To Tithe or Not to Tithe? - Christianity Etc (52) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum › Nairaland General › Christianity Etc › To Tithe or Not to Tithe? (67934 Views)
1 2 3 ... 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 ... 64 Reply (Go Down)
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 12:48pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, sarmy:How very wrong you are! I respect what you "think", but it bears no relation to what is actually in reality. Let us even assume what you "think" to be the case - supposing no one uses the term "TITHE" and the same thing is still happening in your own church - would you have a more relaxed conscience? Why then does it seem to be promoting your faith if you disavowing the term "TITHE" and still do the same thing as "ensure that more can be given"? Isn't it a lack of faith that one is only afraid of the term "TITHE" while hoping to do the same thing by another term which has been dribbled through the back door - such as "freewill offerings"? What is this lack of faith we see in other people for calling it TITHES and then we use other terms to speak about our own lack of faith in a simple term? Dear sarmy, the term is not your problem - dare I say it goes far beyond that. Talk is cheap - you challenge your own faith for 6 months to give above 25% of your income and let's see how comfortable you can get with that! No, I did not say for you to "tithe 25%". . . call it anything you want; but be honest to give above 25% - that is where you faith will be tested - then come back and let us know if you have not lacked the faith in holding your own assumptions. Cheers. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by JJYOU: 1:04pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
hope this makes you wiser [b] I SEEK NOT WHAT IS YOURS BUT YOU[/b]: A Sermon on Tithing John Piper, Pastor Bethlehem Baptist Church January 24, 1982 (Morning) Several weeks ago I spent four days at Shalom House, our Conference retreat center. The text that filled me with most longing and soaked through my prayers was 2 Cor. 12:15, "I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls." The last morning I was there I took a walk before breakfast down through the birch trees to the lake and walked out on the frozen water beside the little rotting pier that had a big bread loaf of snow on it. The sun was just coming up through the pine trees yonder, at the end of the point. There was no wind, but it was 24 below zero. I stood as still and quiet as I could and this word came to my mind: Only live for what is essential! Only live for what is essential! Which I interpreted from Scripture like this: With all joy spend and be spent out for the souls of your people. It was one of those immeasurable moments that go on feeding you long afterward. I came away from those retreat days with a longing to pour myself out in the ministry of the Word and prayer for the advancement and joy of your faith. That's what I want to live for. And so as I pondered the possibility of preaching on tithing, the text that lay closest to hand was in the verse just before the words, "I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls." In verse 14 Paul says, to the church at Corinth, "Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden for I seek not what is yours but you." I seek not what is yours but you! What a great sentence. That is the flag waving over this sermon. It is the preface, heart and conclusion. I seek not what is yours, but you. I seek to build up a church of whom it can never be said, "They honor me with their tithes, but their heart is far from me" (cf. Matt. 15:  . Of whom it will never be said, "Woe to you, Bethlehem, for you tithe every honorarium, birthday gifts and before-taxes-income, but have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faith" (Matt. 23:23). I seek not what is yours but you.How many marriages deteriorate into empty motions because husbands do not hear the silent yearnings of the wife: "I don't want your money, I want you." How many parents have lost their children because they failed to interpret the signs: "I don't want your presents, Daddy, I want you." And how many tithing churchgoers will be lost to the kingdom because the word of God never reached their hearts: "I will seek not what is yours but you." So let there be no mistaking it, in this sermon on tithing I seek not what is yours but you. My desire is to spend and be spent out for your souls not your silver. Things are utterly subordinate. Life essential is the life of the heart. What I would like to do then is get before us an overview of the Old Testament and New Testament teaching about tithing and then draw some implications for how people today who have first given themselves wholly to God should then give of their possessions to the work of God. You may want to look up the passages with me or jot them down for later perusal. The oldest reference to tithing in the Bible is found in Genesis 14 where Abraham pursues a king named Chedorlaomer to rescue his kinsman Lot who had been captured. With 300 armed men Abraham defeats Chedorlaomer and not only saves Lot, but regains all the goods stolen from Sodom. On the way back a mysterious figure named Melchizedek, called priest of the Most High God in verse 18, met Abraham and blessed him. Verse 20 simply says, "And Abraham gave him a tenth of everything." There is no command in the later Mosaic law or anywhere in Scripture that men are to give one tenth of their captured booty to the priest. But Abram did it, evidently as a token of gratitude to God who had just given him such a great victory. So our first encounter with tithing is one where the giver is not paying God to stir him into action, but one where the giver is responding to God who has just fought for him and given him victory and great blessing. That is a pattern we must not forget. The next time we hear of tithing is in Genesis 28:22. Abraham's grandson, Jacob, had a dream at Bethel in which God promised to be with him and give him a great land and many descendants (Genesis 28:13-15). Jacob responds with a vow in verses 20-22 which climaxes with this promise: "And of all thou givest me I will give the tenth to thee." Notice well that Jacob recognizes everything that he has disposal of as a gift from God. Therefore, his tithe is not really something he has produced that he then transfers over to God's possession. Instead the tithe seems to be a symbolic statement that all we have is from God and that we do not count it our own. It is all at God's disposal and we signify that by letting a tenth of it go completely out of our control for some uniquely religious purpose. Surely Jacob did not mean that since God gave him everything therefore he would glorify God with a tenth, but not with nine-tenths. Surely if God gives us anything it is for us to handle in trust for his glory. Giving a tenth to him in a burnt offering, or the service of the temple or the like is a token, a pledge that all we are and have are at his disposal all the time. At the time of Moses, tithing was made part of the law which governed the people of Israel. There are two key texts. The first is Leviticus 27:30-33. "All the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the trees, is the Lord's. It is holy to the Lord. If a man wishes to redeem any of his tithe, he shall add a fifth to it. And all the tithe of herds and flocks, every tenth animal that passes under the herdsman's staff shall be holy to the Lord." Here the law made explicit what is to be tithed: namely, the produce of the field -- grain, and the produce of the trees -- fruit, and the herds and flocks. In Deuteronomy 14:22-29 some instruction is given as to how to give the tithe and what it is for. You shall tithe all the yield of your seed which comes forth from the field year by year. And before the Lord your God, in the place which he will choose, to make his name dwell there (Jerusalem), you shall eat the tithe of your grain, of your wine and of your oil, and the firstlings of your herd and flock; that you may learn to fear the Lord your God always. And if the way is too long for you so that you are not able to bring the tithe, when the Lord your God blesses you, because the place is too far from you, which the Lord your God chooses to set his name there, then you shall turn it into money, and bind up the money in your hand, and go to the place which the Lord your God chooses, and spend the money for whatever you desire, oxen or sheep or wine or strong drink, whatever your appetite craves; and you shall eat there before the Lord your God and rejoice, you and your household. And you shall not forsake the Levite who is within your towns, for he has no portion or inheritance with you. At the end of every three years you shall bring forth all the tithe of your produce in the same year and lay it up within your towns; and the Levite because he has no portion or inheritance with you, and the sojourner and the fatherless and the widow, who are within your towns, shall come and eat and be filled; that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands that you do. Let me make six brief observations from this passage about the practice and purpose of tithing. First, according to verse 23, there was to be a yearly trip to the holy place, the place God puts his name (later Jerusalem). The people were to take their tithe to that place and then eat it there, or at least eat part of it in a feast of joy. Tithing was not to be reduced merely to the pragmatic function of paying the priests and sustaining the temple. It was an expression of joy and gratitude. God did not need the tithe. In commanding it, he was seeking not what was theirs but them. So the second observation at the end of verse 23 is that the purpose of the tithing feast was "that you may learn to fear the Lord your God." Take a tenth of your year' s produce, go to the holy place, offer it to the Lord, eat it (or part of it) to his glory in gratitude "that you may learn to fear him." Tithing was a means of remembering how dependent they were on God and how much one should fear to displease such a God by joyless ingratitude. Third provision was made for those whose grain was too heavy and flocks too many to take them all the way to the holy place. They could sell them and then use the money to purchase substitutes when they arrived in the holy place. Fourth, the tithe is not to be totally consumed by the family bringing it. The Levites who were scattered through the tribes of Israel with no land of their own were to be supported by the tithers of the other 11 tribes (v. 27). The Levites were set apart for special religious purposes and had no crops or herds. The tithe was given to God not only in the sense that it was eaten in a feast celebration of his faithfulness (cf. 'blessing" in v. 24), but also in the sense that part of it supported God's institution of the Levitical order. Fifth, verses 28 and 29 describe a triennial tithe which was designed not only to support the Levites, but also the three most helpless groups of people in that society: the refugees, the orphans, and the widows. It seems that a sort of benevolent fund was replenished every three years for the needs of these people, by the calling in of a special tithe. Finally, the section closes with a promise of blessing on the people if they are faithful in this act of mercy to men and gratitude to God. And this is a good place to remind ourselves of two things. One is that the way most tithes were "given to God" was by giving them to people. God cannot be enriched by us. He has no needs that our possessions can satisfy. But he can be honored by the way we treat others in his name by special acts which celebrate his bounty and by our willingness to trust him to supply all our needs when we give. And the other thing we must remember is that God always honors people who tithe from a good heart of faith. The promise is not to make us rich, but it is this: those who love and trust God enough to honor him with at least a tithe will never lack the resources they need. I believe that is still true today. Two other important passages on tithing in the Old Testament are Numbers 18:21-24 and 2 Chronicles 31:4-18 which I won't read for lack of time. But the point of both is that the tithes are especially for the Levites. Numbers 18:24 says, "The tithe of the people of Israel which they present as an offering to the Lord, I have given to the Levites for an inheritance." And 2 Chron. 31:4 says that Hezekiah, "commanded the people who lived in Jerusalem to give the portion due to the priests and the Levites, that they might give themselves to the law of the Lord." Thus, tithing was God's prescribed way of supporting certain ministries which he had ordained. In summary, then from the Old Testament tithing goes back to the very beginning of Israel's history before the law was given and seems to have been an expression of gratitude to the Lord who fights for his people and gives them all they have. Then as a part of the Mosaic law, tithing was made a part of Israel's formal worship and its various forms and purposes were prescribed. It was used to support religious orders; it was used for religious feasting in celebration of God's goodness; and it taught the people to fear the Lord, that is, to fear not trusting him to meet all their needs. As we come over to the New Testament the picture changes significantly. Jesus mentions tithing twice, both times in reference to its legalistic abuse. He says in Matt. 23:23, "Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy and faith; these you ought to have done without neglecting the others." In Luke 18:9-14, "He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, 'God, I thank thee that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.'" Obviously Jesus did not regard tithing as a spiritual cure all. He does not reject it. He affirmed it for Israel. But he is much more intent on the weightier matters of the law like faith. You can tithe everything and not trust God. Jesus was not seeking what was theirs, he was seeking them: the love of their soul, not the load of their silver. The apostle Paul never once even refers to tithing. Whether he taught his churches to tithe when he founded them we don't know. But his rules in his letters seem to be as follows. First: "On the first day of the week each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper" (1 Cor. 16:2). And second in 2 Cor. 8:3, "they gave according to their means and beyond their means of their own accord." And third in 2 Cor. 9:7, "Each one must do as he has made up his mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." And finally 2 Cor. 9:8, "God is able to provide you with every blessing in abundance, so that you may always have enough of everything and may provide in abundance for every good work." The only other place in the New Testament where tithing is mentioned is Hebrews 7:4-12 where the reference is back to Genesis 14 and the point is simply to show that Christ is like Melchizedek. Therefore, with regard to positive, explicit teaching on tithing, the New Testament is almost totally silent. I have a growing conviction why this is the case. I think God took the focus off giving a tithe in the early church because he wants his people to ask themselves a new question. The question that Jesus drives us to ask again and again is not, "How much should I give?" but rather, "How much dare I keep?" One of the differences between the Old Testament and New Testament is the Great Commission. By and large the Old Testament people of God were not a missionary people. But the New Testament Church is fundamentally a missionary people. The spiritual hope and the physical and emotional sustenance that Jesus brought to earth is to be extended by his church to the whole world. The task he gave us is so immense and requires such a stupendous investment of commitment and money that the thought of settling the issue of what we give by a fixed percentage (like a tenth) is simply out of the question. My own conviction is that most middle and upper class Americans who merely tithe are robbing God. In a world where 10,000 people a day starve to death and many more than that are perishing in unbelief the question is not, what percentage must I give?, but how much dare I spend on myself? It is a Biblical truth beyond all dispute: that all your money is God's (Ps. 24:1) and has been loaned to you as a steward to use in ways that maximize the glorification of God's mercy in the world (Matt. 25:14-30). And it is irrational to think that giving ten percent of that money to the church settles the issue of good stewardship. In a world of such immense need, and in a country of such immense luxury, and under the commission of such a powerful Lord the issue of stewardship is not: Shall I tithe?, but rather, How much of God's trust fund dare I use to surround myself with comforts? I had every intention, as I began to write this message, to argue that even though the New Testament is almost silent on tithing; yet, surely we who know Jesus should do no less than the Old Testament saints who did not know him. I was going to urge everyone to tithe and give reasons why you can always afford it. I still believe that is true. But that is not the lightning bolt of God Is word in the New Testament. The word of God is always more radical than percentage. To commend tithing as the ideal simply does not capture the New Testament view of discipleship. "He who has two coats let him share with him who has none. And he who has food let him do likewise" (Luke 3:11). That's 50% not 10%. Zacchaeus stood and said, "Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor" (Luke 19:8 ). Again 50%. Jesus said to the rich young man, "If you would be perfect, go sell what you possess and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven; and come follow me" (Matt. 19:21). That's 100%. "So therefore, whoever of you does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:33). Again 100%. "A man said to him, 'I will follow you wherever you go.' And Jesus said to him, 'Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head'" (Luke 9:57f). "All who believed were together and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods and distributed them to all, as any had need" (Acts 2:44f). "There was not a needy person among them for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet" (Acts 4:34f). "In a severe test of affliction their abundance of joy and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of liberality on their part. For they gave according to their means, and beyond their means" (2 Cor. 8:2,3). The best way that I know how to capture the spirit of the New Testament generosity is simply to say: the issue is not, How much must I give?, but How much dare I keep? Not: Shall I tithe? But: How much of the money that I hold in trust for Christ can I take for my private use? The financial issue in the church today is not tithing, but exorbitance of life-style. The question is not can I afford to tithe, but can I justify the life-style that consumes 90% of my income? And behind that is the question: Do I love to use God's money to spread justice and mercy and spiritual hope in the world, or do I prefer to embezzle his money to purchase more and more personal comfort? The question whether the work of Christ here at Bethlehem in 1982 will be adequately supported is really the question of where your treasure is. And where your treasure is there is your heart. Therefore, I do not seek what is yours but you. Amen. © COPYRIGHT 1982, 1997 John Piper. January 24, 1982 (Morning) Bethlehem Baptist Church John Piper, Pastor http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper82/012482m.htm |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by jidoma: 1:12pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
if you have a good understanding of the bible,creation in particular u will know that tithing is for your own benefit,not God or the pastors,God can take care of His servants  |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 1:15pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, Now let me address the other matters you mentioned. sarmy:While it may be helpful to you and others (and I'm glad), I would like to point out something I said at the beginning when you offered good questions. Remember I said that you should never rely on anyone's opinions or arguments to make up your mind? I still maintain that position. Please understand this: if anyone is persuaded about something from the inputs (for or against) this matter that they read, that may be good. But over and above all else, be sure that it is the SPIRIT of God that has brought above the deep convictions and revelation to either tithe or choose not to tithe. One thing I will weap over here is this: that anyone is persuaded to tithe because of what pilgrim.1 has said. That is why I initially slowed down and did not want to post my own reasons for tithing. WHY? Because I maintain this very thing that the apostle Paul taught us: 1 Corinthians 9:15 - "neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me" Let the Spirit of God give you a deep conviction to tithe, bro. . . because if you force yoursef to tithe, you will grieve both yourself and the leading of the Spirit about this matter. I know what I'm talking about; but please don't read it as if i'm threatening or anything. This matter is a wonderful privilege; and when you actually get convicted in your heart, you have definitely have the witness in your own heart that you carry that conviction in a tangible way. Please think upon this carefully - and you will come back testifying of the power of tithing in your life, over and above any argument (for or against) here. sarmy:I'm glad you can disagree without dismissing. Please do me two favs - ● please find me where in that whole chapter you see the word "offering" ● please show me what part of Scripture apostle Paul quoted in: 1 Corinthians 9:9 1 Corinthians 9"13 just refer me to the OT passages that the apostle Paul was referring to, thanks. sarmy:I have two questions for you: ● you used the word "offering", not so? Can you be kind enough to show us what verse that word is used in that chapter? ● you quoted from AMP, not so? Can you be kind enough to show us what is meant as "in proportion to" in the same 1 Cor. 16:2 AMP ? Hint: the AMP of that verse - "put aside something and save it up as he has prospered [in proportion to what he is given]". Since they did not use the term "TITHE", then what is "in proportion to" doing in that verse of the AMP if there is no thought of measure, percentage, etc. What does "proportion" have to do with our giving in that verse in the AMP you have been quoting from? sarmy:1. The apostle Paul talked about "proportion" in your AMP in 1 Cor. 16:2 - yes or no? 2. What does the word "proportion" indicate to you in that verse? 3. Did I say anywhere that Christians are living by the Levitical priesthood? What have I been saying about the priesthood of Melchizedek? sarmy:Lol. . . so you never read in the OT that people gave tithes in the same manner? I just want to know before I quote it again for you. sarmy:It was not "introduced", but rather established as a "law" - in context of which anyone who reads it understands that it was instituted as a "civil and political law". That was what led to the revolts popularly known in secular circles as "the war of tithes". sarmy:Okay, I see your point. Please tell us: when you measure out a "proportion of income", what are you saying? Afraid that may be called a "tithe"? I have other names for you - just tell me how much is that "proportion of income" you're talking about. It seems here that the word we so detest (proportion/percentage of income) is what has been trailing us here. See my problem here with us all?  We hate the word "tithe", but we so like to use ideas that speak of the same thing that we detest! Just give me the "proportion" bro, and fiam - I'll give you the name for it.Many blessings. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by TV01(m): 1:24pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
Hi @Pilgrim.1 Not that I should be shocked, but I’m always surprised at the methods you employ. Slicing my post and then answering way off-point will not progress this discussion, but I wonder, is that your aim? I clearly stated that I accepted JJYOU’s point that there would be those who would take advantage of facilities laid on by some, without contributing proportionally to it’s upkeep. I also decried such behaviour. But to say that is the norm is conjecture, because no empirical studies have been done. Further your own anecdotal submission is just that anecdotal and does not necessarily obtain everywhere or apply to everyone. And to continually insinuate that stinginess is the driver for non tithing is disingenuous at best. There is nothing to suggest that non-tithers are non-givers or give less overall. Most importantly, doctrine is not shaped so as to control peoples behaviour, nor is it to be re-defined to produce "outcomes" that may seem desirable, even righteous. No matter how “worrisome” such behaviour may seem. I am yet to be convinced that you would if given leave forcefully impose your spiritualised religiosity on us all. God forbid.  !As to where would the church be? The Lord said He would build his church. Don’t you believe that? Those who champion physical structures and the attendant hierarchies will almost certainly claim such structures are key to church growth and fulfilling the great commission. The desire of those to control believers and appear pivotal in building the Lords church is exactly what prompted this 1Corinthians 7:23 - You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men As I said, if a group of people come together and decide they require a physical building for their worship, let them contribute to it’s build and upkeep - or rent - as they are able and those who wish to join them should be notified of the requirement to do likewise. In the OT it was called a temple tax. Even the Lord paid, He used the temple. But to teach it as doctrinal, spiritualise it and claim the Lord ordain it is just plain rotten. Again, although I don't personally subscribe to it and see few situations were it would be warranted, I have no problem with it on the grounds of Christian Liberty. As long as the basis is not the warping of scripture. So to answer your question, it’s not wrong, nor is it sin for the saints to have a place to gather for worship. By the way, you wilfully misread my submission, and posted replies that didn’t actually answer anything, and you answered absolutely none of my questions. You can do better, can't you? .God bless TV |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by jidoma: 1:35pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
a good understanding of God's word will make u to know that tithing is for your good and benefit.God can take care of His prophets.You better believe it |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sarmy(m): 1:44pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:It seems you did not get the gist "most churches preaching tithe believe members will not give enough if they don't pay tithe (true/false)" If this is true, where is the faith in God who ordained the church, is He not able to inspire members to give more than enough like in the days of the apostles. I tell you the truth, more than 50% of those paying tithe are doing so under fear and that also, is lack of faith (If there is fear, there is no faith) It is not lack of faith for not tithing, it is lack of the word of God to back it up and faith cometh by the word of God, if there is no sufficient word of God in NT to back it up, it may be better not to do it. I strongly believe one can set aside a proportion of ones income on regular basis for church & mankind not by any manipulation but through understanding of the reasons why it should be done. One of the secrets of financial success is ability to set aside a proportion of ones income for a particular objective regularly (I don't see why this should be difficult for any child of God for 6 months as you mentioned above if one understand why it should be done. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by KunleOshob(m): 1:56pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:As usual you are very wrong on this issue again, i am almost tempted to allege that you deliberately confuse issues to butress your point. To set the records straight, tithes was intorduced to the church after the council of macon in the year 585AD by the catholic bishops for the sole pupose of meeting the "growing needs of the church". tithe was not included in the civil laws(of England) till the seventeeth century and the tithe war was not till the 19th century. so lets stop confusing issues here. the fact remains that for the first six centuries of the christian religion tithes was never a part of it. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 2:03pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@TV01, TV01:You can choose to be shocked at the same thing you have always done and never paid heed at anyone who calls your attention to your misconceptions. What is this noise you're pretending with a "shock" now? TV01:Are you pretending to be the only person on this thread who doesn't have eyes to read? How many times have I posted my aims and objectives about this threme? Why are you making all these hyperventilations as if they are anything new? I have enjoyed discussing with others with a more mature outlook - even those who have disagreed with me without necessarily going down the way you often choose to: yet, even when they disagreed without being dismissive, we have got on very well. But you just seem to always have to present your panic as if that is anything to help yourself gain better than where you are. It's a very simple thing: if you can't discuss, just don't notice me - that way you won't feel disturbed about anything and you'll live happier. TV01:And I also wondered why you would decry such a situation and yet have no bearing on reality. So many of us know precisely what is going on - the things we see, the things we experience, the painful realities of these matters - cannot be carelessly dismissed with a "conjecture". That is the point you need to take into account when discussing with others. If they are merely conjectures to you, no worries - and you would have helped us to see the case simply. To offer a response of approval and then decry the same thing is neither here nor there: and of what benefit is that to you personally? TV01:Isn't it funny that you have absoluetly nothing to offer than mere arm-chair musings and yet cry that the experiences of others are merely anecdotal? Have you been living with and serving with people who have experienced these matters? How much research have you done to even speak of a lazy "empirical studies" you hope others would carry out for you? How is it that you sit behind one cubicle and and expect that others who have experienced these matters are only giving anecdotes? You never cease to amuse me with you emptiness, TV01. The way you act presumptiously many times makes one wonder if you're genuinely aiming to help yourself here. TV01:I used that precisely in a well known example that I have seen myself! What else is responsible for the other cases where people how shout the loudest against tithes are the very people who will "decry" everything about this matter? You may decry one and all - yet, you have nothing to offer to promote the same thing you welcome and applaud. TV01:Okay, I hear. I have seen it happen in so many instances - I know non-tithers who are very stingy inspite of their loud screams against tithes. To say that there is nothing to suggest so is not the case. TV01:I agree whole heartedly with you on this one, TV01. If we know already that doctrine is not shaped to control people's lives, why have you been so dismissive and never seem to pay attention to what others have been saying? I know for instance that my response to sarmy outlines that very premsie, where I implored him to go beyond the arguments here (for or against) and be sure to let the Spirit of God convict him on this matter. If you suppose, on the other hand, that my submissions were trying to "re-define" anything, why has it been so difficult for you guys to share and show preciely where I might have got it wrong, instead of being dismissive? Nothing to owrry over personally from me - but like I said, I have enjoyed the discussions of people who have clearly said they disagreed with me and went directly to Scripture to show where they felt deeply that I was wrong (eg., FifiO, sleekmag, sarmy, affee, and a few others - and yet, some or most of these guys are persauded towards tithing). If non-tithers want to discuss these issues, why is it too much to expect them do the same thing instead of being too hastily dismissive without even going into Scripture to share their views as others have done? TV01:Thank you. Seriously, narrow minded carping is of little interest to me. Cheers. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 2:09pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@KUnleOshob, KunleOshob:Kunle, what have you said differently from what I said earlier? Before the "civil law" of the 17th century, did people not practice tithes? When actually did it become a "civil/political law" - was it among the apostles? There's difference between when something "became" and when that same thing "began". Tithing among Christians did not "begin" in the 17th century, nor in 585AD - go and find out. Some quote 777AD, and yet, all these fellows are making things hard for themselves. The simple problem here is that they are driving themselves to read it as "tithing BEGAN" at such periods in history - and that was why I pointed out this fallacious way of reading issues earlier. Cheers. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 2:27pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, sarmy:Well, I may have misread you; but I don't know how. Not that I'm forcing issues - but how could YOU have known that more than 50% of people tithing are doing so under fear? Under fear of what? That is why I did two things: (a) I did not want to hastily post my own persuasions, and only did so when some indicated that it would be of benefit to them; (b) I was persuaded to do so, if perhaps they may understand why I am not under fear when I do so. I don't know how many tithers there are in the world; but I'm not sure that 50% of those paying tithes are doing so under fear. That is questionable. The churches I exemplified earlier (Catholics, Anglicans, Assemblies of God) are tithers - and they don't seem to be doing so under any fear. I have been to so many local churches of Assemblies of God Church (on invitation of friends), and you should wonder that they joyful spirit with which they give tithes and offerings is simply amazing! One thing about human nature is that when man feels he is being pressurized to do something, he could choose to revolt and stop doing that very thing. Take yourself for example: you were wondering whether to leave your church because of this matter of tithing. let's assume that you never read anything from this thread and you actually left that church to a non-tithing church, would that not indicate the very thing I just said? By leaving, you made a choice to no longer be under any fear or feeling of binding to be compelled to tithe! The same thing could be said of anyone - they don't have to feel compelled under fear of anything to tithe. I'm not sure it is fair to assume a position for people before they have the opportunity of saying so themselves. That is why I cannot assume anything about another person living "under fear" until they have said so themselves - and then we can see if indeed it is 50% of those people who are living that way. sarmy:I agree - precisely why I offered to you earlier that if you're persuaded to tithe, don't let that persuasion come from what pilgrim.1 is saying - she's a "silly pilly"!  No, seriously : don't be persuaded by arguments - rather, let the revelation of God's Spirit bring that conviction to the heart to make a decision either to tithe or not tithe. When we can appreciate this point, I believe we can then understand why the apostles never used the terms we detest, nor even try to command people to obey what the Lord had ordained on this matter. They knew that only the Spirit of God would bring a deep conviction to help the tither do so.sarmy:God bless you for your wisdom. I deeply appreciate that.  |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by KunleOshob(m): 2:44pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:This response seems aimed at confusing issues, but for clarity of pupose i would re-state the facts on how tithing was smuggled into the church after being missing for almost six centuries. * Despite all your allusions and conjectures, it still remains a biblical fact that there was no record of tithing amongst the first christians as recorded in the bible * The earliest positive doctrine on tithes is contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the [canons] of the Council of Macon in 585.”—The Catholic Encyclopaedia. One thing is clear tithing was not part of early christianity and it was smuggled into christian doctrine over a period of time be it 777AD as you put it. I don't know why you are asking what is the difference in what i posted and yours when the differences are sooo glaring. When tithing was smuggled into christianity and when it was adopted into the english law are two totally different periods spanning at least twelve centuries so don't lets confuse issues here. I wonder why you are trying to insinuate that both occurences are one and the same when they clearly are not, maybe you should rea my previous post again i really don't think you understood it. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sarmy(m): 3:04pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:AMP version specifically referred to offering, and no where in that chapter will you find tithe 13Do you not know that those men who are employed in the services of the temple get their food from the temple? And that those who tend the altar share with the altar [in the offerings brought]?(A) ● you quoted from AMP, not so?Are you saying any proportion is equal to tithe, 25%, 30%, 45% A proportion does not neccessarily mean tithe, whereas 10%, 20% or 45% is a portion or a percentage of a thing 3. Did I say anywhere that Christians are living by the Levitical priesthood? What have I been saying about the priesthood of Melchizedek?I was not refering to levitical priesthood, what I said was that Jews of those days knew tithes were always meant for the Levites, so if the Apostles wanted Tithe, they needed to instruct them DIRECTLY, we can not assume that they did what he did not teach, is there passage of the Epistles of Paul where he directly instructed the Christian Jews or Gentiles to pay TITHE, lets look at the 1 Cor 16:2 AMP version for example. 2On the first [day] of each week, let each one of you [personally] put aside something and save it up as he has prospered [in proportion to what he is given], so that no collections will need to be taken after I come. Paul said put aside something, any amount, he did not say put aside you tithe, he could have said tithe if he wanted them to bring tithe, why did he not use the word TITHE in any of his teachings on giving. At least it would have benefited the Gentile christians who were not used to the word TITHE. It seems here that the word we so detest (proportion/percentage of income) is what has been trailing us here. See my problem here with us all?2% is a proportion but not thesame as 10% or Tithe, if any proportion is thesame as tithe then many church leaders will need to be aware of it. Correction: May not be up to 50% for sure paying tithe under fear, but many are out there, still under the threat of mal 3:8. and hell fire if they don't tithe, thank God for your life and many others who are doing it under grace. Many thanks |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 3:18pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@KunleOshob, KunleOshob:I would not seek to confuse anyone - they would have said so themselves. KunleOshob:No wahala - that was why I had asked and am still asking: what is the meaning of "in proportion to" in 1 Corinthians 16:2 in AMP? I didn't write that verse, so please show your adulators another panic measure from your quarters. KunleOshob:1 Corinthians 16:2 preceded 585AD, NO? Just so that you understand this issue, let me use an altogether different example: the word Trinity was not used among the first Christians, not so? But did that mean that the first Christians knew nothing about the Father, the Son,a nd the Holy Spirit being the same One God? It is okay to panic around looking for some AD letters to see the word "tithe"; but long before that time, I would like to know from your history archives when the apostle Paul admonished Christians in his day to set aside a "proportion" according to 1 Corinthians 16:2. KunleOshob:777AD was not my postulation - I only referenced it from those who do not know the difference between when tithing "began" among Christians, and when it "became" a civil law. KunleOshob:I asked because you're sweating to make a difference where there is none. KunleOshob:I'm sorry for you, Kunle. Your 12 centuries is now the same thing as the 17th century on the same English Law, abi? No be me you go confuse, because I'm not the one throwing dates left right and center between 585AD, 777AD, and the 17th century. KunleOshob:Lol, where did I project that idea of thinking they were the same? Did I say that what "began" is the same as what "became"? Hmm, Kunle, clam down O. . . you may shoot yourself in the leg soon. Cheers. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 3:40pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, sarmy:I saw the verse before I asked - and that was because I wanted you to think about where the apostle was quoting. This is not the first time I have said this before; but using the AMP (which I also use sometimes), one would find "offering" there, but not so in other versions, NO? Inspite of that, I had raised this issue so many times about where precisely the apostle was quoting when he said "Do you not know. . " in verse 13. I asked you to show us what verse that word was used in that chapter, because I knew the moment you saw it was verse 13, it would take you back to the OT - in which case one would wonder there if what I have been saying is skewed. If the apostle in that verse did not quote the OT, I would be glad again to show it; but I guess you have seen it already, NO? sarmy:I did not make for a specific figure - at least you can bear me witness on that. Rather, I noted the "proportion" and asked that any figure or percentage you mentioned would have a name - whereas, it was not the "name" that was important, but rather the principle behind it. I know this is difficult to understand, but when we look strictly at the Levitical priesthood law where we find a commandment for tithing, isn't it obvious that the total value of the tithes of Israel was beyond 10% No, I'm not dragging us back, but when you see this matter, you come to wonder that the tithies for the year of tithing added to all the other tithes was not merely 10% - are we together on this? That is why I have often stated that the figure was not my problem - whether 1%, 10%, 35%, 75% or whatever percentage anyone chose. What for me was important was the divine principle - and I know people were not comfortable with that. At some point I offered to take a chill until people would see it, noting that if we did not try and correct our perceptions then, we would run into huge problems later. Did I not say so? The bottomline is this: what is "proportion" doing in that verse - however anyone slices it? I know why I'm still asking this question - because some of our friends are persuaded that we should "just simply give" - no percentages, no measurements, nothing of the sort, but "just simply give". No worries - but I would just like to know what "in proportion to" is doing in that verse in the AMP. sarmy:If you have said that 10% is a portion, what name do you give that? Are you aware that there are some recommendations even in the OT where someone may offer more than 10% and it is referred to as their tithes? You see, sarmy, I don't like to go on and on about these figures. I'm a very passionate contributor in this thread calling for us to not be bogged down with figures - we would simply injure our thoughts. But if you just want only one example more, I would be glad to give it to you. sarmy:One answer I have for you: what did Paul mean by "in proportion to" - in proportion to what? What are people measuring it to? Why should he even give us this idea that people should set anything aside in proportion to anything (income, wages, etc) - why even go there at all? sarmy:Okay, I concur - I personally know some who are still doing this under some pressure, and it doesn't matter whether it's tithes, offerings, freewill contributions or donations. . . just name it, and you will be surprised what is happeing in many circles. Bless, bro. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 3:53pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:Here is one such example: Leviticus 27:31 - "And if a man will at all redeem ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof." Just thinking: if such a person actually added a fifth part to his tithes (that's 20% of the tithes now), then - ● would it still be correct to say that the added 20% is still 10%? ● would it still be correct to say that what he gives is still "tithe"? ● would it still be correct to call this total a "tithe" or something else? As I said, two things people should note - (1) I do not base my persuasion to tithe upon the Levitical priesthood, but rather upon the priesthood of Melchizedek; (2) I do not feel that the exactitude of a proportion/percentage is the overarching feature, rather it is the principle of tithing that is of greater import to me. God bless you sarmy. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sarmy(m): 4:38pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@Pilgrim1 Cor 9:13 13Do you not know that hose men who are employed in the services of the temple get their food from the temple? And that those who tend the altar share with the altar [in the offerings brought]?(A) Cross references to ver 13: Deut 18:1 1THE LEVITICAL priests and all the tribe of Levi shall have no part or inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings made by fire to the Lord, and His rightful dues. My dear sister, I'm not an expert but from the two passges above, OFFERING was common to them, Paul meant offerings not tithe for the upkeep of the NT preachers. I wonder how the early christian Gentiles would have been paying tithe when there was no DIRECT teaching on it from the apostles, knowing fully well it was not part of their culture, even for the christian Jews, they still would have needed some kind of DIRECT teaching or instruction on why they can now give tithe to the apostles rather than the Levites they were used to as of that time. There also suppose to have been at least a scripture verse where they gave TITHE (not this issue of a proportion) if at all they were actually paying tithe, Paul should have used the name precisely somewhere in his epistles like:- On the first [day] of each week, let each one of you [personally] put aside (your TITHE) and save it up as he has prospered [in proportion to what he is given], so that no collections will need to be taken after I come With this there will be no ambiguity. I'm only trying to be objective here, there must have been a reason why Apostles did not teach tithe directly but yet we assume the Gentile Christians were paying it pilgrim.1:When someone pays a fine or penalty, it's different from the norm Are you saying one can put 2% (which is a proportion) of an income into tithe basket and still call it tithe, that will be a lying Many blessings |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sarmy(m): 5:14pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:I agree with the principle 100% but would rather not use the name (TITHE) unless God attach importance to it, from your quote above, it seems it's not about the name but the principle. Then why do we still need to use the name? If you have said that 10% is a portion, what name do you give that?Since it's not all about 10% as you said but a proportion, is it not better to use a more neutral name like offering or giving just done by the Apostles One answer I have for you: what did Paul mean by "in proportion to" - in proportion to what? What are people measuring it to? Why should he even give us this idea that people should set anything aside in proportion to anything (income, wages, etc) - why even go there at all?A proportion from that passage simply means a portion of something, part of something, not exactly 10% it could be more it could be less. 1 Corinthians 16:2 (Contemporary English Version) 2That is, each Sunday each of you must put aside part of what you have earned. If you do this, you won't have to take up a collection when I come. Best regards |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sleekymag(m): 5:29pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
Hi all, Greetings to you. Pilgrim.1, You are simply amazing. Your fact-finding methods and way of analysis are simply commendable. Your persuasion for tithing as you outlined in the previous pages was also spot-on. Keep up the good work. JJYOU, Nice points too from you and the 1982 article you posted. Paying one's tithe is much more a heart thing than a pocket thing. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 5:58pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, sarmy:Lol. . I think you're coming closer to the very exact thing I wanted you to see. What does Deuteronomy 18:1 point out was the "offering"? Have you asked yourself what was meant by the "offerings made by fire?" I know that when many people see these cross-references, they just go by them without stopping for a minute to really look at what the verses are saying. Not that I have any problem with Deuteronomy 18:1; but when I first started discussing this issue of 1 Corinthians 9:13, I noted two distinct matters there: (a) ministers (priests) at the Temple (b) ministers (priests) at the Altar I made it absoluetly clear that they did not refer to the same things all at once. Why? Because those who easily take the cross reference of Deuteronomy 18 have not carefully looked at the distinctions of these matters and may not have noticed that the real reference to look at was Numbers 18. In Numbers 18, we understand that the Levites were specifically alloted a particular sphere of service - but when you read the early verses, you may wonder whether the Levites also were asked to minister about the things pertaining to that sphere where the sons of Aaron served. Let me highlight it again: WHO was the LORD focusing on when He said: "only they shall not come nigh the vessels of the sanctuary and the altar, that neither they, nor ye also, die" -- Numbers 18 verse 3. Who was it that were not to come nigh the vessels of the altar? I think when you think upon the answer, it becomes apparent that (perhaps) the apostle wanted us to see the difference when he spoke both of the (a) Temple and (b) the Altar in 1 Cor. 9:13 (KJV) ~~ "Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? " Even the AMP says: "Do you not know that those men who are employed in the services of the temple get their food from the temple? And that those who tend the altar share with the altar [in the offerings brought]? From all accounts, did he mean the very same set of people in this verse - just only the Levites? Now, when you look back to Numbers 18, you see what the Levites got: "And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle of the congregation." (verse 21) "But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance." (verse 24). I don't know if these matters have helped to clarify the point between the classes of priests and their sphere? So, what was my point? The offering you're looking at in 1 Corinthians 9:13 should be understood in light of the service of the Temple (or "tabernacle" , so long as you're dealing with the Levites in matters of the Temple, please look again and see if it had nothing to do with TITHES? Shall I remind you? Here -Numbers 18:21 (AMP) (a) And, behold, I have given the Levites all the tithes in Israel (b) for an inheritance in return for their service which they serve, (c) the [menial] service of the Tent of Meeting." In simple (a), (b), and (c), I have arranged them so you could compare the notes and see what the Levites got. But does this mean that I'm calling for a legalistic application of the Law of the Levites into 1 Corinthians 9"13? Far from it. Like I have always maintained: my position and persuasion of the tithes is not based upon the Levitical priesthood; but rather upon the priesthood of Melchizedek - although we may obtain some benefit for understanding the "principles" of these matters from the OT nonetheless. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 5:59pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, sarmy:The problem here is that you still have your sights on the commandment to take tithes according to the LEVITICAL priesthood. Once you can understand what apostle Paul meant in Hebrews 7:8, even using the AMP, this difficulty will evaporate. You are doing yourself a disservice by seeking a direct command stating "go and pay 10% o ye Gentiles or else!" Brother, you will not see any such stuff - even though it is linked by inference in Hebrews 7:8. If they wanted to disavow anything (such as circumcision), they said so plainly: 1 Cor. 7:19 - "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God" This is a clear statement; and the seriousness of this matter on outward circumcision is underscored in so many passages: Galatians 5:6 "For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. " Galatians 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. There is another issue that people held onto - the Sabbath; and everywhere you look, you will find that this was another matter of the Law that the apostles spoke about in just the same manner that we see for the case of circumcision: Galatians 4:9-11 "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. " My point in all this is that, where the apostles wanted to discourage a practice, they clearly said so, as in the examples of circumcision and sabbath and observance of days and times! Do you know what the apostle there was referring to by "times"? What about such festivals as the New Moon feasts of the Jews? And the feast of harvests? All these matters (including sabbath, circumcision, etc) are clearly discouraged by precise referrals. But the problem for many people is that they are always looking at the LAW and making it what it is not. For instance, someone might say that "circumcision" was a metaphor for "the LAW" - but this is simply not true - and the evidence is there above. If those brothers keep harping to make the LAW a metaphor for circumcision (or vice versa), then what do you do with the other specific things mentioned in this passage as matters of the LAW? Simply, just as you will find the position of such matters of the Law as circumcision and sabbath and holy days and observances of times - all matters that are discouraged as Christian practices, you will not find a single verse in the NT discountenancing TITHES. I have given that challenge out, and I'm still waiting for answers from those who have been making such disavowals. You will not find anywhere in the NT where tithes were condemned - NOT ONE! If you find that verse, please help us quote it directly. sarmy:You're still much driven with the name "tithe". Call it whatever, but if you give any % at all, what is that called? I simply want to know - that was why I offered the case of the 20% added to the 10% and wonder if that was still to be called "tithes". sarmy:I only wanted you to confirm for us if the 20% of the total value that is added to 10% can all still be called "10%" in your estimation. You have a sweet word now for it: "a FINE". . hehe. Bros, I no see am for Bible O! So, what do you call 20% (of 10%) added to 10% before bestowal? Is that still "10% tithes"? Lol.Enjoy. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 6:17pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sleekmag, sleekymag:Well, what can I say? I'm quite encouraged if you gained from my inputs, as I wouldnot like to have it any other way than to benefit others. sleekymag:That is simply the summary of everything I have been trying to state in so many pages. Thank you for wrapping it up for me in so, so few words. Many blessings. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sarmy(m): 7:59pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:Apostles needed not to against tithe DIRECTLY since it was no issue, they did not teach it as a subject, they were not asking early Christians tithes, and definitely you can’t expect both the Christian Gentiles and the Jews to be practicing it. Was there any teaching on giving (YES) but different from the way average Jewish Christian of that time will understand TITHE Was there any direct teaching on tithe (NO), how can we assume Christian Gentiles were practicing what they were not taught? Why would the Apostles condemn what no Christian of that time was practicing? Shalom |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 8:48pm On Oct 17, 2008 |
@sarmy, sarmy:My dear sir, it was an issue, in as much as the Law we are discussing is concerned, it actually was an issue - and that was why you will not find anywhere in the NT condemning tithes. No, not one! If the apostles felt that it was to be condemned, they would no less have directly mentioned it as they did the following already highlighted: ● observance of days ● observance of months ● observance of times ● observance of years ● outward circumcision ● keeping a sabbath ritually ● meats and drinks and divers washings ● carnal ordinances All these and many more were specifically outlined and the teaching of the apostles were clear about them to such extent that they categorically discouraged them under the new covenant. For anyone to assume that merely circumcision or sabbath were "metaphors" for the Law is to indicate indeed that such a person has not studied the subject at all - and that is why they often fail to notice these very detailed issues mentioned in the NT. Where the apostles would have us discourage certain matters/practices, they clearly said so - and it is remarkable that a huge issue such as tithes and offerings in the OT that God categorically spoke about in many places should not even at any time be condemned in the NT. The challenge still stands - let any careful student of Scripture go and find out if there is any verse at all that condemns tithe, and let them share that verse with us publicly. My answer still is this: until such a time, there is not a single verse condemning tithes - NOT ONE. It was for this reason as well that I asked a question: did the apostles not teach anything of Christian practice that was derived directly from the OT Law of Moses? I know this seems to be a most embarrassing question for those who are driven always to assume the extreme idea of having nothing to do with the Law; and that is why as soon as they can help themselves to answer that question in simplicity and honesty, I will then walk them through this very matter yet again. sarmy:Granted - I won't argue anymore on that. sarmy:Christian gentiles were actually practicing so many things derived directly from the Law of Moses - and that was taught by the apostles. Christianity was not built on the ideology of gentile thinking - go and read some more and if the case is not clear, I shall be only too glad to serve some sizeable examples for your consideration. sarmy:We only assume that "no Christian" was practising tithes, and that is why that idea still makes those believing such things to be unable to proffer simple answers to a few questions I have asked about this matter. As long as we continue to think that tithing is all about the Levitical priesthood, we shall continue to miss the real issue of why the apostle mentioned it categorically in positive light in Hebrews 7:8. The oracles of God were not given to Gentiles, but rather to the Jews (Romans 3:1-2); and when Gentiles became believers, they only had to learn and live by the Scriptures committed to the Jews as well (Romans 15:4). Every time people base their theology on the Levitical priesthood for discussing tithes, they will always have a problem with Hebrews 7:8 and never be able to see the power of Melchizedek in relation to tithes there. You just imagine someone who was a Jew (or a Gentile familiar with the Jewish scripture) when he heard that verse read to him - what do you think would have been his reaction? Protest? Nonchalance? Or just plain argument to disavow tithes and Melchizedek? The only reason why there was no argument about this issue is because they knew clearly that a solid teaching was already given on the matter, and not the excuses we hear today about why we should do or not do this, that or the other. If anyone has to make a case, rather than assume things in a general way and deny what they don't know, they could easily go to Scripture and see for themselves that tithe was never once disavowed such as we find for the Jewish feasts, sabbath days, new moons, and circumcision. Not one verse in the NT condemns tithes in the way that many legalistic brethren are doing so without a single warrant from God's Word. Shalom. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by sarmy(m): 12:13am On Oct 18, 2008 |
@Pilgrim My sister, no matter how I argue those points, you will hardly agree. Some of the answers you gave did not address the issues I raised, even earlier. I know you have tried. I pray God will continue to grant us more wisdom to see His will, it's all about Him not about us, may His will be done. Have a nice weekend |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by Comfort86(f): 2:44am On Oct 18, 2008 |
@Posterrrrrr Goodness! I won't bother to read the 52 pages of posted answers you have had on this topic. But yeah, you have to tithe. If you want to give more then good for you. You want to try God and not tithe? Go ahead but I won't advise it. |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by TV01(m): 2:54pm On Oct 18, 2008 |
As requested. pilgrim.1: pilgrim.1: pilgrim.1: Hebrews 7 1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being translated "king of righteousness," and then also king of Salem, meaning "king of peace," 3 without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually. 4 Now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils. 5 And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham; 6 but he whose genealogy is not derived from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. 7 Now beyond all contradiction the lesser is blessed by the better. 8 Here mortal men receive tithes, but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives. 9 Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, 10 for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him. 11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. 13 For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. 15 And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest 16 who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life. 17 For He testifies: "You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek."18 For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, 19 for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. Please note; ~ Abraham gave a tenth part of all - of the plunder, not any of the blessings of God thereto or therafter. ~ the mention of tithes paid to the Levitical priesthood according to the law v5. ~ the emphasis of the Melchizedek type being superior to the Aaronic/Levitical type v7. Demonstrated by Abraham as proxy for Levi/Aaron. ~ change of the law mentioned in v5. v12. ~ the law, the whole of it being referred to as a "fleshly commandment". V16 (that is the exact same as "carnal ordinance " in meaning) ~ Note annulling - redundancy - of that same law. v18 There are two types of shadow high priesthood. Aarons and Melchizedeks. Melchizedeks is superior to Aarons and the one on which The Lord Jesus Christs is patterned. Melchizedek is not our High Priest. Melchizedek did not pay the price or act as propitiation. He was "made like the Son of God" not the Son. We are all priests now, with the Lord as high priest. To insist some priests must tithe to other priests is to introduce a split clergy/laity, leaders/followers, nowhere to be found in NT scripture. And doesn't explain a further tithe to the High Priest. Further how would a further tithe to the High priest work? For orderliness and completeness, check out how we minister to our High Priest in Matthew 25: 31-46. Sounds suspiciously like ministering to physical need to me. But please draw your own conclusions. Here the tithe was a metaphor for the whole law - which is a fleshly commandment or carnal ordinance; that is for mere mortals who have not the power of an "endless life" - and clearly shown as an article of it and annulled along with it. Also note; ~ I did not have to rummage through the OT looking for pre or post law stipulations ~ I did not trawl through the NT pick tenuously related verses and link them to OT scripture, (which I had already acknowledged was not the basis for my position) ~ I did not have recourse to "principles" - which I never actually outlined - found in the law, although it is no longer in effect ~ I did not "infer" from that or other scripture which was not plainly stated ~ I did not claim it was "ordained" but not specifically refered to or mentioned ~ I did not claim it was a"mystery" or an esoteric revelation, merely posted/referenced scripture as it reads Thanks TV |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 3:08pm On Oct 18, 2008 |
TV01:. . . and what have you said? |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by Nobody: 3:14pm On Oct 18, 2008 |
To tithe or not to tithe? |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by Nobody: 3:20pm On Oct 18, 2008 |
I;m tired of reading all this Epistles, Back-forth-back-forth. Haba!! Abeg lock this thread!! |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by TV01(m): 4:29pm On Oct 18, 2008 |
And not to overlook this; pilgrim.1:I would welcome embarrasment if it came with my being disabused from a wrong belief. Please walk us through Christian practice that is " derived directly from the law". Twenty words or less will completely debunk that notion, but let me allow you the chance to make us swallow and of course showcase your "Alagba" scholarship once again.pilgrim.1:Like I said, please show us exactly where in scripture and how Christians - be they Jew or Gentile - were " practicing so many things derived directly from the Law of Moses". Could I ask that they not be inferred or mysterious or ordained but not specifically referenced. Ta !pilgrim.1:When you do it, its "logical inference", when we do others do it its "questionable assumption". Kindly reference - directly - where NT believers of any hue "had to learn and live by the Scriptures committed to the Jews". Not neglecting that you have already stated - umpteen times - that your argument for tithes is not based on the law and prophets. But your statement here obviously means that your position on some notions is. And while you are at it, please explain the "categorical positve light put on tithe in Hebrews 7:8 that makes it a valid NT practice. I must have missed it. pilgrim.1:So here you are inferring that there was already "solid teaching" on "tithe" and "Melchizedek", hence no need to treat it in the NT. Maybe you should tell us who is High Priest for Christians, Christ or Melchizedek  !Thanks again. TV |
| Re: To Tithe or Not to Tithe? by pilgrim1(f): 4:37pm On Oct 18, 2008 |
@TV01, TV01:I don't have any "Alagba" scholarship to showcase. The question is simple: a yes or no would have cleared you from this dribbling. Thank you. TV01:As above. A direct, simple, not dodgy answer would help show the sort of mindset you have. If playing these hide and seek games is all you have to show for your efforts, I think it may be best to leave you singing. Cheers. |
To Tithe Or Not To Tithe: The Whole Truth From The Bible. • Ten (10) Reasons To Tithe • Jesus Is The Fulfillment Of The Law (tithing), Do I Still Need To Tithe? • 2 • 3 • 4
Stephanie Otobo's Statement Of Account Spills More Secrets About Apostle Suleman • ''Wicked Village Wait For Me, I'm Coming'' (Photo) • Vincent & Faith Nzeakor: Achieving Sexual Orgasm In A Christian Marriage (Photo)