₦airaland Forum

MuttleyLaff:
"And once more all the people of Judah began bringing their tithes of grain, new wine, and olive oil to the Temple storerooms."
- Nehemiah 13:12

So far you concede that since there is no temple, you're not in Israel, that what you're tithing from, is not agro-based, as how done, when tithing was restored, as seen in Nehemiah 13:12 above, then any now practised, obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical tithing, monitised, specifically converted into and/or expressed in the form of currency, is null and void, then no wahala.

Ecclesiastical tithing, coming from a position of obligation or imposition, is unconstitutional in the realms of affairs of the New Covenant.

There is no constitution (written law) guiding the New Covenant. The new order is of the spirit and not the letters. Even in the old order, there was no spelt out punishment for not paying tithes.

Christ said to destroy the temple and he would rebuild it in three days, referring to the fact that he would be resurrected after three days. Of course the Jews did not understand him. What he meant was that the old order of temple worship was to cease, as the new order was to begin; mandating all God's worshipers to (re)direct their worship, through him, the Messiah. This renders the veiled altar irrelevant as the sacrificing of animals was no longer needed. That does not mean temple worship ceases. The Levites who were temple workers and law keepers were mainly priests (not just the high priest), choristers and guards. These are all still relevant in today's organized settings for God's worship, through Christ the High Priest, with church workers who see to the functioning of the group. Look at the spirit of the law and do not be caught up with the letters!

MuttleyLaff:
The significance of the splitting of the robe separating the altar from the rest of the temple, is the fact that it happened, immediately after Jesus uttered "It is finished" meaning that what He came to do on earth has been accomplished and signifying that access has now been procured for us t directly access and personally approach God, not at all much like was originally done there, when a human high priest and Levites were required spiritual contact with God was required or needed

Yes, the splitting of the robe and the timing of it was significant. As I am sure you have sensed already, we agree about some issues and not quite about others. I try to point them out so we do not make this about endless contestations; let's know where we disagree.

Even with the abolition of the old order and the establishment of the New Covenant, we still cannot "directly access and personally approach God". Our worship now should be directed through Jesus Christ, who is "the way, the truth and the life" and through whom we are to "come" to the Father. This was not so in the old order.

MuttleyLaff:
It is not my script. I was drawing your attention to your erroneous use of KILL, rather than correctly using MURDER, which is whats in the original text.

"Borrowing from your script" meant here was in style, where you wrote - All priests are Levites, but not all Levites are priests.

There is nothing erroneous about the use of the word KILL. That the more exact word is MURDER is common knowledge. This is not an area where we disagree about the fundamentals.

MuttleyLaff:
I already advanced that, tithing originated from a Mesopotamia practice that prevailed pre and post the Abraham's living days, so yes, affirmative, that tithing precedes and succeeds Levitical tithing.

Now, Abraham by custom was forced to give tithe upon spoils of war. The Israelites, by the Levitical priesthood, were forced by God to give tithe to the Levite et al. The sort of tithing Abraham did was tithe on anything goes spoils of war. The sort of tithing done by the Israelites were specifically restricted by God to agricultural products/produce.

Now, it is freewill giving, that in the New Covenant is what succeeds Levitical tithing. It is giving without being forced, coerced, put pressure upon to give. It is giving that is not obtained from using threats or scare tactics that if the giving is not done then bad things, misfortune, sickness, bad luck et cetera would happen

Under the New Covenant, there is no fixed figure or stipulated number, like for example to be religiously stamping out 10%. Under the dispensation of the New Covenant, your giving is to be spirit led. For example, you might decide to give 10% today, next time it might be 20%, another time, it could be 60%, following time, it could dip to 5%, even sometimes it might be 0%.

Giving has nothing to do with being mechanical, but has a lot to do with spontaneity. Levitical tithing and/or practised, coerced, obligatory or imposed ecclesiastical tithing, monetised is planned and not spontaneous or necessarily spirit led

"⁶Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously.
⁷Each one should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not out of regret or compulsion. For God loves a cheerful giver.
⁸And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things, at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work"
- 2 Corinthians 9:6-8

If we agree that tithing succeeds the Levitical priesthood, then I really do not see what our argument is about. As we know, the word "tithe" does not mean randomized contribution to the Levites. It is a "tenth" of the whole, not 20% or 50%, it was a significant example. Abraham was not "forced to give tithes" by anybody. He respected the custom (which is still my emphasis for Christians, respect the custom, "is not by force" and even rejected the offer of giving up just a tenth of the captives and not all the war spoils, including the goods.

Tithes were also meant for temple workers who minister to God on behalf of the people and for the financially challenged in the society. Is this not the role church workers play today? Please look at the spirit, the relevance of the law and don't get lost in the letters. THE LETTERS KILL but THE SPIRIT QUICKENS!

MuttleyLaff:
It does take all the relevance away from His position on payment of tithes, especially if tithing, has the relics and hang-ups of the old guard. The order of the day, now is 2 Corinthians 9:7. It doesnt specify any number like say 10% for example

The advice of Christ remains relevant, as much today as it was in those days. That is why Christ is SO IMPORTANT. He is a priest and a preacher for all ages. Hence St. Paul referenced that technically speaking, even the Levites, being descendants of Abraham, had paid tithes through the order of Melchizedek, whom Christ represents. (Hebrews 7:4-18) So while the Levites are no longer relevant, as there were not when Abraham gave tithes, the practice is still relevant.

While the law of tithing encourages you to give a tenth to the church, it also discourages giving more than giving a tenth for the basic necessities of the church. You cannot be giving all your wealth to your pastor, encouraging him to live flamboyantly off your hardwork. If you feel like giving all you have, use it for charity and not for tithes!

This whole effort is not to rehash the Mosaic law on Levitical tithing; it is just an attempt to throw some light on the issue and by so doing, remind Christians that the practice of tithing is still relevant in these times. It is a demonstration of LOVE, which is the fulfillment of the law, to people that are committed to working for God. If your spirit leads you to, do not think it is unlawful or irrelevant. Like all willful contributions to God's work, you will be blessed for giving tithes. If your spirit is not moved to giving tithes, much like it was even in the strict era of Mosaic laws, there is no punishment whatsoever for not giving.

MuttleyLaff:
Anybody trying to enforce the Mathew 23:23 obligation of tithing is ignorant of the changing times of what Jesus did on Calvary, doesn't understand the significance of when the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom and so they haven't changed with the times along with others.

If not for father Abraham, seeing today and so with faith believed God, the salvation we enjoy might not have readily forth come.

This is not the age of enforcing any Mosaic law that was scripted on tablets, but the age where God's laws are written in our hearts, we understand their relevance and abide willingly by them; no coercion.

The significance of the splitting of the robe separating the altar from the rest of the temple is the fact that much of what was originally done there - the blood sacrificing of animals, was no longer required. That brought an end to the Levitical/Aaronic priesthood, which was the old order. The blood-letting of animals was not the only activity that took place in the temple. Like the laws, Christ never said he was coming to abolish the temple but to rebuild it. Christ says that now, where two or three gathered in his name, he, the high priest would be there with them - "He has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

MuttleyLaff:
The TORAH, correctly says, "thou shall not MURDER" Not "thou shall not kill" There is a difference between kill and murder.

Borrowing from your script; to murder is to kill, but to kill is not to murder. Sometimes killing is even considered in the passive sense. When we go beyond the letters of killing, we transcend into the spirit of it and begin to consider terms such as murder, man-slaughter, self-defense, suicide, etc., which would then elaborate on how and why the killing occurred.

MuttleyLaff:
Tithe was for the Levites because they did not have a land inheritance in Israel unlike the other tribes had. Besides, just as I earlier advanced, God was exercising His right of demanding for a tenth of the agricultural produce of the land, Isreal, because this is what Israel, the man vowed he will give God based on him being blessed by God in the land, and we have it that over 400 years later Israel the man arrived as Israel, the Nation, in Canaan, the Promised Land with not just, wealth, riches and gold from Egypt, but arrived in a land full of milk and honey. By divine providence, the outstanding vow, the solemn promise made by Jacob aka Israel, the man, was due and/or matured enough to ask for by God from Israel, now, the Nation. It is God's property, and so He decided, that the tithes should be handed over to tribe of Levite with other instructions on how to administer it.

Much of this I concur with, just adding that Abraham did not tithe under compulsion and that tithing preceeds and succeeds Levitical tithing.

MuttleyLaff:
At that time or dispensation, it was necessary to pay tithe, and Jesus agreed to that. However, what Jesus with Matthew 23:23, wasn't pleased about, was people neglecting the religion of carrying out justice, mercy, and faith. As far as Jesus was concerned, justice, mercy, and faith are more important than paying tithing and even doing it up to extent of tithing on mundane agricultural spices plants like mint, dill and cumin. What about watching out for marginalised, the hungry, the downtrodden, the abuse, the incarcerated in prisons, the sick, homeless, the falsely accused, rape victims, why neglect positive convictions, right religious beliefs et cetera.

We are no longer bound to tithe to those who minister to us under the priesthood of Aaron. Rather, the practice of tithing, which is not to be left undone, should now be for those who minister to us under the priesthood of Jesus Christ.

MuttleyLaff:
Jesus' primary focus and concern wasn't about tithing, he actually was talking about misplaced priorities and even notably cursed the teachers of the law and Pharisees for putting paying of tithe in the fore front and ahead of other thing are greater in importance than tithing is.

Agreed Jesus' focus was not on tithes, but that does not take any relevance away from his position on payment of tithes.

desiredhome:
Abraham gave tithe of war not on his monthly salary/income.
Christ is the reason we are called Christians.... there is no account in the Bible where Christ paid tithe....
Majority of today's pastors are so focused on tithe (money/materialism) than building morals into the brethren/society...
It's because we have left the most important thing and focus on the less important things according to Mathew 23:23b, this is the reason the church has failed the society...
You cannot bribe God... Giving your monthly salary to a man of God without keeping/obeying the commandment of God is only enriching the Pastorprenours and encouraging them to build more expensive schools that your children cannot attend, build estates that mostly the thiefing politicians and even unbelievers can afford, buy private jets, live in luxuries etc .....while you are getting poorer hence the high rate of crime in our society despite churches everywhere

I may be wrong, but I can bet you did not read the original post of this thread, which I shared.

Abraham only performed an example of what would be made an obligation under the nation of Israel. We are not bound by the dictates of the Mosaic law on tithing, but it remains a commendable Christian practice. Hence Christ advised that we should not leave it "undone".

A "true Christian" will not, because of the pastors that have abused the law and even the spirit of paying tithes, deny the "men of God" who actually need it. Like I have said, everyone should be led by the spirit. Even if you obey the letters, and your spirit feels otherwise, your obedience is for nothing.

I'll leave you with the words of St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 9

7. Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink the milk? 8. Do I say this merely on human authority? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing?
11. If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?
12. If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?
13. Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?
14. In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

Kobojunkie:
What is written in Matthew 23 vs 23 is not about my view, or your view. There is one Truth,every other position about the lie that does not map right back to Truth is a Lie.

That verse was Jesus speaking to the Pharisees(the teachers of the Old Covenant Laws) admonishing them for picking and choosing which laws to obey and which laws to ignore, of the old Covenant.

True, Jesus was rebuking the Pharisees and telling them how to observe the law. While the upbraiding was specifically to the Pharisees, the standard of keeping the laws, which was the crux of his admonition, is applicable to all. It's like correcting a child by saying, "Why do you sweep the dirt under the carpet? You are supposed to sweep it to a corner, and pack." While the criticism does not apply to everybody, the advice does.

Kobojunkie:
Soldiers are not Children of God. They are soldiers who do work in service of nations of men. They do what they do in service in their master.

My point is there are grounds on which killing is permissible, which does not discountenance the law; hence applying the spirit over the letters.

Kobojunkie:
Oblige my pastor because my pastor is God over me? So, ignore what Jesus said... Obey your Pastor, that is your advice?

I wonder where I ever suggested obeying your pastor over Christ. If you read my original post, I already emphasized the need to hold the words of Christ above all others.

The spirit, again, is my emphasis. It is a humanistic inclination that when someone renders a service that you benefit from, you get to pay and even tip, as the spirit leads. When you see a working government, you are encouraged to pay taxes, regardless of the stipulations and penalties of the law. That is why performing artists/live bands get doles of cash from guests who "bless" them for thrilling the crowd, not minding that they are performing a service they must have been paid for by the celebrant.

If you wake up every Sunday morning and voluntarily join a church, and after a couple of hours, feel some spiritual upliftment from the preachings of the pastor, also enjoying the comforts (or discomforts) and ambience of the whole packaged environment, you are a beneficiary of a system that is funded by persons like you, or started like you. Even motivational speakers get paid.

There is a spirit behind the paying of tithes. The ultimate commandment is love. Understand it and apply the love that motivates you to bless whoever has ministered to you, to whatever situation you find yourself.

Kobojunkie:
Jesus has already made his stance clear on His commandments. You get to decide whether His commandments are worth anything to you in the end.

And his stance on tithing was pretty straightforward - don't neglect it.

CodeTemplar:
Oga KoboJ, read your bible more and don't read it like sign post or recharge cards.

Mathew 23:23 is clear enough. Jesus stressed that some matters are weightier than tithes but all should be adhered to without dropping any completely. It is more of indirectly endorsing tithe while setting a scale of preference for those four items.



Also Christ has broken the barrier between the Jews and the gentiles. He is lord of all who come to him and not lord of some who cone to him. So Abraham's bloodline is of negligible relevance here.

Much thanks for your post. I actually thought Matt. 23:23 was simple enough for even a ten year old to understand. The problem is a lot of times, people are wont to accepting views that reinforce their already set beliefs and totally reject or resist anything contradictory. When I share stuff like this, it is mostly intended for the neutral mind, or at least someone that is open to learning.

The TORAH says, "thou shall not kill", but soldiers have a duty to kill, and a justifiable reason to! Every law has it's relevance. If one cannot understand the relevance and holds fanatically to the letters of the law, then that person is on the wrong path. When your child is a toddler, all you say is "Sit" or "Don't Sit"; you don't explain why until the child begins to gain reasoning abilities. The letters are a shadow of the spirit, the spirit is what gives life.

Tithes, like taxes, are for a reason. There is no need to get too scholarly with letters and history about it. If your "pastor" needs it from you, oblige him (by not neglecting), except of course you do not trust him. Be guided by the spirit, it is not a "do or die" affair.

Kobojunkie:
But what I said stands that no single church today practices tithing exactly as God stipulated that it ought to in the Pentateuch, NONE!

You may be correct, I am in no position to know so there's no point arguing that.

okosunehis:
Question: Have you ever heard from "God Himself"? God always speaks through his messengers.

Kobojunkie:
Yes, Every day, and one thing He never does is change what He has said.

God does not speak directly to anyone, except his messengers(angels) and prophets. If you are in that category, then great!

Hebrews 1:1 , 2
1. In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways,
2. but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

okosunehis:
We all need to understand this; no matter how perfect the law of God is, there is a high chance it will always be translated imperfectly because the person relating the message has his limitations; the prophets and the apostles only received the spirit of God in "part". The only messenger that received the Holy Spirit in full is Jesus Christ.

Kobojunkie:
WHAT? shocked shocked shocked (Me... lol... calm down!)

See what St. Paul (who was greater than Moses - Matthew 11:11) said in 1 Cor. 13:9, 12
9. For we know in part and we prophesy in part
12. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

The only messenger of God who was given the spirit in full measure is Jesus Christ the Messiah - John 3:34
34. For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit.

The only person that can speak on behalf of God perfectly is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Every other messenger - prophet or apostle, can do their best in translating the message received via the Holy Spirit, by their level of understanding and their communicative skills. A prophet like Daniel even admitted to receiving messages from God which he did not understand; but he wrote them anyways. St. Paul was an apostle of Christ that was already well learned before his conversion. His level of education and exposure aided his ministry greatly, which we all benefit from today.

Kobojunkie:
The law of Moses were commandments from God Himself. God never said there was an option to cherry-pick His commandments, so of course, anyone who falls short will be condemned by the law.

Again, though every prophet speaks on behalf of "God Himself", that does not mean their message is perfectly transmitted. God's laws are perfect and timeless; that you cannot say for the Mosaic laws. It is because of the immeasurable amount of the spirit in Christ, that is why he related God's laws perfectly, suitable for humanity of all times and generations. It is one of the reasons Christ's teachings are as relevant today as they were 2,000 years ago, which makes him the most marketable (and sadly, most adulterated) religious brand even in these times.

Kobojunkie:
Jesus Christ, the new covenant, is a better covenant because it is bought with the blood of the lamb of God Himself for our sake, so the yoke is easy and the burden it places on us is light when compared to the old covenant. And just as Jesus said that you do not put new wine into an old wineskin

Indeed Christ is the new covenant and is better. The old was good but the new is better and lighter. The sacrificial ransom of Christ is important because it changes the order and channel of our worship to our Almighty Maker. Under Moses, offerings, vows, tithes, etc. were all offered to God through the blood of sacrificed animals. Under Christ, we are no longer bound to the sacrifice of animals (as performed then by the priests), which was never powerful enough to redeem us anyways. The Lamb of God has made the "once for all" sacrifice and all of God's worshipers, otherwise called Christians, are to render worship, praise, offerings, vows, tithes, etc., through Jesus Christ. That is the new order.

Kobojunkie:
so it is that should you choose to adopt the new covenant, you do not make it better by keeping one foot in the old covenant , you only ruin the new wine that way for yourself.

Sorry but I think you're the one with one foot in the old covenant. If you do not appreciate the ascendancy of the spirit over the letters, then you are still bound by the "balls and chains" of the old covenant letters. If you claim that YESHUA, the Son of God, is subject to the TORAH, which was transmitted to man by a mere prophet, then you are very much in caught up in the old covenant.

Even you have admitted that an ordinance as important as circumcision is not relevant to the new covenant. This also applies to the hitherto strict law of the Sabbath day. It was even one of the 10 commandments issued and the Scribes and Pharisees seriously held Christ's nonchalance to it's tenets against him and his disciples. What about the punishment that should have been meted out to the adulterer (Leviticus 20:10) which Christ tactfully saved her from? Are Christians bound by the old covenant which says that we must not mix different types of fabric in our clothing? or the law against inter-cropping?

In Matthew 5:37-48, Christ took out time to address some of the inadequacies of the old covenant vis a vis adultery, divorce, oaths, vengeance and love.

The fulfillment of the Law is Love - Romans 13:8-10

8. Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law.
9. The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”[a] and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
10. Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

That is why an analytical review of how Christ modified the laws, would make one appreciate it was all based on the commandments of love, which Christ also elevated to be the greatest. The spirit of the tithe laws are, as a demonstration of our love to God and his servants, to make provision for church/temple workers and for the financially challenged in the society; also encouraging communal activities of charity. These are as relevant today as they were in the times of Moses and Aaron. The letters of the Mosaic instruction of paying tithes are no longer relevant. What is relevant today is the spirit of it. It would indeed by paradoxical to imagine that the same Christ that encouraged people to pay their taxes, would discourage or disannul the payment of tithes. Tithes are just a Jewish application of similar taxation systems by other governments.

You will do well to read Romans chapters 7, 8, 9 and 10! They will help to put all (or most of) my points into context. I will also find time to watch the video you shared earlier. Let's try and help each other with relevant scriptural references to drive our points home as we marshal them. Bless up brother!

donnie:
Problems come when we misuse the words priest, levite, temple etc. And I find that this is deliberate.

I've also noticed some conflation here on the use of the above terms, but you can elaborate on that.

I am a Christian. While I consider the Torah to be relevant, I hold Christ above the Torah. If your faith is different, then we'll be deviating from my original post, which is not necessarily a bad thing tho.

donnie:
There is no letter or spirit in this matter. No one can lawfully collect tithes today. It's only when it comes to collecting people's money that pastors remember the laws of YAH.

The crux of your post is one of the first points I tried to address. Do you follow you pastor or Moses or Paul or Malachi or Nehemiah or Jesus. And what did Jesus say about paying of tithes?

Kobojunkie:
He said everything there was to say about what we needed. He was the new covenant and He left us all the details of the covenant that was He(the blessings, curses, commandments, and the Seal of the new covenant). He only needed 3.5 years to do it and He completed what He came to do for us. When He said on the cross that it was finished, He meant for us to know that the new covenant which God promised to us through the prophets was now in available for us all -- all nations.

His message was not for the natural Jews, because even at the time of His death, He only had a handful of followers, even after preaching to at least 5000 persons during His time on earth. There were some who were not even Jews who heard Him -- so not just the natural Jews heard of Him.

His apostles had no power to add or remove from the new covenant that is Jesus Christ. And they did not do that at all.
Jesus already warned them of the meaninglessness that is the doctrines and rules of men, and how those who worship God in such a manner, do so in vain. He also instructed them on the importance of obeying His command and His commandments alone. So you see, the apostles knew what not to do -- they preached obedience of Christ's commandments in all wise.

Circumcision is useless as far as the new covenant(Jesus Christ) is concerned. Again with the mention of "spiritual Jews"? Is the Spirit of the Living God the one responsible for making us these "Spiritual Jews" you speak of?

Yes, circumcision is irrelevant to the new covenant. I think I've figured your not being comfortable with the term "spiritual Jews". That's just semantics, you can ignore it! The main point I'm making only echoes that of St. Paul; a "true" Jew, Jew being a child of Abraham, is one who shares the same faith and belief with him, as with Christ.

I agree Christ said "everything that was needed", that does not mean "everything about everything". Christ said he fulfilled the prophets, and he commissioned the apostles. To add to a teaching can mean to elaborate or expatiate. Christ added to the teaching of the prophets and messengers of Christ are adding to his word today. If it means only contradiction for you, again that is semantics. The apostles do not contradict Christ.

Kobojunkie:
Abram's encounter with the 4 Kings, along with King Melchizedek

Please point out where exactly Abraham paid this TITHE?

Tithe means one-tenth. The Mosaic law of tithes is not what Abraham performed, of course that came way after. Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of his battle spoils. That is the first example of tithing in the Bible and St. Paul corroborated this in Hebrews 7:4-6 (shared below)

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

5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

Kobojunkie:
Abram's encounter with the 4 Kings, along with King Melchizedek

Please point out where exactly Abraham paid this TITHE?

Keep the old testament laws? Because that is the law which has Circumcision as its seal.
A jew is a jew inwardly, got it! One who is circumcized according to the old Covenant is circumcized. Now for the new covenant, however, since the seal is not an outward circumcision but the Spirit of God Himself, I fail to see how that makes the person hence a jew.

Jesus Christ, the author, and finisher of our faith, never said anything about the Spirit of the Almighty God making all nations into Jewish nations. I think you are grossly mistaken. And Paul would not contradict or add to what Jesus said, would he?

Jesus Christ did not say everything about everything; his ministry was only a three and a half year ministry, which was specifically for the natural Jews. But his message was meant for the world, hence the need for his apostles to continue his work. Off course they can add to his teaching, not to contradict but in the context of elaboration or treating areas he did not touch, and there are many of such instances.

The Nation of Christ is not a physical one. With or without circumcision, anyone that believes in Christ and follows his teaching is his true brother and disciple. It is neither familial nor political; but of the spirit. That the gospel of Christ will be taken to all nations does not mean all nations will become Jewish; it only means that you would have "spiritual Jews" in all nations.

Kobojunkie:
I suggest you should re-read the above again. I believe you misconstrue the message that Christ in fact has in there.

I might read it a 1,000 times without seeing your point. What exactly are you disputing?

Kobojunkie:
What denomination's tithing practices are exactly as defined in the books of Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and Numbers, by God Himself?

My point is tithing is not the same in all churches. I cannot tell you one denomination that practices it exactly as stated in the Bible. I never claimed to know all church denominations, and I don't need to. I know Christ, that is what is important.

Question: Have you ever heard from "God Himself"? God always speaks through his messengers. We all need to understand this; no matter how perfect the law of God is, there is a high chance it will always be translated imperfectly because the person relating the message has his limitations; the prophets and the apostles only received the spirit of God in "part". The only messenger that received the Holy Spirit in full is Jesus Christ. The laws of God through Moses were not perfect, anybody that claims they are should do well to abide by them in-toto, not cherry-picking the ones he finds convenient. The new is greater than the old; the old is a shadow of the new; the old was the letter, the new is the spirit. If the old was perfect, then there would have been no need for the new.

Kobojunkie:
Where did Christ say "do not neglect it"?
How and where did Abraham exemplify this?
How can Abraham be our natural father when we are called gentiles here, not jews?

I already shared all this in my original post.

a. Christ said not to neglect payment of tithes - Matthew 23:23

New International Version
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.

New Living Translation
“What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens, but you ignore the more important aspects of the law—justice, mercy, and faith. You should tithe, yes, but do not neglect the more important things.

English Standard Version
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.

b/ Abraham was the first person to pay tithes - Genesis 14:18-20

Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, 19 and he blessed Abram, saying,
“Blessed be Abram by God Most High,
Creator of heaven and earth.
And praise be to God Most High,
who delivered your enemies into your hand.”
Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything.

c/ Abraham is the natural father of the Christian faith - Romans 2:26-29

So then, if those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.

A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

NOTE: Being a Christian makes one a "spiritual Jew". Abraham is the ancestral father of the natural Jews. But his beliefs have gone beyond the natural Jews and into the originally heathen nations. St. Paul was very instrumental in pushing the gospel of Christ beyond Israel, hence his admonition above.

Kobojunkie:
Tithing, as it is done in today's churches, is not according to God's stipulation in His Old covenant, but according to the doctrines and rules of men. Anyone who tithes ought to look closer at how God commanded the people as far as eating/paying their tithes, and then compare that which is written to that which is in practice in today's churches. There are no similarities.
So anyone who chooses to live according to the Old covenant but tithes according to how it is done in today's Churches is living in disobedience to the command of God.

You don't need to generalize as tithing methods are different from denomination to denomination. Rightly tho, a lot of churches abuse it and I kinda addressed that already. There are a lot of false churches out there, Christ himself warned about that. If all your pastor is doing is living flamboyantly off the contributions of his flock, then check yourself and check the pastor very well cos you're probably in the wrong place.

chinebu:
Jesus Christ came and died on the cross of Calvary for our sins and for reunification of man with God.
This sacrifice alone is enough. Accept Christ in your life and live like he did while on earth. We are Christians because we are supposed to live like Christ.
Whatever Christ did while on earth try to emulate him and leave the rest. Heaven at last. Tithe will not prevent you from going to heaven if don't pay. Prove me wrong if you disagree

I quite agree with you. That is why I compared it with paying of taxes, though it is relatively more important. My whole point was Christ's instruction - "do not neglect it". That is different from "you must pay it or you will not be saved". It is a Jewish tradition we should emulate, for the right reasons, as exemplified by Abraham, the natural father of the Christian faith.

TheSourcerer:
Find way to help people dying unnesunnecerily from hunger and ooverpo and stop trying to syphoon the little they have

Paying the "alms tithe" is one of the ways; it is meant for the financially challenged in the society

PAYING OF TITHES: THE LETTERS AND THE SPIRIT

I keep having to share my thoughts on this issue as a lot of Christians are not clear about it. The controversies and falsehood surrounding this topic has also made it a point of derision from detractors of Christianity. So let me try and break it down.
Like in life generally, there are stages to learning, practicing and then gaining a well-rounded understanding or wisdom of human laws and traditions. In this context, the letters usually precede the spirit. The letters can be explained as the exact way a law is laid out for a specific people in specific circumstances of place and time. The spirit on the other hand is what gives us a deeper understanding of why the law is important and how it can be applied in varying circumstances.

Since the whole world is currently talking about covid-19, let me use it as an example. To most governments, when they hear coronavirus, the first thing that comes to their mind is total lockdown. So the letters of “corona law” is; “there is pandemic, order a total lockdown!” But research has shown that lockdowns also have their toll on the society and governments are gradually coming to terms with the fact that the lockdown does not have to be total and should be applied differently, depending on peculiar localized settings. That is why different states in the US and Nigeria also are handling their lockdowns differently; hence applying the spirit of the law.

Back to tithes; what does the word even mean? Simply, tithe means one of ten parts, or a tenth.

When dealing with controversial Christian topics, my foremost point of authority is always Jesus the Christ, who is the head of the Church. I consider his viewpoint on any issue as axiomatic, fundamental and paramount. Beyond that, I may now bring in other scriptural references that may provide more insight. So what did Christ say about tithes? Christ said though paying of tithes was not a “weightier matter of the law", we are not leave it “undone”. (Matthew 23:23) As you can see, Christ’s stance on tithing is quite moderate, not like the extreme views a lot of opinionists bandy around, for or against. So let us now consider other scriptural references.

The very first instance of paying of tithes was by none other than the father of Christianity, Abraham. It was a one-time offering of a tenth of his war spoils which he parted with Melchizedek, the enigmatic priest. (Genesis 14:18-20) Tithe was not mentioned again until the instance of Jacob making a promise to JEHOVAH God, that if he is returned to Bethel, his people would offer tithe to God. (Genesis 28:16-22)
It was not until the time of Moses, after he had led the Israelites out of Egypt that he reeled out statutes governing the paying of tithes to his people. Prior to that, there was no law concerning the paying of tithes.

THE LETTERS
In leading a fledging nation that was just out of captivity, Moses under the inspiration of God, drew up many laws and statutes to guide the Israelites in their day to day operations. In obeisance to the very first commandment – Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, Moses designed a system where the worship of God would be formalized centrally. This was why he consecrated the Levites to the special needs of tabernacle/temple duties. As such, the Levites were denied any inheritance of the land and all the other eleven tribes of the nation were to pay a tenth of their agrarian produce to the Levites, so that they could sustain themselves and their families. This tithe was to be paid at the end of every year. (Numbers 18:21-28; Leviticus 27:30)

Two other less prominent tithes Moses passed a law on were the “refreshment tithe” (Deuteronomy 14:23-26) and the “alms tithe” (Deuteronomy 14:28; 26: 12). Unlike the tithes specifically meant for the Levites, these tithes were not to be offered every year.

Since we’re still on letters, I am inclined to bring in the frequently (mis)quoted Malachi chapter 3. Many pastors and theologians fail to realize or educate people on the simple fact that the “rob God” verses, Malachi 3:8-10, are not applicable to the non-church-worker. A critical look at the verses in context will make one understand that it refers particularly to those who are in charge of collecting and recording tithes, and then moving it to the storehouse as purposed. This duty is for the Levite class only and not for the other eleven tribes. That is why Malachi 3:3 talks about the purification and purging of the “sons of Levi”. In fact, the whole book of Malachi is written with particular reference to the duties of the priests and the Levites. You may read the selected verses of the book and try to place it all in context of the message of the prophet (Malachi 1:6, 7, 10; 2:1, 2, 4-8, 13).

Essentially, the “man” that robs God, and indeed the nation, is not the one that failed to pay his tithe, but the one that corruptly steals what has been paid as tithes already, which he is duty-bound to have moved to the treasury (storehouse).

THE SPIRIT
In dealing with the laws of God, we must remember that the letters foreshadow greater things to come; the spirit. (Hebrews 10:1) Like I already pointed out, the letters are statutes of the law while the spirit is the relevance of it. This is why it is emphasized in 2 Corinthians 3:6 that the letters kill but the spirit quickens or gives life. As Christians, we must endeavour not to get fixated on the letters as Christ has brought the spirit, which is the fulfilment of the letters. The spirit in question is LOVE, which is the greatest commandment, by which true disciples of Christ will be identified. (Romans 13:8-13; 1 Timothy 1:5)

Tithing is a way of demonstrating our professed love for God, by contributing to the welfare of those who minister in His temple. The law of giving of a tenth of our earning is a very good example of how it should be done; hence Christ saying we should not leave it “undone”. St. John says emphatically that you cannot claim to love God if you do not demonstrate this to your fellow man – 1 John 4:20, 21. St. Paul says we should be good to all men, especially to our Christian family. (Galatians 6:10) We are also enjoined to donate cheerfully and willingly to the church. (2 Corinthians 9:6 - 8 ) Although St. Paul proudly asserted that though he never demanded monies from his followers, which he was due; he stressed that he who works for the church should earn his wages or means of livelihood from the church as well. (1 Corinthians 9:11-17) Then in Hebrews 7, he elaborated on how the beneficiaries of tithes had changed from the Levites under the Mosaic Law, (returning) to the ministers of Christ, under the first originally recorded human priesthood – Melchizedek.

I am not a church owner nor can I speak for any; but I believe a tenth of the earnings of all working church members, plus offerings should be sufficient for running the group and catering for church workers (not only pastor) and their non-working family members. It was never meant to be a means of self-aggrandizement but one of modest living that mirrors the average economic class of members of the congregation. This is not the era on getting fixated on the letters of the law; firstfruits, penalty for late payment of tithes, etc. Be guided by the general template of tithes in the Bible; follow the guiding instructions as laid out by your church authorities; remember it’s not about obeying the law to the letters but to show one’s love to God’s work by contributing reasonably to the upkeep of the church and her workers, while keeping a chunk of your earnings for your own upkeep! If your church leaders have some other means of livelihood and do not require tithes from you, following the example of St. Paul, they are very much in order.

This is not the era of stringent adherence to the specifics of the tithing laws. Run from any pastor that tells you to sow a seed with all your earnings; he’s just out to fleece you IMO. If you are so moved, well that’s up to you. Jesus advised the rich young man to sell all his belongings and give the proceeds to the poor before coming to join him (Christ), he did not say bring it to me! The widow that gave all she had, did so because she was poor, not only faithful. What she gave was quite insignificant. I don’t think she would have given “all she had” if she was a millionaire! And remember she did not do it to the knowledge of the temple leaders; Christ knew she had made an extraordinary sacrifice because he sees “the heart” of men, unlike the apostles or the religious leaders.

For Christians who keep coming up with reasons why we should not pay tithes, there is not a single, direct scriptural reference to back it up. If Christ was against the law of tithing, he would not have encouraged it. The most salient reason usually adduced to not paying of tithes, of Christ having made a once-for-all sacrifice, is not relevant to payment of tithes. The blood sacrifice of our Saviour abrogates the need for Christians to offer their prayers and thanksgivings through animal sacrifices, but rather through the name of Christ, the Lamb of God who shed his blood for the remission of our sins. The ordinance has not changed; we are still required to pray, to offer thanksgiving, to give offerings and to pay tithes, but through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. That takes nothing away from the relevance, or the spirit of the law on paying of tithes.

In conclusion, I would point out that tithing is to the Nation of Christ (God's people) as taxation is to governments. They are both meant primarily for three purposes: to provide an income for church/government workers; to provide funds needed to run the church/government; to support the financially challenged in the church/society. If Christ urged his followers to pay their taxes, his disposition towards encouraging paying of tithes should not be in question: Simply, do not neglect payment of tithes.

MuttleyLaff:
[img]https://s2/images/MuttleyDriveLaff.gif[/img]
okosunehis, you and I have been up this "monogene" garden path enough times before.
Do you remember, both two at least ocassions?

Of course I remember, also that you were not able to convince me!

Guys @MuttleyLaff and @mrZENographer, I seriously you are making a mistake in your analytic conclusions. I'm talking about the process by which you arrive at your submissions. We need to remember that Greek words like "exerchomai" and "monogenes" do not have direct English translations. Trying to impose only one referenced word or phrase in translating words of another language is a sort of semantic eisegesis. The original Biblical texts in reference were in Greek and not English; so expressions like "begotten" and "proceeded forth" are only English expressions trying to interpret a message that was rendered in Greek.

So what we should be doing here is using English language to explain what the meaning and context of the Greek text represents, and not picking English words, by different translators with different biases and imposing their meaning on Greek texts. That is why it is SOOOO important not to rely on one particular verse to actually understand the intended message of the writer.

About "exerchomai", it is not a specific word that was created and designated for Jesus alone. I have looked at its general usage and placed it in the context of the different texts it is used. Only in the case of Jesus does is it abstractly connote creation. Its usual application is leaving the company of someone, something or somewhere. That is exactly what the narrative of Jesus in John 8 is about: That God is his father, that he was with God (in heaven), which is from where he came to earth. (Not once did Christ refer remotely to creation in any other verse of John . That is the general usage of "exerchomai", not creation. He went further to emphasize that not only did he (Christ) come from God, but that he was also sent by God. This is because his messengership is a subject that is not covered by "exerchomai". He could actually have come from God but not be sent by God. That is how "exerchomai" was used in 1 John 2:19. If you insist "proceeded forth" must mean emerging from the body or person of God, it is just you trying to impose your meaning on the text. There is no other Biblical usage of "exerchomai" to support that, IMO.

Much of my explanation above applies to "monogenes" as well; it is not a word used exclusively for sonship of Jesus Christ. Strong's explanation already covers the fact that it can mean "son" in general, or "son of a unique kind"; hence the "one and only" in NIV and NLT translations. I don't consider that to be a heresy. The usage of the phrase "son of God" can be narrowed to Christ, and broadened to include others, it is all based on context. To buttress my original point, "monogenes" on the other hand will not be used to describe "sons of God".

The unique nature of the sonship of Christ cannot be deciphered by one verse, scripture or testimony. Christ himself said he derived his life from the Father. Before one "derives" life, it means that person was void of life, non-existent or dead. That means Christ was created by God, hence his being referred to as the beginning or first of God's creatures. Again, we are trying to explain what was originally written in Greek using English words and not the reverse.

This post has totally deviated from the original subject of this thread. I think I will rest my case here. Thanks.

mrZENographer:
My dear, you obviously can blow Grammer. But there is no truth in what you are saying.

What about John 3:16?

NLT (New Living Translation)
NIV (New International Version)

"Blow grammar"? I wish I could say that of myself!...LOL

I don't really know what your grouse is with John 3:16 and its NIV and NLT rendition. Maybe you can explain in your response. So, I am sharing some of the regular sources I use when trying to understand scripture. The focus is on the Greek word "monogenes" which is translated as "only begotten" in KJV. It also appears in 8 other verses of the Bible.

NB: Maybe you got me wrong. My favorite translation of the Bible is actually KJV, but no version is free of errors because no translator is free of some level of bias. Therefore, I try not to get stuck with one or even two versions; I just compare and contrast as much available versions as possible.

=========
JOHN 3:16
---------
NIV - For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,...

NLT - For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son,...

ESV - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son,...

KJV - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,...


HEBREWS 11:17
-------------

NIV - ... He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son,

NLT - ... Abraham, who had received God’s promises, was ready to sacrifice his only son, Isaac,

ESV - ... and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son,

KJV - ... and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

===========
Monogenēs
===========

From Wikipedia
--------------

Monogenes has two primary definitions, "pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship" and "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind". Thus monogenēs (μονογενής) may be used both as an adjective monogenēs pais, meaning unique and special. Its Greek meaning is often applied to mean "one of a kind, one and only". Monogenēs may be used as an adjective. For example, monogenēs pais means only child, only legitimate child or special child. Monogenēs may also be used on its own as a noun. For example, o monogenēs means "the only one", or "the only legitimate child".

The word is used in Hebrews 11:17-19 to describe Isaac, the son of Abraham. However, Isaac was not the only-begotten son of Abraham, but was the chosen, having special virtue. Thus Isaac was "the only legitimate child" of Abraham. That is, Isaac was the only son of Abraham that God acknowledged as the legitimate son of the covenant. It does not mean that Isaac was not literally "begotten" of Abraham, for he indeed was, but that he alone was acknowledged as the son that God had promised.


From Bible Study Tools
- https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/monogenes.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong's Number: 3439
Phonetic Spelling: mon-og-en-ace'
Parts of Speech: Adjective
Definition: single of its kind, only
- used of only sons or daughters (viewed in relation to their parents)
- used of Christ, denotes the only begotten son of God

NAS Word Usage - Total: 9 (only 3, only begotten 6)

mrZENographer:
These translations removed from the scripture and it is so obvious because it's an unfinished sentence/statement. WHO?

In John 3:16 many of these false translations removed "ONLY BEGOTTEN" which distinguished Jesus Christ from "Sons of God" (Job 1:6-12 etc). This is damning.

There are many others. This ones mentioned are at my finger tips.

NIV
6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus

Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and

blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the

Spirit is the truth.

7 For there are three that testify:

8 the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three

are in agreement.

KJV
6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus

Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it

is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is

truth.

7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the

Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are

one.

8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the

Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three

agree in one.

NLT
6 And Jesus Christ was revealed as God’s Son by his

baptism in water and by shedding his blood on the cross

[b]—not by water only, but by water and blood. And the

Spirit, who is truth, confirms it with his testimony.

7 So we have these three witnesses[c]—

8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood—and all three

agree.

==========================

Like you rightly said, 1 John 5:7 is a statement that begs further explanation, which is provided in the very next verse. The many other translations of the Bible did not remove from scripture, rather it is the KJV and other KJ translations that added to the original Greek text.

I have zeroed in on the text in context, taking it from the verse before and the one after so that we can expatiate on the intended narrative. Please follow me closely;

i) You can easily see the consistency in what Apostle John was saying coming from verse 6. His focus was on the authenticity of the messianic mission of Christ as the Son of God. He alludes that Christ's earthly ministry was confirmed not by just one or two evidences, but by three -
water, blood (life components of the terrestrial body) and spirit. So verses 7 and 8 are just to reinforce the message already passed in verse 6.

ii) The translators committed eisegesis by attempting to sneak in the doctrine of Trinity on verse 7. Verse 7 in KJV is not consistent with verses 6 and 8.

iii) In a very deceptive application of semantics, verse 7 of the KJV uses the phrase "bear record" and then "bear witness" in verse 8. Also, verse 7 of KJV says the three "are one" and verse 8 reads "agree in one". Another juxtaposition of contexts. To be "one" and to be in agreement mean two different things.

iv) Let us not lose sight of what St. John was discoursing - the earthly ministry of Christ and how it was confirmed for all on earth to see; by water, blood (being a physical man) and the Spirit (as a bird during his baptism). This has nothing to do with who bears records in heaven.

v) Assuming (without conceding) that the KJV's translation of verse 7 is correct; was Christ in heaven bearing record (or acting an evidence, testimony) of his earthly mission same time he was on earth? I hope you can spot the incoherence.

In conclusion, the KJV rendition of 1 John 5:7 is not consistent with the original Greek scripture, not coherent or consistent with surrounding verses and not consistent with other scriptural references. Hence it is not just a mistranslation, but an interpolation.

mrZENographer:
There's only one thing I figured I disagree with here.

Your Bible version recommendation which is possibly adulterated.


Example compare it to KJV reading this scripture verse "1 John 5:7"

Sorry, 1 John 5:7 is a heavily mistranslated verse in KJV. Trinitarian translators only tried to give the man-made doctrine called Trinity some Biblical authority by translating this verse wrongly. Compare it with many other versions and you'll understand.

New International Version
- For there are three that testify:

New Living Translation
- So we have these three witnesses—

English Standard Version
- For there are three that testify:

Berean Study Bible
- For there are three that testify:

Berean Literal Bible
- For there are three bearing testimony:

New American Standard Bible
- For there are three that testify:

New King James Version
- For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

King James Bible
- For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Christian Standard Bible
- For there are three that testify:

Contemporary English Version
- In fact, there are three who tell about it.

Good News Translation
- There are three witnesses:

Holman Christian Standard Bible
- For there are three that testify:

International Standard Version
- For there are three witnesses —

NET Bible
- For there are three that testify,

New Heart English Bible
- For there are three who testify:

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
- And The Spirit testifies because The Spirit is the truth.

Etc, etc.

The link below might also be of help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Historical_Account_of_Two_Notable_Corruptions_of_Scripture

Brandonx:
How can one accept Christ. I was raised in a Christian home but I grew up and stopped going to church. Now it seems like I'm missing something, I ve done things I'm not very proud of. I can't every say my prayers anymore. I really want to have this relationship with God.

I found this very touching, hence my response. First of all, you must realize that what is happening to you is quite normal. The fact that you were born into a Christian home does not make you a born again Christian. Whether someone is born by Christian parents or not, it does not change the fact that knowing and accepting Jesus Christ as our Saviour can only be processed from a certain age, maybe from one's late teens.

The fact that you yearn to establish a relationship with God is a wonderful thing. It doesn't matter whatever you done that you're not proud of. What matters is that you are ready to repent of them. Don't kill yourself with guilt, it is part of the burden that Christ is ready to bear for you, only if you will allow him. Don't run away from prayers, it is one of the Devil's ploy to estrange us from our maker. Kneel before God with a contrite heart, worship Him, thank Him for His grace and His mercies, then confess and repent. Gradually, you will reconnect to God and His word will begin to find a place in your heart.

EternalBeing:
We really thank HOLY SPIRIT for the testimonies of what HE has used these threads to reveal to many here. I was shocked at the answers initially given by many when I created a thread titled "What is the Purpose of Man on Earth? What is your Purpose on Earth?" Many answered by saying they were amazed that they've never even given that a thought before that day, so, they didn't really know. But by the end of the thread, we've all learned the Purpose and became better beings.

Human being Created by YAHWEH ALMIGHTY can be compared to robot manufactured by man.
The only major difference is that ALMIGHTY gave humans free will to choose whether to be resurrected to live forever or to permanently die, unlike robots that don't have any free will. The man-robot comparison in this post would help us to better understand the tripartite nature of Man as Spirit, Soul and Body. A Man is essentially a Soul, we shall see below.
To understand the 3 components that makes a man, we compare them to the 3 components that makes a robotic computer.

*The physical Hardware is similar to man's physical body. The probability that the robot or computer would still function well even when the mouse or keyboard is faulty is still high. So, loosing a leg, hand, or eyes still don't prevent a human from discovering and fulfilling his glorious Destiny in accordance to the Will of his CREATOR.

*The Software on which the robot runs is similar to the human Soul. The software is the determinant of how well the robot works. It would determine if the computer would excellently perform the task for which it was manufactured or not. I once had my computer system paralyzed by virus infested software, it was an experience far from being pleasant. Just as hackers infect our computers, Satan have put things in place to infect, hijack or worse still, to permanently kill human Soul. he hates the Truth that Man, who was created from mere clay, has been given the ability to choose to live forever. So, he works tirelessly to deceive and prevent humans from earning that very primary right to Immortality that we were put here to receive. The Soul is a very important part of Man because once hijacked by Satan, he uses the persons body to further hijack, corrupt or destroy other humans, and finally destroy the used human that yielded to be his tools for the sake of fame, power and money. Satan does NOT and can never love any human being. He hates all human being with perfect hatred. As the Bible and Quran confirms, Man was granted the highly exulted position that he coveted, demanded and fought YAHWEH ALMIGHTY the Creator of all for. So, those that go to bow to him for one thing or the other are only being deceived with fake love, so that he can destroy them after using them to destroy other humans.

*The Electricity that powers the robot is very much like the Spirit that YAHWEH ALMIGHTY breathe into Man to give us life. When this leaves, Man dies. This is why when a human dies, the falsely flourishing physical pompous body that some labor all their lives to build and excessively nourish to the point of indirectly eating other human flesh and drinking fellow human blood, begins the process of decaying immediately. YAHWEH ALMIGHTY GOD is essentially a SPIRIT, the source of all other Spirits and the CREATOR of all things. That is why HE is called the omnipresent God. The more of HIS Will you do, the more Life comes into your spirit to build your Soul like a software that has been programmed to replicate itself and grow until your Soul grows into full stature of Christ (Ephesians 4:13) and become undefeatable by the adversary.

Out of these 3, the major one that we humans should be most concerned about is the Soul. Proverbs 4:23 "Guard your heart (seat of soul) with all diligence, for from it proceed the issues of Life" Satan has set so much traps to capture the hearts of men. Be very intentionally selective of the kind of videos you watch, music you listen to, things you read, etc.
New International Version Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.

It quite unfortunate that many have been deceived to concentrate more on developing, nourishing and excessively focusing all their energy on caring for their body at the expense of the development of their eternal Soul. Consequently, the Soul becomes dwarfed while the physical body that shall soon be dead and eaten up by worms gives false appearance of flourishing.

Anyone that puts his trust in a herbalist, pastor, alfa, marabouts, satan or demons, instead of being irreversibly determined to please his CREATOR and receive the awaiting reward of immortality, does not know the great opportunity that his great CREATOR has granted him. If your eyes is opens to your true worth as human being, no amount of money, material wealth fame and glory of the ephemeral World would be able to buy your unjustifiably precious eternal Soul.

Isaiah 2:22 "Put no more trust in man, who has only the breath in his nostrils"
Jeremiah 17:5 "Thus said the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm"
Accept JESUS into your life today, and HE shall grant your the Holy Spirit that would lead you in walking and doing only the things that makes your eternal Soul to grow into full statue of Christ and become eligible for resurrection into your glorious eternity. Your CREATOR's plan is to make you great in this current Life and still reward you with immortality if you don't allow the trials of this World and temptations of Satan to turn you against your great CREATOR. May we wisely live and overcome to earn immorality in JESUS Name. By focusing on being Holy, you shall control the Power controlling this World, don't let this World control you!

I really appreciate your effort in shedding light on this matter. I have attempted same on different occasions, of course with different levels of success. There are areas where my understanding of the tripartite nature of man converges with yours, but areas that are not in agreement as well. Allow me to expatiate.

1. First of all, and I am sure you will agree, a robot does not have life. It runs on electric power (which is like the spirit, for you) but life as we can draw from the Bible would also possess the ability of free choice (like you elaborated on) and the ability to reproduce. I'm stating these just for the the benefit of those who might jump into such wrong conclusion.

2. Your understanding of what the terms soul and spirit mean and mine are basically opposite. I believe soul to be the life power that man lives on and spirit to be the power of intelligence. My reasons are;

a) When God wants to boost man's "intelligence" for purposes that He has deemed necessary, he does not connect to man via the soul (according to you, our intelligence) but through the spirit, man's spirit (which for me is man's incorporeal seat of intelligence). Job 8:32 comes to mind; "But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding."
b) Likewise, God's own inherent power that connects to the spirit of man is also called the Holy Spirit, not the Holy Soul. Please consider this scripture, "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Spirit which dwelleth in us." - 2 Timothy 1:7, 13, 14

3. When men of God became possessed by the Holy Spirit, it did not endow them with a more transcendent power of life. They did not become immortals. That tells you that the spirit of man, which is empowered by the Spirit of God, is not man's power of life, but of intelligence.

4.. In some notable texts where Christ talked about the soul, the word is synonymous with life.
- And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28)
- For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Mark 8:36)
There are also Old Testament verses I can refer to but I believe the words of Christ hold the most relevance.

5. When it comes to the usage of words like soul, spirit, life, heart, blood, etc. in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, we must appreciate that it is sometimes figurative. The greatest commandment of "loving God with all our heart" for example is obviously figurative as we know that the heart is not the part of the human body that holds our emotions. This would account for a lot of the ambiguity in the usage of these words which should take nothing away from their proper usage.

6. Though the three words body, soul and spirit can be used correctly to refer to a person, we must appreciate that it literally means that man HAS a body, a soul and a spirit. The absence of any one of the three components means that man is dead. If you burn a living human body, it loses its soul and spirit and is therefore dead. The state of Adam's body before God breathed the breath of life into it was dead. It was the breath of life that made Adam a "living soul", more properly translated a "living being".

I would love to expatiate further but I'll stop here for now because of time and for the fact that there already are many similarities in our understanding of this subject. Thanks

MuttleyLaff:
Think of God, this way, H₂0, sent itself into the world. H₂0 caused and allowed itself to be visible as solid ice.

Christ cannot share the same body with God the Father, because God is formless. God has no clear definite shape or size. Jesus Christ is the product of God projecting Himself as a human being in the person of Jesus Christ on earth. Jesus Christ is the visible image of the invisible God

Though Jesus was God, He did not think of equality with God, as something to cling to.
Instead, He gave up his divine privileges. He took the humble position of a servant and was born as a human being, and so God appeared on earth, in human form, as in, the person of Jesus Christ, His Son

blueAgent & okosunehis, God can send Himself, did send Himself to earth, in the form of Jesus Christ. God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time) Note that, Jesus didnt correct people that addressed Him as God, for example, where and when said: "My Lord, My God" to Him.

Its often said, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Something to be done right is exactly what it's all about and so what God did. This is a matter of the classsic diy aka Do-It-Yourself.

God looked for someone who could build walls or looked for someone to stand in the breach in His presence on behalf of the world so that it won't be destroyed, but He found no one and so God is lumbered with, doing a classic Do-It-Yourself by sending Himself to carry out the redemptive work.

This will explain what the bible said and/or is saying about "begotten" The word translated as "begotten", is the greek word "monogene" "Monogene", means, one and only or better still, one of a kind

Now the word "monogene", is a combination of the root words: "mono" (one or only) and "genos" (of a class or kind) hence "begotten", in the context, or "monogene" in the context means "the only of its kind"

Now, "monogene" occurred also, when similarly used over Isaac, and that is where and when Isaac was referred to, as only son, even when Abraham already had an older son, Ishmael

Isaac was unique, was one and only or one of a kind son. Unique in the sense that, an impotent man and menopaused woman had a child, the promised son, Isaac (i.e. child in a class of its own, this miracle never again has been repeated)

To just clear each other, "begotten" in the Jesus' context isn’t about procreation or some fantasied sexual intercourse

Jesus, is the last Adam, and second man. The first man Adam became a living soul, whereas, Jesus, the last Adam, became a life-giving spirit

The first man, Adam, is of the earth, earthy, came from earth; while the second man, Jesus Christ is from heaven, came from heaven. Alleluia.

"And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge,
and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none
(i.e. I looked for someone who might rebuild the wall of righteousness that guards the land.
I searched for someone to stand in the gap in the wall so I wouldn’t have to destroy the land, but I found no one.)/i]"
- Ezekiel 22:30

"[i]He saw that there was no man—He was amazed that there was no one—to intercede;
so His own arm brought salvation, and His own righteousness sustained Him."
- Isaiah 59:16

"I was amazed to see that no one intervened to help the oppressed.
So I myself stepped in to save them with my strong arm, and my wrath sustained me
(i.e. I looked, but there was no one to help; I was shocked because there was no one offering support.
So my right arm accomplished deliverance or achieved salvation for me, my raging anger drove me on)"
- Isaiah 63:5

blueAgent & okosunehis, you must have quite a lot of times, heard the saying that "If you want something done right, do it yourself", well none, nobody, no angel out of the whole angelic hosts of heaven, nor no man out of the whole world wide, offered to accept the challenge to help man get returned back to man's original status before the fall, so God resorted to DIY

blueAgent & okosunehis, you know that Christ, means Saviour, right?. So if you do, how then do suppose God will be able to pull this off this God's redemptive work, if Christ isnt God and man, hmm? Give this some thought blueAgent & okosunehis

"Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His temple, Even the Messenger of the covenant, In whom you delight. Behold, He is coming,” Says the LORD of hosts."
Malachi 3:1

Of course, Jesus is an angel, Malachi 3:1 confirms Him being a Messenger. This is God sending Himself on an errand. Alleluia.

Why have you decided to do this? I am almost overwhelmed. You have brought in so many issues I don't even know where to begin! Let me try and go with your sequence but I won't address more than three issues I find disputable so we don't get lost in the discussion.

Your first analogy about water; "H₂0, sent itself into the world. H₂0 caused and allowed itself to be visible as solid ice." When a mass of liquid H₂0 is turned partly or wholly into gas(steam) or solid(ice), the initial mass is reduced by a corresponding measure, right? When God created Christ in heaven, it did not reduce His person. Neither was His authority or excellence diminished when Christ was sent to earth. I hope you can see the cracks in your illustration. When a man and a woman come together to procreate, though a new creature emerges, it does not diminish the sources from whence it is created. So creation(whether heavenly or earthly) and change of state of matter are not relatable.

Next, I agree when you say God cannot share the same body with Christ, for different reasons though. In Genesis 1:26, God, speaking to His creative agent Logos(or Christ) did not say, "let us make man in your own image." (Jesus Christ, right from the beginning of creation was a different person sharing similar characteristics with God, his father). Rather, God's statement showed clearly that He was speaking to someone who shared a similar appearance with him, hence the statement; "Let us make man in our own image..." So God is not formless. Something/someone that has a definite image cannot be formless.

Rather, it is the Spirit of God (the Spirit which is not a person) that can be said to be formless. From the same Genesis 1, we are told that the spirit was already hovering on the surface of the earth. It is the spirit that took the form of a pillar of cloud to guide the Israelites through the wilderness. The same spirit can even be transferred from physical person to physical person by mere laying of hands. The Holy Spirit is not a person and has never appeared as a person: It is a force (as best as we humans might describe it) that emanates from the person of JEHOVAH the Father.

Let me move on to Christ being an angel. Though the word "angel" is mostly used to describe supernatural (spiritual) beings, it simply means messenger. God can never be described as an angel, even though He is a supernatural being. Christ on the other hand, being God's chief messenger is an angel.

Please consider this - When a King decides to leave his throne and move to the battle front, he becomes a soldier. That does not make the King a messenger because the messenger and the "messengee" (pardon, for lack of a better word) cannot be the same person. If a king decides to perform a task that he would normally assign to a servant, he has not become a servant by doing that. He is still and very much the king.

So when God decides to rescue mankind from the consequences of our own failures, He did not send Himself and became a messenger of Himself. The Father JEHOVAH did not, for convenience sake, create a new person from Himself and called him Jesus so that He(the Father) can manipulate the existing order and render redemptive death on behalf of humans. God did not send Himself to earth, he sent someone who was already existing as His Son and whom He loved so much. That why it was a sacrifice, for both God and and for Jesus Christ.

This brings me to Christ being the "only begotten" Son of God. Your analysis of the word is quite agreeable; Jesus Christ is a Son of an only kind. This is because Christ is the only direct creation of God and upon whom all other creatures derive their existence. Not only were all other things created by Christ, they were also created [b]for [/b]him.

Like you rightly said, "monogene" also applies to Isaac being begotten of Abraham because of the miraculous nature of his birth and the privileges bestowed on him were singularly inherited from his father.

blueAgent:
From the Bible verse we can see that Jesus was referring to been born by God, because in that same verse he clarified that he was also sent by God eliminating any possibility of the word Exerchomai - "exēlthan" meaning to go forth or proceed as you assume.

Greek/Hebrew Definitions
Strong's #1831: exerchomai (pronounced ex-er'-khom-
ahee)
from 1537 and 2064; to issue (literally or figuratively):--
come (forth, out), depart (out of), escape, get out, go
(abroad, away, forth, out, thence), proceed (forth), spread
abroad.
Thayer's Greek Lexicon:
exerchomai
1) to go or come forth of
1a) with mention of the place out of which one goes, or
the point from which he departs
1a1) of those who leave a place of their own accord
1a2) of those who are expelled or cast out
2) metaphorically
2a) to go out of an assembly, i.e. forsake it
2b) to come forth from physically, arise from, to be born
of
2c) to go forth from one' s power, escape from it in
safety
2d) to come forth (from privacy) into the world, before the
public, (of those who by novelty of opinion attract
attention)
2e) of things
2e1) of reports, rumours, messages, precepts
2e2) to be made known, declared
2e3) to be spread, to be proclaimed
2e4) to come forth
2e4a) emitted as from the heart or the mouth
2e4b) to flow forth from the body
2e4c) to emanate, issue
2e4c1) used of a sudden flash of lightning
2e4c2) used of a thing vanishing
2e4c3) used of a hope which has disappeared
Part of Speech: verb
Relation: from G1537 and G2064
Citing in TDNT: 2:678, 257
Usage:
This word is used 224 times:

It would have been awesome if the Bible could actually interpret itself! Even when Christ spoke, he often had to explain and expatiate privately to his twelve. That is why one must look at scriptural words very carefully and compare to other references before arriving at a conclusion.

I believe we both agree that God the Father gave life to (born or created) Jesus the Son. You have gone further to contend that Christ literally came out of his Father JEHOVAH. The point I am making is that though your description of the manner of the creation of the Son is plausible and glorious, the Greek word "exerchomai" which you used to back your position does not arrive at that conclusion.

Both Strong's and Thayer's definitions agree that "exerchomai" can be used literally and figuratively. Layer's Greek Lexicon further states that "exerchomai" only refers to creation or being born of, when used metaphorically. That is Layer's assumption, not mine!

Thayer's Greek Lexicon:
exerchomai
1) to go or come forth of
1a) with mention of the place out of which one goes, or
the point from which he departs
1a1) of those who leave a place of their own accord
1a2) of those who are expelled or cast out
2) metaphorically
2a) to go out of an assembly, i.e. forsake it
2b) to come forth from physically, arise from, to be born
of
2c) to go forth from one' s power, escape from it in
safety

To buttress this point, I provided John 13:3 and 16:28;

John 13:3 (NIV) - Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God;

John 16:28 (NIV) - I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father."

Both verses left out whether Jesus was sent by God or not. The pattern of the message is the same; Christ "came forth" from God and was returning to God. My argument then was that if "exerchomai" is to literally mean Christ emerging from the very body of God, would it then mean he was returning to the body of God? If anything, that would be mean that in heaven, Christ shares the same body with Father. We must not confuse different bodies sharing similar characteristics for different persons sharing the same body.

Also remember that in John 16(vs 29), even the disciples agreed that on this occasion, Christ was not speaking figuratively. That is why my conclusion is that "exerchomai", used in this text and by contemporary English, would be "being with or in the company" of somebody. The Word, who was with God, came to this world, and would be returning to be with God. Unlike your understanding of "exerchomai", this application is consistent with most of the other 218 times that it is used in the Bible.

I also used 1st John 2:19 to explain that one can "go forth, or out of" another and not be a messenger of the latter.

I really don't get why it is difficult for you to concur that Christ is an angel of God. The word "angel" from the Hebrew "malak" and the Greek "angelos" simply means a messenger. It is mostly used to describe supernatural heavenly beings but can also refer to human messengers.

As much as I totally agree that Jesus the Son is God, meaning he is "Almighty", that he is born of God Father and was created in the very nature of God, I cannot categorically arrive at your conclusions from the Bible. My argument is not that it is not possible, but that it is not conclusive from available scripture.

OkCornel:
Per the bolded, that's exactly why I have a neutral mindset about the whole "trinity" thingy

If we are all sons of God...shebi e don turn to billionity na

As far as billion is involved, I'm in! lol

OkCornel:
Lol...sounds like serving a montheistic God, but at the same time still trying to smuggle polytheism through the back door...

I really don't want to get into the details... but if these three distinct personalities are not of one mind...then there's no agreement and by extension...there's no "trinity"

I'm just saying the main essence of the whole thing is...each of these entities (God, Son, Spirit) are of one mind, and somewhat interdependent on one another.

Just as how...Spirit, Soul and Body depends on one another for a man to live in this physical realm of existence...

Hope I've not confused you

No worries, I get your drift. My point still is that your idea of Trinity is not consistent with what the authorities that came up with the doctrine state. So, you might be the one conflating issues. To discourse issues like this, you cannot avoid going into details. You are actually doing that already!

I have an independent spirit different from yours. No matter how much we become unified in purpose, we are still different persons with different spirits. The same applies to our relationship with God. No matter how much we align with God's purpose and act according to the will of the Holy Spirit, we remain independent beings with our own innate spirit. That is why we are free moral agents. Unity of purpose is not unity of spirits or persons.

Like you pointed out, Trinity is just a disguised form of polytheism. Little query - By the time all the sons and daughters of God become unified in the Holy Spirit, what becomes of your idea of Trinity, which is three minds becoming one? Would we now be looking at Billionity!?? Lol

OkCornel:
Yeah, sort of. That’s the core of this whole “trinity” concept. Everyone is of one mind...

Something similar that triggered God’s alarm bells in that Tower of Babel rebellion episode.

God wants His followers to be of one mind with Him. The moment we yield our lives to the leading of the Spirit, we become the sons of God.

While your analogy has some coherence, it is not what the doctrine of Trinity says. Let me share excerpts of the Athanasian Creed which Trinity basically takes its authority from:

"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith...

"And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God...

"And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity...

"This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved."

I'm sure you can see that your idea of Trinity is quite different from what the authorities suppose. As much as Christ likened himself to the Father, he never placed himself on an equal pedestal with his Father. The Bible is replete with texts that affirm this. When we yield ourselves to the leading of God's Spirit, we act in accordance to His purpose. That does not in anyway suggest that we become equal to our Creator; not in body, not in soul and not in spirit.

blueAgent:
1. "In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not
say to you that I shall pray the Father for you;
2. "for the Father Himself loves you, because you have
loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from
God .
3. "I came forth from the Father and have come into
the world. Again, I leave the world and go to the
Father." John 16:26-28

The words came forth and came out are not idioms

The phrase "came forth " is translated from the Greek word:
("exerchomai " Strongs # 1831) which
means to "issued forth " or to have " issued from". Jesus issued
forth from the Father. In the next verse, "proceeded forth " also
comes from the same Greek word.
The next Scripture is very interesting. In verse 41, the leaders
decided to push their point by saying that they were not
illegitimate like Jesus was. Thus they were saying Jesus was
Illegitimate!
In response, Jesus expanded His message by telling them
where He actually came from. So, Jesus told them that He
was not illegitimate at all. He proceeded forth from God!
Christ told them: If God were their father, they would love Him
because He came out of the Father, and He came from God,
who sent Him into the world.
Jesus was speaking very plainly, telling them where He came
from, yet it was as if they had not heard Him:
1. "You do the deeds of your father." Then they said to
Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one
Father--God."
2. Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you
would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from
God ; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me .
3. "Why do you not understand My speech? Because
you are not able to listen to My word. John 8:41-43
Jesus said He came forth from God when He was accused of
being illegitimate. So it is clear that Jesus was speaking of
His original birth from the Creator. Jesus is not illegitimate!
In this and the next Scripture we find that Jesus spoke of two
different events. 1) He proceeded forth or He came forth from
God and, 2) He came into the world (God sent Him).
The text is not just a fancy way to describe His coming to the
earth twice. But rather, Jesus was saying that He proceeded
forth from God and He also came from God who sent Him to
the earth.
1. "Now they have known that all things which You
have given Me are from You.
2. "For I have given to them the words which You
have given Me; and they have received them, and have
known surely that I came forth from You; and they
have believed that You sent Me. John 17:7-8
Christ's followers knew that Jesus came forth from God and
they also believed that God had sent Him to the earth.
Since He was the only begotten Son of God, Jesus was
actually composed out of the "stuff" of God! He was in the
form of God!
1. Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ
Jesus ,
2. who, being in the form of God , did not consider it
robbery to be equal with God , Philippians 2:5-6
Jesus came forth from His Father in the form of God.

Thanks for your response bro. Referring to Jesus as an angel is right, but he is an arch angel; the first and the greatest; by which all others were created. He is a son like no other, an angel like none else; the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. He is in a class of his own.

Concerning the Greek word "exerchomai", I took time to look into it. Of the 224 times it (and its derivatives) is used in the New Testament, only six times (John 8:42; 13:3; 16:27, 28, 30; 17: does it suggest anything related to creation, and that is if we are going by your understanding of it. Thayer's Greek Lexicon states that such usage is even metaphorical. You can click the link below:

https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Lexicon.show/ID/G1831/exerchomai.htm

Looking at those six verses, the crux of Christ's declaration is not about creation but about having been with the Father (in His company) and sent by Him. In fact, in John 13:3 and 16:28, he went further to say that not only was he from God, but that he would also return to God. Of course this cannot mean that he is returning to the body of God from whence you say he was created. It simply means he is returning to heaven, to be reunited with God, in company and not body.

We can also look at 1 John 2:19 where a derivative of Exerchomai - "exēlthan" is used. Here, Apostle John said, "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." So having come out or forth from something does not presume concord or unified purpose, neither does it even suggest creation. Rather John is disclaiming antichrists, even though they may at some point, been working with true disciples of Jesus Christ.

Personally, I don't think anyone can claim to totally understand the full nature of the creative process by which the Father JEHOVAH gave life to the Son Jesus. If you consider us humans for example, although scientists have done a lot to unravel the physical nature of man's reproductive or procreative process, the spiritual nature of man is almost a complete mystery. How does a spirit being birth another spirit being? How can a physical man even explain that?!

Your posit would be a very beautiful way to look at it though. Maybe comparable to the way a child emerges from the the very body of the mother, having been formed by the egg cells of both parents. Also similar to how Eve was created from the body of Adam and not entirely of herself. But to reiterate, I cannot arrive at that conclusion from available scripture.

That said, being perfect spiritual persons of the highest imaginable essence, I will want to believe that the productive process which birthed Christ must be one of utmost perfection. More perfect than whatever is humanly imaginable, even cloning. Hence he being the express image of God, possessing the fullness of the Father, being in the very nature of God Himself! Indeed, Christ is Almighty, but not the Almighty God. But we must remember that however we want to look at it, nothing is impossible with God!

blueAgent:
I can barely disagree with you.

My only argument is that Jesus was not created by God but was born or Begotten by God.

If you agree that Jesus was born or begotten of God, then I don't think his being created by God should be a contentious issue. Remember that issues like this sometimes come down to semantics and meanings that become lost in translation. When a male and a female copulate and have a child, they become procreators of the offspring.

If you consider the several translations of Colossians 1:15, two words which are ubiquitous are "firstborn" and "creation/creature".

[New International Version]
The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

[English Standard Version]
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

[King James Bible]
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.

The baseline word is the noun creation/creature. Your argument is that Jesus is not within the subset of all things created by God. A question to consider would then be, so what is Jesus "first" or "firstborn" of? In my opinion, the logical conclusion would be that Jesus himself is a part of God's creation, being the first of all things born or created by God.

Let's also look at Revelation 3:14. The Greek word used to describe Jesus is ἀρχὴ (archē) - Strong's Greek 746: From archomai; a commencement, or chief.

[New International Version]
"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God's creation.

[English Standard Version]
“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.

[King James Bible]
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

You can see how ἀρχὴ (archē) applies to this scripture.

So whether we choose to use the words born, begotten or created; while they may vary slightly in usage, it basically means that only JEHOVAH existed at some point, before He brought another completely independent being or person, Logos/Word/Jesus into existence.

In general context, while we can all said to be born or created of/by God, only Jesus Christ is begotten. I'm sure you pretty much agree with that.

blueAgent:
Probably the most widely held Christian
view of God is the Trinity doctrine which
has its origins in the Church of Rome
and the council of Nicea. This belief
teaches that the Father is God, the Son
is God, and the Holy Spirit is God and yet
there are not three gods but one God.
But the question remains: Is this view
found in Scripture?
The most commonly accessed
Encyclopedia on the Internet is
Wikipedia . So a “ consensus of Modern
exegetes ” tell us that both the Old and
New Testaments do not explicitly
contain the doctrine of the trinity. It
came into Christendom from another
source outside of Scripture. The
Encyclopedia Britannica basically says
the same thing as the Wikipedia. Both
tell us that the idea of the trinity came
after Scripture and from sources outside
of Scripture. The Oxford Companion to
the Bible says it “ cannot be clearly
detected within the confines of the
canon”? Is that a nice way of saying that
the Bible does not teach the doctrine of
trinity? The Columbia Electronic
Encyclopedia and the Encarta
Encyclopedia says the doctrine of the
trinity is not explicitly taught in the New
Testament. Can we base our faith purely
on inference alone? If it is a fundamental
doctrine in Christianity, it should surely
have enough evidence to have become a
doctrine! Another two from Encyclopedia
of Religion and the New International
Dictionary of New Testament Theology . If
the Bible does not teach this doctrine
then where did it come from? And last
the International Standard Bible
Dictionary . I will leave the reader to
define the word “allusion.”
Getting to the source of the trinity
doctrine. Let's go to the authority which
states that it is the source of the idea
being the Roman Catholic Church and
see if their definition has any Biblical
basis. This Roman Catholic source is
clear as to the origin of the trinity
doctrine. Scripture does not present the
idea of the trinity doctrine. It came after
the canon of Scripture was closed and
was developed in the 4th and 5th
centuries. The New Catholic
Encyclopedia puts it this way. So do we
have one God in three parts, or three
gods in one?

Great post. I believe, just like the earliest authorities of the doctrine of Trinity, the author of this thread (solite3) is struggling so hard to infuse coherency into one of the most confounding teachings in Christendom. God is a god of reason, not incoherence. Admittedly, His word might be difficult to understand; but upon revelation, they actually become simple and logical. The harder Trinitarians try to explain the doctrine of three persons in one God(head), the more confused they sound!

From the original post, something was already missing. The writer failed to establish what exactly he was going ahead to defend. That leaves room for a lot of people to conflate issues, which I believe is not the intention. If I say for example, "I am a man", I might mean that I am a human being or that I am a human born with a penis. So in trying to establish my point, as common as the word may seem, I have to define exactly what I mean by my statement.

As we might all agree, though there are verses that seem to support the idea of Trinity in the Bible, the doctrine is not Biblical. Anyone can pick a couple of scriptures in the Bible and spin up a new doctrine; even the Devil quotes scripture.

Let us go back to one of the earliest authorities of Trinity - The Athanasian Creed. Although there are some disputations about its sources, it came into popular use in Christendom sometime in the sixteenth century. The Creed says, in excerpts;

"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith...

"And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God...

"And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity...

"This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved."

This is a whole lot to swallow. But at least, we have established a reference point upon which we can now discourse.

In trying to establish a clear Biblical authority for the doctrine of Trinity, even the translators of the popular King James Version of the Bible committed a serious gaffe by attempting the same eisegesis as the author(solite3) here. Let us examine three different translations of 1 John 5:7, 8 -

(KJV) [7] For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. [8] And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

(NIV) [7] For there are three that testify: [8] the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

(NLT) [7] So we have these three witnesses [8] the Spirit, the water, and the blood—and all three agree.

You can easily see the serious and deliberate error made in the KJV, all in an attempt to give authority to a strange and very questionable doctrine. This is one evidence to the perceiving and unbiased mind that the doctrine of Trinity is only an attempt by the Devil to confuse people about the true nature of God.

Jesus Christ, in John 17:3, teaches that it is essential for one to have a knowledge of the true God and he, the Son who was sent to this world. Here, there is no mention of a third person, the Holy Spirit. Again, in John 1:1, 14, Christ makes his disciples understand that he was with God from the very beginning of creation. In 5:26, Jesus highlighted the fact that he received life from the Father, who is the original source of life. Jesus is created by God, hence is the first and the beginning of God's creatures, by which all other things were created - (John 1:2,3; Colossians 1:15-17; Proverbs 8:30; Revelation 3:14; etc). Therefore, Jesus Christ was the other character God was referring to in Genesis 1:26, when He said; "Let US make man in OUR image..."

Due to the many similarities between the Father and the Son, (as we often have in our much less perfect human system), they also share a lot of names and titles. But the name YHWH (or YAHWEH, JHVH, JEHOVAH) is one that distinguishes the personality of the Father from any other. This was the name by which God revealed Himself to Moses in Exodus 6:2, 3.

Some relevant scriptural references that establish the supremacy of JEHOVAH over Jesus Christ and every other being include; Isaiah 40:18, 25; Proverbs 8: 22-30; Mark 10:18; John 5:30; 10:29; 14:28; 1 Corinthians 15:28; 1 Timothy 1:17. A careful study of these texts will make us understand that not only does Christ acknowledge the supremacy of JEHOVAH God, but that he, Christ has always been subject to His Father - before, during and after his human existence.

From the above, it is clear that the claim of Trinity that the Son is uncreated is false: The Son derived life from the Father. It is also clear that omnipotence can only be attributed to the Father and not the Son, making the Father greater than the Son. It is why even though the Bible refers to Jesus christ the Son as "Mighty God"(Isaiah 9:6) and "Almighty"(Revelation 1:, only JEHOVAH is referred to as "Almighty God" or "God Almighty"(Genesis 17:1; Exodus 6:3). So although Jesus Christ possesses a form of "almightiness", being that everything was created by him and for him, hence is also referred to as Adonai, Elohim, King of kings and Lord of lords; his authority is not absolute as it excludes the very person who is responsible for his life and to whom he is subject - his Father JEHOVAH.

Moving on, let us talk about the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not a person. Some relevant pointers to this point are - there is no account of its creation; it does not have a name; it has never acted independently as a person; and it has never appeared as a person. Allow me to elaborate:

- The Bible tells us that the Father is uncreated, the Son is the first creature of the Father, but does not mention the nature of the creation of the Holy Spirit

- The appellation Holy Spirit simply means Spirit of the Holy One. The Holy Spirit is also called the Comforter. These are not personalized names. The Father is called JEHOVAH (meaning Self-existing One); the Son - Jesus Christ (meaning JEHOVAH will save His people through His anointed) or Logos (the Word and Purpose of God); but there is no name for the Holy Spirit.

- There are several records in the Bible of the Father acting as an independent being. Jesus the Son also acted as an independent, free thinking individual who by obedience and humility, acts in complete accordance to the dictates of his Father. The Bible does not suggest same for the Holy Spirit or give an instance of the Spirit declaring that "he" willingly chooses to always do the bidding of God the Father.

- Centuries before the earthly advent of Christ, God had prophesied that He would send a saviour to His people. When this saviour came, he came in the appearance of a human, just like you and I today. But when the Spirit, which Christ had promised his disciples before his ascension, came, it never appeared as a person or lived like a human being like Christ did with mankind for over 30 years. Rather the Spirit appeared as tongues of fire on the heads of the apostles. In fact, of all the records of encounters of the Holy Spirit, both from the Old and New Testaments, not once did it appear as a person. Even angels of God have appeared to humans and spoke in intelligible language to men and women of old. But not the Holy Spirit.

Clearly, the Holy Spirit cannot be a person. This is another falsehood of Trinity. For the fact that a lie cannot stand on its own, you will need to create a web of lies to give it as much credibility as possible. That is why I am taking my time to point out the inconsistencies in the doctrine of Trinity. If the Holy Spirit is not a person, what then is it?

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God's being, an intelligence or force inherent in the very nature of God, which He shares with whoever He chooses to do His bidding. Only one individual is privileged to have received this Spirit from its very source "without measure" (John 3:34), that is Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of JEHOVAH God. All others can only access the Holy Spirit in measured quantities, right down from the Apostles to anyone who is willing to be used by it. A most apt description of the Holy Spirit is given by St. Paul when he said, "For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." - 2 Timothy 1:7.

We might not be able to understand entirely the nature of God and His purpose for man, (we do not even have the capacity to); but a true, clear and basic knowledge of His person and that of His Son, our Redeemer Christ is essential for our salvation. (John 17:3)