnd-holder's incessant interjections to bari_kade's concerns.

Even at that, I still haven't read anyone (including myself) coming back to raise concerns in what he had offered, even though it was sketchy.

TV01:

As for the cut-off, I simply said that asking for rejoinders whilst unlikely to work and being counter-intuitive, was made even more difficult by not giving a cut-off time for them.

We are still waiting for Bari-Kade's insight and we all appreciate the size of the task and the time constraints.

Again, the cut-off time is out of the questions as we do not really know what would occupy our time. I'm sitting here and wondering why he hasn't shown up as yet; but then I trust we can all be patient and not try to set constraints on discussants.

The same thing had happened when I tried to engage Bobbyaf in another thread and had hoped that bari_kade himself would show up to weigh in on the discussion on the seventh-day sabbath law: the latter did show up (after a long absence) - but maybe a little later than I personally had hoped. Let's just forebear and be more patient.

TV01:

Meanwhile, I can respond to 2 questions you touched upon.

1. I never made the claim about "The Church replacing Israel". Nor has it been shown as pivotal to this discussion, so I haven't bothered pursuing that line of discussion.

I know you didn't raise the Church-Israel issue; and I'm glad that bari_kade answered thereto in regards Hnd-holder's offering that as explicatory to the tithe topic. Why did I bring that to bear in my previous rejoinder? For the simple reason that you had offered instead that bari_kade was rather denouncing and denying (rather than debunking) the arguments offered by others.

TV01:

2. Tithes under the law were exclusively agricultural products (of the land), except in the odd mitigating circumstance. Outside the law, I can see no scriptural imperative or divine command for a tithe, OT or NT.

Two things here:

(a) when you make something "exclusive", you leave no room for any possibility of an "exception" - so the idea that tithes were exclusively agricultural products is weakened by the excepted "mitigating circumstances";

(b) most people still hold on to this idea that tithes must by default be a demand (or akin to a command, mandate, coercion, force, compulsion, etc.). The point is (and I agree with bari_kade here) that it ought not necessarily be so. Infact, is that not the challenge he offered to the opposers of tithing to mirror their objections on any other type of "giving" as see if the same argument holds?

The one reason why I'm eagerly awaiting (as you are) bari_kade's input on this topic is to read from him concerning his persuasions as to what informs his tithing from outside the OT tithing law.

---------

Now, instead of sitting here and defending bari_kade's outline (as I really don't know where he might be coming from), I would like to offer you my thoughts on this topic. Please understanding that I'm not playing the "facile" exercise here to claim that I don't have a neat outline as yet; but will be back sometime during the week to make more input thereto.

However, I have come to believe that tithing is one of the several ways of NT giving for Christian believers. I have tried to carefully weigh the cogent arguments against tithes and mirrored them on any other type of giving in the NT; and I found that one really cannot militate against tithing and approve others with the same flawed arguments.

@ Stimulus,

Lets just leave Bari_Kade to post when and as shall we? There is obviously some cross-purpose on that point, so lets desist.

(a) when you make something "exclusive", you leave no room for any possibility of an "exception" - so the idea that tithes were exclusively agricultural products is weakened by the excepted "mitigating circumstances";

Be as pedantic as you please. The madatory tithe under the law was agricultural products. An exception was made when transporting them was onerous. Happy now? If you have an informed rebuttal to this point please post.

b) most people still hold on to this idea that tithes must by default be a demand (or akin to a command, mandate, coercion, force, compulsion, etc.). The point is (and I agree with bari_kade here) that it ought not necessarily be so. Infact, is that not the challenge he offered to the opposers of tithing to mirror their objections on any other type of "giving" as see if the same argument holds?

That is simply your opinion. You have no clue to what most people hold on to.

I have repeatedly stated as follws;

1. There is no mandatory (curse for failure) tithe. Nor is there a
2. Voluntary (spiritual benefits attached, maturity implied, because one calls it a "tithe" one.

If one wants to give and call it a tithe, fine.

As I said earlier and reposted below;

There is nothing about a mandatory tithe and a voluntary one cannot be distinguished from giving, unless you ascribe some benefits from doing so, thus ascribing it some sort of difference from normal giving? Now, pray tell, does the NT do that?

The only way out, is a voluntary tithe as an individual response, which does not in itself accrue benefits denied to one who does not do same, or mark the tither out as any more spiritual or mature. If that's your call no qualms.

If you have anything to post in response, please do so.

God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

Lets just leave Bari_Kade to post when and as shall we? There is obviously some cross-purpose on that point, so lets desist.

Which is what I've been calling to your attention.

TV01:

Be as pedantic as you please. The madatory tithe under the law was agricultural products. An exception was made when transporting them was onerous. Happy now? If you have an informed rebuttal to this point please post.

I'm not being more pedantic as you often try to read others' inputs. What I pointed out was in your use of expressions that will lead us nowhere if we don't begin early enough to raise concerns thereto.

TV01:

That is simply your opinion. You have no clue to what most people hold on to.

Don't make me laugh, bros. How many times was the challenge offered - and not one time did anyone of you take up his challenge!

TV01:

I have repeatedly stated as follws;

1. There is no mandatory (curse for failure) tithe.

Then I guess one has to remind you that he was offering severally that tithes were NOT mandatory as you often again and again argued?

TV01:

Nor is there a
2. Voluntary (spiritual benefits attached, maturity implied, because one calls it a "tithe" one.

Oh come on. If there's neither a mandatory nor voluntary tithe/giving, what are you arguing about then? This is the problem with how you guys make some of us woonder at your debates: it seems to be neither here nor there!

TV01:

If one wants to give and call it a tithe, fine.

And if one wants to give and call it 10% by law, fine also - yes?  This is hardly an discussion.

TV01:

As I said earlier and reposted below;

There is nothing about a mandatory tithe and a voluntary one cannot be distinguished from giving, unless you ascribe some benefits from doing so, thus ascribing it some sort of difference from normal giving? Now, pray tell, does the NT do that?

The only way out, is a voluntary tithe as an individual response, which does not in itself accrue benefits denied to one who does not do same, or mark the tither out as any more spiritual or mature. If that's your call no qualms.

I'll just ask one thing of you, please: could you offer me some explanation of the following verses:

Deut. 15:10
"Thou shalt surely give him, and ^(A)thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: ^(B)because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto."

Prov. 3:9-10
^(A)"Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase: ^(B)[So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine."

Prov. 19:17
"He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again."

Luke 6:38
"Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again."

When people argue that NT believers "simply give" and it has no "blessing" thereto, I'm only wondering if they actually are open to what the Word teaches, or they simply want to remain in their default contrary views.

TV01:

If you have anything to post in response, please do so.

I hope this is a discussion? If you don't want to tithe or give at all because you believe there's no blessing thereto, please remain with that idea to yourself and try not passing it as an authoritarian view.

Cheers.

@ Stimulus,

Oh come on. If there's neither a mandatory nor voluntary tithe/giving, what are you arguing about then? This is the problem with how you guys make some of us woonder at your debates: it seems to be neither here nor there!

For some reason, you insist that voluntary tithing akin to giving. Please show what the distinction is if any. And the difference in benefits if any.

Oh come on. If there's neither a mandatory nor voluntary tithe/giving, what are you arguing about then? This is the problem with how you guys make some of us woonder at your debates: it seems to be neither here nor there!

Sleight of hand I see. I have repeatedly stated that giving is an integral part of the Christian lifestyle.  Your attempting to equate tithing with giving while at the same time saying it is something different is at best confused. Or if I'm the one that is confused, perhaps an answer to my question in bold above may help.

And if one wants to give and call it 10% by law, fine also - yes?  This is hardly an discussion.

You don't appear to differentiate between giving, tithing and law. Back to my question above.

I'll just ask one thing of you, please: could you offer me some explanation of the following verses:

Deut. 15:10
"Thou shalt surely give him, and (A)thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: (B)because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto."

Prov. 3:9-10
(A)"Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase: (B)[So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine."

Prov. 19:17
"He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again."

Luke 6:38
"Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again."

Heartfelt, freewill giving is loved of and blessed by God.

When people argue that NT believers "simply give" and it has no "blessing" thereto, I'm only wondering if they actually are open to what the Word teaches, or they simply want to remain in their default contrary views.

Who made this claim? Surely you can't be ascribing it to me as although I said that NT "simply give" (to a need), I never suggested or hinted that there was no blessing attached.

I hope this is a discussion? If you don't want to tithe or give at all because you believe there's no blessing thereto, please remain with that idea to yourself and try not passing it as an authoritarian view.

Like I said, you have no clue what I want to do, or what I believe. But in any event, please don't ascribe things to me. What you can do is answer the question. Please non of your usual fence-sitting, non-commital ambiguity.

Thanks

God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

For some reason, you insist that voluntary tithing akin to giving. Please show what the distinction is if any. And the difference in benefits if any.

My dear, I did not so tie them. If you're deliberately forcing that idea into my rejoinder, you'll be needlessly sweating out your case. What I have observed in your own position on this matter is that you make tithing mandatory by default; and anyone who tries to share something with you on the subject will have to see you react predictably. How many times have you been asked to rest the "mandatory" connection aside and see things in their simplicity?

Now, since for you it has to be a NO-NO situation, I ask that you please do one thing already offered: mirror your objections on any other type of giving YOU approve of and let me ask you the one pointed question that will open your eyes to your militant objections.

TV01:

Sleight of hand I see.

Which you have used severally, NO?

TV01:

I have repeatedly stated that giving is an integral part of the Christian lifestyle. Your attempting to equate tithing with giving while at the same time saying it is something different is at best confused. Or if I'm the one that is confused, perhaps an answer to my question in bold above may help.

TV01, let me remind you once again:

(a) were you not the same fellow that made so much noise in bold about tithing being equated to TAX, until syrup laid your arguments to rest?

(b) were you not the same chap that was asked to delineate the types of giving you see in the NT - and up until now you are at pains to evade that?

Now, repentantly you come back stating that "giving is an integral part of the Christian lifestyle" - and for all of that, you haven't been able to see your own exercising in making such an obligation as you previously argued against! So, what happens if another Christian does not see it as "integral" (read as your "mandatory")??

TV01:

You don't appear to differentiate between giving, tithing and law. Back to my question above.

Sorry bros, that is because you must have refused to see that I'm not arguing tithing from law! You again are the one pushing this idea that tithing must be by law - otherwise I don't see why you need connect it that way yet again after the case has been stated that it ought not be so!

TV01:

Heartfelt, freewill giving is loved of and blessed by God.

This again is what I offered:

stimulus:

I'll just ask one thing of you, please: could you offer me some explanation of the following verses:

Deut. 15:10
"Thou shalt surely give him, and ^(A)thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: ^(B)because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto."

Prov. 3:9-10
^(A)"Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase: ^(B)[So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine."

Prov. 19:17
"He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again."

Luke 6:38
"Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again."

You haven't answered my question with that evasive run-away cliche. So, please: .

TV01:

Who made this claim? Surely you can't be ascribing it to me as although I said that NT "simply give" (to a need), I never suggested or hinted that there was no blessing attached.

Ahh, I see. So, there's a blessing attached afterall? Welcome home.

TV01:

Like I said, you have no clue what I want to do, or what I believe. But in any event, please don't ascribe things to me. What you can do is answer the question. Please non of your usual fence-sitting, non-commital ambiguity.

Pally, for eons you have been playing your own complaining games. If you try not ascribing things to others, you would not have to suppose anyone was doing same to you. And further, please don't try those spirito-evasions with me - answers to my questions would be simply appreciated.

Regards.

@ Stimulus

What I have observed in your own position on this matter is that you make tithing mandatory by default; and anyone who tries to share something with you on the subject will have to see you react predictably.

You must be mistaking me for someone else. There is practically no one arguing for madatory tithing, at least not based on the law of Moses. Having said that in understanding the whole issue it was useful to look at it from the viewpoints of being;

1. mandatory or
2. Voluntary.

Mandatory Tithing has been considered and thoroughly debunked.

Voluntary tithing as an individual decision is not an issue. I personally have repeatedly said if anyone voluntarily chooses to give a tithe  - even if they choose a figure that is not exactly 10% and call it a tithe-  no problem.

Moving on there seem to be 2 final points;

1. Some insight from Abrahams tithe to Melchizedek (which we are waiting for)
2. Assigning benefits to voluntary tithing which do not accrue to those who simply give.

My point being, that trying to sell a voluntary tithe on the basis of it accruing certain benefits not accruing to someone who simply gives (on the basis of need or blessing),  or claiming it makes one in some respect more spiritually mature is no where found in scripture.

And this is how I left it whilst anticipating Bari-Kade's next post.

"Tithe as voluntary with benefits for adherence is the flip side of the coin that says it's mandatory with curses for non-adherence".

It still leads people into feeling they must tithe. The bondage is the same, the means somewhat more subtle.

The only other thing is to see tithing as giving. In that case what is the point of making a distinction?

Geddit?

God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

You must be mistaking me for someone else. There is practically no one arguing for madatory tithing, at least not based on the law of Moses. Having said that in understanding the whole issue it was useful to look at it from the viewpoints of being

The one thing I would like to state is that my observations still stand - those who oppose tithing have often again and again ascribed it to a mandatory exercise. At least, I did not offer that as my persuasion; and when you go through the rejoinders again, you will see the point is simply that you have tried raising up the "mandatory" question yet once more.

Even so, since I haven't read answers from your latest reposte on some of my concerns, I would rather not keep asking that you do so as you're not obliged thereto.

TV01:

Moving on there seem to be 2 final points;

1. Some insight from Abrahams tithe to Melchizedek (which we are waiting for)
2. Assigning benefits to voluntary tithing which do not accrue to those who simply give.

My point being, that trying to sell a voluntary tithe on the basis of it accruing certain benefits not accruing to someone who simply gives (on the basis of need or blessing),  or claiming it makes one in some respect more spiritually mature is no where found in scripture.

Let me simplify issues:

I don't know so much at present about Melchizedek; but one question that I have asked and again continue to ask is this:

      If tithing was mandatory, (or by commandment, or coerced/forced,
      or obligated), I would like to know: who COERCED Abraham to "give" tithes?

It is unfortunate that I haven't read anyone on the opposing side address that question directly. Rather, what remotely was offered was someone saying that Abraham gave tithes only once! That simply circumvents the question as to the often strained "mandatory" subscript to the tithing issue.

If tithing is a mandatory exercise, who commanded/mandated or COERCED Abraham to do so? And if it is not, why do we often read again and again in your replies that you're so concerned about this question of tithe being "MANDATORY"??

Secondly, I have also asked about this issue of rather denying that the Scriptures teach that tithers and givers derive any blessing thereto. I offered the few verses that came to mind at the time. But for all that, you only gave a terse reply that did not touch upon my question directly. The one thing I have come to is this: if anyone wants to "simply give" and does not find any blessing in doing so, they could remain in that position and do as they please. BUT, they cannot claim that such an idea is what Scripture teaches for others who tithe or give.

TV01:

The only other thing is to see tithing as giving. In that case what is the point of making a distinction?

If there is no distinction of the types of giving we make in Scripture, I don't see any reason why some of you guys would be using the same terms described in Scripture in the first place and arguing against this disntinct service!

stimulus:


The one thing I would like to state is that my observations still stand - those who oppose tithing have often again and again ascribed it to a mandatory exercise. At least, I did not offer that as my persuasion; and when you go through the rejoinders again, you will see the point is simply that you have tried raising up the "mandatory" question yet once more.

Simply not true. My reasons for opposing it on a mandatory or voluntary basis are made clear in my last post. As was my reason for having no problems with it (on a voluntary basis only).

stimulus:

Let me simplify issues:

I don't know so much at present about Melchizedek; but one question that I have asked and again continue to ask is this:

      If tithing was mandatory, (or by commandment, or coerced/forced,
      or obligated), I would like to know: who COERCED Abraham to "give" tithes?

A non-question sir. Who has claimed he was co-erced? Or gave it based on the law or a divine mandate? That can only be an arguement for those arguing for a mandatory tithe. Please think it through? As ever you seem to be arguing both sides and making a case for neither  !

He gave a tithe, once, of the spoils of war. Not of His personal possessions. Not ever mentioned again (Jacob apart) until the law.

I have also repeatedly stated that the main thrust of the symbolism of Abrahams tithe to Melchizedek was to demonstrate the superiority of His High Priesthood over the Levitical/Aaronic type.

stimulus:

It is unfortunate that I haven't read anyone on the opposing side address that question directly. Rather, what remotely was offered was someone saying that Abraham gave tithes only once! That simply circumvents the question as to the often strained "mandatory" subscript to the tithing issue.

Happy now?

stimulus:

If tithing is a mandatory exercise, who commanded/mandated or COERCED Abraham to do so? And if it is not, why do we often read again and again in your replies that you're so concerned about this question of tithe being "MANDATORY"??

It isn't, it wasn't and I'm not.

stimulus:

Secondly, I have also asked about this issue of rather denying that the Scriptures teach that tithers and givers derive any blessing thereto. I offered the few verses that came to mind at the time. But for all that, you only gave a terse reply that did not touch upon my question directly. The one thing I have come to is this: if anyone wants to "simply give" and does not find any blessing in doing so, they could remain in that position and do as they please. BUT, they cannot claim that such an idea is what Scripture teaches for others who tithe or give.

What's the difference between tithing and giving? Or the distinction between tithers and givers?

stimulus:

If there is no distinction of the types of giving we make in Scripture, I don't see any reason why some of you guys would be using the same terms described in Scripture in the first place and arguing against this disntinct service!

Please share the distinctions between "types of giving (other than for a real physical need), with special emphasis on the tithe vs giving difference.

Thanks

God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

Simply not true. My reasons for opposing it on a mandatory or voluntary basis are made clear in my last post. As was my reason for having no problems with it (on a voluntary basis only).

In mentioning the "mandatory" subscript in your rejoinder to my enquiries, did you miss the point I made early enough that I don't argue tithing (or any other type of giving) in that connection? Why mention it again and again if it was not such an issue with you?

TV01:

A non-question sir. Who has claimed he was co-erced? Or gave it based on the law or a divine mandate? That can only be an arguement for those arguing for a mandatory tithe. Please think it through? As ever you seem to be arguing both sides and making a case for neither  !

Thank you, but I wonder if you ever attempt reading issues before making any case. I offered that question again because you simply have a hard case dealing with your "mandatory" default position - and I offered that was not my perspective on the issue.

TV01:

He gave a tithe, once, of the spoils of war. Not of His personal possessions. Not ever mentioned again (Jacob apart) until the law.

Whose are the spoils of war that people obtain after a warfare in the OT narratives? Do you even know what you're arguing here? So, Abraham took of possessions that were not his, and gave them as tithes to Melchizedek (king of righteousness)? Make that another non-question and let me know you have no answers.

TV01:

I have also repeatedly stated that the main thrust of the symbolism of Abrahams tithe to Melchizedek was to demonstrate the superiority of His High Priesthood over the Levitical/Aaronic type.

And to demonstrate the superiority had to be done by possessions that were not his, no?

TV01:

Happy now?

It isn't, it wasn't and I'm not.

I said this long ago: "God does not require, mandate, or command any type of giving from the NT Christian."  https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.864.html#msg1206013

I don't see why you would have to present the question again after I had already stated the obvious.

TV01:

What's the difference between tithing and giving? Or the distinction between tithers and givers?

If there is no distinction between, why have you been arguing all along, TV01?

TV01:

Please share the distinctions between "types of giving (other than for a real physical need), with special emphasis on the tithe vs giving difference.

The one question I'd like an answer to is this: do you see any distinction between them at all?

You're sounding as if in real substance, they all are the same; and if that is what you're arguing for, that would mean only one thing: it is no longer a matter of tithing per se, but of "giving" in any respect.

@ Stimulus,

You are really running hard but makiong no ground. Writing a lot but not saying anything. Answering question with posers and posers with queries.

I'll tell you what, why dont you just succinctly and specifically state your position on tithing (be that voluntary or mandatory) and giving, and the difference between the two if any. Please feel free to adumbrate anything else you think may clear the air.

God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

You are really running hard but makiong no ground. Writing a lot but not saying anything. Answering question with posers and posers with queries.

Okay, thanks.

TV01:

I'll tell you what, why don't you just succinctly and specifically state your position on tithing (be that voluntary or mandatory) and giving,

Did so earlier.

TV01:

and the difference between the two if any. Please feel free to adumbrate anything else you think may clear the air.

If there's no difference, why the argument in the first place?

Cheers.