₦airaland Forum

Luk 11:39 And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness.
Luk 11:40 Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?
Luk 11:41 But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
Luk 11:42 But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

The Pharisees were hypocrites because they made the outside clean but the inside was very dirty and wickedness. They dwelt on none essentials and were mainly driven by the letter of the law. Here were people who thought it is not lawful to put their 30pieces of silver in the treasury but had no problem using the same money to damn a disciple to betray the Lord's Christ. Did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also? Are not the silver and gold God's? What makes agricultural produce more God's and holier than silver and gold? Is God's holy Hill not laden with gold and precious stones? Give alms of such things as ye have.
Mat 20:15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

Why would anyone attack and contest vigorously what i give of mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Why are antitithers more concerned than God about my tithes of mine own income? Antitihers are disturbed, they are uneasy, they are very worried, troubled and agitated. Almost traumatized to see me do what i will with mine own. It's perpetually amusing, is there a spirit of some sort behind these? It's not normal. You know, i've met non-tithers, and have met and have friends and believers who do not agree with or have the same opinions and Bible perspectives as i do. but antitithers, they are a different brand entirely. Ironically, antitithers are aware of the effectiveness and provision of tithes and gracious, bountiful giving. They make a lot of noise and publicity about how tithes make pastors the richest in the world, or something along those lines. i think a lot of their opinion is exaggerated though.
But the point is that if tithes is so acclaimed and agreed to be saturating/overfilling in the church, why the bile against it? Why pass over the love of God as it were?
1Jo 3:17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
1Jo 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

if we have this world's good, and we know the need of the Church. Why shut our bowels of compassion and make some groanings about agricultural products and levites and storehouses? You have the money, the Church needs the money, i want to give the money. But you are on about yam, wheat, cassava and turkey. How dwelleth the love of God in him? It's a valid question. Let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

vooks:
You have INVENTED administrative procedures in which Jesus our High Priest receives his tithes centrally through his body and you don't even know if there is any other way of delivering to him?

Look, under Moses, the tithe still belonged to God only his own appointed Levites collected it. Under Abraham, tithes belonged to God and He collected it himself, no mediators seeing Christ is God is Melchizedek. Why do you inject mediators called the church to receive the tithe?

vooks:
The little that you purport to know should be scriptural not off your imagination. Only then can you even attempt to share it.

What has 1Cor 12:5-6 got to do with your response?

1 Corinthians 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

You said that i invented administrations/administrative procedures, i simply showed you that the church has DIFFERENT administrations. Administration brings in management, direction, order, government and organisation. There are different levels and types of this in the Church. There is nothing wrong or unbiblical with believers having a structure or format of doing things, instead of everyman as it is right in his own eyes.
Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
It is not my fault if you do not believe that. When you persecute the church like Paul, you are persecuting Christ. When you give to the church, you are giving to Christ.

1Jo 3:14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

thehomer:
Is hell supposed to be a threat? Your God is the one sending people to hell for poorly thought out reasons. Why would I want to spend eternity with a tyrant?

If i told you that "Not being careful while crossing the broadway, or driving and overspeeding kills. Would that be a threat? People go to hell because that is where people who do not go to Heaven go. You for instance have no excuse.

How exactly do dead people give guidance, training and advice?

When you follow their guidance, training and advice which they have penned down or that you hear about or see. Their ideas are your model, your copy and paste.

Well are you absolutely sure of salvation? Your God generally asks people to suspend their thinking and do whatever he says.

1. How would anybody come to conclusions that only idiots are absolutely sure of salvation?
2. How would anybody come to conclusions that the more brain you have the less your chance is?
3. What makes you think that believers are not expressing their real opinion?
These were the questions asked.

I'm in such a position because I can think. Well that would depend on what this person's position is and why they hold it. Sure I'm moral but your God isn't. You're not moral either if you simply believe that whatever your God says is good.

Oh, so a differing opinion from your cannot think? What is your view/position on adultery, and what makes your view superior to a contrary one? Do you think the color blue is better than the color red?
What makes you moral? Popular opinion or common standard of justice? Were the societies that killed twins moral? Who determines your morality, or what are the basis?

I'm ignoring him and paying attention to people like you because of what you're capable of. After all, I don't bother him with prayers like you do.

If you were ignoring Him, you wouldn't be so mad at Him. What am i capable of? Do you forget the sordid history of popular atheists and agnostics? Spending your life hating God and reading up on how to "attack" Him, is not ignoring Him.

Kay17:
Can I conclude that with what you have written above, that Love is insufficient to warrant a person like the good Samaritian Heaven without having Jesus as one's master and saviour?

It is not for you to conclude, it is for you to repent. Your conclusion and mine are very immaterial.

vooks:
You have INVENTED administrative procedures in which Jesus our High Priest receives his tithes centrally through his body and you don't even know if there is any other way of delivering to him?

Look, under Moses, the tithe still belonged to God only his own appointed Levites collected it. Under Abraham, tithes belonged to God and He collected it himself, no mediators seeing Christ is God is Melchizedek. Why do you inject mediators called the church to receive the tithe?

1 Corinthians 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

i don't know everything, neither am i required to. i walk with the little knowledge i have of God and I'm very content with that.

MarkMiwerds:
yeah, but which god? Certainly not the God of Heaven and Earth. In His Word, tithes were never commanded for the New Testament Church, tithes were never carried to the New Testament Church, tithes were never collected in the New Testament Church, & tithes were never controlled by the New Testament Church.

Go and answer the questions i posed to you, i really don't want to dance with you in unending circles.

chillykelly86:
It is either you didn't understand the question or you avoided the substance of the question.

For the sake of clarity, is this the Word of God, "Tithe is given to God through the church, His body."?

You asked if it's the Word of God, i said it is the word of God. What is avoided again, you didn't get the answer you wish to get?

vooks:
But you MUST offer tithes through a congregation to Melchizedek?

I don't know.

chillykelly86:
Please, how did you arrive at that bolded statement? Is it your word or the Word of God?

What you give to the church(the Body of Christ) has been given to Christ. That's the Word of God.

vooks:
Excellent,
Is it possible to offer God ANYTHING without going through 'the church,His Body'?

I have in mind offerings/sacrifices such as ourselves, praise...and so forth

Yes, you don't have to be in congregation /church to offer praise.

vooks:
Excellent.
Now, walk me through why anybody is entitled to collect tithes over the others in the body of Christ seeing ALL are priests. Can I collect your tithes? Can you collect mine?

If that is indeed excellent and your words have meaning, i hope you won't be repeating these line of questioning in future and acting oblivious of these. I say this because it is very common of the others, and it is the syndrome scripture described as "ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth". Tithe is given to God through the church, His body. We are His Body, the church. No person is more entitled over the other. For administrative purposes, tithes and offerings are given centrally in a congregation. It's not paid into an individual's account, normally. Thereafter, each church administration (which may be different) uses these provisions as determined or decided. There is nothing wrong with some order, and nothing stops any believer from giving alms of any percentage.

Goshen360:
... the scripture is starring at you in the face as you agreed:

Why is the law of 10% STILL REMAINS 10% if the priesthood had changed and the law must also change? I thought you would change the law of 10% (in the pre-law tithing) if you changed the priesthood from levites to Melchi....look at the scripture you quoted again.

You are chasing shadows and losing focus yet again. What do you gain in dancing up and down? The tithe is not the law, isn't that what you antitithers say all the time? That our present day tithe is not the law's.

Just listen to him when you can.

plaetton:
This is amazing.
This is part of what I am talking about.
You guys hear one thing, and then magically turn it into another thing just so that it can fit your mind and worldviews.

I cannot suffer from a crisis of faith because I Never had it. Faith has never made sense to me from childhood to present.
Faith has zero value to me, so how could I suffer from a crisis of faith?
Crisis of faith is for those of you already yolked, yearning for freedom, but afraid to get out.
Only Christians suffer from it.
I see and hear it in their long, windy and loud prayers every single day.
I have loooong trascended faith.

vooks:
My broda, you can't beat them at Obtuse Game.
How do you ask a question, receive answer and then insist it has not been answered?

Image123 and his entire brains thinks that because Melchizedek collected a tithe 'without commandment', and we are not under the law, then collecting the tithe does not have to follow the Law. So if modern tithe collectors are not Levites, no biggie

The irony of it all is, if it is no longer obligatory to pay tithes to Levites since Melchizedek was no Levite yet he collected it from Abraham, why do we even settle at 10%? WHy can't we collect 10% and go throw it into the river since we are not under the Law? While at it we can also burn it. There is no Law governing our tithing anyway. Why should there be Law on the AMOUNT, 10%? And why should we collect it regularly?

Who makes all these laws for people not 'under commandment'?

pea-brained arguments

You did not fully answer my questions until here 4:52pm, don't be mischievous. Now, while i might endure and tolerate your absurdities, this is my last warning to you on your rudeness and insults. You may need to go home and ask your superiors on how to address others in public. Apart from being a professing christian, courtesy and forum rules demand that you don't abuse, deliberately insult/provoke any Nairaland member. i don't engage people who have no manners. You can convey your points in a mannerly way. Grace, home training, discipline, maturity all help with that. BTW i'd rather wish your repentance/change, not apologies.

vooks:
Not we are not. So it beats me that trousers on women gives you fits

At lastttttttt. Almost had to squeeze it out of you, the answers. So let's have a recap.
QUESTIONS.

---

1. Is Jesus the Christian's High Priest?
2. Are christians priests?
3. If Melchisedek received tithe 'without commandment', what hinders others?
4. Are we under commandment (the law).?
I trust you would answer these questions straight and plainly before shifting the goal.

---

Unfortunate that you couldn't keep to the trust by answering the questions first. So your answers are;

1. Jesus is the a high Priest
2. All Christians are priests
3. you are no Melchizedek. You don't do stuff simply because Melchizedek did!
Explain how you give Melchizedek your 'tithe of all' like Abraham. AND
They are not Deity nor are they High Priests so they are not entitled to 'without commandment' privilleges Melchizedek enjoyed.
4. Not we are not. So it beats me that trousers on women gives you fits wink.

Mark is of the opinion that "the sons of Levi are to receive the tithes... Levites are to take God's holy tithes, not pastors who are not of the lineage and dscendancy of Levi."
From what you seem to be saying in answer 4, we are not under the law. Therefore, Mark needs an update. The Levites were under the law, we are not.
On answer 3, you beat around the bush both grammatically and logically and spiritually. Believers are priests after the order of Melchisedek BECAUSE their High Priest(Jesus) is of that order.

Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

The priesthood has been changed, this should be no newsflash for any Bible student. There is made of necessity a change also of the law. We are no more under the law where tithes go to the levitical priesthood. As Jesus is, so are WE. We are His body, He is the Head. What we do to the church(the Body of Christ), we have done to Christ. i trust hope i do not need to show you the scriptures that say these things.

Goshen360:
Image123,

If you teaching Melchizedek example of tithing away from law tithe. The law tithe was commanded to be taken to a location. ..aka Storehouse which some erroneously interpreted as the church, insulting the body of Christ by calling us storehouse.

Question: What's Melchizedek location to take the tithe to? Don't tell us it's the same church because no church existed when Melchizedek received tithe and the place he received tithe wasn't a church neither.

i'm not interested in useless rigmarole and dribbling in circles. Stay on point and gain at least one thing for this once. The FOCUS where you entered the fray was on Mark saying that only Levites can take tithes. i replied that with the obvious Melchisedek taking tithes without being levite, and Jesus being of that order as High Priest. i'm not teaching, simply making a simple and open point so cancel the IFs and assumptions in your statement. Your next move is to ridiculously decide to go on an absurd logic with location. Before that, God's house is where the tithe went according to Malachi, and the church is God's house. Gosh, is the church God's house? Why the childish semantics just to oppose the tithe? i guess to you, Jesus has to be in the same location as Melchisedek for Him to be of the order.
Psa 110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
Heb 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest,
Heb 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, [b]The Lord swore and will not repent, [/b]Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek)

"After the order of" simply means 'like' or 'in the similitude'. Melchisedek could collect the tithe without 'commandment', same way Jesus our High Priest can collect the tithe without 'commandment'. Actually He has been collecting it since forever as He is God. The High priest is the Head of Priests, which believers are. In other words, we are in the same order or likeness. We don't need "commandment".

vooks:
You never asked a question
There remains NO benefit from not circumcising,keeping Feasts and so forth. Why stop at tithes, go the whole mile

The question was "In other words, you agree with what I stated." A straight yes or no would have been an appropriate reply instead of the tantrum you threw. The exchange between me and Gnoni was TITHE, stay focused or go wash your face.

For your many questions and crises of the faith.

plaetton:
For what, if I may ask?

plaetton:
I left Christianity because the more I looked the more meaningless it seemed.
And over last few decades, it has become even a lot more meaningless.
Like I hinted, religious superstition is for a bygone era. Religion thrives on ignorance and fear.
Enlightenment takes care of ignorance, and empowerment takes care of fear. Here, religion, custodian religion, becomes less relevant as people begin to seek rational answers to existential questions.

Have you ever listened to Dr. Ravi Zacharias? I highly recommend him.

vooks:
IF you are continuing tithing because there are NO benefits for not doing so, you may as well throw in a bunch of other stuff..circumcision,Feasts,Sabbath.....Freewill animal offerings......it is absurd and I'd be shocked if it hit you

There remains NO benefit from not tithing, simple yes or no. No need throwing tantrums over simple straight and basic questions.

vooks:
If answering is reading your mind, am sorry am not psychic. I have answers your questions. Let me repeat them lest one of the things I accused you of recurr(ed)

Question: If Melchisedek received tithe 'without commandment', what hinders others?
Answer: They are not Deity nor are they High Priests so they are not entitled to 'without commandment' privilleges Melchizedek enjoyed

Are we under commandment (the law).?

vooks:
There remains NO benefit from not circumcising.

Reductio ad Absurdum

In other words, you agree with what I stated.

BabaGnoni:
LOL
- typical of a tithe lobbyist, thinking about rules, mistaking need to know information for "rules"

There are better and more important need to know than half truths and trip questions. There remains NO benefit from not tithing.

StarBoard:
And youve been saying absolutely nothing on this mattet,just blowing hot air and wasting MB.
if you think Melchizedek tithe is a standard to follow based on your hollow assessment then there is no point responding to you.
it is your ilk who keep peddling false doctrine and bringing scorn to the faith with your vain and inane anslysis of issues that are clear.
Adios.

Adios amugo.

vooks:
What hinders others is staring right at you; you are no Melchizedek. You don't do stuff simply because Melchizedek did!
Explain how you give Melchizedek your 'tithe of all' like Abraham

You still managed not to answer the questions, how did that happen? Even Mark the original recipient has been very shy.
If Melchisedek received tithe 'without commandment', what hinders others?
Are we under commandment (the law).?

StarBoard:
And the tithe instituted by God (which should be what you should be looking at, not the type given to Melchizedek) tells you to give your tithe to whom?
The tithe of all that includes war plunder is now standard practice to be used today? Meaning we csn embezzle funds or take what belongs to others and give a tithe from that,abi?

You are just scoring own goals all over the place.

The Melchizedek tithe example cannot be used to justify your position anyway you look at it.

You answered none of the questions, scoring zero. That's how i look at it.

vooks:
1. Jesus is the a high Priest
2. All Christians are priests
3. Because Christians are not Melchizedek. When did you last walk on water? What about dying for our sins?

1 and 2 , i mark am correct. 3 is answer to what?
If Melchisedek received tithe 'without commandment', what hinders others?
Are we under commandment (the law).?

italo:
But that's the meaning of what you said in the quote below. Members of the church cannot contradict one another on the salient issues. So if anyone contradicts you on a salient issue, either you or him or both of you are not members of the Church.

Why are you denying your own position now?



Stop twisting the words of St. Paul to fit your heresies. Nowhere did he say some Church doctrines are salient while others arent.

And nowhere does the Bible give a list of salient and non salient doctrines.


If church A teaches that abortion always sinful and church b teaches that abortion (in the way church A defines it) is not always sinful...

Those are contradictory doctrines.

At least one of them is a false doctrine...from the evil one.

These two doctrines are found in your protestant "churches."

Lol, so abortion is doctrine for other denominations, but it is personal opinion which you are free to hold in your own denomination. Really, i'm not in for these denominational battles. Just suit yourself, and live a life that pleases God.

musKeeto:
I'm cool. You?

i'm saved.

plaetton:
I agree with your statement about life.
But how does opting out of blind faith religion equate to opting out of life?

the OPTING OUT part, i suppose.

italo:
Still dodging my question because you fear truth.

The hundreds of thousands of Protestant communities and the millions of "non-denominational Christians" in the world have different contradictory doctrines. Yes or no?

Why are you permitted to hold differing opinions in your one denomination, but have a problem with other denominations having differing opinions/doctrines? Dodge not.

We are discussing Church doctrine. The Catholic Church doesn't recognize individual teachings as part of its doctrine. So you are in no position to force individual teachings into Catholic doctrine because you are desperate to equate it to the quagmire you have in your protestant communities.

Catholic doctrine is determined by the Catholic Church, not you. You attempt to put what you like into Catholic doctrine only demonstrates your dishonesty.

You still cant show me two Catholic doctrines that are contradictory.

Teaching is doctrine. Other denominations hold differing views on gay marriage as well, and abortion, and cigarettes, and alcohol, and wearing of necklaces etc. These are the things that make up your so called million contradictions. So, do well to apply them to your denomination as well instead of separating them as opinion or teaching when it affects you. Your church's doctrine on gay marriage is inconsistent. FACT. What is the Roman Catholic position on gay marriage? Does it not differ from person to person, and priest to priest, and pope to pope? Show me two Mountain of Fire doctrines that are contradictory, that is one denomination. i have shown you the Roman Catholic denomination's.

1. My views or teachings (if they are different from that of the Catholic Church) are only my teachings, not Catholic doctrine. Stop the dishonest attempt to equate them.

Oh spare me this madness. If you were a priest or Bishop or a teacher in any capacity in the Catholic church, would you not give out your views?

2. The teachings of each Protestant "church" can be termed "church" doctrines. Here are just a few of the multitude of examples known all over the world: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_Confession

http://www.deeperlife.ca/bibledoctrines/

http://www.methodist.org.uk/who-we-are/doctrine-of-the-methodist-church

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_doctrine

My point exactly, teaching is doctrine. But in the Roman catholic church, you are insisting that they are opinions and everyone can have them. Methodist is one denomination, Roman catholic is one denomination, Anglican is another, so also deeper Life.

Also, there are many protestants so called christians who believe that anyone can interpret the Bible and come up with their own teachings, those who say they are their own Church, they also call themselves "nondenominational"...and there are millions of them. Whatever they teach can be called Church doctrine because "they are their own church." That is obvious.

I dont know why you insist on lying/playing dumb just because you fear the truth.

Are you soliloquizing here or what? Whatever you teach in the Catholic church can be called Church doctrine, it is not personal view. What you teach on gay marriage, holy Mary, evolution, priest marriage, is all DOCTRINE. That is obvious i suppose.

3. Your video is full of lies, half truths, misconceptions and deliberate manipulation. Can I take the contents as your views or do I assume you just latched unto anything you thought disproved the Church without doing an honest investigation yourself?

Let us call it THE video. It's not mine or yours, its just there on the internet and anyone can verify its content. The video truly shows contradictory and contradicting popes. Your popes, from the same denomination, having differing doctrines. It is not FULL of lies. Please point out the lies, talk is cheap.If you call it HALF truth, then it cannot be FULL of lies BTW. Tell us the half that is truth and the half that is lies. Its just about 5mins, the video. Quickly from the video for my dear fellows without MB.
FACT 1. Pope Honorious was condemned as an heretic at the Sixth General Council. Obviously, he must have had some differing views/doctrines in the same Catholic denomination.
FACT 2.Pope Eugenius IV condemned Joan of Arc, while another Pope Benedict XV canonized the same Joan of Arc as a saint. Is this contradictory?
FACT 3. Pope Paul V and another Pope condemned and KILLED Galileo because of his knowledge and teaching about planets and the shape of the earth etc. i'm sure you and your present Pope now agree with Galileo.
FACT 4. Pope Innocent III or IV forbad Bible reading in common languages. i want to believe it is not still so today.
Another infallible Pope sanctioned the Inquisition. pope Leo XII condemned and battled with Bible societies and translations. Pope Gregory XII pope Benedict XIII and pope John XXIII were all claiming to be the pope at the same time in 1415. These are historical facts.You should not open mouth when people are talking about contradictions. Your one denomination is full of them. It is not my desire or plan to talk down anybody or church, but if you are insisting and making false claims, i might have to show or remind about one or two things. The church is not any particular denomination or building but the Body of Christ. It is comprising of those that are saved and washed in the blood of the Lamb, having faith in the Lord Jesus. It is not about doctrine, as important and good as they may be.

You are saying the Church of God can teach error...falsehood. You're saying the New Testament, the written teachings of the Church leaders could be erroneous.

You're just totally confused.On paper and in Spirit, Catholic teaching is one.

i'm being factual, not confused. Peter was an integral part of the church, yet he made mistakes. Same too with James and john and any other believer there is. We are all pressing TOWARDS perfection as it were. So, there might be room for varied understanding in some matters.

In a sense, I worship her a little like you worship your mother...but I dont worship her as God.

i do not worship my mother, neither do i pray to her or through her. i do not kneel in front of her picture either or any other such things that you do to the virgin Mary.

So your "church" teachings are not of the Spirit...thats why there are contradictions.

Peter was one moment declaring Jesus as messiah, and in the next moment being used by the devil. Is Peter a part of the church?

Doesn't mean the Church was at anytime teaching the Philippians error on any issue (salient or non salient)

Duhh, that is the very basis of most of the epistles and New testament books. Churches were not living right or teaching right, and they were corrected by the epistles. Some churches have Jezebels teaching them.
Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

Speak for yourself.

As for me, I have found it. It is not a denomination. It is the Catholic Church...which gave you the Bible and told you about Jesus Christ.

If it is false, then the Jesus story could well be false. But they are both true.

oh, i supposed this was what these was all about but you just confirmed it. my Roman Catholic denomination is better than all other denominations. Suit yourself, make sure you see me in heaven though.

italo:
You keep dodging my questions only because you are afraid of truth.

Was any opposition to the Church teaching in Acts 15 tolerated?

Was there any opposition recorded?