₦airaland Forum

Fresh! A pure heart is a heart that has been cleansed by God.

@garyarnold

in the order of Melchizedek

Actually, it is AFTER the order of Melchizedek.

This is petite, it's the same thing: In the order of OR after the order of. Stop making issues out of nothing.
Heb 6:20  On our behalf Jesus has gone in there before us and has become a high priest forever, in the priestly order of Melchizedek. (Good News Bible)

In Hebrews 7:18 it says the command was disannulled.  That means that Numbers 18, the ordinance that established the Levitical priesthood along with tithing as its means of support was DISANNULLED, or ANNULLED.  That means it is treated as though there was never a Levitical priesthood.  It erases it.  Takes it out of the picture.

No, that's not what that scripture means. When it says 'a disannulling of the commandment', it's good to find out what commandment, for there are different commandments. Even God's words qualify as commandment going before so don't cut the wrong tree. Just in verse 16 before this passage lies your answer.
Hebrews 7:16  Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.
The law of carnal commandment was the commandment to be done away with i.e ordinances and washings and co. Why? Because Jesus had now taken their place and was/is more effective. It's not the law of tithe(as Kunle and some sometimes mysteriously call it). there's nothing in the bible about any law of tithe. it's certainly not referring to God's law.God's law/commandment is holy and pure.
Psalm 19:7  The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
Psa 19:8  The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
Psa 19:9  The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
The new testament also attest to this FACT that God's law is good and holy. One needs to know which law is been spoken of as changed so as not to arrive at wrong conclusions, or contradict the bible. Because we have the law of Christ and we have the law of God and we have the law of liberty and the law of Medes and persians and so on and forth.
The major issue in Hebrews 7 isn't on tithe, i wonder why it usually comes up as scripture to attack tithe.

It diminishes what Jesus did on the cross.  It diminishes grace.  It diminishes the use of the Holy Spirit.

This is a baseless claim. how does tithing diminish grace, the Holy Spirit et al? What's this?

Now you have to understand the meaning of earnings.

here we go againnnni

Using YOUR understanding of the definition of income, if YOU build YOURSELF something, you now have income.  If you have a tree on your property I guess you think that is income to you.  If you chop down the tree, the wood would also be income to you whether you sold any of it or not.

I never said this. this is gross misunderstanding, i think/hope? If you build yourself something, you're merely converting what you have to another form. in this case, maybe money to sand. Nothing new is coming in. Like i've said earlier, you can convert your income into another form, you can also convert your 'asset' into another form.

Things of nature are not income UNLESS you sell them or trade them.  They are GIVEN TO US by God.

Everything i have is given to me by God, can you please leave me to that belief of mine? iF I'M A FARMER TODAY or a doctor, to me, all my needs are supplied by God, and i play my part by sowing. My seed may be maize, it may be hardwork, diligence, study. i believe at harvest time god will give me my wages. And as a side-note here, wages is not always money like you believe. The wages of sin is not money, but the sinner will not miss his wages. Recall Jacob and Laban in Genesis? Do you know his wages? I'll show you never mind.

Genesis 29:15  And Laban said unto Jacob, Because thou art my brother, shouldest thou therefore serve me for naught? tell me, what shall thy wages be?
Gen 29:16  And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.
Gen 29:17  Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favored.
Gen 29:18  And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.
Gen 31:8  If he said thus, The speckled shall be thy wages; then all the cattle bore speckled: and if he said thus, The ringstreaked shall be thy hire; then bore all the cattle ringstreaked.
You see Jacob's wages on this two different occasions. the moral of my story is that wages MUST not be COMPULSORY money. I guess you may want to  go into irrelevances like asking "what's the tenth of Rachel". If that's the case, then you're not learning but only seeking to win points, goodluck to you.

So tell me, Image123, IF the harvest is income, then would the sale of the harvest create additional income?

If the harvest is income, then you tithe of it and do what you like with the rest. OR you convert the whole to money by sale, and tithe of your final income. It's simply a change from one form to another. You weigh the value of one form in the rate of the other and then you convert, if you so wish. But in the OT, if you convert your food to money, then tithe of your money, then the priest will have to go and re-convert the money again to food which was what he needed. That's redundant. The priests did not need money as such/much. All their needs were already supplied. All they needed to do was concentrate and serve God acceptably. Today, it's different. There's evangelism to be done, no such thing in OT(if you think that doesn't involve money, maybe's because you don't do it). There's children to send to school, and i dunno if the school you went to collects yams as tuition, mine didn't. There's family and relative to cater for, and you need money to do that today sir/ma. There's the local church to maintain in a sense without having to tell the congregation to contribute for every single need.

I have shown that the scriptures excluded income from the tithe.  I will give it to you again:

How can that be when even the word 'income' is not in the Bible as reported by you?

Numbers 18:27 (KJV)  “And this your heave offering shall be reckoned unto you, as though it were the corn of the threshingfloor, and as the fulness of the winepress.”

That verse is referring to the Levites who were required to tithe from the tithe they received.  If you fully understand the above verse, you will see how it PROVES, beyond any reasonable doubt, that even WAGES could NOT be tithed on.  IF wages, or income, could be tithed on, that verse means nothing.  It would just be taking up space.

So once it's not what you think, it must just be taking up space? The passage is simply proving what i'm saying

Numbers 18:26  Thus speak unto the Levites, and say unto them, When ye take of the children of Israel the tithes which I have given you from them for your inheritance, then ye shall offer up a heave offering of it for the LORD, even a tenth part of the tithe.
Num 18:27  And this your heave offering shall be reckoned unto you, as though it were the corn of the threshingfloor, and as the fullness of the winepress.
someone else's tithe may be your own income/harvest. It's 10% one.it's 100% to you. Then the Levites were to tithe of this and it was reckoned/considered by God to be equal to the field harvest. you see God wasn't driven by the letter of His Word but by the Spirit.

Please tell me, if all income was tithable, WHY did God limited every tenth animal to ONLY animals in herds and flocks?  Why not all animals?

Which one is this one again? Must God make a comprehensive list of every animal at every instance?
Leviticus 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.
Flock and herd includes all animals that you rear, don't you know the meaning of the two words? As if He's expecting peeps like you, He adds EVEN OF WHATSOEVER that passes under the rod. Ah Ah

How is it that the Church's claim to tithes was EXTENDED in the middle of the 13th century to other animals if everything was tithable to begin with?

Maybe because the writer is ignorant or blind to the events that were the norm in bible days. Did you say 13th century? Field, Yard, Stall, Forest. Your harvest is your harvest whether you reared it in the moon or in Uranus. When one understands God and His ways, one'll not be getting ridiculous in the word. you don't need to tithe for someone else, it's an individual's choice. You don't tithe when there is no increase(which by the way is below God's will for you), you don't tithe on what you've already tithed on except you wish to, you don't make unnecessary issues and mountains out of tithe, it's wasn't meant to be a big matter.

Many say that in Biblical times they didn’t have money and that the economy was based on bartering of goods and services.  That is not so.

Can you point to the 'many' that have said this, or it's all in your imagination? I've listened to popular preachers on several occasions. I hardly hear them speak on tithes. There are many things i may disagree with them on, but they rarely make mountains of issues. It's only you that keep hearing pastors spreading the lie from the pit of hell. It's only you that keep hearing messages on tithe every sunday, and Malachi keeps ringing in your ears. Well may God help you find true peace, that's my prayer for you.

@zikky

I know individuals work at Nestle, same way a farmer will employ people to work the farm. But this was not what my objective. I was hoping you would see the organization as an individual (e.g. a farmer), and see the harvest as having gone through a processing cycle that converts the seed (raw material) into the finished or final product. Like gary already mentioned, you don’t receive income twice on the same item (except you be yahoo man). The product only becomes income when you sell.

What more can i say? The point is so close, yet so different. the issue of the 'income talk' is that gary claims that the harvest of the israelites is not income, my claim is it's income. i see your point about the harvest going through a processing cycle of conversion. It's the same process for the farmer, his seeds go through a processing cycle to become crops. It's the same thing. A hundred processings, the final product is still income. It's merely gone through an exchange of values. He's not receiving income twice on it, he's only converting. One man's income may be another's raw material. Your final product/your goal is the income.

"Income is the sum of all the wages, salaries, profits, interests, payments, rent and other forms of earnings received, in a given period of time"
Income must involve a counter/second party. It’s not a one way traffic. They all involve a sale (somehow). Take a second look at your post.

And what happened to the other definition i posted? i could defend this, but it seems you'll simply look for seeming faults and leave other real issues.

Let even assume that this is income (which of course is not true, but let just assume), the business man then must tithe from what his business generates and not his profit as some people believes.

It's not compulsory to tithe from the exact thing that your business generates. You're missing the spirit/goal/point why God told the people to give a tithe to the levites. The reason for the tithe was that there may be meat i.e that the levites might be provided/catered for. It's the same spirit in which we're to cater for God's ministers today. When you talk of wealth in Bible days, it could easily be associated with how much food you've got, consider for instance the rich man in Luke

Luke 12:19  And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.
His bank was his storehouse full of crops. Today, more focus is on money in our society. Money is what will get you anything today, as it were. Even a beggar would prefer you give him money than food, that's the world of today. How you'll take care of ministers today without money beats my imagination. And if you're still feel to bring crops for your tithe, i don't think it will be rejected. That will be legalistic and immature though IMO.

I see a bit more complexity in the tithe of the flocks. It says every tenth animal that passes under the rod is holy unto the Lord. What I see here is that you can tithe from your flock year after year even if there were no new additions in the year. The tithe was not from the additions to your assets. The fact that the tithe is the tenth animal means you don’t tithe if you have just nine. So you see not everything is tithe-able

You don't read one verse of scripture and run with it. the Israelites knew that the tithe was of their increase. There was no complexity in it, they understood it even though they didn't go to university like us.
Deuteronomy 14:22  Thou shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed, that the field bringeth forth year by year.
And God's plan for them was fruitfulness, not barrenness. i believe i said it on this thread already that you don't tithe from losses or other people's property. You tithe on your harvest/yield/wages/profits/what comes in to you.
On the bolded in your quote, it suggests you do not understand the purpose for the command. the purpose was that instead of allowing the Israelite to choose the best or the worst animal to tithe, God made it a random picking. i.e all the animals(increase) were put into a place with a small gate, as the animals came out one by one, the tenth was chosen as tithe. You can picture it in your mind, or go to a farm, you put some chickens or goats  into a place and as they come out randomly, you pick the tenth. If the owner felt that picked animal should be changed(maybe it looks weak or sick or something), he couldn't replace it but only add the preferred substitute.

Leviticus 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.
Lev 27:33  He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed
That's the purpose, it's not for an excuse not to tithe. A true giver would still give something as his tithe. It's like in our today's case, maybe someone earns 74000. Now the tithe would be about 7400. If he gives 7400, he's tithed. If he decides to round it off, and give 7500 or even 8000, it's still accepted by God. that's the person who understands the spirit. But when we begin to play mathematics with God, or. we're compulsorily looking for change before we give, it's either immaturity in that understanding or carnality.

Image is not a dishonest pastor. I understand his plight. It’s not easy to accept as false, something you believed in and have been practicing for quite a while.

thanks for my defence, thou art right in the bolded, that's why i'm beginning to fall in love with you  i actually find tithing as a small issue. It surprises me myself the amount of posts i've written for it. i don't recall the last time i spoke to someone on tithe outside nl. And i'm trying also not to be too involved, but still truth is truth and we cannot do anything against it but for it. If it is this little thing that i have to defend, idefend. and if it is a weightier thing, i defend. And i'll say it again, it's not FORCE, this is a discussion forum. But what do i see, i see garyarnold who is making a career on 'fighting tithes' and i'm tempted to say like you( " it's not easy to accept as false" your dream and source of livelihood). I look at someone like KunleOshob who claims to be ordained by God to fight tithe and could be very violent against anyone on the way, and I'm tempted to think oh what a ministry. Thank God for everything all the same.

@Zikky,

@Image123, maybe I can add my thoughts here. Please note I have not gone through any dictionary, so I could be wrong, and don’t hesitate to correct me if you believe I am.

The harvest is not an income. Let’s consider a manufacturing concern like Unilever or Nestle. To produce Milo, Nestle will combine a number of raw materials (your seed) in addition to labour. The end product which is Milo (your harvest) is still an asset (stock) of finished goods which is kept in the warehouse. It becomes or generates income only sales are made to customers. Shell or Exxon-Mobil extracts crude oil from the ground, the crude is not income to the company till it’s sold.

Let even assume that this is income (which of course is not true, but let just assume), the business man then must tithe from what his business generates and not his profit as some people believes.

I see a bit more complexity in the tithe of the flocks. It says every tenth animal that passes under the rod is holy unto the Lord. What I see here is that you can tithe from your flock year after year even if there were no new additions in the year. The tithe was not from the additions to your assets. The fact that the tithe is the tenth animal means you don’t tithe if you have just nine. So you see not everything is tithe-able

Hi, maybe you should go through a dictionary. gary has decided to stick to his economics textbook definitions, and thinks anything outside his textbook is EXPANSION of God's Word. First to your analogy, Nestle is not an individual. the individuals working at Nestle do not consider milo as theirs. They probably wouldn't agree to be paid in Milo. They must even ask for permission before borrowing milo for themselves. The organisation doesn't function just as a department but as a team. they have marketers and sales outlet into which they invest a lot. They all share from the gains when sales are made. Of course, the milo is valuable asset to the company, but it needs to be exchanged to another value(usually monetary) before they can declare that they've arrived. The Israelites could easily make use of their crops and herds  etc as ready means of exchange. It was their moneywealth. That's the kind of society they lived in. Their riches were majorly in agric produce, not in the banks like is popular today. Their own banks were filled with agric produce, not paper.
It's a similar thing for Shell and crude oil. BTW, Shell doesn't sow crude oil. Their sowing/labour is in the drilling, refining and selling. Their harvest is in the exchange. The individuals that work there are not paid in barrels of oil, their own gain is money. The company is different from the individual.
Then to the definition of 'income'. i thought education should tell us that income is simply something that comes in, an increase. Well, since we must resort to higher authorities(books). let me quote one or two.

Income, money or other gain or return resulting from goods or services produced in a given period of time, usually measured annually. Income may be received by an individual or by an entity, such as a corporation or a government.

The various types of income are usually described within the private or the public sector of economic activity. In the private sector the four major types of income are wages, the return for labor; rent, the return for use of land; interest, the return for the use of capital; and profit, the return to the business owner. Income in the public sector, called national income, is the money measure of the annual flow of goods and services in an economy.

Income is normally measured in money terms, although nonmoney definitions are sometimes used. Real income refers not to the actual money income

Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2008. © 1993-2007 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Note the bolded.
I'm looking at Wikipedia and i see almost the same thing, you may also freely check it. I'll quote a sentence there; "Income is the sum of all the wages, salaries, profits, interests, payments, rent and other forms of earnings received, in a given period of time"
This are for the general public. this is what the common man views income as. That's why i was telling gary that it's not only accountants and economists that live on earth. He can't limit meanings to what he must put down at an exam or for tax purposes, that's not the purpose of education. I'm going out, i'll see to respond to other issues laterrrr. thanks

@ Joagbaje and newmi

l think you should answer them question Joagbje asked you: ifi them disciples were bornagain before Jesus died and resurrected then of what significance then is the shedding of the blood of Jesus to their them. thank you

why are you afraid to answer the question. Let's not try to win an argument. If i'm wrong , I will gladly admit and learn. Don't raise all these wof sentiments nonsense to dodge a question. I'm sure you guys are feeling boxed in. If not you should have answered .

I already answered that on his behalf. I'll re-post it and add to it.

---

1Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures;
Hebrews 2:9  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
for every man, for the whole world, to bring us in not just the jews, to open the vail, to make an end of sins. To take our place, our punishment (for the soul that sins shall die).

---

Christ did not die to recreate us, He died for the sins of all the world. Without His death, the gentiles could not be brought in en-masse. Without His death, the vail of the temple could not have been done away with i.e we all couldn't be brought nearer to God, to His very presence. He died to take our place of punishment (the wages of sin is death), so that we do not have to take it, in the process also taking the place of the paschal lamb. That's why we do not have to kill lambs today, He has taken their place,, that's the 'disannulling of the law'. That's why Jesus shed His blood.
Ephesians 1:7  In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
There is no scripture that will tell you that Christ's death is for recreation.
And lets i skip it again, He resurrected because He is Life. That's His nature. Or let me dwell on a point that is more easily understood; that is that He is both priest and sacrifice. Christ was not just the sacrifice but also the Priest that offered the sacrifice. And He still remains our high priest today.(Hebrews). The significance of the resurrection amongst others are;
1. It stands Christ as unique for all time from any other religious leader or founder.
2. It gives Him victory over death, giving all believers hope and certainty of our own resurrection.
3. It proves His commitment to fulfil all scripture(the Scripture cannot be broken), giving us faith in His promises and immutabilty.
Again, the scriptures do not say resurrection is for recreation. Recreation is the life of Christ/eternal life in us, and we receive it when we believe in Jesus. Jesus was verily verily sure of this.

John 5:24  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but IS passed from death unto life.

Many professing christing lack understanding of righteousness in christ. If your foundation is faulty it will affect the entire structure. The truth is simple.

I wish you really believed and understood this quote of yours. Your sect appears to be the one in lack of this basic understanding, the entire structure is seen affected. The likes of OLAADEGBU do not struggle with major sins that are common to many in your congregation. Your congregation, sorry to say, is widely reported for base sins like fornication, lasciviousness, idolatry, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, revellings, and such like. While you deny some, some you excuse as mistakes due to immaturity, but OLA and his friends say they've passed that stage. The truth is simple, and perhaps bitter.

There was no physical blood shed from the foundation of the world. It was a prophetic utterance.

Ohh, were you not the one that was pointing to names written from the 'foundation of the world'? So this one is prophetic? ahhh.

The operation of the holy spirit has been outward . Just like the Old Testament prophets . The holyspirit operation was not inward because Jesus had not been glorified .

Jo, this is scripturally wrong. The Holy Spirit has always been around and in God's people. He came on Pentecost in baptismal measure and to dwell PERMANENTLY with us. Look at this scriptures showing that the Spirit was not just outward but inward.

Psalm 51:10  Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
Psa 51:11  Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.
Luke 1:41  And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
Luke 1:67  And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,
Exodus 31:3  And I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship,
Numbers 27:18  And the LORD said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him;

Jesus didnt come into any person until his ascension . When a man receives Jesus , he receives the life in christ as well. Because the life is in christ.

Jesus was already IN, nobody is disputing the bolded.
John 15:4  Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
Joh 15:5  I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
Joh 15:9  As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
You obviously cannot stay somewhere you are not IN, you can't abide somewhere if you are not there.

John 3:15  That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
John 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

All these scriptures are irrelevant to your claim, they were written after his resurection.

Written after His resurrection? What sort of excuse is this? where do you stand exactly? when convenient, you'll claim the gospels were before the resurrection, now, you're claiming after resurrection. When did Jesus say it and who was He talking to? You becoming such a joke on this issue.

The communion was symbolic , that's drink was symbolic , but that was not the blood of the covenant

Jesus said it is the blood of the new testament, Why are you saying it is not? should we believe you now ahead of Jesus? I'll quote it again from another passage.
Mark 14:24  And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

Repeating yourself is not equal to overwhelming evidence. You just show that it's hard for you to learn. Makes the phrase 'He that HAS ears to hear' so relevant. It's one thing to have ears to hear, it's another not to have at all.

@Joagbaje

They believed in christ but their spirit had not been recreated, they saw jesus in the light of a political messiah.

Yes, the disciples did not fully understand Jesus, and His Words. Do you? Does a negative then confirm that you don't have a 'new life/spirit'?

We must remember that there was no remission without the shedding if the blood  It is a big error to say that men were reconciled to God without the shedding of the blood of Jesus.

We must also remember that Jesus was slain from the 'foundation of the world'. Don't you remember?

the new creation was created in christ when he was resurrected. His resurrection gave birth to the new creation.

They had a form of godliness but their worship was In the flesh before Jesus died. The true worshippers came on the scene after resurrection

Any scriptures to confirm the bolded? You quoted this passage, did you read it?

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God[ is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship[ him] in spirit and in truth.

The question is when did the apostle get born again , the answer is, they got saved after the death of christ .

John 17:12  While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the Scripture might be fulfilled.
Luke 19:10  For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

If you claim they were born again , what did Jesus die for? Was there any need for Jesus to die again?

So what did Jesus die for.

1Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures;
Hebrews 2:9  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
for every man, for the whole world, to bring us in not just the jews, to open the vail, to make an end of sins. To take our place, our punishment (for the soul that sins shall die).

John 5:24  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
This above is the condition for passing from death to life, not just the resurrection. Believe the good news and you will be saved.
2Corinthians 5:17  Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
Any man IN Christ is a new creature. That is the gospel. To believe IN CHRIST, in His sacrifice, in His Life, In His atonement, In His substitution, in His resurrection, in His Lordship, In Him, that's salvation. You become born again when you believe In Him, not when He resurrected.

@Joagbaje
Thanks for answering the questions, its a good step in the right direction.(though i'm not sure you said what it means to be born again, but i'll pass)

To be born again is thesame as receiving eternal life of God in our spirit . This eternal life is a life we recieve instantly we got born again.

This is corRECT, being born again is the same as eternal life. what we're saying is that the above disagrees with your belief concerning the apostles. The apostles had eternal life, no doubt. Meaning, it is the same as them being born again. What are the pre-requisites for eternal life again? Amongst others, it's simply the below:

John 3:15  That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
John 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 6:54  Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Does this ring a bell?
Matthew 26:26  And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
Mat 26:27,28  And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Also this

John 6:68  Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
John 6:69  And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
Search the Scriptures for "Believe in Christ and you will be SAVED".

John 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Joh 17:3  And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

John 17:25  O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
Clearly from the above, the disciples were saved. They believed in God and in Christ, they had eaten and drank, they had eternal life, they were not lost. There's no way you can be a follower/disciple of Jesus and not be saved, they were called and chosen, what more?

sin doesn't separate us from the life and the love of God. So long as the person still lives God

Isaiah 59:2  But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
Sin cuts us away from God, even 'baby' sinners know that. Even Jesus was cut from God when He bore our sins.
Romans 8:12  Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
Rom 8:13  For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
(BTW, the above is dear uncle Paul after the ooooooooold testament.

a man commits sins because of his immaturity. if he sins and realise it,all he need do is to repent of it and come out of such errors.

immaturity! i reserve my comment by thunder and fire. Why does he have to repent since he's not lost eternal life according to you?

If your child  brakes your plate, he does not cease to be you child because he did wrong. Eternal life does not switch off and on.

Breaking plates, you compare sin to breaking plates? Sin cost Adam and Eve Eden, sin is damnable.

1Corinthians 6:9  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1Co 6:10  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
If you commit a pardonable sin, and do not repent and ask for pardon, you do not have eternal life, or the word of God living in you.

1John 1:9  If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

I can remember ahithiopel and judas ( law of double reference)

Please can you quote scriptures that say that the above two's names were blotted out of the book of life? And if you believe their names are, i won't argue it but what makes you think that God will blot out their names but won't blot out others?

@5solas

In my insistence that things happen as foreknown by God, I must refer to this post of yours.
When I said it was absolutely by God's grace I saw 2011, did I in anyway infer I tried to take my life and couldn't?

All things happen as God foreknew before the foundation of the world. And we as believers can believe this without resorting to fatalism. We can believe God is in charge of every aspect of life and still trust Him to help us be the best we can.

I do believe in foreknowledge, but knowledge and grace do not mean the same thing, do they? The OP is on GRACE, not knowledge. You bring in knowledge into the discuss and have always sounded fatalistic from my knowledge of you. So sorry if i'm wrong sha.

Note that Simeon could not have died without seeing Christ and note also that this knowledge did not make him tempt the Lord by being suicidal.

Says who @the bolded? I didn't say that the knowledge of God's will/plan should make one tempt God. What i've said is that if one tempts God, God's will/plan can be changed inspite of the knowledge. A positive example for you then, God said Nineveh was going to be destroyed. They repented and things were changed. You can't say "Note that Nineveh must be destroyed in 40days because the Holy Spirit revealed it".

Image, you have to realise that Christ could not have died other than He did ,for the simple reason that all the particulars of His death (time, place, manner) were foreknown, predestined and foretold by His father and if any of these had happened otherwise, then would God have been stripped of His foreknowledge, power to decree, foretell and necessarily of every of His attributes and hence cease to be God.

If He couldn't have died, He wouldn't have bothered to escape or hide himself, or strictly charge people not to reveal His identity. When He was to die, He told them Himself, and viola, they started stopping ears, tearing shirts and nailing hands. He knew the plan and played His part in the plan., submitting to it even when tempted not to. Was He tempted, yes?
God wouldn't have been stripped of anything that is His. There are some people who think it is disrespect to call God's name or write His name. There are some people who clean their pen and themselves before and after writing "GOD". I think this are all naive human concepts(harmless and not sinful to me btw), it's not about stripping God of any attributes. God is GOD. He can't cease to be God, whatever the word cease may mean again.

His secret will however is unknown to us and not prescribed to us. We cannot frustrate it.

Can you name one of His secret wills? How then do you know that we cannot frustrate it.
Eccesiastes 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
I believe God has given us His word(the Bible) so that we may know His will,, and follow it for our good. It's how choice to make and He is very willing and able to aid us.

@garyarnold

But there is no INCOME from that LABOR until the product is sold.

You can receive goods instead of money from an investment.

The bolded is what i'm saying, i think. It doesn't have to be money. Income may be something else, of the same agreed value.

Since the word income does not appear in the KJV of the Bible, but the term is being used today with tithing

In the KJV you say. Well it's synonyms do appear (increase, yield, wages etc)

You absolutely refuse to accept the proper definition of income. Stop making up your own definitions and stick with the scriptures.

What is the 'proper' definition of income? I do not deny your textbook definition, i've been saying that it's not limited to that! Income is not limited to accounting class, or practising bookkeepers. People have being receiving income since days of yore, before there was ever a business book. Income is simply something that comes in, an inflow, profit, returns, revenue, earnings, proceeds, yield, wages, pay, salary, take-home pay, takings, produce, result, what english can i use again? i understand you have a career on teaching people on money and against tithe, but drop this bigotry.

What are goods received from investment? Is sowing not an investment? Is the harvest not received from this investment? This is not an accounting exam gary. This is reality, application of knowledge. A man who builds a house has only converted his wealth from paper to sand. He had it alright already and probably tithed it before building from the remaining resource. It was his before as cash, and is now still his as house.

^
It seems when i'm on FM, then you're on AM. And when i try to get on AM, you switch to SW. We were discussing on whether people's salaries/income today was equivalent to harvest(which you refused to see as 'income'). Not about israelis going to Jerusalem to eat festival tithe or wharreva. Remember?

It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman Proverbs 21v19
0P, you need to change your ways and attitude to your husband if you want the marriage to work smooth. The man also has his own, but you're the one here. So forgive him and try again. It's a smarter option than the lazy divorce thought.

@zikky
I have forgotten o! I ended the quarrel by fire and thunder and water in faith by grace.

@garyarnold
You were the one who said that crops and animals are ASSETS, not income. You said that God commanded the Israelites to tithe from their assets. It's that line of reasoning that i towed, and that was by the way. If according to you, the crop(asset) has to be exchanged for money(income), is it not logic that the value of 'asset' exchanged is equal to the income?

Really, i'm at a loss for words, but apology sincerely accepted and given as well nuclear.

OLAADEGBU:
"Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you." -- John 15:3

Who is speaking here and to whom?  When was this said?

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." -- 1 Peter 1:23

Can anyone here decipher whether the Apostles were born again before Jesus' death and resurrection or not?

I can decipher sir. I sir, me sir, i sir. They were sir.

@aletheia
Welcome o, how the leave? Se you bought something for us?

father Jo
The questions are on post 55and 56. You should have bothered to look for it.
Jesus resurrected never to die again, a firstfruit of what all believers will partake in in the future. Lazarus and others were raised to die again. They'll still partake in the 'resurrection morning'. But Christ lives forever.
sidenote- what's with this your continual 'mistake' with pastor chris[b]t[/b]? Why do we see only ce members often making this 'mistake'?

@zikky
Let not the sun go down on our quarrel na.

@garyarnold
Tell that to the lagos business school, or to Adam Smith. We're speaking common english, not chartered accounting. I believe the career and education section is still on NL. Go display your theories there. So you want to slam copyright on english words. You need a dictionary asap. What comes in at the end of the year, the month, the week, the day, that's income.(and the common people heard him gladly). Whether you decide to call it harvest, profit, sales, salary, blessing, my name. It's what you reap. That's basic english, not all this theories revised and reversed till the millionth edition.
To tow your line of reason, is your income not equal in value to your asset? Is your income not a product/produce of your asset?

Joagbaje:
They were not born again until Jesus rose from the dead. He was the first to be born again.

Revelation 1:5
5 And from Jesus Christ,[ who is] the faithful witness,[ and] the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 

So Jo, you're back and you haff dodge my questions. Anyway, life goes on. I see Enigma has explained that scripture you quoted. Always study, and also think 'outside your box' once in a while. There are resources and commentaries around you for passages you're not clear on. Don't just build weird doctrines out of one passage.
Like enigma has said, Jesus being the first begotten of the dead simply points Him as the first to resurrect. That He may have the preeminence, and be no.1 in all. Clearly He was born of God before He died, even from eternity.
1Corinthians 15v20. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and BECOME THE FIRSTFRUITS of them that slept.
He's the firstfruits, the initial, the pivot and beginning of resurrection. It's not referring to being born but to resurrection. He was already begotten of God and pleasing to God.

The levites were given the tithe and offerings so that they may serve God without distraction. Not because there was no chance the labour market. The same principle is applicable today. Some church workers are on full time. They also have needs, families, educations, relatives etc to cater for. Not every christian can be a paul in every way. Paul wasn't married btw. We follow Jesus expressly, not man. Jesus can easily be seen by the Word, the scriptures. The scriptures is our guiding light, a lamp to our path, written for our learning. We can learn from all scripture, not just paul. Today, we may not be laying money at apostles' feet, or selling properties, or writing epistles, or frequenting prison and crucifixions. As many as are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God.
Today we have usher, choir, keyboard, glass pulpit, dvds and devotionals. The wind blows where it listeth. We're guided by the principles of the Word, not the letter.

@zikky
The apostles worshipped and prayed at the temple. The temple was still functional. The early christians still went there. You'll see peter and john there. You'll find Paul there. It wasn't a take over. It's later that christians were chased from the temples and synagogues. In 70A.D, the temple was destroyed. We're now in the gentile age fully. We are a holy nation, howbeit grafted in. God has qualified us priests and kings. If you have your offerings, sacrifices and tithes, you are free to bring them to your local church. That's grace, not the letter of the law. Christ accepts what we bring, as we bring it as unto God, not men.

To re-emphasise that John 17v12, He says 'those that Thou gavest me I have kept, and none is lost'. That's absolute proof that they were saved not lost. For the Son of man came to SAVE that which was lost.

^i dey guffaw chortle ooo tonye, don't kill us here abeg. Thou shall not kill is still relevant to my life?
Zikky i dey come o.

@garyarnold

Neh 10:38  And the priest the son of Aaron shall be with the Levites, when the Levites take tithes: and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of the tithes unto the house of our God, to the chambers, into the treasure house.
He's referring to the high priest, the son of Aaron. He can't possibly be with them in their cities, he's not omnipresent.

No, Aaron was the high priest, not his son(s).

Aaron was dead dead dead in Nehemiah 10 and Aaron wasn't omnipresent either. The high priests came from his geneology, this are simple sunday school stuff gary. You're the one who accuses others of being ignorant and false.

God doesn't change.

Are you quoting Malachi?( i thought that's the law talking to the priests?)

You change Leviticus 27:30-33 to include income, and you change Numbers 18 to allow God's tithe to be taken to the church.  GOD DOESN'T CHANGE, AND NEITHER DOES HIS WORD.

This is english. Income, profit, proceeds, wages, harvest, produce,yield, returns. They're all the same thing. It's your gain after work/toil. What you sow is what you reap. You go to work(at the office at the farm, on the sea, anywhere-the earth is the Lord's and the fullness) what you get at the end of the day is yours, given you by God. Making unnecessary ado about the meaning of income and profit is quite childish, if not insincere.

Why would all the tithe go to the Temple?  Nearly all the Levites lived in the Levitical cities, not the Temple.  How would the Levites live if their food was at the Temple?

Stop asking me, i didn't command it. Ask God who gave them all the tithe. The Levites didn't live in the temple, it's God's house. they had cities like you noted in the suburbs. But the people brought them the tithes for those who ministered at the temple. They had another tithe that they gave to their levite neighbours and the poor and widows, they had another tithe that they ate.
[quote[b]]I've already shown scripture to show the Levites and the priests ROTATED on a weekly basis[/b] - they served at the Temple about two weeks per year, one week out of every 24.  The wifes and children also lived in the Levitical cities.  Only makes sense if the whole tithe went to the Levitical cities where the food was needed.  That is why the Levites had to take a portion to the Temple.

[/quote]thanks for showing, i thought it was common knowledge though. btw, the shown rotation started with David i.e at the time of David, just in case you missed that. The Word of God doesn't always make sense to all and sundry. Another tithe actually got to the neighbour levites, and its common sense that when the levites in the temple shared the tithes, they took it to their respective families. that was their inheritance. Nobody suggested that they offfered it as burnt offerings.
Numbers 18:8  And the LORD spoke unto[b] Aaron, Behold, I also have given thee the charge of mine heave offerings of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel[/b]; unto thee have I given them by reason of the anointing, and to thy sons, by an ordinance forever.

Num 18:21 And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Num 18:24 But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as a heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance.
It was an heave offering. they didn't offer their offerings in their parlours, they usually brought them to the temple. It was the Levite's in the temple's increase, and they also gave a tenth of it. then they were free to use the rest as they pleased.

Num 18:31  And ye shall eat it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation.
And which ones are assets that came from God's miraculous increase? What's this one again? This people sha. So when Jesus miraculously  provided fish, it's not counted ko? assets from Go's miraculous increase. I consider my salary as one of such assets na.
And lest i forgeteth.
[quote]@image123,

You’ve taken 2Chronicles 31:5 out of context.  They even took the tithe to the wrong place.  They didn’t even understand what they were supposed to do!
In error King Hezekiah commanded the ordinary people to bring all the tithes to the Temple in Jerusalem. Due to his idolatrous predecessors the Temple had been closed and the exact location for tithes had been forgotten.
King Hezekiah had to "question" the priests and Levites because something was evidently wrong. All tithes of the nation were never intended to be brought to the Temple. The "storehouse tithing" concept was built on a mistake!

Look at this gary saying King Hezekiah was in error. And all those wonderful and most excellent ministers of God that you say they are either false or ignorant! (as Solomon might say,Men more righteous and better than you). Hezekiah was in error to you, hear God's verdict and opinion. He brought revival and godliness to his people.
2Kings 18:3  And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did.
2Ki 18:4  He removed the high places, and broke the images, and cut down the groves, and broke in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.
2Ki 18:5  He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him.
2Ki 18:6  For he cleaved to the LORD, and departed not from following him, but kept his commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses.

2Chronicles 29:1  Hezekiah began to reign when he was five and twenty years old, and he reigned nine and twenty years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Abijah, the daughter of Zechariah.
2Ch 29:2  And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father had done.
He did that which was right in the sight of the LORD. But in your sight he was in error, because it doesn't make sense to you. He's a scammer with lies from the pit of hell because he dared talk for tithe.
But the Bible records that he brought in revival. he restored the priests and levites to the temple, he organised the passover, he invited Israel to be part of the revival i.e asides the tribe of Judah which he ruled, he invited the divided tribes. He brought in sanctification and cleansing. Go and read 2Chronicles 29-31. He didn't follow the law like a pharisee but operated ahead of his time, in the realms of grace.
2Chronicles 30:22  And Hezekiah spoke comfortably unto all the Levites that taught the good knowledge of the LORD: and they did eat throughout the feast seven days, offering peace offerings, and making confession to the LORD God of their fathers.

2Ch 31:4  Moreover he commanded the people that dwelt in Jerusalem to give the portion of the priests and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the law of the LORD.
2Ch 31:5  And as soon as the commandment came abroad, the children of Israel brought in abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil, and honey, and of all the increase of the field; and the tithe of all things brought they in abundantly.
The obedience was so great that it took months for the priests to collate the givings. They didn't even have the grace that we often claim belongs to us.
2Ch 31:6  And concerning the children of Israel and Judah, that dwelt in the cities of Judah, they also brought in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and the tithe of holy things which were consecrated unto the LORD their God, and[b] laid them by heaps[/b].
2Ch 31:7  In the[b] third month[/b] they began to lay the foundation of the heaps, and[b] finished them in the seventh month[/b].

This is what surprised hezekiah, and it should surprise you too.

2Ch 31:9  Then Hezekiah questioned with the priests and the Levites concerning the heaps.
2Ch 31:10  And Azariah the chief priest of the house of Zadok answered him, and said, Since the people began to bring the offerings into the house of the LORD, we have had enough to eat, and have left plenty: for the LORD hath blessed his people; and that which is left is this great store.
2Ch 31:11  Then Hezekiah commanded to prepare chambers in the house of the LORD; and they prepared them,
2Ch 31:12  And brought in the offerings and the tithes and the dedicated things faithfully: over which Cononiah the Levite was ruler, and Shimei his brother was the next.

the english above is clear. They made a bigger storage to accomodate the offerings and tithe. Was massive

2Ch 31:20  And thus did Hezekiah throughout all Judah, and wrought that which was good and right and truth before the LORD his God.

God accepted him, don't condemn him.


@Zikky

Would you give a tenth of war spoils to God?

Sure i would, if like Abraham, God gave me the spoils like he does my salary.

Gen 14:19  And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
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.

It's actually a biblical practise and i'm a child of Abraham by faith

1Chronicles26:27  Out of the spoils won in battles did they dedicate to maintain the house of the LORD.

You see image123, we are saying the same thing and that’s why you should read gary’s post again

Not too sure we arrived at the same conclusion. The point was that the levites were alive and well and the temple was in use by all during peter's time. It's not so today, temple's been destroyed. Today, our priests and levites are our spiritual leaders and we are God's israel. Today, we give our offerings and tithes to God through them, not the extinct levites.
Hebrews 7:8  And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

@Enigma

First regarding the "overcomer": who is the 'overcomer'?

The Overcoming Life is eternal life. It is a life of perpetual victory. It's not just a yesterday's victory, or a would be victory. Rather, it encapsulates yesterday, today and tomorrow. That's the life of faith. That's Jesus- the same yesterday, today and forever. And so when He says "Everyone who is born of God overcomes the world.". It is to be seen in it's context. In this case,it's a context of faith. (1John 5:4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.) It is encapsulating all. It's saying The born of God has overcome, overcomes i.e is overcoming, and should overcome the world. It's speaking of potential, ability i.e He can overcome/He is able to overcome. It's not a guarantee that He WILL overcome. Infact, it is he that endures to the end that will be saved. That is the one who truly overcomes, He finishes his course as it were.
One can look back like Jesus or John and say "I have overcome", but saying "I will overcome" is hope, or at best speaking by faith or prayer. one don't even see that in scriptures.

Back to the book of life: just as some people's names were written in the Book of Life before the foundation of the world, so also some people's names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world. Revelations 17:8

The 'foundation of the world' talks are all centred on Christ. Christ is the focus here, let's not lose that focus. He's the one from the foundation of the world. he's the eternal one, not man. What those foundation of the world scriptures are saying is that the arrangements were already settled with Christ before even the creation of the world. It's all in the plan, the way of salvation, damnation, calvary. There are other scriptures you've probably not considered in making your conclusions. The matters of our justification or condemnation is all determined by His death which was known from the foundation but actually carried out/manifest when He dwelt among us.

Hebrews 4:1  Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
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.
Heb 4:3  For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
We have the same promise of rest like the Israelites in the wilderness had, but there was/is a possibility of coming short, ALTHOUGH the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

If the name was not found written! NOT if the name was blotted out ------------- of the Book of Life. Remember that the names were either written or not written before the foundation of the world.

Logically, if the name was blotted out, then it also won't be found written! If you wrote something on the board, then cleaned it, it would not be found written. Same as if you never wrote it. And Jesus told some people that He would not blot out their names, That obviously says it can be blotted out or there's no point promising.
Revelation 3:5  He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
This is a possibility far after the foundation of the world. Commenting on the incidence in Exodus 32, hear moses' deuteronomy
Deuteronomy 9:14 Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven: and I will make of thee a nation mightier and greater than they.
Exo 32:33  And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.
These obviously show that God has the potency to blot out names and write names after the 'foundation of the world', and Jesus still can. i just quoted it.

I hope I have given you food for thought and will stop here for now

.
Most surely you did, and you got me worrying on how to explain this. I hope that the above is explanatory.

Okay 5solas, welcome back.

John7:30  
Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.
John8: 20
These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.


Image, do you still maintain in the light of the verses above , that Jesus could have been killed before His time?

The above verses do not say a thing different from what i've said. Please, we should search the scriptures, they are complete and available to us. The 4 gospels complement one another and show us the full picture. If we just take some few verses, there's the danger of not getting the complete message. Take a look at the passages below and compare to what i've said.
John 10:39  Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand,
John 10:40  And went away again beyond Jordan into the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode.

John 8:59  Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Matthew 12:14  Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.
Mat 12:15  But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all;
Mat 12:16  And charged them that they should not make him known:

Wisdom is profitable to direct. Even from the beginning of Christ's ministry, He never lived in recklessness. He knew better than to tempt God.
Matthew 4:6  And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Mat 4:7  Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
he knew God's plan and purpose and sought to do it/fulfil it. Even when the time came, He still could have escaped. His will wanted Him to escape, Judas was slack, the false witnesses were not agreed, Pilate almost changed it, even the people who came to arrest Him were falling helter skelter. but thank God He prayed at Gethsamane, and God answered His prayers as usual. We too can pray and change things.

Peter was told what death he would go through to glorify God. It could not have been otherwise (John 21:19).

I'll quote myself again below.
"Jesus could have been killed before time, but He escaped. The Israelites that left egypt were supposed to get to canaan. It was God's plan for them, but they frustrated it."
Do you know that God's plan for Israel was the promised land, and not death in the wilderness? It is possible for we humans to actually make God's Word of no effect. Jesus Himself said that the pharisees did that countless times. I continue to say it, God did not make us as zombies but as 'in His image'. We have a lot of capacity(more than we realise), that's what makes satan so incensed. There is no blow to man's freewill. It is what God Himself made, and it's all over scriptues from the 1st chapter to the last chapter, literally.

Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever WILL, let him take the water of life freely.

So why did Jesus die?

But to have the salvation, so great salvation available at Calvary, where the clensing fount is opened wide for our sins. The salvation that saves us, not saves God. That makes us follow immediately like true disciples. That keeps us praying for 3days as it kept Paul, that came on Nicodemus, and on Zaccheus, that made Elisha, who had a good job, to turn his work instruments into firewood, so as to become servant to Elijah, never to look back or reconsider.
Elisha slew the oxen, and boiled their flesh with the instruments of the oxen. It was bye-bye. He wasn't asking about how hard it was for him to get the job, and it pays a lot. He wasn't saying "we produce cigarette but i don't smoke it, i only pack it, and i have children in school now." He didn't go to forums to hear opinions and say "my boyfriend is a married man and I love him only. He's taking care of me and my junior ones, should i continue with my only love of my life?"
Today, i think we live in a better covenant than Elisha's. We will do better. We must make up our minds, consecrate ourselves and commit our spirits to God. Together with Christ, we can do all things, and we will in Jesus' name!

January 19 1Kings 19v21

21. And he returned back from him, and took a yoke of oxen, and slew them, and boiled the flesh with the instruments of the oxen, and gave unto the people, and they did eat. Then he arose, and went after Elijah, and ministered unto him.


You heard that 'if any man be in Christ, old things are passed away.' Our Today's passage is the practical. There is a salvation that changes your job. There is a salvation that makes you to resign, that changes your wardrobe, your friends, your habits, your way/method of relaxation, even your church, and where you live.
Sorry to say, today, there is little or no conviction of sin. What many hear of is the good Lord, and how His goodness are begging to follow you all the days of your life. And then we ask, 'how many want to accept this good Lord, come forward'. Some even accept Him to pity Him. It appears as if they showed the Lord mercy, brought Him in to deliver Him from the cold outside. And so, when they are told that things are become new, they say No. "how can I leave what makes me happy?"(the women, the guys, the harlot attires, the bribery, the deceit, cheating, the fame, the limelight). Then, they'll say "God looks only at the heart. Infact, He's now there, I invited Him."

What more can i say? You can force a horse to the stream, but you can't force it to drink the water.