once upon a time was there a nlander called pilgrim 1 .About two years ago she went into hibernation only to surface last year with a new Id viaro.

Viaro herself similarly disapeared mid last year and has rappeared with another Id wordtalk.The big question now is why all these games ?why cant you maintain one Id? Pilgrim hope u don't mind explaining

At least Joagbaje eventually acknowledged his own ruse of Akhozem!

Oh, he too continues to deny that he does use the Azibalua handle too ---- no probleeeem; one day go be one day!

@Enigma, seems like you don't have work to do

I get plenty of time today madam, and I use it how I want to --- small time now I dey go outside go do some fishing from inside River Thames. Nice.

@post
are you sure wordtalk is pilgrim1 can you provide proof?

;d

all i know is religion section is full of cultists who also masquerade in other parts of the forum, using various ids.

i personally dont know who is who.

LOl. ^^^^^^^^ Aussie. gaad dey.





put a shrimp on the barbie.

sweetnecta

is there any particular reason why you're always happy to see me post.

you want your wife to come after me?

^^^Ha! He's allowed four wives naa. I hear he has only three yet so you have nothing to be afraid of.

@mammustac

There is no doubt pilgrim 1=viaro=wordtalk.They all have same ways of writing cum same views on issues xpecially being ambiguos on tithing

Op just give us proof thats all. The atheists wants empirical proof. Im also interest in ur proof

@chukwudi44
I don't know about wordtalk but the way I recall it viaro's position on tithing is that (1) the preaching of tithing as a Christian requirement is wrong, (2) there are no biblical injunctions against giving a certain percentage of your income, (3) tithing or not ought to be a personal matter.

That is the way I see the matter; in fact, beyond all the rhetorics these are the bare facts and I am yet to see a good argument formulated against them. Nothing ambiguous there, but I guess viaro said them in too many words.

^^^ See here https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria?topic=459705.msg6274184#msg6274184

Enigma:

I don't think that I am able to agree that we are saying the same thing! I have never seen any of them (Edit i.e. viaro, Joagbaje etc) 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!

Enigma:

@nuclearboy

I'm afraid I'm not yet convnced we (EDIT i.e. Enigma/nuclearboy on one hand and viaro etc on the other) are saying the same thing. As I said I have never seen her (EDIT i.e. viaro) or any of the others say you don't have to give the 'tithe' into church but can give it specifically to widows etc

nuclearboy:

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

Whence the clarification?

EDITED

^^^ You used the word overwhelmingly fraudulent in one of your posts in that thread when talking about the preaching of tithing today, that means you also share the point that tithing may not be bad in itself and you would all (excluding the compulsory tithists, of course) be saying the same thing in that respect. It is the way it is being preached and applied today that you are concerned about.

I think your point is that there is the danger that voluntary or not, once tithing is preached, it is likely to result in negative consequences. You are concerned that while what is viaro is saying may look good on paper, the practice of tithing we see in practice is a sinister scheme which is enriching the church elite. Therefore, you believe, Christians should stop talking about tithing and instead talk of giving which is clearly what is emphasized in the New Testament. That is, “voluntary tithing” which benefits “the least of Jesus’ brothers” is not being practiced by churches, so people need to stop pretending anything good can come out of tithing and instead focus on the problem at hand. It is hard to fault that argument, but biblically speaking, I don’t think the fact that a particular teaching has caused problems is enough to condemn what God has not (Acts 10:15). Since the argument that willingly giving a certain percentage of your income is wrong cannot be sustained biblically, it follows that the reverse argument cannot be dismissed.

Enigma:
@nuclearboy

I'm afraid I'm not yet convnced we (EDIT i.e. Enigma/nuclearboy on one hand and viaro etc on the other) are saying the same thing. As I said I have never seen her (EDIT i.e. viaro) or any of the others say you don't have to give the 'tithe' into church but can give it specifically to widows etc

There is a strong point there. Yes, only viaro can clarify his view on that.

^^^ I'm afraid while your summation above is reasonable, it is not a totally accurate summation. (Edited  ) The tithing issue has actually been going on in the last couple of days with the poster wordtalk which is what brought up the issue of that poster being the same as viaro. See especially pages 8-10 of this thread https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.224.html

Let me sum up my position first and then demonstrate its difference from viaro's or wordtalk's

1. What the Bible teaches for Christians is voluntary GIVING.

2. Tithing, as an obligation, has been abolished for Christians ---- certainly in the Bible and in the New testament.

3. A Christian can choose voluntarily to do his giving voluntarily in the form of "tithing"

4. I can just about tolerate "tithing" being taught by preachers but only as totally voluntary

5 Now this is key: voluntary tithing means that the tither can choose not to give the tithe in/to church --- but outside the church to widows etc

6. On the other hand, tithing is taught widely and overwhelmingly at least erroneously and quite often fraudulently as obligatory; that I challenge or condemn.


The difference with viaro and wordtalk

I await to see viaro and wordtalk who claim to preach voluntary tithing accept that the "voluntary" tithing can be given anywhere but in/to "church"; e.g. that the "voluntary" tithing can be given to e.g. widows, orphans etc.

It is a very very very significant difference!

Enigma:

I await to see viaro and wordtalk who claim to preach voluntary tithing accept that the "voluntary" tithing can be given anywhere but in/to "church"; e.g. that the "voluntary" tithing can be given to e.g. widows, orphans etc.

It is a very very very significant difference!

This will be one difficult question for anybody that gives his/her tenth to the church. If they believe the tenth can be given to widows or orphans, they would be doing it

Edited:

If this is your problem -

Enigma:

. . . that the "voluntary" tithing can be given to e.g. widows, orphans etc.

- have I said anything anywhere that they CANNOT?

- have you read any line in my comments that I made tithing or giving a matter of "ONLY IN Church"?

- have I argued otherwise to make "voluntary tithes" something that CANNOT be given to widows, orphans, etc?

- have I made any assertions ANYWHERE that voluntary tithes are not meant for care that included the poor or widows?

What you have tried to argue is that my idea of "voluntary tithing" is not "voluntary" unless I bend to your own terms. I WILL NOT bend to please you. I have said that I find it really callous for people to to go about hunting other believers in order to tell them what to do and not do so that you can then be satisfied - whereas YOU are not willing to dialogue and show people what YOU do.

Since I did not argue any hint of "compulsory tithes", why all the heat to force that into my position? Just WHY?

Those who want to know what I stand for can go through my articles on my site, or read them in all the threads I have posted on in this forum. NOWHERE have I made giving in Church the "ONLY" acceptable means of Christian giving. What I do not do is confuse between the various types of giving among Christians.

Second, no one asked me why I feel that tithes "SHOULD" be be given in Church. Apart from garyarnold who sought a red herring to force "SHOULD" as meaning 'obligatory tithes' into my comments, I wondered why NO ONE ever asked that question. Not interested? No problem - but that should not then mean that all I have said and shown that voluntary tithes and giving lead to any idea of "compulsory" or "obligatory" tithes or giving, whereas that is NOT TRUE,  I have shown clearly that I do not agree with those who preach any form of "obligatory" or "compulsory" giving. I have shown this on this forum, and also quoting articles I wrote on my site.

Now, again I ask: if your problem is about this  -

Enigma:

. . . that the "voluntary" tithing can be given to e.g. widows, orphans etc.

- I have not argued to the contrary. So why do I feel (my POV) -  why am I persuaded that voluntry tithes should be given in Church? Because -

(1)  it COULD BE a channel of meeting the same ends and uses as you guys have argued for: that is, to meet the care of widows, orphans and other needy causes. Perhaps some might object to this and question WHY? My answer is that the care of widows is taught in Scripture to include what happens in Church. I do not mean that there are no widows outside the Church; but I think it should be pretty obvious to any reader of 1 Timothy 5:9-11 that Paul spoke about care of widows who meet certain prerequisites. First, Paul says "Let a widow be enrolled IF she (has done or meets certain criteria)". . . but then he says: "But refuse to enroll younger widows, . . ."

Now, I do not make hard and fast rules about these things. But the reason why I felt that voluntary tithes be given in Church is simply that the ends for such offerings could be (not "MUST BE" met - widows, ophans, the poor, etc., could be taken care of. This does not mean that there are no widows or orphans outside the Church; but I express my opinions based on what I see in Scripture and can stand for them. If someone asks me what our voluntary tithes and offerings are used for, my opinion is the same that you are arguing for: that includes widows and orphans and what nots!

Now, IF you are arguing that others might decide to do otherwise DIFFERENTLY from what I feel and gave in my opinions, I did not object - I reiterated that AGAIN and AGAIN, for example:

That is simply because I believe that tithes should be given in Church where they could be used for the very same ends and purposes that you and your lot desire to see. The problem here is that even if I were to write everything in A-B-C fashion in your dialect, you still will never be satisfied - as long as I am not joining your drama to start hunting other Christians to prevent them from freely expressing their giving through tithes. My position is not a law for any believer - and I have said over and over again that I do not have a quarrel with anyone who wants to do as they wish!

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.288.html#msg8983801  

If people feel that they do not want to give tithes or offerings or anything else in Church, I am happy to let them feel free to do as they wish. And if some feel pressured to make me force anyone to bend to certain rules or definitions, I WILL NOT PARTAKE IN SUCH - because that is contrary to the true spirit of liberty in voluntary giving that we are all preaching! I cannot change anyone's perception - NOR will I allow for anyone to try to force their own definitions upon anyone else in order to satisfy them, especially where such people who sit themselves as judges over other men's affairs are not showing what they themselves do!

Feel free to give - and also feel free NOT TO GIVE!! To presure someone to give is as diabolic as forcing them to give according to some capricious idea of definitions that some people have made for themselves! My view of "voluntary" may not (and will never) satisfy some people - that is all well. But I will not be put on spot to please some party loyalist on their own terms.

Zikkyy:

If they believe the tenth can be given to widows or orphans, they would be doing it

I feel personally that tithes (ie., voluntarily given) are ALSO used for the care of widows. I use "ALSO" because that is not the "ONLY" point of tithing voluntarily in or outside Church. I know a lot of people who claim the same thing as succinctly put by Tunde Bakare that: "Tithes are to be used to take care of widows, the helpless, and services in the house of God" - but that is NOT THE ONLY point of voluntary tithes. We cannot be emphasising half-truths and make one half the most emphatic factor in any expression of our giving - whatever that giviing may be.

People sometimes narrow their thinking to the point where they lose sight of more important matters - just like when people have issues about the Law to such extent that they build multiverses and multiplanets from minor issues and then lose sight altogether of far more important issues (in Jesus' own words: "the weightier matters" - Matt. 23:23). People should be allowed to give as well as fell free to do so as they choose - as well as make their own choices to NOT GIVE AT ALL IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT TO DO!

Uhm soooooo . . . . wordtalk, you're not denying the Viaro allegations? 

@ wordtalk

I really do not want or expect (or will derive any joy) that you "bend to my terms"

However, I do think the following two questions follow logically and legitimately from all that you have written on at least three threads now. More critically, I think you will clarify things (and perhaps even show me up) if you do please provide direct answers to them once and for all.


1. Is the "voluntary" tithing to be done only using money or can it be done in any other form e.g. with food crops, clothing etc?

2. Is the "voluntary" tithing to be done only by giving money (or any other thing acceptable) in/to "church" or can the tither instead choose to give the "tithe" to widows, orphans or other needy charitable causes?

JeSoul:

Uhm soooooo . . . . wordtalk, you're not denying the Viaro allegations? 

We should stop all these immature allegations. Does it matter if anybody change ID. what matter is the topic and views of individuals

^of course it doesn't matter if anyone wants to change ids, its a free forum afterall. what some of us are leary of are people who hide behind new ids and try to pass themselves off as someone else - especially if that person says they're christian.

but as far as I'm concerned, wordtalk is innocent until proven guilty . . . unlike some other people

Weldone o

I can smell viaro on this thread

Well if u are indeed viaro, toba has missed u greatly and i hope odunnu delivered my numerous messages to u

toba:

Well if u are indeed viaro, toba has missed u greatly and i hope odunnu delivered my numerous messages to u

At this point, I will not hide - indeed I am viaro. I got all your messages and that of odunnu. It's a long story - but I thank God I am alive after a very serious accident. I signed in with a different ID because I lost the details of my viaro login. I did not deny the connection - only did not think it was that important and did not want it to deflect from the topic being discussed.

I'll give u my dummy mail. Kindly copy asap for me to delete. Send me a msg.

^^Done. Thanks.

ok

Joagbaje:

We should stop all these immature allegations. Does it matter if anybody change ID. what matter is the topic and views of individuals

Lol,

Yes it does matter, if the person changed his/her ID and posed as another person. It is called "Pretence" and only exposes the person's falsehood (very detrimental as this is the religious section). An assumed degree of perfection is always expected in connection to religious parametres.

@wordtalk

Nice to know you are a female. This section suffers from a rarity of females that contributes meaningfully without referring to their Pastors .

Jesoul exceptional though  

wordtalk:

At this point, I will not hide - indeed I am viaro. I got all your messages and that of odunnu. It's a long story - but I thank God I am alive after a very serious accident. I signed in with a different ID because I lost the details of my viaro login. I did not deny the connection - only did not think it was that important and did not want it to deflect from the topic being discussed.

Settled then! Welcome back Viaro. Glad to hear you're okay . . . I hope your recovery has been swift and well. Be blessed.

dare2think:

Lol,

Yes it does matter, if the person changed their ID and posed as another person. It is called "Pretence" and only exposes the person's falsehood (very detrimental as this is the religious section). An assumed degree of perfectness is always expected in connection to religious parametres.

@wordtalk

Nice to know you are a female. This section suffers from a rarity of females that contributes meaningfully without referring to their Pastors .

Jesoul exceptional though

Aww Dare you're just too kind . . . and as far as I know Viaro is a dude, abi that one don change too?

dare2think:



@wordtalk

Nice to know you are a female. This section suffers from a rarity of females that contributes meaningfully without referring to their Pastors .

Smdh lol. Who told u Viaro is a female? Hes a full male created by God. He has balls