₦airaland Forum

@anonimi,

anonimi:
This does not correlate with what followed from you in the same response:

Maybe you should pause for a while and gather your thoughts clearly to stop further muddling trying to justify the unjustifiable for CHRISTians.

It appears you did not seek to even understand sleekmag before arriving at your opinions. Perhaps it could be that you were only interested in seeking out just where you might find something to complain about, and that is why you did not even bother to read his thoughts collectively.

Sister pilgrim how body?

What has been happening?

I just returned to the forum yesterday.
I was begining to get addicted to the forum and Oga was not happy about it.

@anonimi,

anonimi:
I believe it might be useful at this time to re-introduce this drama sketch, that covers most of the issues in this tithe fraud that continues unabated in our churches.

Lol, I wonder how those who are so opposed to this matter cannot contain themselves and must resort to this unfortunate antics just to drive their point. It even gets more interesting on a sad level when such antics involves directly displaying irrational disaffection such as this one:

anonimi:
As a sequel to my last article debunking Mr. Enoch Adejare Adeboye’s claims about tithing, Believers are not subject to the Tithe, I hereby present a court scenario in which the General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God stands before the Great Judge of all the earth, the Lord Jesus Christ, on this subject.

The ridiculous simply has no bounds in the above. First, so many people have reached a concensus that believers are not "subject" to anything at all - you cannot make a few things "mandatory" for anyone while arguing against this single issue. Incase you missed it: God is NOT COMPELLING anybody to give anything! Resorting to this sad level taking your arguments to a personal level and pretending to be Jesus Christ is not only unhealthy, it is ungodly.

Besides, whoever was pretending this drama here is only demonstrating the same bitterness we often find from those who are vehemently opposed to tithing. The bitterness does not stop at simply sharing and discussing (even arguing), but now it has to degenerate to personal attacks under the claim that you were presenting the G.O. before the Great Judge of all the earth! Have such people never read such warnings as:

         ●  Romans 2:1  -   For wherein thou  judgest another, thou condemnest thyself.
         ●  James 4:11   -   Speak not evil one of another, brethren.
         ● 1 Peter 2:1    -   Lay aside malice, guile, hypocrisies, envies, and all evil speakings.

Hmm, slander is not a light matter O. It does not bless the slanderer. . . and if all this effort was the style and machinery you seek to "deliver" your readers, you have even made your case worse.  Just because someone does not agree with others on a subject does not mean we should descend so low to ungodly levels in order to express our views.

Just thought you should try and keep these things in mind. It is well.

@affee,

affee:
Sister pilgrim how body?

What has been happening?

I just returned to the forum yesterday.
I was begining to get addicted to the forum and Oga was not happy about it.

My sista, you be waya! Kai! I was wondering if I did something wrong to have made you disappear on me like that! I had no clue you were on recess. Body dey kampe. . . lovely sunshine for my area today. Oga knows wetin 'i[color=Black]m[/color] want. . so it is understandable that his love for you cannot be rivalled by anything for anything or anybody. We are very much in agreement!

No mind me. . I'm just so relaxed and joyful today. Busy afternoon soon, but I'm catching all the rest before then. Grace and enjoyment to you.

abandon you ke?

not possible.

anyways take kia

remember Jesus is Lord and He'll ever stop Loving you

pilgrim.1:
@anonimi,

It appears you did not seek to even understand sleekmag before arriving at your opinions. Perhaps it could be that you were only interested in seeking out just where you might find something to complain about, and that is why you did not even bother to read his thoughts collectively.

I only understand too well his stating the ovbvious that tithe even in the old testament has no correlation with what is being done today in the first part highlighted yet he goes on, in the next sentence, just as you have been doing on this thread to state something contrary to his earlier biblical quote. Maybe you are the one who needs to re-read his post.

anonimi:
I only understand too well his stating the ovbvious that tithe even in the old testament has no correlation with what is being done today in the first part highlighted yet he goes on, in the next sentence, just as you have been doing on this thread to state something contrary to his earlier biblical quote. Maybe you are the one who needs to re-read his post.

@anonimi,

There's no need to become disaffected about this issue. We (sleekmag and I) were directly sharing views and he actually called my attention to something in my submissions where he did not agree with me, and I subsequently looked into it - before he summarised his view on the same thing I had been stating consistently for ages:

        1. sleekmag called my attention on the 10% issue

        2. my response to help resolve his query

        3. sleekmag's summary and inference

        4. his commentary which you earlier quoted.

The point is that it does not appear to me that he was driving for a 10% to be given every single time; and the reason why I feel that way is because of this line in that same reposte you quote from:

          _______________________________________________________________
            [size=14pt]"[/size]You give your tithes not because you hope to prosper in return, but in true
            obedience to him and his work. There are people give much more to God;
            God doesn't need my blessings i am the one that needs his hands. >snip<
            Tithing is not compulsory, giving is not compulsory, but you can't love
            without giving. If we claim we love God, our tithes shouldn't be a big deal.
            God so loved us that he gave his son to die for us.[size=14pt]"[/size]
          _______________________________________________________________

If you feel I had misread him, that;s okay. I just thought that it was unwise to have missed his summary and assumed he was one of those who come under your fire of 'fraud'.

Regards all the same.

anonimi:
I believe it might be useful at this time to re-introduce this drama sketch, that covers most of the issues in this tithe fraud that continues unabated in our churches.
------------------------------------------------------------

>snip<

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credits:
This narration was crafted and adapted from my previous article, Believers are not subject to the Tithe, and from materials put up at http://tithing.christian-things.com/articles.html

Source: The Trial

@anonimi,

I actually had read that article before you reposted it on this forum. Certainly, everyone is free to post whatever; however, I wonder if by doing so here, you're sending a message to readers that Yomi's article represents your thoughts precisely? There are a few issues which I would like to highlight, though; but if Yomi is saying something differently from what you would have said, then it would be nice to know as well.

Cheers.

affee:
remember Jesus is Lord and He'll ever stop Loving you

Amen. . Jesus is Lord; and I know He'll [b]n[/b]ever stop Loving me and you!

sorry o

na typographical error

10ks pilgrim.1 for ur insight offered 2 anonimi. If she'd been following all our earlier posts with an open mind, maybe she'd have gotten what i was tryin to say there. It's usually not easy trying to win someone vehemently opposed to your views, however reasonable you might put your case.

I actually feel anyone's free to do whatever he/she likes as regards to the above since it seems our convictions must be personal and based on our actual relationship level with God and understanding of his will for our lives. If we all had the same common denominator operative in our lives, then it would be easier to find a balance. This common denominator is what i call the Holy Spirit. If he's active in our lives (we, the posters on this topic), i believe he'll show us what we need to know if we ask him.

Jn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (KJV)

Jn 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (KJV)

So i believe if we ask him, he'll show us what we need to know. Moreover, our faith levels aren't the same, and we have don't have the same goals and expectations in life. For me, my tithe is compulsory (10%) cos i know where i'm going and am willing to give it all it takes. Two joggers jog down the road every morning, one plans to keep fit while the other hopes to be world champion in long distance races. Do you think they'll spend the same input during the jogging exercise? Of course not! Why? Cos' they've got different goals. REVELATION IS PERSONAL.

Hi ppl. What a week its been here.

Blessings!

I've thoroughly enjoyed the various perspectives shared on this subject - whether for or against.

pilgrim.1:
@anonimi,

Certainly, everyone is free to post whatever; however, I wonder if by doing so here, you're sending a message to readers that Yomi's article represents your thoughts precisely? There are a few issues which I would like to highlight, though; but if Yomi is saying something differently from what you would have said, then it would be nice to know as well.

Cheers.

Precisely is too exact a word to use under any circumstance. I would rather say I generally agree with the thoughts he expressed in the article and will encourage you to read the Bible passages referred to in full context.

pilgrim.1:
@anonimi,

The point is that it does not appear to me that he was driving for a 10% to be given every single time; and the reason why I feel that way is because of this line in that same reposte you quote from:

          _______________________________________________________________
            [size=14pt]"[/size]You give your tithes not because you hope to prosper in return, but in true
            obedience to him and his work. There are people give much more to God;
            God doesn't need my blessings i am the one that needs his hands. >snip<
            Tithing is not compulsory, giving is not compulsory, but you can't love
            without giving. If we claim we love God, our tithes shouldn't be a big deal.
            God so loved us that he gave his son to die for us.[size=14pt]"[/size]
          _______________________________________________________________

If you feel I had misread him, that;s okay. I just thought that it was unwise to have missed his summary and assumed he was one of those who come under your fire of 'fraud'.

Regards all the same.

Once again, may I ask you to read what you posted above PLEASE?
In one breath you agree with sleekymag "it does not appear to me that he was driving for a 10% to be given every single time" yet you go on to highlight his " You give your tithes <skip> in true obedience to him (God) and his work, There are people give much more to God; "
Ask yourself, how can one corellate your and his agreement that one needs not give 10% or any % for that matter everytime with a later assertion that tithe giving is in obedience to God (thus suggesting mandatory nature) and make reference to people actually giving more thus establishing 10% as the least threshold
We all agree that giving is part of Christianity, no doubt about that.
The question we disagree on is how much/who to/when to. These details are necessary in the light of how much abuse can be wrapped thereinto. Meanwhile the giving for CHRISTians as prescribed in the NT has no compulsion to it.
Hence, anyone no matter his claimed level of annointing who compels people overtly or subtly is trying to obtain money through falsehood/pretence and is no different from a 419 crook. QED.

@anonimi,

anonimi:
Once again, may I ask you to read what you posted above PLEASE?

I know what I posted - so does sleekmag. The one thing I find really funny with people who are so driven to oppose tithes is that they just cannot contain themselves and must see a case for forcing their presumptions on others. Just let me ask: have you missed the one thing everyone is saying all along in recent times? Here again:

      Tithes is not compulsory - and for those who give, it is not treated as FRAUD.

That is why I have been asking you guys to simply open your Bibles and discuss it directly from there: but NO, you will not be satisfied thereto - is it then any wonder that this issue is causing so much bitterness from those opposed to it? WHY are you guys so bitter over an issue that nobody is forcing upon you?

anonimi:
In one breath you agree with sleekymag "it does not appear to me that he was driving for a 10% to be given every single time" yet you go on to highlight his " You give your tithes, in true obedience to him (God) and his work, There are people give much more to God; "

Yes, I did. And you know what? You had misread him as if he meant to say "Tithes are COMPULSORY for EVERYONE" - which has been the issue you keep driving here. Even sleekmag came back to note that same issue after my last reposte to yours; and if he saw anything contrary in this regard, I trust he would have made it clear as he earlier called my attention to something he did not agree with.

The thing here is that we can all discuss and even disagree with one another on various points. I guess (not sure) that sleekmag was clear and still is that I may be mistaken; and I'm sure I made clear that I'm not forcing my ideas or inferences on anyone on this issue. But as we all learn to look into God's Word and see the shades of our interpretations, a healthier discussion is presented before us.

anonimi:
Ask yourself, how can one corellate your and his agreement that one needs not give 10% or any % for that matter everytime with a later assertion that tithe giving is in obedience to God (thus suggesting mandatory nature) and make reference to people actually giving more thus establishing 10% as the least threshold

There are 3 things I should highlight there:

(a) we have time and again asserted that no type of giving (tithes, freewill, contribution, donations, ministry support, etc) is mandatory to anyone. Please calm down and go back and check us out. I suspected as above that you might have been mistaking our persuasion for a "mandatory" giving - and nothing could be far from the truth.

(2) the fact that we are most agreed that people give much more should make it plain that we are not bent on tithe = 10% everytime. Think carefully here: we did not make any issue mandatory; nor did we suggest that what is given by any name be always 10% or any % for that matter. If people give much more than that in recognition of the real value of their offering (the 'real value' which I highlighted as the 'hallowed part'), why should that be an issue at all?

(3) Lol, I don't remember establishing 10% as the threshold of tithe or anything else. Dear anonimi. . . who has been talking about 1% and saying that it is not the same thing as 10%?!? I have always maintained that view - so I don't think it was a great point for you to have read that we were establishing 10% as the threshold. Lol, please clam down - I believe that we can all discuss amicably without trying to misrepresent anyone's views.

I know of someone who's giving consistently challenges me: she consistently gives a certain percentage (dare I say it: about 35%) differently from what she gives at other times. The best part of it is that she did not receive this as a doctrine from our pastor to give such or any other percentage of income. I remember the evening we had what was called "in-house study" and the lady raised the question of tithe (at that evening, it was quite unrelated to the subject we were studying). Our group study leader said she would pass the question on to her husband, who was a group leader in a men's fellowship of our church. This leader-couple were not even tithers (they told us so); but what came out of that study was not threatening to anyone: because we were all chalenged by our pastors to do just one thing ~~

    -- please, we challenge you to refrain from giving anything to this church for just a month! --

The pastor said afterwards that we should do what was in our hearts to do. My brother, following that study, everyone came to the same thing: nobody was forced to tithe or give, but we saw how God touched our hearts that we have been very careless in this matter. And the lady who asked that question? She's the one who is today giving about 35% consistently.

Today, I asked her the same issue, since we have been discussing this on this forum. She just smiled and asked me to listen to God speak to my heart. I know what I felt deep in my heart and that was the type of challenge I was referring to in this entry.

Of course, I am not building a doctrine out of our personal experience; but think along with me - nobody is forcing anyone to give anything, but if we take anything out of our income to give as any type of "giving", is that not a percentage taken from the income as well?

anonimi:
We all agree that giving is part of Christianity, no doubt about that.
The question we disagree on is how much/who to/when to. These details are necessary in the light of how much abuse can be wrapped thereinto.

I agree; but here you have touched on something - "these details are necessary". I guess that's what we have been trying to do - and the details was why we have been clearly sharing that we should look beyond the percentage figure in % and think upon the real meaning of our giving.

Lol, have you noticed how many people who argue against tithes specifically do not take the time to look at how other types of giving have been abused as well? You can't beat the people you complain against - those who are using this ministry for filthy lucre. They don't mind you calling it "tithes" or "freewill giving". Just anything will be abused (especially freewill giving) to draw out the changed from people's pockets. It is happening much more than some of us have noticed - and I can come back and share on that with you if you care.

anonimi:
Meanwhile the giving for CHRISTians as prescribed in the NT has no compulsion to it.

Tithes were not made compulsory for anybody under the new covenant - and nothing was made compulsory to the Christian. We have said so more than a hundred times already.

anonimi:
Hence, anyone no matter his claimed level of annointing who compels people overtly or subtly is trying to obtain money through falsehood/pretence and is no different from a 419 crook. QED.

Agreed. Further, don't you think the same applies to people who force their views on tithers? Lol, no - I did not call anybody a crook; but I think it is on par to also assume that forcing the likes of Yomisays on anybody is plain falsehood. That was why I asked you this question earlier, and I haven't seen a response yet.

Cheers.

@pilgrim.1

How have u been, longtime,

This is the former SYSUSER,SYSUSERX or WITNESS, (nairaland conspiracy to have me banned made me cus the name changes )

By the way u were completely offline for quite a while around April, hope all is well with u,

@No2Atheism,

Wow! I was wondering who had that fine name until you posted the above, lol. My bros, I'm doing okay. And you? My unceremonious disappearance - I apologise: a lot suddenly came my way that took me way out of town. But I'm around for a while now and enjoying the discussions on various themes. Hope you will also. Many blessings.

@pilgrim.1,

good to hear from you,

abeg pls keep trying to minister to all atheists and muslims and non-christians on this website.

I really thank God that u were saved from the cult of iissllam.

By the way u have not yet gisted me as to the details of the conversion, hope u'll do that soon.

I beleive ur testimony would be good.

Hi Pilgrim,

How far? Hope you are well.

I wonder, if a tithe is not a fixed %age and is not compulsory, exactly how does it differ from simple giving? And exactly what is your premise or point?

Also, when you say "types of giving", could you kindly classify these types from NT scripture. My premise is that NT giving is predicated solely on need (I will not ignore, but distinguish it from "offering,even though I don't see that that takes a physical form in the NT. I wil leave that out for the purpose of this discussion, although I'm happy to discuss elsewhere).

Pilly you must realise that you are on a hiding to nothing and have gradually blurred your position. I'm actually see no reason to force this, trusting true seekers and seekers of truth will be led. I just miss you some, and thought I'd engage .

@ All,

Although my walk has led me away from deep discussion of doctrinal/sectarian issues, I would still love to share more. One thing that deters me is the lack of "end-to-end"discussion around topics. Point in question, what is the practical outworking and fit with real Christian living of a tithe?

Note: I have no issue with tithe as a personal thing between a believer and their God, my issue is with a mandatory, fixed rate, benefit or curse accruing faith wide diktat. Neither do I see any basis for suppoting NT tithe from OT scripture or Abrahams one off example.

I note with interest the "Slain in the spirit/Falling under the anointing" thread. How come no one has asked the obvious question; What then? I believe it would make the discussions -or debates as they often are - much more robust and ultimately edifying.

God bless
TV

Hi again TV01,

How body?

Thanks for that very intuitive thought there:

TV01:
I wonder, if a tithe is not a fixed %age and is not compulsory, exactly how does it differ from simple giving? And exactly what is your premise or point?

This is somewhat another way of putting a very important question someone had asked earlier; but it may help to say just this bit:

(1) The percentage (%) thingy: My point is that we have always been stuck on a particular percentage in this question of giving; whareas my effort has been to help readers see that is not the point God has always wanted us to look at (IMHO). And what point is it? I think that tithes go further than mere calculations based on income - it goes as far as its spiritual value - which points to that which is the 'hallowed part' of all our giving.

(2) Complusory: My point has always been that nothing has been made compulsory to the Christian as regards this issue. Absolutely nothing. Yes, I have noted that in my opinion this ministry has been ordained by the Lord Himself; but even so, He did not force it upon any believer at all.

Bearing these issues in mind, it then becomes apparent why those who are vehemently ooposed to tithes may have serious issues as not to be able to see these points. In which case, they argue again and again that ~~

(a) it has always been compulsory
(b) it is based every single time on 10%
(c ) it is only given to meet needs
(d) it is always a matter of the LAW

Now dear TV01, I have serious problems digesting those assertions as based on Scripture. Why? For the simple reasons already shared that:

(a) it has not always been compulsory - citing Abraham's case

(b) it has not always been 10% every single time (citing a few other examples)

(c) it was not Melchizedek's need that made Abraham give tithes

(d) it was not always a matter of the LAW (again, Abraham's example)

Now, some are also opposed to the above because they counter that __

(1) Abraham tithed only once

(2) Abraham did not give of his own income

(3) we cannot repeat anything that Abraham did

(4) there was nothing said about tithing in the NT

Again, I counter that indeed ~~

(1) Abraham indeed tithed once; but how many times did Melchizedek meet him?

(2) if Abraham's tithes were unacceptable as "tithes", God would say so

(3) the basic current in Abraham's life was faith (see Galatians 3:7)

(4) there are indeed so many texts in the NT where tithes were mentioned


You see, we keep going round in circles like this until. . .

But my points are that: (a) people should look away from a calculation of percentage (%) and rather look at the basic issue involved in the meaning of tithes - God alone specifically pronounced what it meant: Leviticus 27:30. . . . and, (b) they should be willing to look beyond the LAW and understand what tithe meant outside of it - which was why I have been calling attention to Abraham's case.

TV01:
Also, when you say "types of giving", could you kindly classify these types from NT scripture. My premise is that NT giving is predicated solely on need (I will not ignore, but distinguish it from "offering,even though I don't see that that takes a physical form in the NT. I wil leave that out for the purpose of this discussion, although I'm happy to discuss elsewhere).

Maybe some day we might have the happy occasion to expound on the various types of offerings in the NT. But I think somewhere along this discussions I made reference to the various kinds of giving in the NT (which I "stole" from another poster). In anycase, I shall come back and outline them again.

However, suffice to say that we make a mistake (IMHO) when we assume that all giving in the NT was in refernece to need. I don't think so; and both in the OT and NT, there are examples where they were given in response to worship even though the receiver had no need. Two examples: Abraham to melchizedek (the latter had no need); and the widow mites in the NT (she was the one in need, but were the treasurers in need?). I think we should look into these issues and see the point.

TV01:
Pilly you must realise that you are on a hiding to nothing and have gradually blurred your position.

I'm humble to see where it is so, if you could help me see it. However, even when people have questioned my position, I have always tried to share with them the consistency in my position.

TV01:
I'm actually see no reason to force this, trusting true seekers and seekers of truth will be led. I just miss you some, and thought I'D engage

I agree; we are not to force anything on anybody - and as annimi noted, it is important to note the details so that nobody is confused about issues. If we did not attempt to clarify the details, people would still be making huge mistakes and running with the default idea that tithes were not mentioned at all in the NT; or that tithes = LAW, whereas it is not so.

Cheers and thanks again for pointing out these issues.

Blessings.

@No2Atheism,

Well, I'm going to reply as an off-line just this once so that the tithe discussion would not be derailed.

No2Atheism:
@pilgrim.1,

good to hear from you,

abeg please keep trying to minister to all atheists and muslims and non-christians on this website.

Well, I'm trying to share with our atheist friends on several issues; although I have not as yet entered into deep discussions with them. I thought it might be helpful to make them see the gaps they hold in their own assumptions before I bring them round to see just how far from reality they actually are. Some are reasonable, some are not - and we have candidates like that in almost every segment of the religion/irreligion discussions. For those who hold a rationalistic atheist worldview, the basic prmise has been to ask them to stand up for what they truly believe by first asking questions about the definitiosn of atheism. So far, I have not seen a coherent position on that definition well defended in any discussion before disaffection begin to emerge.

As for Muslims, well. . . I have clearly stated to them that pilgrim.1 would no longer be engaging them in arguments and debates for three reasons: (a) it is rather counter productive - and many people who email may have made me see that point. Howevere, they are happy to go back and read the articulate debates I held in the past and up until now, I have not seen anyone return offline to show me anything different: just insults and abuses seem to flavour their responses. (b) most of the so-called debates these days are boring - if they have not run to websites to plagiarize articles, they would dribble round and round an issue endlessly with ad hominem repetitions in order to keep ducking the issues being discussed. In such instances, those who have emailed me offline have advised again and again that I don't have to keep repeting myself as they do, because it would make me descend "lower than my station" to entertain such frutless repetitions. (c) you won't believe that when someone challenged me to stay off such debates (even though it was tough), I listened - and just as she had predicted, the things she mentioned actually came to pass: she rather urged that the mark of a Spirit controlled woman is to endure all things and let Christ do His work. I listened, and little did I know that fruit would be borne as she had stated. You should have been around about a month earlier - and you would have been amazed as I was.

No2Atheism:
I really thank God that u were saved from the cult of iissllam.

Well, what can I say? The challenge for me these days is to bear all things for Christ's sake and love them even more intensely no matter what some of them do. I'm not perfect, but the Lord has been faithfully helping me.

No2Atheism:
By the way u have not yet gisted me as to the details of the conversion, hope u'll do that soon.

I beleive ur testimony would be good.

Hmm, make I no talk yet - I'm sure someone would privide you with the link soon and also a follow up about what ensued!

Jesus is Lord.

I cannot believe that somebody will take the Bible and try to make it fit to thier own ideology, some say that tithing is in the old testament and therefore it is not valid in the new testament, if that is true then also all the promises of God in the old testament is then invalid and all the blessings and promises in the psalms are also not valid in the new testament.

Tithe is written as a tenth of everything you owe wether it is good or bad. ( Leviticus 27:32-33)

Any tithe that you want to redeem, you shall add a fifth to it. (Leviticus 27: 31)

The Blessing attached to a tithe (Malachi 3: 10-12)

A Curse is attached for not paying (Malachi 3:8-9)


Please endevour to pay your tithe. Everyone is subject to his or her own opinion

@ugo_2u,

ugo_2u:
A Curse is attached for not paying (Malachi 3:8-9)

Hmm, that may be true and valid if the people under the New Covenant were Jews. Many people know that no curse is called upon the Christian who does not tithe; I'm sorry, but that is a Biblical fact.

okay no probs, @pilgrim.1,

You are absolutely right, i also realised that constant argument with atheists and issllamists on nairaland on ended up increasing pride and anger in me, which is not good.

Rather (just like u did) what is said once as a testimony to Christ should be left as that so that the holyspirit can do His work in Them, cus ultimately nothing we say or do not say on nairaland can change them , unless the HolySpirit ministers to their hardened heart.

Your testimony as being a former muuslim is certainly something special , cus i understand the family pressures and persecutions that would ultimately come along with being saved by Jesus Christ.

pilgrim.1:
Hi again TV01,

Hi Miss.

pilgrim.1:
How body?

Body dey fine sis', I have reason to really thank God, I've been all but incapacitated recently, but I'm on the mend.

I'll make a few brief points;

pilgrim.1:
(1) The percentage (%) thingy: My point is that we have always been stuck on a particular percentage in this question of giving; whareas my effort has been to help readers see that is not the point God has always wanted us to look at (IMHO). And what point is it? I think that tithes go further than mere calculations based on income - it goes as far as its spiritual value - which points to that which is the 'hallowed part' of all our giving.

You may well have attempted to make a point about the "hallowed part", firstly there is no such scriptural notion. And secondly, you have singularly failed to make it. Please think on the application of "hallowed".

Giving - without classification - as a Christian notion is a response to a need predicated on a heartfelt compassion for man, bourne out of a love for God. What hallows it, is the attitude (heart/spiritual sincerity). Perhaps unintentionally, by focusing on the gift, you do no more than ritualise it. Just as a supplicants focus on the Giver, not the gift. Likewise, God's focus is on the giver not the gift.

pilgrim.1:
(2) Complusory: My point has always been that nothing has been made compulsory to the Christian as regards this issue. Absolutely nothing. Yes, I have noted that in my opinion this ministry has been ordained by the Lord Himself; but even so, He did not force it upon any believer at all.

Bearing these issues in mind, it then becomes apparent why those who are vehemently ooposed to tithes may have serious issues as not to be able to see these points. In which case, they argue again and again that ~~

(a) it has always been compulsory
(b) it is based every single time on 10%
(c ) it is only given to meet needs
(d) it is always a matter of the LAW

So, it's not compulsory, yet it is ordained by the Lord? Is it an ordinance, a command, a sacrement, a law? Like communion perhaps? Could you kindly draw scriptural parallels or lend further insight to clarify what appears to be a contradictory statement.

No one - at least not myself, is "vehemently opposed" - in the way you are suggesting, and I clearly outlined my premise and riders in my last post.

a. as part of the mosaic/levitical law, and any arguments for a tithe drawing on the law must acknowledge this.
b. whatever the %age, if stipulated as law, then a. comes into play.
c. NT giving is only on the basis of need (lets leave out worship offering as I requested in my last post) 
d. it is if you use the law and the prophets to establish tithing as a NT notion

pilgrim.1:
Now dear TV01, I have serious problems digesting those assertions as based on Scripture. Why? For the simple reasons already shared that:

(a) it has not always been compulsory - citing Abraham's case

(b) it has not always been 10% every single time (citing a few other examples)

(c) it was not Melchizedek's need that made Abraham give tithes

(d) it was not always a matter of the LAW (again, Abraham's example)

Now, some are also opposed to the above because they counter that __

(1) Abraham tithed only once

(2) Abraham did not give of his own income

(3) we cannot repeat anything that Abraham did

(4) there was nothing said about tithing in the NT

Again, I counter that indeed ~~

(1) Abraham indeed tithed once; but how many times did Melchizedek meet him?

(2) if Abraham's tithes were unacceptable as "tithes", God would say so

(3) the basic current in Abraham's life was faith (see Galatians 3:7)

(4) there are indeed so many texts in the NT where tithes were mentioned

I'll respond briefly point by point;

a. Abrahams case was to demonstrate the superiority of the Melchizedical priesthood over the Aaronic/Levitical. Once. Never before or after, repeated.
b. please cite examples outside the law
c. worship offering, please don't muddy the waters.
d. outside of Abrahams one of tithe for a specific reason please see a. - it was.

1. true, but that bolsters the position of those against
2. likewise
3. we are only to have the faith of Abraham, not to marry close relatives -are you Ijebu ? - or lie to the king.
4. nothing said to Christians as an ordinance or law or ritual or to suggest that it's a NT imperative

1. We are informed of the once, which was for the reason outlined above. It was not a law or ritual, it was symbolic to contrast types.
2. unacceptable? your point here being? No one has denied the right of believers to tithe, but it's not Christian doctrine. It's Christian  liberty.
3. true, please see 3. above.  We are not to ritualise his actions. I know, lets go to war and plunder some heathen potentate !
4. 3 times, 2 are the same - the gospels - and are addressed to those under the law, but not understanding or living it, and once per 1. above.

pilgrim.1:
You see, we keep going round in circles like this until. . .

But my points are that: (a) people should look away from a calculation of percentage (%) and rather look at the basic issue involved in the meaning of tithes - God alone specifically pronounced what it meant: Leviticus 27:30. . . . and, (b) they should be willing to look beyond the LAW and understand what tithe meant outside of it - which was why I have been calling attention to Abraham's case.

Maybe some day we might have the happy occasion to expound on the various types of offerings in the NT. But I think somewhere along this discussions I made reference to the various kinds of giving in the NT (which I "stole" from another poster). In anycase, I shall come back and outline them again.

However, suffice to say that we make a mistake (IMHO) when we assume that all giving in the NT was in refernece to need. I don't think so; and both in the OT and NT, there are examples where they were given in response to worship even though the receiver had no need. Two examples: Abraham to melchizedek (the latter had no need); and the widow mites in the NT (she was the one in need, but were the treasurers in need?). I think we should look into these issues and see the point.

I'm humble to see where it is so, if you could help me see it. However, even when people have questioned my position, I have always tried to share with them the consistency in my position.

I agree; we are not to force anything on anybody - and as annimi noted, it is important to note the details so that nobody is confused about issues. If we did not attempt to clarify the details, people would still be making huge mistakes and running with the default idea that tithes were not mentioned at all in the NT; or that tithes = LAW, whereas it is not so.

Beyond the law are grace and truth, John 1:17. Giving is a grace 2 Corinthians 8

I recall the taxonomy of giving severally outlined earlier in the. It simply misses the point, the only drivers are need (and worship). The requirement is not to give, but too have the right spiritual posture when doing so.

You are only agreeing with me citing giving in response to need and worship. Finito. I leave out worship offering too 1. keep things simple, however, 2. I believe the bible shows giving to the needy is actually considered worship, 3. if one wishes to make the distinction and then give for either reason the introduction and use of the word tithe or employing notions like "hallowed" are essentially pointless at best and potentially dangerous.

That sis' is the whole problem with your position. Its not only inconsistent, but also contradictory. It's not by law, but you defend it using the law. It's not compulsory, but it is an ordinance. It's not a set%age, but it is hallowed. Forcing a deeper meaning into it is just an attempt to justify it. Can't honestly be sold using the law, attaching blessing or curses is the flip side of the same coin and just wrong. Abrahams example was clearly symbolic and shown to be such in the only other NT reference in Hebrews. So finally, painted into a corner and running out of options, we spiritualise it? Enough already.

Your only plank - short and shaky - is that it's a level one gets to. In that case why pursue it? Let folks get there. And please, acknowledging that anecdotal evidence and personal experience do not constitute doctrine whilst citing lots of both is disingenious. That wasn't so much Pilgrim.

pilgrim.1:
Cheers and thanks again for pointing out these issues.

Blessings.

Kindest regards Miss, it's my pleasure. Apologies if I come across a bit terse, you know I flinch at - but admire - how much you can slap down in one post. Where's mein feisty Pilly? I'm not so sure about this new "humble" person !!!

Peace

God bless
TV

@TV01,

Most of the issues you raised again have been dealt with on this and other threads about the same subject - and it seems to me that you would just like to conclude ona default position before even examining what have been said in recent times. Even after these issues ahev been discussed, I might grant reminders as appropriate:

TV01:
You may well have attempted to make a point about the "hallowed part", firstly there is no such scriptural notion. And secondly, you have singularly failed to make it. Please thinkvon the application of "hallowed".

The application of the 'hallowed':

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1312.html#msg2908410

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1344.html#msg2918203 (repetitions)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1376.html#msg2918691 (summary outline)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1376.html#msg2921847 (again detailed)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1376.html#msg2922746 (reiterated)

TV01:
Giving - without classification - as a Christian notion is a response to a need predicated on a heartfelt compassion for man, bourne out of a love for God. What hallows it, is the attitude (heart/spiritual sincerity). Perhaps unintentionally, by focusing on the gift, you do no more than ritualise it. Just as a supplicants focus on the Giver, not the gift. Likewise, God's focus is on the giver not the gift.

What 'hallows' it is not the heart of the giver - it is the value God Himself places on it (Leviticus 27:30 & 32).

TV01:
So, it's not compulsory, yet it is ordained by the Lord? Is it an ordinance, a command, a sacrement, a law? Like communion perhaps? Could you kindly draw scriptural parallels or lend further insight to clarify what appears to be a contradictory statement.

Already highlighted and discussed earlier:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1376.html#msg2922428

TV01:
No one - at least not myself, is "vehemently opposed" - in the way you are suggesting, and I clearly outlined my premise and riders in my last post.

I didn't mean you in particular, though.

TV01:
a. as part of the mosaic/levitical law, and any arguments for a tithe drawing on the law must acknowledge this.

I do not base my arguments of the tithes on the LAW:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1216.html#msg2884413

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2885787 (succinct here)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2888222 (reiterated)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2888480 (addressed again)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2888555 (again outlined)

There are principles in the Law that help us to understand the meaning and value of tithes; but that is not where I start from; nor is it where I see tithes every single time.

TV01:
b. whatever the %age, if stipulated as law, then a. comes into play.

But before the Levitical priesthood, where was tithe "stipulated as a law"?

TV01:
c. NT giving is only on the basis of need (lets leave out worship offering as I requested in my last post)

I don't think so:

~~ scroll down to "Not every example in the NT was about giving to the needy"
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2893431

~~ examples in the NT are not all on the basis of need:
I referenced the case of the widow's mites besides several others.

TV01:
d. it is if you use the law and the prophets to establish tithing as a NT notion

I do not base my arguments of the tithes on the LAW:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1216.html#msg2884413

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2885787 (succinct here)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2888222 (reiterated)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2888480 (addressed again)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-272.1248.html#msg2888555 (again outlined)

There are principles in the Law that help us to understand the meaning and value of tithes; but that is not where I start from; nor is it where I see tithes every single time.

TV01:
I'll respond briefly point by point;

a. Abrahams case was to demonstrate the superiority of the Melchizedical priesthood over the Aaronic/Levitical. Once. Never before or after, repeated.

We've been through this before. My simple question was this: how many times before and after that incident did Melchizedek meet Abraham? If he did it once and God called it "tithes", what is the arguments there as if to call it something else?

TV01:
b. please cite examples outside the law

I have done so repeatedly.

TV01:
c. worship offering, please don't muddy the waters.

I never have - we have done this thread before.

TV01:
d. outside of Abrahams one of tithe for a specific reason please see a. - it was.

Please see my comment there.

TV01:
1. true, but that bolsters the position of those against

Far from it - those against tithes make so many excuses against Abraham's case and yet are not able to answer simple questions thereto. It seems to me it would have been better and easy for these guys (they wish) if Abraham's case was never called "tithe" in Scripture. Unfortunately, in both the OT and NT they are precisely called TITHES - and that was even before the LAW.

TV01:
2. likewise

Point made.

TV01:
3. we are only to have the faith of Abraham, not to marry close relatives -are you Ijebu ? - or lie to the king.

Haha! What are you saying? Make I speak Ijebu Ode lingo for you before you follow the faith of Abraham? Abi, how does that differ from "we are only to have the faith of Abraham"?

TV01:
4. nothing said to Christians as an ordinance or law or ritual or to suggest that it's a NT imperative

Em, what does 1 Corinthians 9:14 say in your Bible?

KJV - '. .so hath the Lord ordained that . .'

NIV - '. .the Lord has commanded that . .'

AMP - '. .the Lord directed that . .'

ESV - '. .the Lord commanded that . .'

ASV - '. .the Lord ordain that . .'

HCSB - '. .the Lord has commanded that . .'

Now, it seems quite an oxymoron for me to first argue that the Lord had "ordained" this ministry, and then come back and consistently say that the Christian is not COMPELLED to give anything. let me remind us:
___________________________________________________________
'When the apostle noted that the Lord had ordained the very same thing
for the Christian (1 Cor. 9:14), he did not argue to make it a compulsion or
force or make it binding on anyone - indeed he stated clearly that it was
not so written so that people would start feeling they must do it unto him
(verse 15). ~~ (see it here)
___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________
Get the point? Although he recognized that the Lord had ordained that
they which preach the Gospel should live by it, and thus recognizing the
same thing as his "rights and privileges", the point is that he did not use
his rights - a personal choice he made for himself. (see it here)
___________________________________________________________

TV01:
1. We are informed of the once, which was for the reason outlined above. It was not a law or ritual, it was symbolic to contrast types.

I don't remember having made it a ritual or law.

TV01:
2. unacceptable? your point here being? No one has denied the right of believers to tithe, but it's not Christian doctrine. It's Christian liberty.

You guys are funny. No one has denied the "right" of believers to tithe - and yet the same opposers of tithe had called it . . . what? Em, reminder:

False doctrine
Fraud
A Lie
(. . . even worse)

. . . are all the above the same things you call "Christian liberty"? Wait: if it is Christian liberty that believers have the right to tithe, then in heaven's name, WHAT IS THE ARGUMENT FOR ALL THIS LONG WHILE?!? Can people just let up and allow this Christian liberty to be enjoyed by those who are TITHERS as Christians?

TV01:
3. true, please see 3. above. We are not to ritualise his actions. I know, lets go to war and plunder some heathen potentate !

Again, I don't remember ritualizing his actions.

TV01:
4. 3 times, 2 are the same - the gospels - and are addressed to those under the law, but not understanding or living it, and once per 1. above.

Lol, you're still going round in circles. "Christian liberty" - remember? No worries - it seems to me that you guys are waiting to see the word "tithes" about 700 times before you recognize it is in the NT.

TV01:
Beyond the law are grace and truth, John 1:17. Giving is a grace 2 Corinthians 8

Again, I do not argue tithes based upon the Law.

TV01:
I recall the taxonomy of giving severally outlined earlier in the. It simply misses the point, the only drivers are need (and worship). The requirement is not to give, but too have the right spiritual posture when doing so.

I'm falling off my chair! I don't know why you choose to run in circles like this. First, you urged that we "leave out worship offering", then you come back and quickly type "worship" there. The drivers are "need", and you just assume it so, without having checked every single case out. Hmm, I don't think extremum is a very healthy posture to assume, though.

TV01:
You are only agreeing with me giving in response to need and worship. Finito. I leave out worship offering too 1. keep things simple, 2. I believe the bible shows giving to the needy is actually considered worship, 3. if one wishes to make the distinction and then give for either reason the introduction and use of the word tithe or employing notions like "hallowed" are essentially pointless at best and potentially dangerous.

You are too quick to dismiss what you seem lazy to check out. "Keep things simple" - and all I see in your repostes are exculpations driven to assertions that have not actually answered to the gist of what we have been discussing. I have posted reminders in the several links above for this issue, and I hope you would find them helpful.

TV01:
That sis' is the whole problem with your position. Its not only inconsistent, but also contradictory. It's not by law, but you defend it using the law. It's not compulsory, but it is an ordinance. It's not a set%age, but it is hallowed. Forcing a deeper meaning into it is just an attempt to justify it. Can't honestly be sold using the law, attaching blessing or curses is the flip side of the same coin and just wrong. Abrahams example was clearly symbolicand shown to be such in the only other NT reference in Hebrews. So finally, painted into a corner and running out of options, we spiritualise it? Enough already.

I agree - enough already, although I'm not inclined to lazy ideas. If you cannot see what is written, how then do you understand it? Okay, I may pass and excuse the fact that you resumed this discussion mid-way - and I have tried to post the links that address your worries. At least, you should have helped yourself to look directly in the Word before assuming an argument merely on what you read from others. If you do not find "ordained" in 1 Corinthians, one would have expected that you pointed it out, rather than assume I was contradicting myself. On the other hand, if you had seen that word "ordained" and read further to see that the apostle indeed did not force it on anyone, what would the problem be for you?

I'm not confusing issues, TV01 - I may be accused of all sorts, and they don't bother me. The one thing I find really sad with this attitude is that people often tend to close their Bibles, assume extremum, make direct accusations where their understanding fail them; and then worry about where they got off at the last stop. What is so difficult in opening the Bible and pointing out simply that:

(a) the word "ordained" was not used anywhere in 1 Cor. 9:14
(b) inspite of that, Paul did not make it compulsory to anyone (vv. 15 ff)

If you had opened the Scriptures and shown me those points, then you would have a point. But if I simply pointed them out and your argument was that I am confusing myself, you make me laugh. It only indicates to me that I don't have to worry anything about your assertions if you have never taken the time to study the subject for yourself. If these things are not in the Bible, just simply say so and then bring out all those verses quoted in mine and show that I had inserted words which are not there.

TV01:
Your only plank - short and shaky - is that it's a level one gets to. In that case why pursue it? Let them get there. And please, acknowledging that anecdotal evidence and personal experience do not constitute doctrine whilst citing lots of both is disingenious.

I have not built a doctrine out of my own experience, thank you. I think you should calm down and reason along rather than be too driven to extremum. . . such an attitude is quite unhealthy. Read the Word, share your views, be open to other's views rather than dismiss them out of hand. These are the things that help a dicussion. If you cannot make a move along such lines, what's my worry? As I have shown, after all your arguments, the one question is how you dismiss something and come back asserting it - so once again: WHAT IS THE ARGUMENT FOR ALL THIS LONG WHILE if you admit that believers have the "right" to tithe? Is that not smething you should rather have considered instead of trying to assume these extreme posture?

TV01, as always, what interests me most and draws me into a discussion is when people can go into the Word and discuss. I tend to shy away these days when words are merely flying in the air and saying absolutely nothing. The effort is well appreciated, though. . . but it would be more beneficial for people to go into the Word and share their own views instead of pretending that believers have the right to tithe and then come back castigating them yet under the idea that such disdain is to be mistaken for "Christian liberty". That is hardly grace.

TV01:
Kindest regards Miss, it's my pleasure. Apologies if I come across a bit terse, you know I flinch at - but admire - how much you can slap down in one post. Where's mein feisty Pilly, I'm not sure about this new "humble" person !!!

Okay, lol. . . I'll keep that in mind. I don't want to be silly all at once to lose the lessons I have learnt the past few months.

Warmest regards.

Morning Pilgrim,

Hope you are well.

Ah, ah, you know the sheer length of your replies will deter me . Rather than reply to every point, I'll share.

First, I know I stepped in midway, I had been kind of following, but yes, I am remiss for not reading thoroughly, your submissions are too detailed for me to render that disservice. Apologies.

Never the less, I don't see the premise of your arguement and still feel that you are set on justifying your position by sheer dint of scholarship.

Mine has been simple;

1. Tithing is permissable, but not mandatory - and like most opponents, opposition is to those that would make it mandatory, not tithing per se
2. I believe that in the fullness of NT living, it is redundant and with time one would see that. But why force it? Hence, Christian liberty
3. It cannot be justified/enforced under the law and the prophets or based on something else and then enforced by same
4. Abrahams sole instance was/is not a pattern or ordinance. Abrahams faith is the only pointer for NT Christians.
5. Confers no distinct or unique blessings over one who simply gives - whatever amount/frequency - with the right posture
6. I don't actually agee that God is obliged to respond to our giving in any form on the basis of some set pattern or return
7. I don 't believe that God ranks giving or distinguishes giving types or gifts/offerings and then responds accordingly
8. NT giving is predicated on need, also noting
9. the offering/worship element - #1459 - but in the NT dispensation I see no real examples of that, although I stand to be corrected.
10. Following on from 8 & 9, I'D be really interested to hear how one would worship God directly with any physical gift in this dispensation. New thread?

I'm happy to discuss any point, or any that you may raise, but after so long and with so little consensus, I appreciate that it may start to get circular and tedious.

I'll find time - or there'll be opportunity at some stage - to explain all the failed jokes/one liners !

Best
TV

Hallo TV01,

Good morning. 

I would like to first start by commending your resourcefulness and reason in neatly packaging your persuasions in comestible form. My comments:

TV01:
1. Tithing is permissable, but not mandatory - and like most opponents, opposition is to those that would make it mandatory, not tithing per se
2. I believe that in the fullness of NT living, it is redundant and with time one would see that. But why force it? Hence, Christian liberty
3. It cannot be justified/enforced under the law and the prophets or based on something else and then enforced by same
4. Abrahams sole instance was/is not a pattern or ordinance. Abrahams faith is the only pointer for NT Christians.

In summary, those points are the very thing we have all been saying. The pain started when antagonists tried to allege that tithers were justifying a position based on the LAW - thus 'compelling, cajoling, manipulating, demanding, forcing' tithes upon anyone, whereas no tither has been trying to do so. Abraham's faith has been frequently highlighted as well; but our friends opposed thereto vehemently disagreed; and I'll subsequently show an example of such an extremum.

TV01:
5. Confers no distinct or unique blessings over one who simply gives - whatever amount/frequency - with the right posture
6. I don't actually agee that God is obliged to respond to our giving in any form on the basis of some set pattern or return
7. I don 't believe that God ranks giving or distinguishes giving types or gifts/offerings and then responds accordingly
8. NT giving is predicated on need, also noting

Certainly, your persuasions are appreciated - and we can absorb them in brotherly love. However, I would not be tedious to us at this point, lest I run the risk of repeating the examples and discussions I already gave in outlining answers to them.

TV01:
9. the offering/worship element - #1459 - but in the NT dispensation I see no real examples of that, although I stand to be corrected.
10. Following on from 8 & 9, I'D be really interested to hear how one would worship God directly with any physical gift in this dispensation. New thread?

I would be delighted to share on those if and when necessary - with lucid examples, certainly.

TV01:
I'm happy to discuss any point, or any that you may raise, but after so long and with so little consensus, I appreciate that it may start to get circular and tedious.

Precisely. I have summarised the points earlier on a concensus many people have reached; but just so nobody gets confused mid-way about what I was sharing, it was necessary to actually discuss them in detail.

TV01:
I'll find time - or there'll be opportunity at some stage - to explain all the failed jokes/one liners !

That'll be helpful, but not necessary. All the same, warmest regards.

So, as hinted earlier:

pilgrim.1:
Abraham's faith has been frequently highlighted as well; but our friends opposed thereto vehemently disagreed; and I'll subsequently show an example of such an extremum.

There are two extreme positions on this issue to avoid:

(a) those who force a curse upon Christians for not tithing
(b) those who sentence Christians to Hell for tithing

What these fellows are doing is that, whether you tithe or not, you are still under a curse or going to Hell. Surprised? Well, look again.

If we worry about pastors who use tithe to curse Christians (using Malachi 3:9), it does not mean that non-tithers have said anything better. Yes, I know of people who, being vehemently opposed to tithing, have said exactly the same thing and worse - sentencing people to Hell because they tithe! Apart from two cases I have witnessed for myself, let me give one example found online by a man who is opposed to tithing. His argument? Here: "Tithing - the old lie that could send you to hell". He quotes Galatians 5:4 and uses that to teach that anyone who tithes has "lost their salvation" and had started "down the road to hell".

Typically, such a man argues tithes based only upon the Law; but like I have often highlighted, tithes came before the Law; and the writer predictably did not make any reference to that at all before concluding that Galatians 5:4 sends tithers to Hell!

Are these antagonists better than the pastors who use Malachi 3:9 to curse Christians for not tithing?

I mean, have we noticed that there is simply no difference between those who force a "curse" upon Christians (using Malachi 3:9), and antagonists who sentence Christian-tithers to Hell (using Galatians 5:4)?!?

These are extreme positions that have no bearing on the Word of God or the leading of the Spirit. So, people who often get so bitter about Christian-tithers need to go back and examine their own lives - often, this bitterness is simply a display of their own rebellious cleverness to be deliberately blind to the Word.


In summary - avoid extremes. Many people (for and against) have fallen into the mistake of being too driven on this, so that what we have looks like this:

(a) If you don't tithe: you are cursed - Malachi 3:9 says so!
(b) If you are a tither: (using Galatians 5:4) you have :
~ lost your salvation
~ started down the road to Hell

What is the difference between these extreme fellows who curse and sentence people to Hell whether they tithe or don't tithe?

This is why I appeal that if we are saying, as you did, that - "No one has denied the right of believers to tithe", why can't those opposed to tithing just simply allow others to enjoy this "Christian Liberty" instead of being driven to the extremum of sentencing them to HELL?

May God help us follow His grace as He leads.

pilgrim.1:
why can't those opposed to tithing just simply allow others to enjoy this "Christian Liberty" instead of being driven to the extremum of sentencing them to HELL?

You keep missing the point Pilgrim.1, we are not really opposed to tithing what we are opposed to is the lies and fallacies some preachers preach about "compulsory tithing" which is manipulation of scripture and aimed at de-frauding faithful christians of their hard earded income. We have no problem with people paying tithes out of the goodnss of their hearts to worship God or further his work.
How was your wekend?