₦airaland Forum

TV01:
^{Now, has anyone figured out the alias "Traugott", or do I have to do everything around here  !}

manmustwac:
Pilgrim1 Oops sorry i mean viaro your so passionate about tithes 

Indeed the bone of contention is that those who support "tithing" today are essentially saying, either directly or indirectly, that it is compulsory or that it is a Christian obligation. A lot of the debate would be unnecessary IF certain simple acknowledgments are made.

1. We who argue against the modern teaching of "tithing" acknowledge and accept that a Christian can voluntarily choose to "tithe" (including giving it in the form of money to a church) - preferably when s/he knows that it is not compulsory and s/he is not coerced or manipulated into doing it.

2. Those who support "tithing" today acknowledge that it is not a Christian obligation.

3. Those who support "tithing" would agree that a "tither" can choose not to give the monetary "tithe" to his/her church or to any church at all; thus

4. Those who support "tithing" would agree that every month, a "tither" can choose to give the "tithes" to charity e.g. to the poor, the orphan the widow.

5. Those who support "tithing" would acknowledge that the "tither" does not have to give/pay the "tithe" in money but that it can be in other forms including giving of food to the hungry (to take a less controversial example).

Traugott:
Enigma: I have nothing to say to your posts above. I have already said a lot on this thread.

Traugott:
Enigma, as much as I respect my guy Viaro, if he yarns dust about the Christian faith I will take him up on it. But here you see KunleOshob and Ogajim saying TITHING IS A SCAM, and you keep quiet. Yet you guys claim you have no problems with Christians who willingly strike a covenant with God in the name of tithes, and you double-back and say its a scam? As long as that is your view, I can only wish you Godspeed.

Enigma:
Not defending Kunle but to make a more general point: context!!!

It is true that Kunle could have been much more careful with his language . . . BUT

Readers of this and other/related threads must know know that, like me, Kunle has said there is no problem if a Christian who knows the truth chooses to tithe; also, Kunle has said repeatedly that his main concern is about the "pastors" who use the teaching of compulsory tithing in particular to 'fleece the flock' i.e. as a scam.

With this background and context, it really should be obvious that the statement "tithing is a scam" especially along with the context of the particular post in which it was made could not be intended to be absolute and/or incapable of qualification.


I make this point, again not so much as to defend Kunle, but so as to tie it to the now 'famous' "semantic pedantry" point.

techie:
Just a quick question if i pay my tithe religiously every month and my job ends and I have to borrow money (which gives me a negative in come) am I free to request for 10% of what I borrow from the church ?

Indeed the bone of contention is that those who support "tithing" today are essentially saying, either directly or indirectly, that it is compulsory or that it is a Christian obligation. A lot of the debate would be unnecessary IF certain simple acknowledgments are made.

1. We who argue against the modern teaching of "tithing" acknowledge and accept that a Christian can voluntarily choose to "tithe" (including giving it in the form of money to a church) - preferably when s/he knows that it is not compulsory and s/he is not coerced or manipulated into doing it.

2. Those who support "tithing" today acknowledge that it is not a Christian obligation.

3. Those who support "tithing" would agree that a "tither" can choose not to give the monetary "tithe" to his/her church or to any church at all; thus

4. Those who support "tithing" would agree that every month, a "tither" can choose to give the "tithes" to charity e.g. to the poor, the orphan the widow.

5. Those who support "tithing" would acknowledge that the "tither" does not have to give/pay the "tithe" in money but that it can be in other forms including giving of food to the hungry (to take a less controversial example).

Indeed the bone of contention is that those who support "tithing" today are essentially saying, either directly or indirectly, that it is compulsory or that it is a Christian obligation. A lot of the debate would be unnecessary IF certain simple acknowledgments are made.

1. We who argue against the modern teaching of "tithing" acknowledge and accept that a Christian can voluntarily choose to "tithe" (including giving it in the form of money to a church) - preferably when s/he knows that it is not compulsory and s/he is not coerced or manipulated into doing it.

2. Those who support "tithing" today acknowledge that it is not a Christian obligation.

3. Those who support "tithing" would agree that a "tither" can choose not to give the monetary "tithe" to his/her church or to any church at all; thus

4. Those who support "tithing" would agree that every month, a "tither" can choose to give the "tithes" to charity e.g. to the poor, the orphan the widow.

5. Those who support "tithing" would acknowledge that the "tither" does not have to give/pay the "tithe" in money but that it can be in other forms including giving of food to the hungry (to take a less controversial example).

Traugott:
Enigma, you keep talking as if Nairaland will not be there for years as long as Seun Osewa keeps renewing his domain and hosting registration. Will you be there in, say, 20 years time to explain KunleOshob's misplaced statement "Tithing is a SCAM", will you or him be there to explain the context? You speak as if WE (Viaro, Traugott, etc) should know, but don't you get it? We're not saying all of this for ourselves only, its also for the future. THAT is why we always speak carefully about matters that you refer to as irrelevant details. One who is passing information around should better do it properly or not at all, lest it deforms rather than inform. 

Imagine that I never drew attention to what he just said, and someone else sees that LIE. It will lead such a one astray and he too may keep spreading the false doctrine that TITHING IS A SCAM. Can you imagine that? 

Jingle bells. . .

Indeed the bone of contention is that those who support "tithing" today are essentially saying, either directly or indirectly, that it is compulsory or that it is a Christian obligation. A lot of the debate would be unnecessary IF certain simple acknowledgments are made.

1. We who argue against the modern teaching of "tithing" acknowledge and accept that a Christian can voluntarily choose to "tithe" (including giving it in the form of money to a church) - preferably when s/he knows that it is not compulsory and s/he is not coerced or manipulated into doing it.

2. Those who support "tithing" today acknowledge that it is not a Christian obligation.

3. Those who support "tithing" would agree that a "tither" can choose not to give the monetary "tithe" to his/her church or to any church at all; thus

4. Those who support "tithing" would agree that every month, a "tither" can choose to give the "tithes" to charity e.g. to the poor, the orphan the widow.

5. Those who support "tithing" would acknowledge that the "tither" does not have to give/pay the "tithe" in money but that it can be in other forms including giving of food to the hungry (to take a less controversial example).

These are just some basics to keep things simple; proper scholarship can distill things into such simplicity than obfuscate issues with irrelevance.

KunleOshob:
So i maintain my stand, tithing as it is preached and practised today is a scam as it lacks sound biblical basis and it was never part of the christian doctrines handed down by the apostles but only introduced by men centuries later. If any pastor wants to encourage his flock to tithe he owes it an obligation to make them know it is not a christian doctrine and they should be made to understand it is a purely discretionary choice of the tither, any teaching short of this is a 100% scam.

The modern teaching and preaching of "tithing" is certainly wrong. If you check several other threads, I have in the past argued very strongly against it. A very short summary:

1. Tithing is not a compulsory requirement for a Christian
2. Tithing does not have any greater spiritual significance (or attached blessing) than voluntary 'grace' 'giving'.
3. Nevertheless, if a Christian knows the truth (as in 1 & 2 above) and yet chooses to "tithe", that is perfectly fine.
4. However, bear in mind that many so-called pastors and preachers who teach the compulsory "tithing" nonsense are fraudulent and, as the Bible says, their god is their belly.

Traugott:
KunleOshob, you see yourself? You said you want to show that TITHING IS A SCAM? That is as unfounded as saying all Nigerian women are Italian love-peddlers and all the Nigerian guys are bloated conmen. If what you are saying is that Tithing is a scam, then there's nothing to discuss. I'd rather wear a red-feathered white cap cos Santa is coming to town.

Traugott:
KunleOshob, take my word for it. viaro is NOT pilgrim. I know the guy outside NL and not only is he male, he is not an ex-muslim. Remain the blessed of God.

Having to go through off point verbiage on semantics or when and how to use the right verbs, pronouns, adjective, structure, definition etc, can be tiring and just makes a reader want to give up reading the thread. . .

TV01:
For the avoidance of doubt and to clarify some of the deceitful sleight of hand labelling that some insist on employing let me state simply as follows;

1. Tithing under the law has been abolished along with the law of which it was part.
2. There is nothing to suggest that Abrahams tithe to Melchizidek constituted a practice - mandatory or otherwise that Christians are to follow.
3. Tithing as a notion is superceeded by the Christian imperative of needs based or Spirit-led giving
4. If anyone wishes to tithe or is led to do so, no problem, but there is no "Body binding" tithe.
5. There are no tithe specific blessings that are withheld from those who simply give, nor curses for non-tithers.

The principles and spirit of Gods laws are eternal and unchanging. The way of fulfilling their demands is not and has. Please note point one above. Justice, mercy and faith will always be in view, however Gods righteous requirements are spelt out or satisfied.

Does that mean that the "weightier matters" are indivisable from the way of fulfilment given in previous dispensations as some claim in order to imply that The Lord taught tithing? No. Hebrews 7 clearly shows the annulling of "written-law" based righteousness. However the principles and spirit  behind them remain, there's just a more excellent, more glorious way of fulfilling them.

So there you have it. The headline news about tithing in a few short and simple sentences. With no need for multiple id's, lying in Hebrew, foul mothed vituperation, co-opting some religious leaders & theologians and castigating others. No dissertations, treatises, tomes or lengthy turgid pieces of discourse that will make you feel like chewing your own tongue, which you'd pay not to have to read them - which is really what they are after .

Monetizers, religionists oya !

God bless
TV

Zikkyy:
@Viaro, Enigma, Traugott, you guys have hijacked this thread. I am not so keen posting my views on the subject of mandatory tithing here as I think we are deviating from the initial question.

ogajim:
Abram ( later named Abraham after his covenant with God) paid a tithe that was more "Customary" than anything else ( much like the one practiced by some African tribes-send your first salary to the family or what have you,

We never saw Abraham pay ANOTHER one until his grand son Jacob mentioned it in a conditional sense.

KunleOshob:
Okay i am willing to accept that tithes was never "abolished" for christians as long a you also admit that tithing was never part of christianity ab initio so the issue of abolishing it does not even arise.

olowolekan:
. . .
It's sad that people put themselves in darkness despite very close to the ligth.You read it yourself from the Holy Bible and yet you cannot understand.You better repent and ask for mercy.[b]Tithe is not optional .Anyone who does not pay tithe is a thief and is robbing God.[/b]This is the word of God.

olowolekan:
Mal 3:8 says Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
[b]Anyone who fails to pay tithe is robbing God and such a fellow is a thief and a thief will not get to Heaven.[/b]May be this topic finds its way into Nairaland so that those who are in this condition can restitute their ways.After death,there is no another chance.Pay your tithe and God will bless you.In new testament Mat 23:23 ,Jesus says  Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith:these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Hebrews 7:2 and   To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace ,and 4;Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils

Traugott:
It appears like it is still an Enigma to you, Enigma. You don't choose where to give your money to, and you don't choose how much you give 

Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

A Christian who chooses to tithe, unlike all the categories above, does not pay tithe, or does not refrain from paying tithe; but GIVES a tithe to someone / somebody (organizations inclusive) representative of God.

Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Traugott:
@Enigma:

Don't bother, I will probably not attend to the thread, since they are old questions. I don't believe in unnecessary arguments, and I won't be saying anything new. Remain blessed.

Traugott:
Did it occur to anyone that Matt 23:23 says

Mat 23:23  "You're hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime you get, but on the meat of God's Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment--the absolute basics!--you carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required.

Which places tithes, judgment, mercy and faith as aspects of the law? If tithing, not weighty enough, has been abolished, how much more the weightier matters as Christ said: judgment, mercy and faith? Have you guys abolished them as well?

Because I believe the way things work, the weightiest of matters with respect to the "law" will be abolished first, and not the least significant? 
Mar 3:27  Do you think it's possible in broad daylight to enter the house of an awake, able-bodied man, and walk off with his possessions unless you tie him up first? Tie him up, though, and you can clean him out.

Traugott:
@Enigma: There are three statements in question, you say. Now see this:

1. Tithing compulsorily is abolished.
It's great that you agree with me on this statement, but you are yet to provide empirical statistics to show how majority of tithers do it compulsorily. We are waiting, please don't make it an Enigma for us.

Traugott:
2. Tithing based on the law is abolished
Enigma, is your secondary school education abolished because you went to the University? Viaro has dealt with this on this thread, and I don't want to re-belabour the points.

Traugott:
3. Tithing is abolished
Now to adjust and accommodate this lie, you are making an exception on Abrahamic tithes? Your goalpost just became mobile, sir. Congrats and regards.

Traugott:
By the way, please reflect on what it means for something to be abolished, as opposed to being fulfilled and thus no longer compulsory for sustainability.

Traugott:
Also, recall that tithes have nothing to do with perfecting any believer, in light of v19. So what are we on about? Is v19 then talking about tithes? That is a very, very narrow way of forcing the scriptures to indicate something that it isn't.

It is true that when Hebrews 7 speaks of the "law" in general it is talking about the "law of Moses" which means not only "tithing" but the whole corpus of that law. Verse 5 of Hebrews 7 mentions two things: (a) the commandment to receive "tithes" as part of (b) the law of Moses.

The rest, indeed the whole, of chapter 7 makes clear that the law of Moses including the commandment to receive "tithes" has been done away with ("annulled" NKJV) with the advent of the new priesthood of Christ.

Question: where then is the source of teaching people to "tithe" today?

Is it the "tithing" mentioned in Malachi, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Nehemiah? Has that not been done away with and disannulled with the law?


Is it the "tithing" done by Abraham?

If it is the "tithing" done by Abraham: how many times did Abraham give "tithes"? From which "possessions" or "increase" did Abraham give the "tithes"? Did Abraham ever pay "tithes" as an obligation? To whom and when else did Abraham give/pay "tithes"? Did Abraham ever give/pay "tithes" more than once?


Is it the "tithes" promised by Jacob? When and how did Jacob pay the "tithes"? How many times did Jacob ever pay any or any other "tithes"?

It would be better next time to say it in full "Tithing compulsorily is abolished", and not "Tithing based on the law is abolished" or "Tithing is abolished" because the last two statements are wrong. And when you say what is preached in MOST churches, how are we to believe you? What is your statistical finding on this point? When you rally against the twisting of the scriptures, you should not also twist the scriptures to support your own points, saying tithing has been abolished.

And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham

For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, [there is the] bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.

Yes I can sustain it with the fact that you insist that "tithing has been ABOLISHED", rather than saying that tithing is no longer compulsory, but done out of an act of love.

That's my point.