Luke 11:42
2 "Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.

(NIV)

Jesus said that it was not wrong to tithe the spices (which appear to be trifles to some) but that these teachers of the law and pharisees should also practice the other important matters OF THE LAW i.e. justice, mercy and faithfulness and the love of God. In the above context, Jesus implied that the pharisees were fastidious when it comes to tithing and other legal issues but they did not show the love of God in them. This, He defines as hypocrisy. Tithing to them is just an outward show of their self righteousness (see also Luke 18:12). Just as a reflection on this passage, if tithing was compulsory for the New Testament Christian,, wouldn't it be a a sin if he forgets to tithe the "spices and herbs" or "flowers" he receives (as a gift)?

According to the New Testament scriptures we are not cursed for not giving a 10th percent as in the laws of the First Covenant. Our giving is giving from the heart to support the work of God. I like giving 10% because it requires me to trust God to meet my needs and it reminds me to keep God first in my life no matter what my circumstances look like.

allonym, if tithing does not come straight out of the Bible which Bible are you reading? All of my Bibles even my Oxford edition (which has all the Catholic chapters in it) has over 30 verses that discuss tithing.

@jclord, thanks for your pity, but you can have it back i dont need it

there are no altars to mary

saints are not restricted to dead priests or dead nuns, this smells like ignorance on your part to me

GOD! how many times will i say it, we DO not pray to mary, didnt you read what i wrote, please praying to someone and asking them to intercede for you are two different things, get it straight!

as for whatever you saw on tv or on billboards, your mind was probably clouded because you are adamant in believing this whole idea of praying to mary and the saints, and frankly that is your cup of tea, me too im tired of talking to someone who is obviously enmeshed in his/her own view of things, maybe you need my pity lol

Catholics argue that praying to Mary and the saints is no different than asking someone here on earth to pray for you.

Let us examine that claim.

(1) The Apostle Paul asks other Christians to pray for him in Ephesians 6:19. Many Scriptures describe believers praying for one another. 2 Corinthians 1:11; Ephesians 1:16; Philippians 1:19; 2 Timothy 1:3). The Bible nowhere mentions anyone asking for someone in Heaven to pray for them. The Bible nowhere describes anyone in Heaven praying for anyone on earth.

(2) The Bible gives absolutely no indication that Mary or the saints can hear our prayers. Mary and the saints are not omniscient. How could they possibly hear the prayers of millions of people? Whenever the Bible mentions praying to or speaking with the dead, it is in the context of activities the Bible strongly condemns (Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 18:10-13). The one instance when a "saint" is spoken to, Samuel in 1 Samuel 28:7-19, Samuel was not exactly happy to be disturbed. It is plainly clear that praying to Mary or the saints is completely different from asking someone here on earth to pray for you. One has a strong Biblical basis, the other has no Biblical basis whatsoever.

Ok, let's suppose you are right about that.

Now I tell you bit about pentecostal and charismatic worship.

The strongest criticism I level at pentecostal/charismatic churches centers on two theories: one, the experience is tongues -centered, and two, the experience is Spirit -centered. The two have in common, of course, the inference that the source and focus of the baptism and its attendant gifts are something (or someone) other than Jesus. Let us take a look at whether or not these two charges are accurate.

I see today that tongues -speaking has become an end in itself, and the central teaching, and seeks to convert people to tongues instead of to Christ. Don't tell me no, and that it is not true, been to churches before and it's always the same thing. And most pastors mission here is not to lead souls to Christ but is to evangelize the gift of tongues.

The implication is that what many believe to be a work of God is in fact the work of carnal man based on incomprehensible gibberish. This reminds us that tongues for tongues sake is a dangerous and deplorable doctrine. It might be compared to putting more importance on the ringing of the doorbell than the guest at the door. Christians who wish to enter into this dimension of power and service should understand that the evidence of tongues is a mere external sign of a dynamic interior work being wrought by the Spirit. Anyone desiring to be used to edify the Body with an utterance of tongues should understand that the most important gift is the one needed at the moment, and the gift of tongues, per se, is no more important than any of God s charismata. Uppermost in our minds should be the desire to serve and honor God. Servanthood and God-centeredness are the hallmarks of Christianity, charismatic or otherwise.

From the beginning of the twentieth-century, leaders have instructed those receiving the gift not to become infatuated with tongues but to preach Jesus. Pentecostal Joe E. Campbell was acutely aware of the dangers when he titled his book Warning! Do Not Seek for Tongues. And his chapter titled Something Far More Important than Speaking in Tongues establishes love as the motive spring from which all gifts of the Spirit should proceed.

chrisd, do you know what you just posted up there? a dot

jclord:

allonym, if tithing does not come straight out of the Bible which Bible are you reading? All of my Bibles even my Oxford edition (which has all the Catholic chapters in it) has over 30 verses that discuss tithing.

Hmm, let me see, according to the bible, tithing is the practice where:

1) You give a percentage of the livestock or food your raise in sacrifice to the priests
2) If you did not raise beyond a certain amount (ie the minimum to feed your family and maintain enough stock to be able to replant or reseed for another year), you did NOT pay any tithes.
3) At the end of the year, your tithe was to be spent by YOU for food, beer, or anything you want in the annual celebration
4) Every three years at the Jubilee, you would also spend YOUR tithe on YOURSELF buying food, beer, etc
5) The tithe during the year supported the levites, who did not participate in any money making activities like the rest of Israel


Why do tithes not apply to me?

1) Through the sacrifice of Jesus, I am freed from having to make ANY other previous sacrifices (THIS INCLUDES THE TITHE).
2) I am not an Israelite or Jew, further, there are probably no more levites (as there was in the days of the bible) to support through tithes.
3) The Levites made up more than 1/12 of the Israelite population. How do I know, well, the bible itself says that the tribes of Judah and Benjamin were smaller than the others. So, without some weird division of population, the Levites would make up a significant portion of the population. . . Now, lets think this through. I need to support say. . .10% of the population of a country with the wages of the other 90%. What could I do? Hmm. . . make the other 90% give up some portion of their income.
4) Old Testament laws were handed to JEWS, something I'm clearly not.

- Guess what, pastors, preachers, etc don't come close to making up a 0.1% of the population of any nominally "christian" country. So, if anything, tithes should be like 0.05% (probably less) of my income, NOT 10%.

Of course, since the biblical description of tithes no longer applies to anyone, it is pointless to even try to determine what the correct percentage should be today.

I state this unequivocably, there is NO passage in the New Testament which says Christians should pay tithes. NONE. The closest people come is when Jesus says "render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and to God what is God's".

If you plan on making the argument that tithing (in today's times) is based on this, perhaps you could explain why we should disobey our governments when they institute things whe believe are incorrect. Further, if you are going to try to argue that the bible supports tithes. . .which is doesnt. . .but if you try, then you of course realize you'll be twisting some passages to fit your agenda. Fine, I'm used to that. Almost everyone does it. But then, be ready to explain this to me. Without ANY twisting of the wording WHATSOEVER, I can SHOW without ANY shadow of DOUBT, that the bible supports slavery. So, tell me, how can we now say slavery is wrong? How can we contradict the bible so clearly?

Prepare Yourself Well.

Calling yourself "born again" means nothing. It is the belief.
I am Catholic, yes we realize we are born sinners, we accept that we must repent and that Jesus is our savior. However the personal realization of being born again I think comes to all real christains at some time, it take maturity. I know soo many people who call themselves "born again christains" who don't have the maturity, mental capacity, or appritiation to even understand what it truely means in the first place. Calling yourself "born again" does not save you.

it all goes back to the definition of born again which the thread owner tried to list. At the end he unconciously proved that catholics believe in being born again.

This issue of born again always come up as if it is the the only way that Christ told us will lead to heaven. Born again is just a state of mind and not a society of people who are going to heaven. Thats what these protestants are made to believe.

this word Protestant

Born again is not a state of mind: it is a divine reality of receiving the gift of new life - divine life - by the power of the Spirit. The Bible was not describing a state of mind in John 1:12 - God gave repentant sinners (like me ) the power to become the sons of God.

Actually I'm not a Catholic member, and i don't know if they believe in been born again. But there is an organisation there called CBIU, this is the group I know that intercedes more or prays hard in Catholic church

what CBIU

welborn:

Born again is not a state of mind: it is a divine reality of receiving the gift of new life - divine life - by the power of the Spirit. The Bible was not describing a state of mind in John 1:12 - God gave repentant sinners (like me ) the power to become the sons of God.

FANTASTIC!!!

This is what people do not realise. The Bible says born NOT of the will of man but of the Spirit of God. Some Christians are in the habit of saying others are not "born again" when in the first place they themselves do not even understand what the Bible says about "born again". Some people think it is all about their "decision" especially if they answer an "altar call". They think anyone who has not followed that mode or who does not believe like they do cannot be born again ---- they display a gargantuan and sad ignorance!

Born against or Again is a fanatical way of protesting. Catholic is catholic they are not protestants. OK

This word protestants, do folks really know what it means

Hnd-holder:

Born against or Again is a fanatical way of protesting. Catholic is catholic they are not protestants. OK

Do Catholics believe in being born again? At least, that is what the topic seeks to address. If Christians (of whatever label - Protestant, etc) point to such verses as John 1:12-13 & 3:3-5 in trying to proffer answers, how has that become fanatical? Let's try and be a bit more mature with our comments.

@well born

u just said my mind well. thanks

welborn:

If Christians (of whatever label - Protestant, etc)

Christians don't have labels. They are just that Christians. No qualification required.

Catholics are Catholics
Anglicans are Anglicans
Mormons are Mormons
Pentecostals are Pentecostals (& repeat ad infinitum for all traditions/denominations)

I have no problem with debate between "denominational apologists" (or even those that expend their energy championing various MOG's), but please leave us Christians out of it!

Thank you & God bless

The Protestant movement actually preceded the 16th-century Reformation. Several dissident movements in the late medieval church anticipated the Reformation by protesting the pervasive corruption in the church and by criticizing fundamental Catholic teachings.
The four main Protestant traditions that emerged from the Reformation were the Lutheran (known in continental Europe as Evangelical), the Calvinist (Reformed), the Anabaptist, and the Anglican. Despite the considerable differences among them in doctrine and practice, they agreed in rejecting the authority of the pope and in emphasizing instead the authority of the Bible and the importance of individual faith.

The term Protestantism was given to the movement after the second Diet of Speyer (1529), an imperial assembly at which the Roman Catholic majority withdrew the tolerance granted to Lutherans at the first diet three years earlier. A protest was signed by six Lutheran princes and the leaders of 14 free cities of Germany, and Lutherans in general became known as Protestants. The term Protestant has gradually been attached to all Christian churches that are not Roman Catholic or part of the Orthodox or other Eastern Christian traditions. In the late 1990s the world had about 400 million Protestants (including some 64 million Anglicans), constituting about one-fifth of all affiliated Christians.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761555703/Protestantism.html

TV01:

Christians don't have labels. They are just that Christians. No qualification required.

I have no problem with debate between "denominational apologists" (or even those that expend their energy championing various MOG's), but please leave us Christians out of it!

Hi TV01,

I've seen the rejoinder you left me here about MOGs and I'll take time to post a reply. What you do have to understand here is that I was not responding as a "denominational apologist". You're sounding as though "us Christians" excludes every other Christian in the various denominations. Please wake up - that is the most pitious sectarian spirit any believer could ever exhibit.

Listen to what some chaps were arguing about in I Cor. 1:12 - "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ." Now those who were claiming "I of Christ" were acting as if others were "denominational" except they themselves. What they didn't realise was that they were as sectarian as those who they regarded as denominational, because they were acting as if others were not equally "of Christ" as much as they. This lullaby of "Catholics are Catholics. . Anglicans are Anglicans. . and ad infinitum" is a bit weathered by now, and we should learn to realise that we are all the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:26) - and that is precisely what makes a person "born again", regardless the labels used by many today. If some Catholics feel a bit averse to the teaching of being born again, that is what the topic seeks to address.

Much love in Jesus  

@Hnd - Holder
That means you [catholics] discriminate other christians. You despise other christians that are not catholics.   
So every other christian who Christ died for is a protestant, just because they are not catholics.

Hnd-holder:

The term Protestant has gradually been attached to all Christian churches that are not Roman Catholic or part of the Orthodox or other Eastern Christian traditions. In the late 1990s the world had about 400 million Protestants (including some 64 million Anglicans), constituting about one-fifth of all affiliated Christians.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761555703/Protestantism.html

lioness:

@Hnd - Holder
That means you [catholics] discriminate other christians. You despise other christians that are not catholics.
So every other christian who Christ died for is a protestant, just because they are not catholics.

Maybe Hnd-holder does not actually. He was helping out to inform us of the epistimology (big grammar - "background meaning" of the term "protestant", and in that respect I enjoyed that input.

welborn:

we are all the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:26)

Your quote above is my point. Which is that, faith is Jesus Christ is what makes one a Christian.

By it's very nature denominationalism demands something extra. It has a tendency to to defend certain cherished positions, and often leads to an unbalanced view of scripture or additions (tradition). This invariably leads to disunity and squabbling.

Which is why certain denominations are not considered truly Christian by others. Since I personally do not belong to any denomination, I wonder how I would be viewed by them?

Believe me, attempting to prove my previously held sectarian beliefs against scripture, humbled me and led me out of the denominational approach to Christianity. It's quite clear that there is truth in all and error in all, but the very real danger is the error will lead to spiritual harlotry. Hence my emphasis on just being Christian and not taking positions against any one denomination.

I hope this clarifies things. (But I'm sure you'll let me know if it doesn't  ).

God bless dude

I have come to the conclusion that there are
1. Christians - who follow Christ Jesus, believers in his teachings, Love and atonement
2. Denominational worshippers - those who worship their denomination. Those who would rather die for their church/denomination instead of dying for Christ.

TV01:

Which is why certain denominations are not considered truly Christian by others. Since I personally do not belong to any denomination, I wonder how I would be viewed by them?

Hmmm, U know. . . you sorta remind me of many groups I've encountered along the lines of "we are not denominational." It's my personal opinion that they really are as much denominational as others, even though they don't realise it, or try to claim the contrary. Some of the groups I've been in and out of include "Church(es) of Christ" and "Living Stream Ministry" (LSM) (besides several others), and my experience in these say much the same thing that inform your outlook.

I believe denominationalism of any expression (including those who claim to be not denominational) is a sad experience among God's people. However, I believe that separation from some "Christians" whose teachings are aberrational (hyperscriptural or unscriptural) is a direct command of Scripture: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (Rom 16:17-18).

You have made good points as well, TV01. However, I really do not care to which group a believer belongs - afterall, how are we sure that our own "undenominational denominationalism" is better than anyone else's in God's sight? I engage in useful conversations with Catholics, LSM, and believers from the various shades of protestantism; and I respect them as Christians while acknowledging that of necessity people sometimes want to be clearly identified for their strain of worship style - in just the same manner that you're stating your own position (undenomination Christian).

I appreciate your inputs, and I'm humbled if my rejoinders have been somewhat ambiguous. We learn everyday, and how much of that I need in my commitment to Christ  

When I say non-denominational. That is as plain as I can state it.
I actually do not have a"church" that I am a member of, neither a group that I belong too.
It really is just me.

So I can see what you are alluding to when you say "inform my outlook", but truly my outlook is not formed by association (although I do have a denominational background). It's primarily The Word & I(and I trust The Holy Spirit).

Likewise, I fellowship with anyone who wants to share the word (on a relational basis), and I find that my non-denominational appraoch makes this easier (although people often try and convince me of the superiority of their tradition/church branch/"pastor" So right now I don't actually have anyone I could actually separate from! (Maybe one day we'll talk church model/structure).

One of my points all along has been that I don't take umbrage at the teaching of individual traditions, because truth and error are clearly evident in them all. So I see inter-denominational squabbling as kind of like a "log & speck" or "sin & stone" situation. And just plain confusing.

I test all things by God's grace and hold fast. But I am by no means certain on every position. But I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing, as I am open to be led by The Spirit of God, which I believe is the whole point. Being in a denomination would by it's nature make me bound to certain traditions whatever I personally believe.

I choose liberty in Christ. So when I say non-denominational, I really mean that. Maybe the term should be extra-denominational? Actually no, that would probably become another tradition in itself.

So I have no need to reference myself against others, as I see myself as a "maturing Christian", not better or worse than anyone else.

Thank you for your kind words. And no, you have not been unambiguous. I see that we have slightly differing perspectives (I won't hazard a guess at yours, as I'm sure we'll talk more), but I'm sure God works in and leads each of us in a unique way.

Stay committed sir.

God bless

Hi TV01, 

Very good points you raised - and many thanks. I sat for a few moments after reading yours and tried to make sense of a situation of being Christian without the need for church (in the more general sense). However, again and again, Heb 10:25  kept coming back to mind - "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching."

I have great respect for your position, but may I share some things with you about why I felt the Holy Spirit leads believers to church, not away from it -

(1) The Church Occupies a Central Place in Jesus' Heart (Eph. 5:25)
"Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it" - that is huge. Add to that the tremendous promise He left her in Matt. 16:18 - "I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

(2) The Angels View God's Mystery in The Church (Eph.3:10)
"To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God."

(3) The Church is Where Believers Express Collective Worship (Heb.2:12)
"Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee" is Jesus' prophetic declaration, and indeed He has promised to be in the midst of those gathered unto His name (Matt.18:20).

Indeed, as individual believers who believe in Jesus Christ, we belong to Him. But there definitely is more we are called to be as the Body of Christ. It cannot be overstated, however, that there are matters in our commitment that cannot be accomplished as individual believers:

  -- celebrating the Lord's Supper (or breaking of bread) - I Cor. 11:26-27,33.

  -- worshipping as 'church' (Heb.2:12).

  -- the giving of our substances (Heb.13:15-16).

Even in first century Christianity, there were threats of heresies or errors among believers (I Cor.11:19), but the apostles did not ask Christians to make out their own individual "pathway" - those who tried to do so, met with a rebuttal from Paul (I Cor. 1:12-13). The apostles laboured to correct the misconceptions among believers then, and urged them to not forsake the assembling together of themselves. There are so many reasons why people will not want to go to church at all - and in many instances, the concerns are genuine. However, you will not find an absolutely 'perfect' church until Jesus comes back - for He is the One who perfects all things.

In Revelation 2 & 3, almost every church spoken to had problems in varying degrees (except one - the church in Philadelphia). However, even to the most corrupt church, the Lord still expressed His love to them (Laodicea). But, what about the other churches that had problems, even errors? Read it for yourself my dear - Jesus was still in their midst. How do I know this? Chapter 1 says Jesus was "in the midst of the seven candlesticks" (v.13). In verse 20, He said the candlesticks are the churches. So, even though they were imperfect and some of them had errors, Jesus was in their midst! He was constantly warning that the churches repent, but never did He threaten to leave them - He promised to be with them till the end (Matt.28:20). To individuals who had a concern to leave the churches, the Lord simply said, "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches" - the Spirit is speaking to the churches collectively, not as individuals.

In loving appeal, may I urge you to reconsider your position and ask God for help. I guarantee you He will show you what the Church is to Him, and point you to where you belong in the Body of Christ. Read I Cor. 12:15-18 and see how important it is to realise our place in collective worship rather than individually. Churches may be weak and imperfect  today, but God wants to see us joining our brethren collectively serving and worshipping Him - because, more than anything else, that is where Jesus Himself gathers with the saints.

Much love in our Saviour.

Hi Welborn,

Thank you very much for you encouragement and for taking the time to pen a response.

I mentioned earlier that maybe we need to talk church models/structure, but maybe we need to go ab initio, and explain what we mean by church.

Is church something you "go to"? or something "you are"? Repentance towards God and faith in Jesus Christ places you in the body and hence the church.

At no time did I say I do not assemble or fellowship with other believers. Neither have I forsaken collective worship, the breaking of bread or ministering.

Assembling is not a question of numbers, 2 or 3 satisfies.
Fellowship is primarily with The Father and His Son Jesus Christ - 1 John 1:3.

"Enoch walked with God".

Feel free to ask specifics about my walk, it will mean we can dialogue without having too rebut incorrect assumptions. It's why I always wait for you to state your position or ask before I respond with regards to mine.

I can see you feel I "withdrew" from church, no sir, I didn't, I was led out, kicking and screaming.

As thick as I was, I couldn't see and refused to believe that was how God was leading me. It went completely against everything I understood. But I know I am right where God wants me to be.

And no, I am not looking for the perfect assembly, but neither do I believe that every gathering that labels itself church or mentions the Lords name is necessarily the body of Christ.

So, let me ask you two things
1. What tradition/model do you worship in?
2. Are we transgressing? We appear to be a little off the topic of this thread.

Talk soon

God bless

lioness:

@Hnd - Holder
That means you [catholics] discriminate other christians. You despise other christians that are not catholics.
So every other christian who Christ died for is a protestant, just because they are not catholics.

We are praying for you all to come back home. The bible, the bable say, etc. Catholic wrote the bible you pick it up trying to twist what they wrote as the word of God.

Christ calls the highly educated Biblical scholars of His day liars (John 8:55 - Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.) and says that their father is a liar (John 8:44 - Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.).  Paul, in what people today would call vicious bigoted discrimination, calls a whole RACE of people liars in Titus 1:12; they came from Ham.  One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
A man lies because he is afraid (Abraham - Genesis 12:11-19; Sarah - Genesis 18:15; David - I Samuel 21:12-15).

A man with a bad conscience (II Samuel 18:29) is always afraid.

No man has to lie where there is no threat of some kind.  He is told to put away lying (Ephesians 4:25), whether there is any threat or not, but human nature being what it is (Job 13:4), he still tends to lie when under stress.

What do we have in almost all the pulpits in America?  Liars!  Many even profess to be born again, they all profess that their friends and teachers are good and godly, and they all profess that their education is accredited because of the 'qualified authorities' who hold to 'historic positions' and as we see in this entire series, because of their personal opinions!

I wonder if the Father of lies has even lied to them to make them believe that they are Biblically and truly saved even though they may not be.  Now THAT would the lie of all lies, eh! 
I John 2:19 is pretty clear: They went out from us (FROM CATHOLIC), but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

I John 4:3 sure does lay down a pretty damning possibility as well - And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

culled from The Battle of the Seeds
King James Onlyism - vs - Scholarship Onlyism
Lies from the Pulpits

http://www.touchet1611.org/KJVOPulpitLies.html