₦airaland Forum

^^^ No problem and I really appreciate that.

The "two" sample answers one matters to me in particular but I'm glad you now see my point.

The name calling one ---- I've been through the posts again (I stand by "sleight of hand" and "chicanery"; other than those two the only other pejorative words I have used are "tithe mongers" and "lemon" (not even directed at wordtalk and only 'borrowed' for short term purposes). Don't get me wrong; I can be very caustic when occasion demands --- but I haven't been so on this thread. 

Nuke

I no wonder at you oh! I know where you stand ----- my only concern is to have a true appreciation of where wordtalk stands. I maintain that an honest and straightforward answer to the following simple question would have looooooooooong settled the issue.


Can a voluntary "tither" give his tithe directly to widows, orphans and other needy causes instead of in/to "church" ---- and is it appropriate to call that "tithing"?

@debosky

You see, I resent the false accusations -- especially now you can't sustain them against me.

As to my "two" answers --- here you make another false accusation ---- the two answers are one and the same except one is an expansion of the other. Read it again --- carefully!

^^^ Could you point out the name calling I did --- other than my "sleight of hand comment" which I stand by?

Could you point out the question that I have not answered on this thread other than refusing to say what I do in terms of my giving?

@ Nuke

If you read my posts carefully, you will see that I have remained calm --- so it is not about emotions. It is about fighting an insidious technique --- of "we are on the same side" when the person saying so is truly trying to undermine.

See the simple question: Mr A chooses to give 10% of his (monthly) income to charity rather than into church: I have no problem to call him a tither or a giver or his action either tithing or giving!


Why would someone who believes in "voluntary" tithing have difficulty accepting such an act as "tithing" and the person as a "tither"?

Unless the person really agrees with the "lemon" (but does not want to say so openly) that it is not appropriate to call it tithing since it is not given in/to church?

nuclearboy:
Nlmediator seems to be the only one getting the same vibes as I am - this is so disheartening

Post #183 finally passed Gary's message to me. Still, there were too many words here and nothing was gained

Sorry Nuke, but I'm interested to know why you find these proceedings disheartening?

^^^ Typical pilgrim.1 and viaro; you really haven't changed after all.

wordtalk:
@Enigma, I will answer your questions - trust me, I will - BUT ONLY IF you seriously answer this question:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.128.html#msg8975551

IF you will not answer, I will not take you seriously enough in these things.

You think I mind whether you of all people take me seriously? Dream on!

OK Nuke, I will put the test expressly to wordtalk once again so you can see clearly the answers to the following questions yourself.


@ wordtalk

If tithing is "voluntary", then:

1. Can the tither choose to tithe with provisions, food stuff, crops ---- instead of money?

2. Whether with money or with provisions etc --- can the tither give the tithe directly to widows etc instead of in/to church?

@ Nuke

If "voluntary" means "voluntary", then:

(a) the tithe does not have to be money, it can be food stuff, "provisions" etc, and

(b) whether it is in money form or as food stuff, provisions etc, it does not have to be given in/to church; instead it can be given directly to widows etc.


A person who is truly preaching voluntary tithes will not hesitate to agree to these.

@ Nuke

Well, I'm going to "chill" a bit ----- but I hope you now see the reason for my very first post.

I still wait to see proof that "voluntary" truly means "voluntary".  

wordtalk:
Your excuses are your "answers"? Are you seriously at odds with understanding simple things? Did I ask you the question before of after #126? (see post #129) How did you ANSWER the question in post #130? You're still hiding behind excuses and celebrating your own sleight of hand, innit?

As I said before, the sleight of hand was tried as pilgrim.1, as viaro and now as wordtalk; it doesn't make a difference what the username is, chicanery is still chicanery. That is why pilgrim.1 couldn't answer these same question in "her" days, why viaro couldn't answer these questions in "his" days and now why wordtalk can't answer then in his/her day.  

^^^ Did you not see post #126 ---- or is this another attempt at sleight of hand?

@ Nuke

The reason why my questions have been difficult for wordtalk to answer is very simple: "voluntary" does not truly mean "voluntary"!

@ Nuke

I also edited my question slightly before your answer thus this supplementary question:

Apart from Deuteronomy, if one believes in "voluntary" tithing, then can a tither give his tithe directly to widows etc ---- and is it appropriate to call this action "tithing?

Note also that I actually provided two sample answers to the original question earlier in post #126 above  https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.96.html#msg8975447

OK Nuke, here is the simplified version:

YES the tither CAN give his tithe directly to widows, orphans etc instead of in/to "church" --- and YES it IS appropriate to call that action tithing.

Do you agree or disagree?

EDIT Especially if you say that tithing is only voluntary.

@ Nuke

I will say confidently that what you're "missing" is that wordtalk's position and the "lemon"'s position are the same that what is in issue is not tithing ---- except that the "lemon" had the integrity to say so openly.

I will however be quite happy to be proven wrong ----- because that would mean the "antitithers" were correct after all. See, garyarnold has got this figured out correctly!

^^^ Of course s/he will not answer the question; I knew that from the beginning.

Let me make one point: I do not make the allegation that a person is "playing sleight of hand" lightly! I usually know what I'm talking about before I use that expression. Also, as I suggested before --- does "voluntary" now really mean "voluntary"?

All good.

@Nuke

What do you make of the impasse that we seem to have now reached?

^^^Some of us don't proclaim what we do in public, I'm afraid.

Now, here is a simple statement

YES the tither CAN give his tithe directly to widows, orphans etc instead of in/to "church" --- and YES it IS appropriate to call that action tithing.

Do you agree or disagree?

nuclearboy:
@wordtalk:

Apologies but what Enigma is saying is obvious to many of us!

Its easy (as it were) to say you believe in "church" tithing! Its a totally differentything to say Deut 14 splits tithes amongst "fatherless", "widows", "stranger" AND "levite"! One "insists" its church ONLY whist the other says it could go to others! The church only advocates say church should do the giving to others (as church sees fit) whist the supposed anti-tithers say "we can give ourselves as led".

For saying so, such people are seen to be in rebellion to God's Word!

What Enigma is asking you is thus simple - do you believe tithes can only be paid to church (and thus that its only church that can disburse) or do yoy stand with those who say God can lead a man to give directly to a cause outside of church?

What is the betting that wordtalk will not answer the question directly ---- not even after you ask it and not even after I have provided sample answers?

OK so here is the question:

Can a voluntary "tither" give his tithe directly to widows, orphans and other needy causes instead of in/to "church" ---- and is it appropriate to call that "tithing"?
[quote][/quote]Now let me demonstrate two examples of an honest and straightforward answer ---- for someone who honestly believes that tithing is "voluntary".

Sample Answer 1.

YES the tither CAN give his tithe directly to widows, orphans etc instead of in/to "church" --- and YES it IS appropriate to call that action tithing.


Sample Answer 2.


YES the tither CAN give his tithe directly to widows, orphans etc instead of in/to "church" --- and YES it IS appropriate to call that action tithing.

First of all, this accords with examples of tithing found in various parts of the Bible including Deuteronomy and Leviticus.

Second, the principle of helping the needy (if not necessarily through "tithing" underlies the apostle James teaching that true religion is to help widows etc

Third, Jesus Christ also said "as long as you did it for the least of these, you did it for ME"; again even if He wasn't talking specifically about tithing, it would be entirely in accordance with what He said if we use our "tithes" to help the kind of people who Jesus said was Him.


See, it is not so difficult afterall to give an honest and straightforward answer to the question. 

^^^ The question has always been a simple one and one that very readily lends itself to an honest and straightforward answer!

Maybe it would help if once again I ask it in another way:

Can a voluntary "tither" give his tithe directly to widows, orphans and other needy causes instead of in/to "church" ---- and is it appropriate to call that "tithing"?

@ Nuke

OK: if someone says tithing is "voluntary" ----- and you said that means the "tither" has total control over what to give as and where to give his "tithes" ------- then there shouldn't be difficulty to accept that a person who sets aside a tenth every month but gives it it to widows and orphans etc instead of into church is a tither.

One person has at least had the integrity to say openly it is not appropriate to call that a tithe or the action tithing - because it is not give in/to "church",

wordtalk is avoiding the question because, I repeat, wordtalk's position is exactly the same i.e. it is not "tithing" ---- even when saying that tithing is "voluntary".

It really should be a straightforward question for wordtalk to answer if s/he truly believes that tithing is "voluntary".

@ Nuclearboy

Now, this question is for you if you please.

If a person takes a tenth of his income every month and gives it to widows, orphans, other needy people etc, is it appropriate to call the actions of that person "tithing" AND is that portion of income that the person so sets aside a (or even his) "tithe"?

Please just try and answer the question; if you do not want to there is no problem.

^^^ OK I will ask the question specifically!

If a person takes a tenth of his income every month and gives it to widows, orphans, other needy people etc, is it appropriate to call the actions of that person "tithing" AND is that portion of income that the person so sets aside a  (or even his) "tithe"?

^^^ Actually the "lemon" did make a useful contribution: ---- that if a person sets aside a tenth of income to give to widows, orphans etc, then "it is not appropriate to call it a tithe" because it is not given in "church". This is in reality the same position as wordtalk's except wordtalk doesn't want to say so openly.

garyarnold:
@Enigma,

Wordtalk is not going to answer your specific question . . . .

To be honest, I did not expect any different.   In fact I had one more question which I didn't bother to ask; but now I think I'll just put it on the thread for people to ponder.

If a person takes the tenth of his income every month, buys food stuff, clothing, hygiene equipment etc and takes them to "church" in the expectation that the "church" will use these things to help widows, orphans and other needy people etc, is the person a tither?

Now I direct my question to Nuclearboy.

Nuke, do you think the responses meet (or amount to the same as) this your post below?

nuclearboy:
@Enigma:

I see your point now! Lawyers desire for absolute clarity negating the fine print!

I think "wordtalk" covered these when he used the word Voluntary!

That word gives the "tither" full and TOTAL right to disburse as he decides - as cash, groundnuts, goats or a computer! It also allows his right in deciding where he "GIVES" his tithe!

"wordtalk" will soon become very unpopular on this site for daring to have his on mind and disagreeing with the MoG championers

wordtalk:
^^
I sense that is a hypothetical case. Again, this is my answer:

2. I believe that tithing should be given in Church where ministry for the care of widows, orphans and other needy causes could be (please note: "could be" administered from. Others feel that they cannot give money in Church - whether through tithing or other forms of offerings: it's up to them. Yet, giving in Church should not be confused with giving to other causes - they are two independent facets of this ministration.

Let me try once more!  

There is this fellow Mr Christian who earns 1000 per month. Every month he takes aside 100, he buys food stuff, clothing, hygiene products etc, and gives these things (not money) to widows, orphanages and other charities. He may then sometimes give 50 in church in a month or sometimes less to the church.

Is Mr Christian a "tither"?

Let me try again: there is this fellow Mr Christian who earns 1000 per month. Every month he takes aside 100 and gives it to widows, orphanages and other charities. He may then sometimes give 50 in church in a month or sometimes less to the church.

Is Mr Christian a "tither"?