₦airaland Forum

PastorKun:
Melchizedek tithe was based on babylonian custom and not the law which mandated jews to tithe. Tithing in the time of Jesus was based on Law and Jesus was not eligible to collect based on his tribe. He was also clearly not interested hence he never taught it or c0ollected it it whilst he was here on earth. Yet some charlatans who claim to preach his gospel insist on collecting it on his behalf.

PastorKun:
First of all it's a biblical fact that Jesus was from the tribe of Judah and by extention he was not eligible to collect tithes so stop calling the word of God crap. Secondly believers sold their properties for distribution to the needy by the apostles of their own free will and not becos there was any christian commandment to do such. Also note that church giving in the new testament was primarily to take care of the poor and needy amongst them and not for some church leaders to feed fat on as is so rampant today.

PastorKun:
I have read, studied and meditated on hebrews 7 several times and I have a very clear understanding what the passage is trying to convene and clearly you are the one twisting it. The passage was merely telling the Hebrew people the superiority of C0hrist's priesthood over that or Aaron and it drew comparisons with the Melchizedek priesthood which was obviously familiar to the Hebrew people of that time. The references to tithes was just to show that Melchizedek was greater than Abraham who was the progenitor of the Hebrew people. And the tithe being anulled with the other levitical laws was to show that it was not relevant to the priesthood of Christ and that is why you would NEVER a single example in the bible of new testament christians preac0hing or paying tithes. It's just not a christian requirement and modern preachers had to do a lot of bible twisting to arrive at the unbiblical version of tithes being peddled in churches today.

PastorKun:
You obviously don't understand the passage. The commandment to take tithes in verse 5 which was stated clearly as (according to the law) was the commandment being referred to as weak and useless in verse 18. No other c0ommandment was mentioned in the passage so don't get it twisted. In verse 12 it was stated clearly that Jesus was from the tribe of Judah thus he was not qualified to receive tithes. And no verse implied that Jesus now collects tithes in heaven, you are the one forcing your opinion into sc0ripture otherwise why is there no record of any of the apostles preaching or collecting tithes in scriptures? In fact the earliest record of tithes in the church was not till 585AD when it was first introduced by the catholic church in agric form. Monetary tithe was introduced to the church as recently as 1895 by American evangelical churches.

Melchizedek, Priest of God
7 1-3 Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of the Highest God. He met Abraham, who was returning from “the royal massacre,” and gave him his blessing. Abraham in turn gave him a tenth of the spoils. “Melchizedek” means “King of Righteousness.” “Salem” means “Peace.” So, he is also “King of Peace.” Melchizedek towers out of the past—without record of family ties, no account of beginning or end. In this way he is like the Son of God, one huge priestly presence dominating the landscape always.

4-7 You realize just how great Melchizedek is when you see that Father Abraham gave him a tenth of the captured treasure. Priests descended from Levi are commanded by law to collect tithes from the people, even though they are all more or less equals, priests and people, having a common father in Abraham. But this man, a complete outsider, collected tithes from Abraham and blessed him, the one to whom the promises had been given. In acts of blessing, the lesser is blessed by the greater.

8-10 Or look at it this way: We pay our tithes to priests who die, but Abraham paid tithes to a priest who, the Scripture says, “lives.” Ultimately you could even say that since Levi descended from Abraham, who paid tithes to Melchizedek, when we pay tithes to the priestly tribe of Levi they end up with Melchizedek.

A Permanent Priesthood
11-14 If the priesthood of Levi and Aaron, which provided the framework for the giving of the law, could really make people perfect, there wouldn’t have been need for a new priesthood like that of Melchizedek. But since it didn’t get the job done, there was a change of priesthood, which brought with it a radical new kind of law. There is no way of understanding this in terms of the old Levitical priesthood, which is why there is nothing in Jesus’ family tree connecting him with that priestly line.

15-19 But the Melchizedek story provides a perfect analogy: Jesus, a priest like Melchizedek, not by genealogical descent but by the sheer force of resurrection life—he lives!—“priest forever in the royal order of Melchizedek.” The former way of doing things, a system of commandments that never worked out the way it was supposed to, was set aside; the law brought nothing to maturity. Another way—Jesus!—a way that does work, that brings us right into the presence of God, is put in its place.

20-22 The old priesthood of Aaron perpetuated itself automatically, father to son, without explicit confirmation by God. But then God intervened and called this new, permanent priesthood into being with an added promise:

God gave his word;
he won’t take it back:
“You’re the permanent priest.”
This makes Jesus the guarantee of a far better way between us and God—one that really works! A new covenant.

23-25 Earlier there were a lot of priests, for they died and had to be replaced. But Jesus’ priesthood is permanent. He’s there from now to eternity to save everyone who comes to God through him, always on the job to speak up for them.

PastorKun:
You quoted Hebrews 7:4-9 out of context, continue reading it to verse 19 and you would come across were tithes was anulled for christians in verse 11, were it was stated that the priesthood of Jesus could not receive tithes because he was from Judah(i.e not a levite) in verse 12 and were tithing is described as a weak, useless and unprofitable practise in verse 18.

brocab:
Yes it tells that story Abram paid a once tithe, from the spoils of war.
And it tells that story why Jacob offered God tithes, after a dream.

And some where down the track God had made it into a Covenant law, tithing, sacrificing and offerings, laying down the rules for Jewish farmers, and herdsmen, etc, to pay a yearly tithe to the Levi priesthood bring your tithes {food} into my storehouse, for the works they did, and the lands they didn't own.

It was never a covenant law to tithe before God had made it one.

After finding fault and because of its weakness the law was changed through Jesus given us a better covenant.

If your ancestors was about to jump of a bridge would you follow.

Do you sacrifice for your daily sins?

Jesus had sacrifice shedding his Blood once and for all.

brocab:
Explain to us viewers, who changed the tithing rules, was it God, all lets say: was it man.

onatisi:
This accusation is very very weak. There is no concrete proof that it was reno that even actually used that name and besides two or more people can bear the same name . There is no need for reno to even refute the allegations ,they woman can go to the appropriate authorities and report .

sarutobie:
you are a juvenile when it comes to economic matters..a similar thread is on the front page where people are commending the improved power from aba to enugu to bayelsa to Ogun...the security challenge in the northern part of the country is peculiar, and for a known reason..even that is is gradually and decisively being tackled..keep grasping at straws with your hackneyed and regurgitated mantra of " corruption"

sarutobie:
calm down and re-read your post...ask yourself if it makes sense, ask yourself if there is logic in what you posted there.

Guidette:
Abeg can someone help me merge these two pics to make one. Thanks in advance.

adaybayor:
with 1m you can earn btw 250k to 350k monthly on agric, if you want to know how add my pin 7CE131F0 and I will share some ideas with you. cant put my business idea on a public forum.

Blackchampion:
As an Elder Statesman Has he ever advised d ruling govt on how to tackle dis insecurity or only waiting to clinch d seat n den wud act? #justasking

Blackchampion:
Nigeria is our own, we hav no other place to call ours dan dis dear country. One shouldn't wait to clinch to d seat of d President to help fight terrorism. We should help fight terrorism irrespective of ur status in d nation. Let all of us APC, PDP n neutral men contribute dearly to defend our country.
.
If u can't help Nigeria from d walls of ur room, surely u can't help wen u live in Aso Rock.
.
#Say no to Terrorism
#Say no to bombing
#Peaceful Nigeria we want.
#God bless my dear country

papalnuncio:
my question is not for ROCHAS
before now, he said that igbo has no hope in P.D.P, now were is Igbo's hope in A.P.C?
pls take ds question to him, i need the answer

 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gAr77wWNms?list=UUEXGDNclvmg6RW0vipJYsTQ

 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbi_UtnND2o?list=UUEXGDNclvmg6RW0vipJYsTQ

 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHfJxtmHyBU?list=UUEXGDNclvmg6RW0vipJYsTQ

DidierKing:
Jonathan perhaps succumbed to the pressure to serve a single tenure or remained silent when the issue of service duration was being deliberated.

His argument however remains that he did not put a pen on any such agreement.

In a civilized society, once it’s not in black and white, it never existed.

idumuose:
Anyone who wants to propagate equity must come with clean hands.Unfortunately,APCs hands are not clean.You cannot give what you don't have.
I rest my case.

tit:
And he will be impeached by the house of assembly within the week.