Viaro, I am not so keen on interfering in your discussion with gary. But I have been going through your posts which I find interesting. You talked about ‘principles’ which to a good extent, I agree with, but I would like to understand how the Levitical tithing practice is applied in the teaching of ‘giving a tenth of our income to the church’. Can you do this for me Viaro, it will be appreciated. Thanks

viaro:

This is also why no anti-tither has the nerve to accuse Paul of basing new covenant CHRISTIAN doctrine on the Levitical system. NONE of these anti-tithers has ever had the nerve to condemn Paul for the same things that we see preachers do today. To keep arguing legalistically on tithes and yet shy away from making the same legalism on Paul's new covenant doctrines for Christians is simply double standards and not befitting for intelligent Christians.

There is a whole lot of difference between Paul's preaching and what we have today Viaro. I see legalism instead in the preching of tithe.

Hope you will ddress my concern Viaro  Sadly i am bout stepping out of the office hope to be back later in the day.

Hello Zikkyy,

Zikkyy:

Viaro, I am not so keen on interfering in your discussion with gary. But I have been going through your posts which I find interesting. You talked about ‘principles’ which to a good extent, I agree with, but I would like to understand how the Levitical tithing practice is applied in the teaching of ‘giving a tenth of our income to the church’. Can you do this for me Viaro, it will be appreciated. Thanks

Pardon me for saying this: but I don't know what else there is to say if you agree with the core of my position on 'principles' in discussing with Gary. The one thing I wanted to point out was that we need not be so fastidious and legalistic with issues around this subject; and that is why we should see PRINCIPLES rather than hammer endlessly on about and around legalism.

As regards the question of how 'the Levitical tithing practice' is applied in Church, the basic point is that ministers and the needy ought to be supported by our active giving in Church. This ought not be based ONLY ON TITHES - not at all so, and it could include tithing as well as other forms of expressing our giving. Perhaps that is why I have reiterated often that I'm not polarised to either camps of 'anti-tithers' or 'pro-tithers'. The bottom line (for me, at least) is for us to go beyond meaningless arguments and actually get involved more actively in our giving - be it in the forms of tithes, contributions, donations, offerings, assitance, wages (yes, wages - it's there in the Bible), etc.

Another point here is that tithing, even under the Levitical system does not save anybody as far as justification is concerned. Neither the non-tither nor the tither becomes more justified, saved, or glorified at any point for choosing to tithe or not tithe. The major concern there is that we express our love for our brethren and the Kingdom of God through the Body of Christ by actually giving in principle as exemplified in the Levitical system.

Thirdly, the Levitical system contains so many principles we find and have had no problems at all flirting with in our Christianity, whatever denomination we prefer. Rather than get bogged down with petty pedantics and formalisms, we could express our concern for the 'weightier matters of the LAW' without becoming Jews in the flesh nor having to argue for eons about non-essentials. When we begin to argue about 3-year tithes, and other formalisms of "festivals", etc. . . where do we end up?

I don't know if the foregoing affords a gist of what I've been saying; but if I happen to have skipped your point, please let me know.

Zikkyy:

There is a whole lot of difference between Paul's preaching and what we have today Viaro. I see legalism instead in the preching of tithe.

I understand and have acknowledged that on several occasions. This is why I said to Gary in post #525 that "others who live from their ministry are on sound grounds to do so as long as they do not use the ministry as a super-highway for filthy lucre."

However, this does not then mean that we should all get worked up and make every preacher or teacher of tithes guilty by association. One problem with dealing with issues like this is that aany people tend to see some of these abuses in their own local environment and experiences - but what is selling the Body of Christ short is that these folks would tend to make these local events larger than they are, and then assume that is what goes on in all occurences of the mention of 'tithes'. The result? All mention of tithes anywhere will simply spell doom for them, so that they do not even give room to reconsider the possibility of the fact that not everyone is guilty of the abuse.

Typically, those who are driven by a default anti-tithing position often do not take the time to recognize that there are preachers and teachers who are not guilty of the said legalism; nor has it occured to many of these anti-tithers that they are indeed arguing on the misguided ground of their own legalism.

Either way, I don't think we should be polarised to either extremes. The anti-tither who rattles his inconsistencies is not making any more sense than the pro-tither he seeks to condemn. I'm willing to agree with simple and honest discussions regardless who the discussant is, whether anti-tither or pro-tither. I do not see how dividing the Body of Christ with these arguments is helping our Christian lives.

viaro:

That is where the problem is - and that is what should be dealt with. The attack on tithes is misguided, that is why no intelligent anti-tither has anything of substance to say when their arguments have been closely examined from Scripture.

This is also why no anti-tither has the nerve to accuse Paul of basing new covenant CHRISTIAN doctrine on the Levitical system. NONE of these anti-tithers has ever had the nerve to condemn Paul for the same things that we see preachers do today. To keep arguing legalistically on tithes and yet shy away from making the same legalism on Paul's new covenant doctrines for Christians is simply double standards and not befitting for intelligent Christians.

Where do you find Paul basing NT christian giving on the Levitical system that would make you expect we castigate him for it? No-one here has, to the best of my knowledge, castigated even our dart-board (chris oyaks) for preaching holiness etc. Its only on the subject of prosperity WITH the proviso THAT a tenth of your income MUST come to him that makes everyone bare fangs. And you agree with this so what brings a "nerve" to accuse Paul into the issue of tithes?  

BTW, I do agree with "tithes" if they come from an informed point of view and are voluntary rather than coerced either via ignorance or "legalism" WHICH is the meat of this matter i.e. what you call "use of the ministry as a super-highway for filthy lucre."

As Kunle said in his last perceptive post, you can expect a lot of obfuscation.

The standpoint of those of us arguing against "tithing" is very simple.

1. An individual Christian can choose to do his own giving in the form of "tithing" --- particularly if s/he knows that "tithing" is not a Christian obligation . We have always said we have no problem with that. In my case, I have been saying that on nairaland since 2005; Kunle has been saying that since at least 2007.

2. We challenge and condemn the overwhelmingly fraudulent teaching of "tithing" --- as compulsory.

3. We resist and challenge the erroneous, i.e. misinformed teaching of "tithing" as compulsory.

4. Now we face the challenge of the egregious teaching of "tithing" as "voluntary" ----- knowing that it will only support the fraudulent and erroneous; knowing that neither Jesus Christ Himself nor the apostle Paul went that far.


All the talk of "principle" always stops at "paying/giving" the so called "voluntary" "tithes" into "church"; the "principle" never includes seeing tithing in Deuteronomy, Numbers, Leviticus etc as being given to widows, orphans, strangers etc. If it is a question of principle, why not "teach" that today's "tithe" does not have to go into church but can be given IN PRINCIPLE to today's equivalent IN PRINCIPLE of "widows, orphans, strangers" etc.

See which is more obvious IN PRINCIPLE:

Storehouse = "Church"

Widows, orphans, strangers = Widows, orphans, strangers


"In principle" of course!

^^Commander-in-charge, I salute! Howdy?

nuclearboy:

Where do you find Paul basing NT christian giving on the Levitical system that would make you expect we castigate him for it?

Well, it is pretty obvious when we turn to 1 Corinthians 9:13-14. In verse 13, Paul was referring to the Levitical system; in verse 14 he declares that "EVEN SO hath the Lord ordained. . " (KJV), or as ESV renders it: "In the same way, the Lord commanded that . . ."

I was not calling for the castigation of Paul; rather, I was directly challenging those who have a problem with preachers and teachers basing their teaching about giving on the Levitical system. If they have a problem with quoting the Law of Moses today, surely they should have had the same quarrel with Paul for directly citing verses from the Law of Moses as he did in 1 Corinthians 9:9, no?

Instead of the legalistic arguments we often hear, I have been trying to call attention to just one thing: PRINCIPLES. I thought this would have been so clear, understandable and easy to grasp - but seeing that it was not helping Gary, I then quoted from the Amplified -

   '[On the same principle] the Lord directed that those who
    publish the good news (the Gospel) should live (get their
    maintenance) by the Gospel' - 1 Corinthians 9:14.

I hope now it should come home a bit closer. . . we should understand the simple and very effective point about 'PRINCIPLES' rather than looking for pedantics and formalisms derived from legaistic interpretations.

nuclearboy:

No-one here has, to the best of my knowledge, castigated even our dart-board (chris oyaks) for preaching holiness etc. Its only on the subject of prosperity WITH the proviso THAT a tenth of your income MUST come to him that makes everyone bare fangs. And you agree with this so what brings a "nerve" to accuse Paul into the issue of tithes?  

No, I think sometimes you should not be in a hurry to jump to conclusions, commander. I do not agree with frauds or scams in any shape or form. Perhaps anti-tithers expect me to concentrate my energies on castigating preachers all over the place; but I have noted that I DO NOT favour those who "use the ministry as a super-highway for filthy lucre".

On the other hand, I also do not favour or agree with anti-tithing misinformation, false assertions and logical fallacies. Just because our neighbour's son is called 'Clinton' does not mean every 'Bill' one comes across automatically is a Monika-Lewinsky-randy (apologies to the man himself, no pejorations intended). We should be able to look at issues a bit more maturely rather than bandy everyone who mentions 'tithe' and then assume all are guilty by association.

nuclearboy:

BTW, I do agree with "tithes" if they come from an informed point of view and are voluntary rather than coerced either via ignorance or "legalism" WHICH is the meat of this matter i.e. what you call "use of the ministry as a super-highway for filthy lucre."

Humbly acknowledged.

Enigma:

All the talk of "principle" always stops at "paying/giving" the so called "voluntary" "tithes" into "church"; the "principle" never includes seeing tithing in Deuteronomy, Numbers, Leviticus etc as being given to widows, orphans, strangers etc.

That is not true.

The talk of "principle" does not stop with tithes (a tenth, ten percent, etc.) - however that may be given. Besides, in responding to Zikkyy's request on the principle of the Levitical system, I have already noted that our giving "ought not be based ONLY ON TITHES - not at all so, and it could include tithing as well as other forms of expressing our giving".

Outside of my comments, there are others who tithe of their income but have not therefore stopped at that point. Their tithes and offerings of other kinds do not end up only in the local Churches, but go from there to outreaches and Missions. I know this happens in my local Baptist church; and I also know from experience that this is what happens in many AoG (Assemblies of God) Churches.

We should avoid making very misleading generalizations - they do not help foster understanding or appreciation for real issues.

Viaro:

I'm fine, chairman but expected a greater showing on the "chris says take it. do you believe it thread". That harakiri dude kept me away from all but 2 hours sleep since yesternight.

If you read Kunle's last post, Zikky's deliberately snide comments, Enigma's last post and what you just responded to from me, you'll realise we're all (you included) saying the same thing.

Nobody (including Kunle who we could call NLs' anti-tither in-chief) says giving a tithe of your income to church is wrong AS LONG AS it is with full knowledge of what you are doing i.e. it is informed AND voluntary. All everyone is saying is "THOSE" we are complaining about are those who turn it into a compulsory thing and preach it as a "requirement", not only for physical and financial well-being, but infact in many cases, go to the point of linking it to salvation.

Just read Enigma's post again. And remember what each has written in times past as to support for the work of God and ministry of those engaged in the work of the Gospel. And your correction above may be true of "some" that you know. Truth is that here, most all do not work like that. They tell you it MUST NOT go anyplace except to them.

nuclearboy:

I'm fine, chairman but expected a greater showing on the "chris says take it. do you believe it thread". That harakiri dude kept me away from all but 2 hours sleep since yesternight.

Hehe, as an asides. . I was up almost all through the night (my local time) studying and playing [undisclosed] as well following that thread (around 3 am local time, I even responded to one of Gary's posts). I didn't know how to come catch whatever was making them 'fall', so pardon me for not turning up for duty there sir! I didn't wanna risk falling and breaking something important in my life.

nuclearboy:
If you read Kunle's last post, Zikky's deliberately snide comments, Enigma's last post and what you just responded to from me, you'll realise we're all (you included) saying the same thing.

Acknowledged, lol. . . although I didn't think Zikky's was a snide remark though.

nuclearboy:
Nobody (including Kunle who we could call NLs' anti-tither in-chief) says giving a tithe of your income to church is wrong AS LONG AS it is with full knowledge of what you are doing i.e. it is informed AND voluntary. All everyone is saying is "THOSE" we are complaining about are those who turn it into a compulsory thing and preach it as a "requirement", not only for physical and financial well-being, but infact in many cases, go to the point of linking it to salvation.

But have I argued to the contrary? Why does the NL anti-tither fail miserably to see the point in my comments before seeking to slur and be reactive to whatever viaro says on tithes?

Where I find issues that do not make any sense, I very simply and clearly post my disagreements. At other times, I don't bother to comment - unless someone keeps repeating a fallacy and assumes that is what Scripture teaches. Everything else is unnecessary to quibble over, as I'm neither pro- nor anti- about tithing: rather, I'm willing to let others have the freedom to decide intelligently what they want to do without muddying the waters with misdirected attacks on tithes.

nuclearboy:

Just read Enigma's post again. And remember what each has written in times past as to support for the work of God and ministry of those engaged in the work of the Gospel. And your correction above may be true of "some" that you know. Truth is that here, most all do not work like that. They tell you it MUST NOT go anyplace except to them.

I sympathise with the Nigerian situation; which is why often my comments surprise many who only see things from the 'greatest country in Africa' (I'm disappointed, though, thay they got booted from the ongoing worldcup). Anyways, let's endeavour to maintain a balance rather than being reactive.

nuclearboy:

Viaro:

I'm fine, chairman but expected a greater showing on the "chris says take it. do you believe it thread". That harakiri dude kept me away from all but 2 hours sleep since yesternight.

If you read Kunle's last post, Zikky's deliberately snide comments, Enigma's last post and what you just responded to from me, you'll realise we're all (you included) saying the same thing.

Nobody (including Kunle who we could call NLs' anti-tither in-chief) says giving a tithe of your income to church is wrong AS LONG AS it is with full knowledge of what you are doing i.e. it is informed AND voluntary. All everyone is saying is "THOSE" we are complaining about are those who turn it into a compulsory thing and preach it as a "requirement", not only for physical and financial well-being, but infact in many cases, go to the point of linking it to salvation.

Just read Enigma's post again. And remember what each has written in times past as to support for the work of God and ministry of those engaged in the work of the Gospel. And your correction above may be true of "some" that you know. Truth is that here, most all do not work like that. They tell you it MUST NOT go anyplace except to them.

I don't think that I am able to agree that we are saying the same thing! I have never seen any of them agree:

1. That a "tither" can instead of giving the "tithe" into "church", s/he can take that specific "tithe" (not another "tithe" after one taken to "church" and instead give it to widows etc: OR

2. That the tither can take the one "tithe" (not another, not "offering" and share it among "church", widows, orphans etc.

3. The two above are minimal ----- going beyond them I would still like to see that the emphasis is on "giving" which is what the Bible teaches --- rather than the "tithing" scam!

@Viaro

You'll notice I stopped responding to your posts after I got your point when you "came down hard". It was because I finally got your point and understood. However (and this is where the problem lies), please note Image123's multiple (and excited) posts following that exchange. He believed (and prior to that I used to too) that you were in support of "THEM" in the scam. That was/is the problem here!

Remember we almost all to the man stated we saw you as their prop. AND THEY were not saying what you are. For them, it is an obligation to obfuscate the issue, confuse people and compel them that tithes are compulsory. So whist I get you "NOW", they don't and remain convinced they have "Viaro" advancing the "tithes as compulsion" cause in their behalf.

On Zikky, actually I was referring to another thread (the Oyedepo thread by petres_007) where someone said charity makes you wealthy and he "snidely" remarked that he thought "tithes" had already accomplished that. My bad!

You need to stop playing ( ) till 3am! That could be unhealthy. Worse still would be falling (how do you explain that to a doctor) during "games". I mean its not like you're a gladiator in the arena, is it?

@Enigma:

We ARE saying the same thing with Viaro. The difference is he uses tithe interchangably - whist you say tithe and mean the scam, he says tithe and means a voluntary honorable gift of a tenth. Problem is the dolts who use his words as a prop.

@nuclearboy

I'm afraid I'm not yet convnced we are saying the same thing. As I said I have never seen her or any of the others say you don't have to give the 'tithe' into church but can give it specifically to widows etc

I get your point. Only Viaro can clarify his position then.

[size=4pt]That maggot must be skulking around someplace praying Viaro is proud like him and argues counter. NL drama [/size]

Thanks Viaro, I do appreciate your taking time out to address my concerns. I so much find your post comforting, cos I was expecting something different (something that will probably gladden the hearts of people like Jo or tithing-t ). So I will just my share my thoughts here instead.

True we can rely on principles, I believe in it and I agree with you on this. My concern is what principle underlying the levitical tithing and what is the practice today? We see that a large number of our MOGs miss it by thousands of miles. I still believe it’s difficult to preach and still achieve the expected result of people rendering a tenth of their income to the church. This cannot be achieved without resulting to rule setting (benchmark and thresholds) which to me is tends toward legalism as well. One thing we can do is to truly preach the principles which have to do with meeting the needs of the have-nots or less privileged (i.e. poor, widowed e.t.c). We can draw the attention of the congregation to see how this was achieved under Mosaic Law, but let their heart decide on how to apply it.

I am against anybody preaching/advocating for tithers to stop tithing. Education maybe (for the un-informed if any), but we still cannot make their decisions for them. My focus really has been directed at the way it is preached and not the act (by tithers). I believe this is the position of most ‘anti-tithers’ here. Let the MOGs preach the truth and you see members of the so called ‘anti-tithing’ camp seeking new line of work

Crusaders! Hey ease up on Nike

[flash=600,600]http://bookstore.umhb.edu/outerweb/product_images/10120538.jpg[/flash]

lol. I enjoyed all the jokers.

Viaro:


Have you ever heard other Christians who base their reason for tithing on Abraham's example instead of the Levitical tithe? No?

Then you're living in a small world indeed.

There are so many pastors and members of churches around the world who teach tithing on the basis of the Melchizedek priesthood

and not on the Levitical priesthood . . .

. . . Do you now see why no sane mind would be arguing your anti-tithing legalism?

Yes, the apostles taught Christian doctrines on the basis of the Levitical system;

but rather than apply the Law in a legalistic manner championed by anti-tithers, they rather sought to follow simple PRINCIPLES.

This is why Christians can tithe from their income without waiting for your legalism of 'crops and animals'.

Just get rid of your legalism and you will be thankful for the release that follows.

Enigma:


Whether it is Abraham "tithe", Melchisedec "tithe", Jacob "tithe", Levitical "tithe", Malachi "tithe",

the fact remains that the teaching/preaching of "tithing" today is overwhelmingly fraudulent and a scam. The scam must be resisted and condemned.

Again, I repeat, those who are teaching/preaching the so-called "voluntary" "tithing" are simply aiding and abetting the scammers.

@^^^

Viaro sure legalism is one of the greatest robber[/b]s [b]of Christian benefits,

it robs people of their understanding of the Word of God and all of the benefits of the gift of Grace

Enigma and others (i.e. crusaders) are we now expected to throw the baby out with the bath water?

No, on the contrary, as Viaro has already mentioned clean up the act and get back what the devil has stolen or is destroying

Tithing is a shadow of the antitype (i.e. the antitype is how it was meant to be or how the status quo was originally)

Viaro has pushed the boat out and already stepped out at the deep end

so you better know how to stand on water the Word before plunging in after alternatively be sure you can swim

Right. Why has this subject matter turned into an arduous task?

Why is it failing to find the common ground and why problems having a mutual understanding?

This is a one of the classic full circle moments of time

Remember Cain & Abel's first free will offering >> then Abraham's Melchizedek tithe >> the Isralites Levitical tithe >> New Testament's free will offering

Well Cain & Abel's free will offering is self explanatory as it is. Abel got it right but Cain somehow didnt manage to.

Abraham's Melchizedek tithe was an offering of instinct, a way of saying thanks to God and demonstrating his acceptance of God as his Owner; Lord.

Abraham's tithe had nothing to do with a pre-existing law but everything to do with a grateful heart and a love for God.

Note that Abraham was moved to give the tithe and was not forced or compelled.

The Isralites Levitical tithe needed the schoolmaster (i.e. the Laws of Moses) to justify tithes and make it mandatory

Where the protagonists have a valid case with the perpetrators' methods of obtaining & flaunting their shameful gains

GaryColemanArnold'sJackson argument against paying tithes seems to be with its association with the law (i.e. the Schoolmaster)

But we know giving of tithes was around before the law (i.e. the Schoolmaster) and that free will offering was before giving of tithes

So the law (i.e. the Schoolmaster) did not invent tithing it only exposed it (i.e. similarly as the OT usually conceals the NT and the NT conversely reveals the OT)

Just as the law (i.e. the Schoolmaster) has always steadily helped to establish the importance of many of the unwritten truths already known by the patriarchs

it helped in the training of giving ontowards free-will giving by establishing the importance and relevance of tithing.

Now that Jesus brought us grace and faith there is no longer the need for the supervision of the law (i.e. the schoolmaster)

Jesus taught us to give. The New Testament admonishes us to give.

Hey, tithing too, the forerunner has taught us how to measure our giving and showed us how (i.e. let us know where to begin). How good is that, eh?

From the law (i.e. the Schoolmaster) we have the understanding that the purpose of tithing is for:

1) Supporting the work of God and the Kingdom of Heaven
2) Providing for His workers (i.e. DIY wealth gain or lucre is a big No No)
3) To support aliens; not ETs   but rather strangers, the marginalised, the homeless, disadvantaged etc; the fatherless and widows

The absence of any direct command in the NT to pay tithes does not relieve saints of the great privilege of giving, or does it?

Tithe serves a helpful hint of where a dedicated believer could start giving from.

The act itself is not to fulfil the law (i.e. satisfy the Schoolmaster)

but rather a display acknowledging God as the one that provides and gives power to get or make wealth . . .

Passing the humility test  (i.e  lofty, prideful or arrogant when successful test).

Moses' Deu 8:17-18 NIV to the stiffed-neck Isralites:


¹⁷You may say to yourself, "My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me."

¹⁸But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth,

and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today.

The full circle moment: free will offering >> tithe >> free will offering . . . back to square one.

. . . Unlike Cain, I pray you get it right when doing the right thing, at the right time and remain in right standing with God whilst doing it  . . .

>>>Trying to understand what this whole write up was intended to convey, musical bent I must say

FACT: It is not Christian to call folks names they were not given or intended to be called!, eg, Gary Coleman reference, I am not a judge oooooo

Is it okay for you to call your giving tithe and others choose a different name for theirs?

Is it only MONEY (straight cash homey) that one can give? >>>see where the "greed" is leading?

No need for name calling, that's even below high school let alone Christian,

^^ E36991 believes OT tithing was a type pointing to what God expects us to do NOW; as it were - a starting point. That is reasonable.

Problem is that God wants us to give willingly and cheerfully as OUR heart determines. How does e36991 then relate this to the average guy who never comes to understand this but is "made" to believe through [1] trust in the preacher(s) [2] fear of not being in tandem with what the trusted preacher says [3] an ignorance of the scriptures helped mainly by these "trusted" preachers who insist you need a "special" anointing to understand plain language.

And what he is made to believe is [1] Tithes MUST BE PAID ACCORDING to how the preacher says [2] Tithes are neccessary OR you go to hell [3] Without tithes, you cannot prosper or have good health

@e36991:

How do you reconcile the way it is presented "IN TODAY'S REALITY" by your "own" informed knowledge that God wants us to give willingly. Does God require that the "tax collectors" lie and confuse us so God can get what He wants but which THEY spend?

Do you remember stories of when the white man came here and the missionary schools? Christianity was the "vehicle" on which education, better health and science rode? How expensive was that education or health or understanding? How do you compare that to the Costs of Covenant University where even Living Faiths pastor's cant afford to send their children who are chased out on fees default?

Your poetry is nice and I'm sure you play the guitar/piano well. How does your poetry etc help those who you YOURSELF say the schoolmaster gave us the understanding of who this "help" was meant for i.e the poor, widow and stranger AND workers (who were included because they had no other means)?

OgaJim:


Trying to understand what this whole write up was intended to convey, musical bent I must say

FACT: It is not Christian to call folks names they were not given or intended to be called!, eg, Gary Coleman reference, I am not a judge oooooo

Is it okay for you to call your giving tithe and others choose a different name for theirs?

Is it only MONEY (straight cash homey) that one can give? >>>see where the "greed" is leading?

No need for name calling, that's even below high school let alone Christian,

@OgaJim

. . . a bit over your head was it?

Is it OK to call giving tithe and others choose a different name for theirs?

Answer: Semantics aside, if the giving was a tenth, what would that giving be? Technically it is tithe, isnt it?

Is it only MONEY?

Answer: This is a myopic assumption. Of course giving can be time, talent or financial contributions

Name calling?

Answer: Tell me is GaryColemanArnoldJackson the same as Gary Coleman.

- With the strikeouts, obviously not the same

Oga Jim you dont half tell porkies. O ga ooo Jim. Na wa ooo.

Those familiar with the television sitcom "Diff'rent Strokes"

would have already figured that the ID garyarnold is a juxtapose of the actor's first name and his TV role's first name

- Actor's name; Gary Coleman - and his role name; Arnold Jackson

nuclearboy:


^^ E36991 believes OT tithing was a type pointing to what God expects us to do NOW; as it were - a starting point. That is reasonable.

Problem is that God wants us to give willingly and cheerfully as OUR heart determines.

How does e36991 then relate this to the average guy who never comes to understand this but is "made" to believe through

[1] trust in the preacher(s)
[2] fear of not being in tandem with what the trusted preacher says
[3] an ignorance of the scriptures helped mainly by these "trusted" preachers who insist you need a "special" anointing to understand plain language.

And what he is made to believe is

[1] Tithes MUST BE PAID ACCORDING to how the preacher says
[2] Tithes are neccessary OR you go to hell
[3] Without tithes, you cannot prosper or have good health

@e36991:

How do you reconcile the way it is presented "IN TODAY'S REALITY" by your "own" informed knowledge that God wants us to give willingly.

Does God require that the "tax collectors" lie and confuse us so God can get what He wants but which THEY spend?

Do you remember stories of when the white man came here and the missionary schools?

Christianity was the "vehicle" on which education, better health and science rode?

How expensive was that education or health or understanding?
How do you compare that to the Costs of Covenant University where even Living Faiths pastor's cant afford to send their children who are chased out on fees default?

Your poetry is nice and I'm sure you play the guitar/piano well.

How does your poetry etc help those who you YOURSELF say the schoolmaster gave us the understanding of who this "help" was meant for

i.e the poor, widow and stranger AND workers (who were included because they had no other means)?

@nuclearboy

Whao! Reading through the post(s) with patience is admirable. We can take this further and jaw-jaw on Yahoo Instant Messenger

- I can drop a mail address here if you're game. Holler if/when you're ready

Note all boils down to what God (i.e. the Influencer) is to you, the type of relationship you have with Him, your intimacy/knowledge of Him etc

Importantly also to note is that God hasnt given us a spirit of fear but love power and a sound mind

All ought to study to show themselves approved . . .

The day the truth is known, one shall be free indeed of all falsehoods, ignorance, scare-mongering etc

It's a pity, we will always have the poor with us but the training of the law of tithing (i.e. the schoolmaster) hints how they can be taken care of

The bath water of course is dirty but hey do we have to throw the baby out with the dirty bath water

No, hence the call to wash the baby with soap and clean water

^^ By all means, Sir, drop your Yahoo ID.

You are honorable and so I am honored.

Please note that NOT ONE of what you call anti-tithers base their arguments on aught else but scripture. Not one is in support because a "MOG" says so unlike majority of the other side. Note MOSTLY that their arguments are not against tithing/giving but the way the 10% is preached to seem as a "compulsory LAW" to be fulfilled in "church" rather than a means God designed for societal support for all the needy. Remember it is taught "today" that if you do not give it, you will not be blessed, may (will) not go to heaven and have given your all to satan. These are the problem, not tithes/giving!

I await your Yahoo "tag"

nuclearboy:


^^ . . . drop your Yahoo ID.

You are honorable and so I am honored.

. . . I await your Yahoo "tag"

@nuclearboy

Thanks for obliging . . .

Drop me a mail at a1411326@bofthew.com

The yahoo ID will follow after we've done a mutual authentication and integrity test (i.e. to confirm its really us communicating)

nuclearboy
When will you start to be honest? It's open to many that the anti-tither's base is fear. They are THE TITHEPHOBICs. I recall you screaming in utter anguish "I HAVE EVERYTHING against tithes". Sorry if such forgettable memories trouble you, as I see your 'diplomacy' on this page.
BTW, does God hate an uncheerful giver? Will someone go to hell if he gives of necessity? Who are the poor?

e36991:


@nuclearboy

Thanks for obliging . . .

Drop me a mail at a1411326@bofthew.com

The yahoo ID will follow after we've done a mutual authentication and integrity test (i.e. to confirm its really us communicating)

@nuclearmanboy

Seems you're online right now . . .

Scratch out the above

Use this mail address a1422935@bofthew.com to drop me a mail

Sorry I waited over 3 hours monitoring my inbox before permitting the former mail address to self-destruct

Image123:


nuclearboy

When will you start to be honest? It's open to many that the anti-tither's base is fear. They are THE TITHEPHOBICs.

I recall you screaming in utter anguish "I HAVE EVERYTHING against tithes".

Sorry if such forgettable memories trouble you, as I see your 'diplomacy' on this page . . .

@Image123

That was a momentary emotional outburst (i.e. emotion is energy in motion)

Emotion deals with feelings, experiences (i.e. good or bad ones) etc

If not checked emotions often clouds ones actions or decision (i.e. a conclusion of an issue can get influenced by emotion)

The best decisions made are those done when emotions were put aside (i.e. logical and factual thinking was done)

Understandably peeps have been used and abused

and are now disgusted of dog collared charlatans wagging their tails all the way to the banks after pissing from the pulpit

@e36991:

Will write presently. Forgive the delay - had guests so wasn't by my laptop

@Image123

You're asking me for the 2nd time if God hates an "uncheerful" giver. Let me answer this time -

God loves a cheerful giver is what the Bible says and His Children will delight in ensuring givers are happy and aware what they are giving to/for.

But there's another "father" who does not care whether you're cheerful or not. His children (like him) will twist, misquote, misinterpret, lie and cajole people in "giving" whether cheerful or not. For them, its just bring the moolah. Their father's name is "_ _ _ _ _". Fill in the blanks, Image123. At least, you know your father's name.

@e36991:

Check your mail. But remember, "Strawberries are my favorite fruit"

nuclearboy:


@e36991:

Check your mail. But remember, "Strawberries are my favorite fruit"

@nuclearboy

Hi you the man!

Got it

Check your inbox for "You got mail"

@nuclearboy

FYI a1422935@bofthew.com too is now defunct

It's hot out there, hey have this . . .

e36991:

@OgaJim

. . . a bit over your head was it?

Is it OK to call giving tithe and others choose a different name for theirs?

Answer: Semantics aside, if the giving was a tenth, what would that giving be? Technically it is tithe, isnt it?

Is it only MONEY?

Answer: This is a myopic assumption. Of course giving can be time, talent or financial contributions

Name calling?

Answer: Tell me is GaryColemanArnoldJackson the same as Gary Coleman.

- With the strikeouts, obviously not the same

Oga Jim you dont half tell porkies. O ga ooo Jim. Na wa ooo.

Those familiar with the television sitcom "Diff'rent Strokes"

would have already figured that the ID garyarnold is a juxtapose of the actor's first name and his TV role's first name

- Actor's name; Gary Coleman - and his role name; Arnold Jackson

DUDE!

Don't get too far ahead of your self buddy, I see nothing funny making fun of dead guys or calling living souls by dead folks' names but again, I'll just leave that at "to each his own"

If 10% is all you can give, nothing wrong with that but no one should equally condemn folks who can give more or less, nowhere did the Bible tell us to give a simple %, We are asked repeatedly to give as the Spirit leads us not in the way it is MOSTLY preached these days starting right here in the USA to Nigeria where it's been taken to a higher level.

I have standards below which I do not operate so don't expect equal sarcasm from this side, I don't do stuff because others are doing it neither do I feel a need to dwell on my giving, I just refuse to believe the way they go about it, I believe we still love you all with the love of God.


## Beat Ghana