₦airaland Forum

@Opening Post2 contd.....

Heb 7:4 Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

The 'better than' theme is beginning to emerge here. Consider that since the writer mentioned Aaron in comparison to Jesus, he had been sort of bringing up their similarities and building up a room for comparison. Now, he follows with "Now consider how great". the book of Hebrews uses the word 'better' about 12times in comparing Jesus Christ(the New Covenant) to the Old. this is the theme and the line of argument, as it were. See for example
Heb 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
So he says Melchizedek must have being a great man because Abram gave him tithes. There's this scripture that says give to God what is God's. you don't give what is God's to man or to an animal. Infact, Jesus said not to cast pearls before swine, or give the children's bread to dogs. Alms belong to man, to beggars perhaps. Tithe and offering belongs to God. God told some people in Malachi who did not give their tithes that they had robbed Him. they had robbed God, not the priests, not the Levites, because tithes and offering belongs to God. you don't give worship to man or prayer to man, they belong to God. I've heard people erroneously quote "whatever you do to the least of my brethren, you have done to me". if you worship Image123, you are in idolatry, you are not doing it to God, sorry. If you pray to Peter the saint, it is wrong. You can't give God's tithe to the poor, or to a friend in need. God's tithe is for God. You can give another tenth, or even 100% for any purpose, you can even borrow and perhaps delay or postpone to give God's tithe so as to sort out a need or emergency, if your conscience allows you. but to say, i'm giving my tithe to the beggar on the highway, that's just deceiving one's self at best. Abraham didn't give his tithes to the King of Sodom, or to Lot or to any of the captives he could have changed their lives or fortunes with. He didn't even give it to the men who he wanted to have their portion.
Gen 14:24 Save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion.
It says to consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. We should consider, and learn from Abraham. Wisdom says My son, give me thine heart, and let thine eyes observe my ways. Abraham gave his tithes to a great man, king of righteousness, priest of the most high God. And what did he give, it was the tenth of the spoils. Again, note that Abraham did not take Lot's property or the King of Sodom's goods. So, what did he take and tithe from? Of the spoils.

spoils, plural noun
1. property seized by victor: valuables or property seized by the victor in a conflict
2. something gained through effort: something valuable or desirable gained through effort, opportunism, or other means

Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
These were the goods of the about four kings defeated and their armies, or maybe kingdoms.

Gen 14:17 And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale.

Gen 14:9 With Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and with Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings with five.

You may not still readily appreciate the volume of the spoils until you consider that these four Kings were ruling over the more than 5nations/kingdoms before this time and for more than 12years. You may begin to estimate when you consider how Israel was often spoiled and emptied by Kings like Nebuchadnezzar, the Syrians, the Asyrians, the Philistines and co, anytime they sinned against God and were being punished thus. The point is that it wa massive. Recall, he time of Elisha, when the spoils gotten from one nation Syria was enough to feed a nation in famine and cause a massive change in prices of goods? See below;
2Ki 7:1 Then Elisha said, Hear ye the word of the LORD; Thus saith the LORD, Tomorrow about this time shall a measure of fine flour be sold for a shekel, and two measures of barley for a shekel, in the gate of Samaria.
2Ki 7:8 And when these lepers came to the uttermost part of the camp, they went into one tent, and did eat and drink, and carried thence silver, and gold, and raiment, and went and hid it; and came again, and entered into another tent, and carried thence also, and went and hid it.
2Ki 7:15 And they went after them unto Jordan: and, lo, all the way was full of garments and vessels, which the Syrians had cast away in their haste. And the messengers returned, and told the king.
2Ki 7:16 And the people went out, and spoiled the tents of the Syrians. So a measure of fine flour was sold for a shekel, and two measures of barley for a shekel, according to the word of the LORD.

That is the picture of spoils of war from one country. Also recall how Israel spoiled the Egyptians(one nation) when they left them for Canaan? It was of the spoil that they contributed in the wilderness until Moses had a problem called "too much". Now, consider the spoils from four major kingdoms in the time of Abraham. it is of this that Abraham gave a tenth to the King and Priest Melchizedec.
........................i should continue later, read this meanwhile though.

debosky: Even if he was, there's nothing to gain by retaliating - abi are you Oyedepo in disguise?

And you are his voltron or what? He called oyedepo incompetent and shallow, and i'm asking him, before he emoves the log in someone else's eye, he that is competent and deep, what have he done for himself or for God? Allow him to answer for himself, he is of age. Abi no bi KunleO we dey talk for hia? i no he has nothing important to say though, i know him.

@Opening Post contd...


Heb 7:1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;Melchizedek was a king and a priest. he was a priest of the most high God. Just like believers today are kings and priests.

Rev 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen

1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light:

We are kings and priests because we are joint-heirs with Christ who is our Head. We are the kings, and He is the King of kings. We are the priests and He is our High Priest. Our elders, leaders, pastors, bishops, and shepherds take the place of chief priests, with a mandate to give account of us.
Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
Christians/Believers are sheep, their elders are shepherds while Jesus is the good Shepherd and Bishop.
1Pe 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
1Pe 5:4 And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Melchizedek was the only king that was also a priest in all of the old testament. Old testament kings were not allowed to minister as priests.
2Ch 26:18 And they withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the LORD, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honor from the LORD God.

Melchizedek, being a priest, had the pre-requisite/requirements/qualifications to receive the tithes and offerings of God. So also, Christ our High priest is qualified as a priest and a King. He is also of the order of Melchizedek. Nothing stops or disqualifies Christ from receiving tithes if truly Melchizedek was made like unto the Son of God.

And so, we see Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings. this event happened in the past and is rendered in the past tense. It happened as far back as Genesis 14.
Gen 14:1 And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations;
Gen 14:2 That these made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar.
Four Kings in verse 1 made war with 5kings in verse 2. please, consider that this is not a riot or a melee. it's not university aluta,it's not even civil unrest, it was WAR. War between about 9 nations!! The kings in 14v1 won and had dominion for over 12years before Sodom and its allies mounted a rebellion. In that time, one of the four victorious kings(Chedorlaomer) had emerged as a major 'principality' defeating other nations around. See it below
Gen 14:4 Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.
Gen 14:5 And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim,
Gen 14:6 And the Horites in their mount Seir, unto El-paran, which is by the wilderness.
Gen 14:7 And they returned, and came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazezon-tamar.

The rebellion was a failure as the four kings defeated the five kings again. Remember that we are not talking about wrestlers here, we are talking about armies, kings, kingdoms/nations so that you can understand and picture the magnitude. Infact one of the 4kings was called 'king of nations', he was that powerful. See it below;

Gen 14:9 With Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and with Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings with five.
Gen 14:10 And the vale of Siddim was full of slime pits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; and they that remained fled to the mountain.
Gen 14:11 And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their victuals, and went their way.
Gen 14:12 And they took Lot, Abram's brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.

This is where Abraham comes into the picture, his relative, Lot was also captured in the war, and his goods. remember that we're not talking about one travelling bag here. lot was rich, so rich that he had to part ways with Abraham.

Gen 13:5 And Lot also, which went with Abram, had flocks, and herds, and tents.
Gen 13:6 And the land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together: for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together.
It is this Lot's possessions that were taken, a man who had great substance, herds, flocks and tents. The five kings took Lot's goods and family, took Sodom's goods, ALL the goods of Sodom, Gomorrah and of course the rest of the defeated kings. It was these that had been done before Abram abi na Abraham heard and came to fight. Obviously, the victory was not by his military prowess or strength but God. It was a miracle(Gen 14:20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all. )

Here's the summary of the battle below in case you don't have your Bible close by.
Gen 14:14 And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.
Gen 14:15 And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus.
Gen 14:16 And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.

It is after this that the King of Sodom and Melchizedek met him. Hebrews 7v1(who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him. )

Heb 7:2 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;
It was to Melchizedek that Abraham gave a tenth of ALL. ALL of course doesn't refer to the wives of people or to other people's property. it is wrong to give tithes of other people's property. Other people's property is theirs. Abraham didn't take Lot's goods and give tithes, neithe did he take the king of Sodom's goods according to the passage. Yet, it is recorded that he gave tithes of all. tithe is simply a tenth part i.e 10% as seen from Hebrews 7v2. A tenth is 1/10 of a whole.
Melchizedek was/is first King of righteousness. What a title! What a position! The priest of the most high God, and King of righteousness. What man can be King of righteousness? This is truly made like unto the Son of God, who is the Sun of righteousness(Malachi 4:2), and the Lord our righteousness(Jeremiah 23v6 and 1Corinthians 1v30).
melchizedek is also King of Salem, which is, King of peace. Salem is Jerusalem the city of the great King. The great king is by the way, Jesus Christ, the Lord of David. Jesus is the Prince of peace. He is the Lord our Shepherd that guides us besides still waters.
Psa 76:2 In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion.
Psa 87:2 The LORD loveth the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob.
Whenyou read the passage, every other thing is supposed to pale in significance, compared with Him with whom we have to do. It is actually (Heb 7:13) He of whom these things are spoken (that) pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
The writer is not throwing light on tithes or on anybody but Christ.


Heb 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
For time and space, i'll be more brief ihope. Here is an awkward verse if looked at literally. Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life are the features in Melchizedek used to connect Him to Christ. This features make Him like unto the Son of God. In reality, the Son of God as the name suggest has a father(God) or physically (Joseph to the Jews), a mother(Mary), descent/pedigree and geneology well stated by Matthew 1 and Luke 3, beginning of days(Bethlehem) and end of life(Golgotha). So actually, the writer goes into something above the normal, apparent here. An issue that brings up debates on whether Christ is melchizedek and whatever, an issue i'm not delving into anytime soon by God's grace.
Heb 5:11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
Nevertheless, it is agreed that Melchizedek and Christ are being aligned in this passage as of the same order.

debosky: This is getting too personal.

My Lord God. debor, was your friend kunle not personal on oyedepo?

@Opening Post
i thought to add a little knowledge to the Hebrews 7 understanding. We should realise that Hebrews 7 is not in isolation but surrounded by 12 chapters and more than 50 other books which all make up the Word of God. The theme of the Bible is Jesus, and the theme of Hebrews is Jesus.

Heb 8:1 Now a summary of the things of which we are speaking is , We have such a one high priest who has sat down on the right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens; (Darby Bible)

The book of Hebrews is a letter/epistle to the Hebrews attempting to show them (and us of course) that Jesus is the One above all and is the One to whom our faith should be attached. Recall "Looking on Jesus, the source and goal of our faith.", that's Hebrews 12. The book of Hebrews takes everything that the Jews respect and regard, place it with Jesus and shows, giving reasons, that Jesus is greater and should be embraced. When we hold on to this theme and anchor, we'll see the big picture and not be detracted or distracted into thinking that there is a chapter in the Bible dedicated to tithe(pro or anti). Notice there is no real antagonism of any kind against tithing in the Hebrews, unlike what antitithers paint for us. Tithe is an insignificant part of God's Word. It is a minor matter as stated by Jesus, and is not a guage for anything important. It's bad enough to hear that some pulpits focus on tithes(i'm yet to see one for myself BTW). but to come on a forum and magnify tithes in an anti-defence is eternally puzzling. There has been much ado over nothing on this thread unfortunately, and i know thee will still be in other threads to come up. Back to Hebrews, hebrews begins with a comparison of Jesus Christ and Angels. The first chapter tries to basically prove Jesus' superiority to angels.

Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
The point of the writer to this claim among other things are as follows;

Heb 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom.
And he continues in the defence till about

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
He's already pushing for his point of the NT era been better here,
Heb 2:1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.
The Jews/Hebrews naturally paid a lot of attention to the law, angels and co, but the epistle is bringing their attention to something higher and better. One, better than angels. two, better than Moses!! The Hebrews had a world of respect for Moses but this writer comes and says Jesus Christ is BETTER.
Heb 3:3 For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honor than the house.
i'm not dwelling on the reasons but on the THEME, Jesus Christ. He is better than angels and better than Moses. he says Moses is a servant while Jesus is a Son. Now, we can argue for or against that point scripturally,but the focus remains that Jesus is better than Moses.
Heb 3:5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

He's about now to enter something much huge and touchy. Notice that he never condemns the Old testament or the commandments of God on the way. Instead, he reckons with them. He says that the problem the OT Israelites had was unbelief. their problem was not tithe or the law. Paul said the law is good, and holy and righteous. Jesus and all the apostles had similar words for the law. Infact, John said sin is the transgression of the law. Not 'was' but 'is'. Anytime you transgress the law, you have sinned. Anytime you sin, you have transgressed the law.
1John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

So the issue with the OT was not tithes or the law, but unbelief.
Heb 3:19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
He talks about this for a while, adding in the process that,
Heb 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
Again, it is the what they heard that was wrong. They heard the gospel just like we do, that's what this verse says. All of the law is love. God is love. god so loved us that He gave. So far, so good, infact very good. the OT and its content is good and the gospel truth. The problem was that they did not believe/have faith. He further makes reference to the scripture.
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

You know, its good to note that at the time of this writing, and putting one's self in the shoes of the initial recipients of the epistle, The Word of God referred to was not majorly any book in the NT. What they knew then as scripture was majorly the OT. And here, we are told that this Word of God is alive and powerful and sharp. That is, the law and the prophets, books like Nehemiah, Psalms, Exodus, Jonah, Malachi are alive and powerful. this were their scriptures. James refers the OT as Jam 1:25 the perfect law of liberty, and said anyone who continued in it will be blessed. Peter said to put us in remembrance to be mindful of the words of the Holy prophets, prophets like Moses, David, Abraham, malachi and Elisha. John, Paul, Jude and others also copiously quoted the OT as pillar to the points they were making in their writings. Looking sincerely at the writers of the Nt, we find no antagonism against the OT or the writers, unlike what antitihers would have us believe that they are all useless, and all that matters and should be taken serious are writings after the resurrection.
The Hebrew enters a comparison between Jesus and Aaron in chapter 4. This is the core, as the Jews were majorly religious, seeking to follow the purity and righteousness of the Levitical order. He had briefly said in chapter 3,
Heb 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Now He begins to enter cautiously in chapter 4. He majorly lays the ground for comparison
Heb 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee.
Heb 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
He first introduces Jesus as High priest, then brings in Aaron, then Christ, then melchizedek. He then actually leaves off, to start the comparison at chapter 7. Along the way though, notice that he has no bile against OT priests or against the OT scriptures.

OLAADEGBU: Thanks for placing it in it's proper perspective. Those who have listening ears and believing hearts will surely get the message.

My Brother miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii. So you sef come hia, how you dey? Hope Christ is doing wonderfully in you?

You pretend not to understand my post. The animals relate to burnt offerings. If you are saying Christ commands that pastors be maintained exactly the way it was done in the OT, then pastors should be maintained with animals sacrificed as burnt offering to God.

Take your animals to your pastors, they'll do what is best with the animals. Evn in the OT, na the priests and levites dey chop the thing so why you dey fear na? Your pastor will eat it with his fellows especially in this yuletide season. Or he may sell it and use the money for something worthwhile, like paying rent, bills, school fees, gospel tracts, books, evangelism, charity etc. Though you refused to know, he would know that

Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

You should be ashamed of yourself. This is how you have been trying to manipulate the scriptures to show tithe is for Christians The word yield can mean a lot of things but never income or harvest at the same time (because income is not harvest as you have shown in your definition).

'Yield' is the same thing as 'income' or 'harvest'. i brought up the three so you can have a cumulative picture. Get a thesaurus or a good dictionar instead of disturbing me with frivolous semantics.

why are you defining income instead of defining harvest?

You are supposed to define "harvest" = income.

You are a afraud that wants to gain riches through the gospel.

This by exploiting others.

Your love for God can not take your making sacrifices but you must get back riches other wise no. And this through tith.

The apostles died for christ dont forget.

Greed.
I hope that you live forever with your exploit.

This one would start quoting me like a stammerer now. Anyways, i defined both income and harvest, can't you read? Zikky was complaining that i defined three, you are complaining that i defined one. i didnt really get the rest of the mumbo jumbo. The apostles died for Christ? i thought it was scripturally recorded the other way round

But they were fasting and praying to their own god. Were they tithing to their god? NO. What that tells you is that they were used to fasting and praying what changed was the God/god they prayed to.

How do you know they were fasting or praying to anything?

Are you saying the Lev. 27 you quoted above simply states that the tithe is holy to God? or is it saying that the tithe of the land, whether of the seed or the fruit of the tree is holy to God? Even a blind man will see the difference! You need to wake up from your nightmare and face reality.

Did the Bible only mention tithe in Lev. 27? When would you start to read cumulatively instead of segregationally?

On the basis of the law? i thought you said you don't tithe based on the law? Act 15 makes nonsense of this assumption anyways.

Malachi 3 is the law? Genesis is the law?

The gentiles gave more than 10% agreed, and you know why? it's because you don't teach giving. It comes as a nature, it is not based on a command to give. The gentiles were true Christians, they gave from their heart. we cannot say the same for people like you. The Apostles taught the gentiles charity, they taught them love and what was the result? they gave their all! Today's pastors teaches giving in percentages, and what is the result? we have 'Christians' (like Image123) using (scientific ) calculator to determine their giving

Luk 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you, good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again
Mat 10:8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

You already know what followed. It didn't take long for them to go back to their old ways. All that was required was for Nehemiah to leave town for a while

This is no point. There is possibility of backsliding also in the new covenant/testament. There are several warnings by the apostles, refering us to past OT backskslidings telling us to beware. That one does something for God out of love doesn't rule out possibilities of backsliding.

Jude 1:5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

But it wasn't only tithes - people (i.e. the Jews) also continued giving burnt offerings in the temple, kept on giving all the various offerings prescribed under the law without a word of condemnation or discouragement, as well as giving tithes to the Priests. This lack of condemnation was not restricted only to tithes.

There was word/discouragement clearly against burnt offerings

Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Heb 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

I guess this will also make a perfect instruction, correction unto righteousness since it's also part of the "All Scriptures"......take a look:

22 You shall surely tithe all the yield of your seed produced by your field each year.

23 And you shall eat before the Lord your God in the place in which He will cause His Name [and Presence] to dwell the tithe (tenth) of your grain, your new wine, your oil, and the firstlings of your herd and your flock, that you may learn [reverently] to fear the Lord your God always.

24 And if the distance is too long for you to carry your tithe, or the place where the Lord your God chooses to set His Name [and Presence] is too far away for you, when the Lord your God has blessed you,

25 Then you shall turn it into money, and bind up the money in your hand, and shall go to the place [of worship] which the Lord your God has chosen.

26 And you may spend that money for whatever your appetite craves, for oxen, or sheep, or new wine or strong[er] drink, or whatever you desire; and you shall eat there before the Lord your God and you shall rejoice, you and your household.

27 And you shall not forsake or neglect the Levite [God’s minister] in your towns, for he has been given no share or inheritance with you.

28 At the end of every three years you shall bring forth all the tithe of your increase the same year and lay it up within your towns.

29 And the Levite [because he has no part or inheritance with you] and the stranger or temporary resident, and the fatherless and the widow who are in your towns shall come and eat and be satisfied, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands that you do. - Deuteronomy 14, Amplified Bible (AMP)

You know this is also an instruction unto righteousness.........

There is nothing wrong with obeying this as far as you understand that it is a different tithe/tenth. you should learn to spend for/on and with others. Share your income with others, it is v.good for your health. Don't be a solo.

debosky: I have not disputed the above, however any words of Christ must be understood in context and applied within context. The context of Matthew 23:23 is with regard to the law and its requirements to tithe - it is not applicable to Christians.

Besides, if the issue here is 'obeying the words of Christ', Jesus said approved of tithing cummin to Levitical Priests - are you tithing cummin to Levitical Priests? If you are not doing so, then you are not obeying the words of Christ in Matthew 23:23.

Actually, the context is as regards the hypocrisy of the pharisees and scribes, It is applicable to anybody including christians. The issue is the HYPOCRISY or DOUBLE STANDARDS i.e the false claim to or pretense of having admirable principles, beliefs, or feelings. The comparison is akin to the straining at a gnat and swallowing a carmel verse.
Mat 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Mat 23:23 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.

Jesus called them hypocrites, why? FOR/BECAUSE ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith. They paid tithe(observing a small part of the law) to the DETAIL. He's not saying that they only tithed anise, mint and cummin, but that they tithed to the detail of anise, mint and cummin. These plants are flavourings, they are for aroma, like maggi or curry. The pharisees tithed to the last, that's what Jesus is saying. They strained at a gnat, something of little consequence. It's like someone at a gate or border searching to detail using microscope, metal detector etc, paying much attention and correction on the gnat, and would not allow the gnat to pass. they would make sure tithes are paid to the kobo as it were, but they swallowed a camel, they omitted the weightier matters. The camel would pass their gate/border without batting an eyelid, while they have all the machines and details for the gnat. There are some folks that way today, i don't support such too. these folks can pay tithe, calculate, porate, to the nearest kobo. they can tithe on gifts, even if someone gives them 20naira, they can write it down with aim to tithe. If they got a lift, they cantithe on the equivalent transport cost. That's detail, tithing mint, anise, cummin. But same folks would not help others even if its 20 naira, 100naira. They'd owe bills and debts, they'll commit fraud at work, be wicked lecturers and goverment workers, omitting judgement and mercy. There are folks like this today. This is the hypocrisy Christ was pointing out, not tithing according to one law or the other. he didn't mention anything about levitical priests. i give tithes of my income, which do not include anise or cummin or mint. He didn't mention animals so why the sudden focus you're putting on plants? Was levitical tithe only plant? You guys need to focus on the real issues and read the big picture, as it were.

Pastor Kun: @Goshen
I just read somewhere on this forum that 'double portion' is the theme for this year's shiloh Jamboree of winner's chapel. If that is what inspired this write up, I would say why bother after all every body knows that oyedepo is a very shallow and incompetent preacher who has no understanding of what christ's gospel is all about.

And you that is competent and deep, what have you done for yourself or for God. Envious fellow, look for something to achieve before you die.

debosky: Matthew 23:23 was referring to Pharisees (Jews) tithing agricultural produce to the Levitical Priesthood. That instruction is not applicable to Christians as we are neither subject to the law neither is there a Levitical Priesthood in existence to collect agricultural produce.

wrong, all the words of Christ are eternal truth, spirit and life. There's nothing wrong with a Christian obeying the words of Christ.

not again. There's nothing wrong with a double portion. All this noise about limitless and there's struggle to see a single portion among folks. Walk with God is majorly according to your faith personal. There is positional blessing and experiential blessing. Each believer walks continually from experiential to positional in his pilgrimage to perfection.

debosky: What scripture have you provided to show tithing was recommended as a practice for Christians? All we've seen is holding on to 'tenses' (which refer to Jewish practice and not to Christians) as 'evidence'.

Matthew 23:23

Am just me: Do u tithe a loan?

would you do it if told to, or you're just here to engage in unprofitable scorn?

No Scripture has been truly presented that shows that tithing is ended or abolished. All we've seen are men's ideas punctuated by twisted passages.

Zikkyy: This is all you have to say? After all your 'gra-gra' when you were shouting "count me in Gosh, count me in" I was thinking Goshen was in serious trouble. You dey fall my hand

by now, you should have learnt that i can very well reply each sentence of an antitither's post if i wanted to, thank God for His grace. If Rancho's post or even www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tithe was the OP, I'll largely ignore the thread. But to insist and attempt to force on the populace that tithe is false doctrine or ended or wrong, that's unacceptable.

thank you.

[quote author=Ofonagoro ]I'm coming back next July when my house in Abuja will be done.[/quote]hmmm, OP dey build house for Abuja with which money na. You no want more nigerians to build house for Abuja ko? Monopoly business man, make we come bi your tenants instead of to go amerinka.

Zikkyy: You pretend not to understand my post. The animals relate to burnt offerings. If you are saying Christ commands that pastors be maintained exactly the way it was done in the OT, then pastors should be maintained with animals sacrificed as burnt offering to God.

You hypocrite, do your own part of faithfully bringing the animals. The pastors you can leave to do what's best with it, whether na burnt, or grilled, or fried they go take am do. I know you're not as thick-headed as the quote.

debosky: Ok, maybe you are confused - I am not arguing that 'men indeed receive tithes' - I have clearly said those men are Levitical Priests and no one else. If that is your point of argument, refer to this post below:



My argument is about your false claim that Melchisedek continues to receive tithes.



Again, the issue here is your claim that Melchisedek continues to receive tithes - I have no argument about 'present continuous' receipt of tithes by Levitical Priests.

good of you, very good. The value of that is that people received tithes under the noses of the apostles without a word of condemnation or discouragement. Most antitithers treat the subject as if the very gospel and salvation hangs on it. To them, tithe is the mark of an heretic, blasphemy, who is a brother and who is not. Antitithing has become a ministry to them and anybody tithing MUST be gullible or a major beneficiary of "the tithe scan". This is the rooted notion being uprooted by fire, as it were.

Goshen360: @ Image123,

Let's "assume" and/or "agree" that the tenses of Hebrews 7:8 on your "receives/receiveth" and all that stuff is considered and/or ignored; WHO IS THE "HE" that "receive, receiveth, received" or whatever, Who is the "he" in that context or verse Melchizedek or Jesus

that you're still assuming shows some insincerity when the passage tense is so clearly present and continuous. There are two groups of people in the talked about and one verb, no? Why are you making out like its one person the verse talked about? Let's settle the first before you move to the second where already know my answer BTW.

plaetton: Liar liar. There is always a scripture to support every lie.
Where in genesis does it say that the devil possessed the snake, where was the omnipresent and omnipotent god when this possession took place?.

And your reference to Rev: 20.2, I thought the book of revelations was about events that are yet to come,future events. But yet you dishonestly presented it as if the event had taken place before Adam's fall from grace, just to justify your devil-possessed-the-snake fantasy.

Going by Rev: 12:9 dragon=serpent=devil=satan, right? So who possessed who, and where does the snake come into this equation?

Now back to this: Gen 3:1 The snake was more clever than all the wild animals the LORD God had made.

Now, if the snake was more clever than all the wild animals, should that also not be true today? Is there any biological evidence to show that the snake is more intelligent, or , clever than all wild animals?
Do you see how ridiculous and silly you can render yourself by believing and blindly regurgitating stone-age fables?

So the devil could not find any monkeys or apes, or rabbits or wily foxes, or dolphins , or whales, but settled for a pea-brained snake to charm Eve, and you say it was because the snake was the most mentally advanced creature in your garden of Eden?
Na wa.

And Adam could communicate with animals? Where did you get this from?

You are soooooo used to selling your fables to children and zombies, that you so often forget yourself that you are on a public forum with adults.

Pro 17:16 Wherefore is there a price in the hand of a fool to get wisdom, seeing he hath no heart to it?

@zikky

...and i have been asking one question: was this goal achieved by adherence to the law? you people know how to dodge questions sha

You've asked more than one question, even if i answered this one, you'd ask three more. i'm not under a debt to answer your every question. i'm answering your questions in order of relevance to the points being discussed, so that you see the real issues instead of gallivanting around aimlessly. BTW, the goal of the law, which is love, is achieved by anyone who adheres to it. Love has not passed away.1Corinth 13.

You still don't get it. according to you image123, when Paul said that just as priests were maintained with tithe & offerings 'even so' pastors should be maintained with tithes and offerings today. Your position is that pastors should be maintained exactly as priests were being maintained. All i did was show that priest were 'chopping' the meat sacrificed on the altar. If you say pastors should be maintained in the same manner feed of tithe and burnt offerings, i agree.

i retain that they should be. if you agree to tithes and offerings, fine, very fine. Pastors are maintained with tithes and offerings today. there are different types of offerings. If you feel like giving your own pastor food, crops and animals, go ahead. they'll do with it, what they know is best. your own na to bring the animal. A giver like you, i expect cow, goats, fat chicken and turkey aplenty. It's very good and welcome.

1Co 9:13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
1Co 9:14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

CEV

1Co 9:13 Don't you know that people who work in the temple make their living from what is brought to the temple? Don't you know that a person who serves at the altar is given part of what is offered?
1Co 9:14 In the same way, the Lord wants everyone who preaches the good news to make a living from preaching this message.

This one no need for argument. all you need to do is provide that good dictionary that defines harvest as income. Provide a link here for us to study.

You are proving lazy and dishonest. i don't do online dictionaries and thesaurus as i have one. But i'll oblige you with the microsoft on my system. Merriem Webster is also similar.


in·come [ín kùm]
(plural in·comes)
noun
1. money received over period: the amount of money received over a period of time either as payment for work, goods, or services, or as profit on capital
2. inflow: an act of coming in or flowing in

Thesaurus: profits, proceeds, returns, revenue, earnings, wages, pay, salary, take-home pay, takings
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.



har·vest [hrvəst]
noun (plural har·vests)
1. quantity of crop: the quantity of a crop that is gathered or ripens during a season

Thesaurus: crop, yield, produce, return, fruitage, ingathering
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

yield [yeeld]
verb (past and past participle yield·ed, present participle yield·ing, 3rd person present singular yields)
1. transitive verb produce something: to produce something naturally or as a result of cultivation

Thesaurus: harvest, crop, produce, vintage, profit, earnings, INCOME, revenue, return

Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

if we must assume probabilities, let based it on our understanding of other events, commandments/instructions, practices e.t.c at the time. we know the following;
1. Prior to conversion, the gentiles were not tithing to God

Neither were they fasting or praying to God.

2. Acts 15 provide details of the aspect of the Jewish practice that the gentiles were required to comply with and tithe was not included

Wrong, Acts 15 provides details of the aspect of the law of Moses they were required to comply with. Fortunately for us, the laws of God are not limited to the law of Moses. Tithing was BEFORE Moses' grandfather!

3. We know from the O.T that there was an instruction for the Levites to receive tithe and the Hebrews 7:8 you keep regurgitating refers only to the Levite. We don't find a contrary instruction for gentiles to tithe to pastors

The bolded is right and is what i've been saying for about 12pages, except you mistakenly wrote this.

4. In the course of establishing the tithe in the O.T, God declared the tithe of the land as sacred to him, he defined his tithe and mandated that this should be given to the Levite as their inheritance. In the NT, God did not modify this definition and beneficiary.

You make it sound so cool, establishing, declared, defined, mandated, bla bla. All na grammar. Every Bible student knows when God was specific and detailed in the law. Compare the issues of making the tabernacle, or of cleansing, or of sacrifices, with what you're saying of tithes. There is no such detail and definition given. It simply states that the tithe is holy to God.

Lev 27:30 And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD's: it is holy unto the LORD.

Lev 27:32 And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD.

It's not limiting it or defining it or establishing it. The focus is that tithes belong to God. In other places, it mentioned of some tithe that belong to widows and levites. Take the scriptures cumulatively not in some regimented isolation nobody demanded of you.

5. We know Paul did not collect tithe because [s]a. there was no contrary instruction that tithe can be received by non-Levi priests;[/s] b. Paul refused to burden the converts by working to earn his living. If tithe was the key to wealth, Paul would not deny the gentile Christians their 'breakthrough', instead Paul went from one Church to another collecting from those that are better off to support those in need. We know very well that most of the bible verse used to support prosperity gospel were Paul' s statements, yet Paul did not practice it.

selective reading yet again. paul never gave a reason for not collecting tithes or for collecting tithes. i thought you loved to argue that Paul did not talk about tithes? suddenly you know the reason why Paul did not collect what he did not talk about? i didn't say tithe is any key to wealth, dunno why you're devilishly trying to push that on me. Paul didn't 'burden' people but could have. He had the power to, it was his personal decision as shown here.
1Co 9:11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
1Co 9:12 If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.

So image123, on what basis do you want me to assume that the gentiles tithed?

On the basis that they were mindful of the words of the holy prophets. Words like Malachi 3 and co.
The gentiles gave more than 10%. they didn't need to be taught giving. Many of them gave their all. The early christians were serious and practical. Today, we have little of their type left, people need to be taught to give. You don't teach alphabets to an O'levels student. Why should they be taught on 10% when they had given their all and were ready to give their eyes? Its unlike many of the wishy washy folks today, who are still asking if it is reading the Bible is necessary or not.

@Gosh

...make I go sleep first. When I wake up, I will respond...at least I don quote you already....

And what is this supposed to mean? you don't trust him, right? He's not a christian because he tithes, or he's dubious because he's not an antitither. It's sickening how many of your folks think salvation is all about tithes, yet accuse others(pastors without names) of preaching tithes as pre-requisite to salvation. you're blind and under the law without knowing it.

@zikkyy and fans

How do i reconcile these two

you would when you start reading the passage as the Word, instead of for tithe argument.

first Bidam says it was Jesus receiving tithe in Hebrews 7:8 (see below).....

Bidam: Paul even settled d matter in verse 8..of heb 7...He states plainly that Christ receiveth them(the tithes) of whom it is witnessed that He liveth"..who are the witnesses that Christ is Alive? Christians ofcos..we are His witness..Christians give tithes to Jesus. Paul could not make it any plainer.

Didn't want to respond to this as you're only fooling around. You well know that i also say this, and that's why you initially asked if bidam was related to me. Bidam gave you an answer, then you decided to put an insincere spin on it.

....then Apostle Image123 says it was some men (see below)

Image123:
(BBE) Now at the present time, men over whom death has power take the tenth; but then it was taken by one of whom it is witnessed that he is living.
If this is not evidence, there is nothing called evidence. hebrews PLAINLY states that some people were receiving tithes. hebrews was written AFTER the law.[/color]

Now who is right who is wrong? the problem is that you guys believe you are saying the same thing.

You well know that i was referring to the first/bolded part of that verse, while Bidam was referring to the second/latter part of the verse. In case, by any sick chance, you didn't really know, well re-read it now with a better understanding. i'm talking to all of you that fell for the zikky bait BTW, zikkyy and fans.

debosky: This is a tenuous argument at best and a disingenuous and deceptive one at worst.

This is what the 'tense' means here - In Genesis 14:20 (what the 'there' refers to) Melchisedek receives tithes from Abraham. That is simply a presentation of the previous narrative.

It does not mean Melchisedek continues to receive tithes from anyone else. It is simply a way of comparing a snapshot in Genesis 14:20 with present day (at the time of writing Hebrews).

In Genesis 14:20, Melchisedek receives tithes from Abraham - in the days Hebrews was written, a Priest receives tithes from Jews.

Many other translations omit the 'receiveth' in order to emphasise on what is actually being compared, the immortality of Melchisedek compared to Levitical Priests.

Can you explain why Melchisedek would be collecting tithes alongside with Levitical Priests? How would the people know who to give tithes to? Is it one month to Melchisedek and the other month to Levitical Priests? Or do they share a rota for tithe collection

As much as you're trying to make it a 'there' and 'here' argument, that's not what we are talking about yet. We are talking about 'receiveth' and 'received'. There is a difference of tenses. I bake is different from i baked. Now, you're trying to blame the King James. Look at it in 7other translations. i guess all of them don't know their tenses like you do.Focus on the 'receive' instead of 'received' if you can.
1. (ALT) And here on the one hand dying [fig., mortal] men receive tithes, there on the other hand [it is] being witnessed that he lives.
2. (BBE) Now at the present time, men over whom death has power take the tenth; but then it was taken by one of whom it is witnessed that he is living.
3. (DRB) And here indeed, men that die receive tithes: but there, he hath witness that he liveth.
4. (Darby) Heb 7:8 And here dying men receive tithes; but there one of whom the witness is that he lives;
5. (GNB) In the case of the priests the tenth is collected by men who die; but as for Melchizedek the tenth was collected by one who lives, as the scripture says.
6. (LITV) And here dying men indeed receive tithes, but there it having been witnessed that he lives;
7. (WNT) Moreover here frail mortal men receive tithes: there one receives them about whom there is evidence that he is alive.

They are all in continuous tense. Why didn't they say men received tithes? That would so much have helped your case. Especially when one considers that the chapter freely used past tense where things were past. Pls, take note of the bold.
Heb 7:6 But he whose descent is not count[b]ed[/b] from them receive[b]d[/b] tithes of Abraham, and bless[b]ed[/b] him that had the promises.
Heb 7:7 And without all contradiction the less is bless[b]ed[/b] of the better.
Heb 7:8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
Heb 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, paid tithes in Abraham.
Heb 7:10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him.

If you can't see this, its beyond me what can be done to show you. Verses in Hebrews 7 refering to Genesis 14 all very clearly show the action in past tense.
Melchi and Levi are of a different order of priesthood. Jesus was our High Priest even while the Aaronic priesthood was in place. In the end of the day, it is to God that you give tithes.

Zikkyy: How do i reconcile these two first Bidam says it was Jesus receiving tithe in Hebrews 7:8 (see below).....



....then Apostle Image123 says it was some men (see below)



Now who is right who is wrong? the problem is that you guys believe you are saying the same thing.



This i agree with. You guys are baptised with the same spirit; the spirit of confusion even image agrees.



How dare you call zikkyy (the perfect gentleman) a bully



You see your self i told you already that you lost touch with reality i will talk to you only when you are in your lucid interval

a deliberate attempt to confuse issues, God is watching too.

debosky: Hebrews 7:8 does not say Melchisedek continues to receive tithes.

But there he receiveth them - The ὡδε, here, in the first clause of this verse refers to Mosaical institutions, as then existing: the εκει, there, in this clause refers to the place in Genesis (Genesis 14:20) where it is related that Abraham gave tithes to Melchisedec, who is still considered as being alive or without a successor, because there is no account of his death, nor of any termination of his priesthood.

http://bible.cc/hebrews/7-8.htm

This passage is only comparing the mortality of Levitical priests with the immortality of Melchisedek and not evidence of non-Jews giving tithes to anyone else. The only men 'receiving tithes' as recorded by Hebrews 7:8 are Levitical Priests for whom, as far as they are concerned, the law continues to apply.

the tenses brova, the tenses! receiveth is not the same as received, you can't twist this one.

Before you continue, you can read the third chapter of genesis.

The first time the serpent is mentioned, he is described as the most mischeivous of animals. It is for this reason he is able to tempt eve. He is even able to talk to her. I still wonder how an animal was able to do all these. What was he even gaining by tempting her?

But lets assume it was the devil that possessed the snake although that was never mentioned and we have already been given a great impression that it was actually the snake doing all those things.

If it was the devil that possessed the snake, how come the snake was directly punished and no reference was made to the devil? That seems very silly right? Unless we again assume God was punishing the snake for allowing the devil use him. So now the snake has the power to resist the devil? And that is very unlikely by the way.

Yet again lets make another assumption which could be the only remaining explaination: that the snake is the devil itself.
In other books of the bible the snake is refered to as the devil. But if the snake is the devil how come moses who even wrote the book of genesis used the snake as a symbol of healing when the isrealites were dying? How come the devil is helping us kill rodents?
It all seems quite silly, all the possibilies I mentioned, so does the story itself.

But I would appreciate it if you could give your own explantion of the events of the third chapter of genesis, unless you have none ofcourse.

The bolded is the answer to your question even though i'm convinced that you and your ilk are not looking for any answer. It can be inferred, deduced, gathered and reasoned from other scripture.

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

the serpent/snake was a cunning animal.
GW Gen 3:1 The snake was more clever than all the wild animals the LORD God had made. He asked the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must never eat the fruit of any tree in the garden'?"

Animals have varying levels of intelligence incase you do not know. The snake was more clever/cunning/wiser/crafty/subtle. With much power comes great responsibility. the serpent allowed Satan to use it, just like you usually allow satan to use you on NL and at home.
In those days, Adam could communicate with the animals, this is not strange as even today, some people communicate with animals especially through training. Any more questions?

chukwudi44: Oga joagbaje don come againoo wetin pesin no go see for nl.Do you really mean to tell me that men are no longer inferior to God? This sheer heresy of the worst proportion.

guy i dey chop pepper oh, no go wound me for here.

You will not waste your time discussing because you don't have anything to say. I was expecting this. It very obvious you dont understand what you are talking about. You think its enough to come here posting beautiful nonsense abi?

sharrap bully, find your mate. Not everybody can defend things to the core. Doesn't mean what they are doing is wrong. Some atheist guy can tear one's faith to shreds and the believer is speechless or confused doesn't mean the athiest or unbeliever is right. A good lawyer can perplex the innocent in a courtroom and make him look and even feel guilty. Talk to me ehnnn.

Are you related to image123

waohhh, you no serious at alllllllll. We are BTW, and like bidam brilliantly said. BTW, if Mechi is the guy in Heb7v8, how is tithe before the law a one-off since 'Melchi' continues to receive, not just once?

@zikky and co

We don't have evidence of people receiving tithe after the law, it is not stated anywhere in the bible. I agreed it's possible people received tithe after the on the fact the temple was active till about 70 AD. We don't know if any body received tithe, we can only assume.

this is laughably sad.

Heb 7:8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

(BBE) Now at the present time, men over whom death has power take the tenth; but then it was taken by one of whom it is witnessed that he is living.
If this is not evidence, there is nothing called evidence. hebrews PLAINLY states that some people were receiving tithes. hebrews was written AFTER the law. Where do you guys keep your knowledge of tenses while reading Hebrews7. Gosh was hypocritically yapping about tenses earlier. Is Hebrews 7v8 not different from "And here men that die receive[b]d[/b] tithes; but there he receive[b]d[/b] them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth".
Insincerity is a spiritual disease oo.

You should be asking yourself the reason the gentiles did not tithe.

how do you know for sure that they did not? Is it recorded that they sang, or fasted or had their bath? must it be recorded for you to believe or at least assume a Probability?

I dunno what else we can deduce from you claiming that Paul, being under the law, encouraged Gentiles to follow him.

Or maybe you'll explain the 'law' was Paul 'encouraging' gentiles to follow here.

Your antitithe friends are the ones that have the job to explain. i've been trying for time and pages to show them that there are different types of laws, that you can't just generalise the law in Hebrews7 to mean every law. i've asked first, what law? i've told what law it was in another thread before but they did not believe me, they were spewing stuff about law of tithes then. thank God, now they aren't so naive. Read Jo's posts on this issue, he explained it.

If tithing a portion of my income is a valid tithe, then my tithe could be anything. My tithe could be a tenth of my transport cost to church every Sunday and according to image123 it's a valid tithe. You see then your definition of tithe as tenth of income is rubbish.

you're deceiving yourself by claiming that i said things that i didn't.

@zikkyy and co

Your problem is that wherever you read the word 'law' in the bible, you assume it is the mosaic law that's being discussed. You don't even understand the verse you are quoting

Actually, it seems you are the ones making the assumptions, you the anti-tithers that is.

The goal and purpose and summary of the law is love, and love still needs to be adhered to. It is the summary and goal of the law.
1Jo 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
BTW, what is the Mosiac law and what is the old commandment, ZIKKYY?

Brother image123, i think you have lost touch with reality.

Meaning you can't argue against the points raised but you are not willing to take it.

For your learning abi? you agree it's not for you to practice. so what exactly did you learn from the OT tithing practice?

What do you learn? i learnt to tithe as this would help ministers on a consistent basis. Stop deceiving yourself.

Jam 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Even so abi? you realize the that God took care of the priest with tithe & offerings. Offerings here includes sin offering, guilt offering, cereal offering e.t.c If the priest were maintained with part of meat and cereals burnt on the altar, even so they should be maintained with burnt offerings today abi? you see yourself

they afre still being maintained today with tithes and offering. Nobody stops you from bringing food, meat, cerals or animals to your pastor. It's awkward in many quarters today though because exchange rates have changed. People pay rent, transport, education, bills with primarily MONEY now. But you're still free, if that's what makes you comfortable.

The law of God in this case is not referring to the Mosaic law. You forgot to add the part that says "For what the law could not do....". Before you begin to argue the verse i quoted you must first understand the purpose for which it was quoted. You image123 are still walking after the flesh, you rely on the mosaic law to check your excesses. That's what am pointing at; you still rely on the law to perfect you. some peeps already walk after the spirit, them don leave you behind.

Again, kindly explain what the mosiac law is? Also, what is the law of God and what is the difference. you're the only one harping about the mosiac law, please explain what you mean. i specifically said "the law of God" but you keep forcing yourself to assume that i said mosiac laws(whatever that means). You quoted the verse to try to show me that you are not on the same 'level' with me, which wasn't clear how that could show me. Until you realise that the law is not to justify or save or perfect anyone, you'd continue to stumble.

You are totally wrong.The Israelite did not assume that tithe was a tenth of income; Under the Mosaic law, tithe was not defined as a tenth of income. the Israelite knew tithe was tenth of their harvest (crops), and measure tithe of the farm animal every tenth animal.

Semantics, income is harvest. You need a good dictionary and perhaps a thesaurus.

Then what EXACTLY was SET ASIDE and ANNULLED Or better still, what exactly is the "former commandment" that was set aside. We need answers please.

You didn't know you needed answers when you were engaged in your solo piece? You should thank God and learn from the reply Jo gave you.

I don't think anybody is saying the law is bad. Quoting from the law is not an issue. It becomes an issue when you tell Christians to adhere to the commands contain in the law.

No, it only becomes an issue when you tell christians that keeping the law is the way to their salvation or justification or perfection.

(CEV) what God's prophets said would happen. You must never forget what the holy prophets taught in the past. And you must remember what the apostles told you our Lord and Savior has commanded us to do.

(GW) I want you to remember the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and what the Lord and Savior commanded you through your apostles.

2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior:

You are learning absolutely nothing .

Tithe must be so important to you , not sure why, is this what provides your daily income for livelihood ? SMH

that frosb guy got talents, he's a comedian. he needs to pursue his real destiny.

Where did Paul say circumcision was a 'good thing'?

The one i just showed you plain clear, you dey stammer. If i dare show you this one indirect, you fit put WANTED warrant for my head.

What Paul meant .... story story. See fact here, you said
"but for someone to use Paul's words to claim that Paul said, he was not without law, but under the law, and he encouraged gentiles to follow him. is just disappointing."

And Paul said,
1Co 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
1Co 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
1Co 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.
1Co 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
Paul talk am, abi he no talk am? All these are in the same epistle, to gentiles.

Let's see somewhere else where Paul clearly states he isn't conforming with the law: Philippians 3:1-9

you're talking about Paul's past tense, i'm talking about his present tense. Paul would do 1Cor9v20,21 again and again again.

The 'men' described here, as shown in other translations, are PRIESTS -

Who cares if they are monks. The simple and straight fact is that MEN received tithes to the knowledge of the apostles, and nobody made a rant about it, no apostle condemned it, neither did the Holy Spirit speak expressly about the dangers of the tithe-heresy.

I am sure those priests also were receiving and administering burnt sacrifices (as practiced under the law) - where did the disciples 'condemn' that, since that is what you are emphasising? Please show me where burnt offerings were condemned by Apostles.

what is this nonsense. You guys are been lazy and blinded by a small issue as tithes. When i show you this now, you'll not believe but will look for another question to ask. Watch this.

Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Jesus has clearly taken the place of such sacrifices. Jesus has not paid your tithes for you, be responsible.