alBHAGDADI:


Let me prove to you why you don't understand all I stated up there.

First answer the questions:

Do you believe Jesus died for your sins?

If you did now, why do you think you might not make heaven?

The answer to those questions will show why you don't understand what I stated up there.

Oh...now you want to deflect with unrelated questions?

What does these unrelated questions have to do with the following lies you cannot back up with the scriptures?
1) Pastors are Spiritual Levites

2) The tree of knowledge of good and evil is Adam and Eve's tithe

3) Hebrews 7 v 12 means that a change in the Law automatically means that tithe changed from agro-produce to money...

The most ridiculous thing I've ever read from a pro-tither is Hebrews 7 v 12 changed the basis of tithing from agro-produce to money...

Damn! This is height of scripture twisting I'll ever hear...

The second thing that comes close is that the fruits of the tree of knowledge of good and evil represents Adam/Eve's tithe


alBHAGDADI...you'll make it big time in comedy

alBHAGDADI:


Do you think Abraham did what he did without being told?

All what Abraham did were by faith in God. He heard the voice of God telling him to do what he did.

Genesis 26:5
Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Now, how do we know what God's laws, statutes and commandments Abraham obeyed? We know all of that by reading the things Abraham did in the book of Genesis. Tithing is one of them.

The spoils of war is not a bad property because there is no law in the Bible against such.

Read Hebrews 7 to see how Paul spoke of how the law changed especially concerning tithe. That's how it changed into money.

Melchizedek the Priest
7 This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, 2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.

4 Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! 5 Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. 6 This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. 7 And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater. 8 In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. 9 One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, 10 because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.

Jesus Like Melchizedek
11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12 For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:

“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”[a]

18 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

20 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21 but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:

“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
‘You are a priest forever.’”[b]

22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant.

23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely[c] those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

26 Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.



alBHAGDADI... Where exactly in this chapter did tithe change from agro-produce to money? Where was it expressly written that in the Priesthood of Jesus, Christians are expected to give monetary tithes in the new covenant?

alBHAGDADI:

We are barely days into the New Year and those against tithe/firstfruits have already started launching their attack on the doctrine. According to these people, the concept of firstfruits is not a doctrine for Christians because we are not under the law of Moses. What they fail to know is that even before the forefathers of Moses were born, God had been collecting first fruits from humans. This post will show that it is God himself that ordained the collection of firstfruits and it is not subject to any law.

The first person recorded to have given first fruit or firstling is Abel the son of Adam and Eve. He and his brother Cain were told to do so By God.

Genesis 4:4
And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

You see, whenever we mention Abel as someone who gave first fruit way before the law of Moses, all those anti-tithers love to give excuses to rubbish such point. One of the excuses they give is that God didn't command or order him to bring any first fruit, which means he did it of his own free will. Before I show you that it is God that commanded Abel and Cain to make that sacrifice, I will first of all like to show you that these anti-tithers understand nothing about the Bible. They don't understand because they lack the spirit of God, that's why someone can deceive them easily against tithing.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and
they are life.

They lack the spirit of God, that's why they don't understand the word of God which is spiritually discerned. Now, let me show you that God gave the command for Abel and Cain to offer sacrifice unto him. See what the Bible said below.

Hebrews 11:4
By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

Did you notice the words in bold above? The above verse says Abel offered sacrifice to God by faith. This means he believed in the word of God and proceeded to offer the sacrifice. This clearly shows that the word of God told him to do what he did, meaning he didn't do it if his own free will. See what the Bible says about faith and the word of God below.

Romans 10:17
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

As seen above, you can't have faith without hearing the word of God. Now, if the Bible in Hebrews 11:4 says Abel had faith in God towards offering a sacrifice, then it means he heard the word of God telling him to offer the sacrifice. He heard the word of God and had faith in it which made him carry out the command.

It's now ridiculous for people who lack understanding of the Bible to sit somewhere and start saying God never commanded Abel to bring first fruits or firstlings. They read the Bible like it's a romance novel, that's why they never grab anything from the word which is spirit.

It is that same practice of Abel that Abraham followed, his grandson Jacob followed and also the children of Israel under the law of Moses. God is still the same yesterday, today and forever. He change not. If he collected first fruit from the people of old even way before the law of Moses, then what makes you think he has changed?

Malachi 3:6
For I am the LORD , I change not;

Yes, I understand that many are angry that today's pastors have abused this doctrine and have enriched themselves with it to the point of living in opulence and flying in jets. But that doesn't mean we should throw away the doctrine which is the word of God. Throwing it away because of them is like throwing away the baby with the bath water.

If you feel your church is one those who have abused this doctrine, then find another church which hasn't; they exist. Mind you, not all churches are really the house of God. As long as the message they preach is works based salvation and not saved by grace alone, then such is not the house of God. Such churches are an example of Cain and his offering. That is why most people who pay first fruits there are not really getting blessed. Let me show you why they are Cain.

Remember we established above that it was the word of God that made Cain and Abel make sacrifice unto God. But how come God rejected Cain's sacrifice but accepted Abel's?

Cain failed to follow instruction given by God's word. How do we know what this instruction is? We know this from Abel's sacrifice which the Bible says God had respect for. Abel made a blood sacrifice unto God, he sacrificed a lamb. Had it been Cain did the same thing, his sacrifice would have been accepted too. Rather, he offered fruits of the ground while Abel offered the blood of a lamb which represents the blood of Jesus Christ who is this Holy Lamb.

Cain's offering was based on his works. He thought if he offered an offering based on his sweat of tilling the soil and harvesting the produce, God will be more pleased by his effort. He failed to obey simple instruction of offering blood sacrifice, instead he relied on his WORKS. His sacrifice represents work based salvation, hence the reason why God rejected it.

Abel on the other hand followed the instructions God gave. He didnt rely on his works but relied on the blood of the lamb which is the same as relying on the blood of Jesus which was sacrificed on the cross. That is what God wants us to do today. But these dubious churches have changed the gospel and are now selling a work based salvation where people No longer rely on the sacrifice of Jesus but on their works of righteousness or their ability not to sin. They have turned their congregation into people who will present works of righteousness which the Bible calls filthy rags before God as their means of salvation.

Isaiah 64:6
But we are all as an unclean thing , and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags;

They do not know that we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. And it is not of our works lest any man should boast.

Ephesians 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

So, if your church is telling you that you can lose your salvation and that salvation involves works, then that is a clear pointer that such a place is not the house of God. That is why the pastors of such churches are very wealthy because they do not believe in God and have fleeced the sheep to stupor. If you continue to give your money whether in offering, tithe or first fruit, just know that your money is not reaching God. It's the same as going to GTBank to send Money to me when I don't bank with them. The money won't get to me. You have to look for the right bank which I have an account with before I can receive the money.

To all those who go about telling people Not to pay tithe or give Money to church, be careful or else God will descend on you.

Hebrews 10:31
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

You know little about God's word yet you are going about persuading people to disobeying him. If you have decided not to pay to churches, so be it. But going about telling others to do the same is very dangerous.

Many will come to this thread to try to rubbish it by saying I'm a pastor trying to defend my cake. I'm not a pastor neither do I have a church. People who make such claims only do so to prove they are on the wrong. They attack the messenger while they neglect the message. That is being guilty.

Well, this is true, but very difficult to accept. Like tithes, it's one of the controversial topics within today's church. Within the Christian circles, all of us may not accept it as a valid practice. On a general note, firstfruit offering is a seed of faith; a free-will offering to God.
https://huntersinternational.org/2019/01/30/christianity/how-to-give-firstfruit-offerings-in-church/

OkCornel:



Melchizedek the Priest
7 This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, 2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.

4 Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! 5 Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. 6 This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. 7 And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater. 8 In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. 9 One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, 10 because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.

Jesus Like Melchizedek
11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12 For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:

“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”[a]

18 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

20 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21 but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:

“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
‘You are a priest forever.’”[b]

22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant.

23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely[c] those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

26 Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.



alBHAGDADI... Where exactly in this chapter did tithe change from agro-produce to money? Where was it expressly written that in the Priesthood of Jesus, Christians are expected to give monetary tithes in the new covenant?

Did you read verse 12? Did you see it stated that the law changed also as the priesthood changed?

How do you expect the new priesthood to feed and cater for the church when they don't even have farmers in the church?

The old priesthood received tithes of agricultural produce. The new priesthood receives tithe of ALL, which includes money because all means all and all is what all means.

Luke 18:12 KJV
I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of ALL that I possess.

They as priests receive tithe of ALL on behalf of Jesus Christ the high priest just as Abraham gave a tithe of ALL to the same Jesus. That is the same essence of Hebrews 7 which you couldn't comprehend.

Genesis 14;20 KJV
And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of ALL.

Hebrews 7:2
To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

OkCornel:


Oh...now you want to deflect with unrelated questions?

What does these unrelated questions have to do with the following lies you cannot back up with the scriptures?
1) Pastors are Spiritual Levites

2) The tree of knowledge of good and evil is Adam and Eve's tithe

3) Hebrews 7 v 12 means that a change in the Law automatically means that tithe changed from agro-produce to money...

Perhaps you are an unbeliever, that's why you failed to answer my questions which have shown why you didn't understand those statement I made.

alBHAGDADI:


Did you read verse 12? Did you see it stated that the law changed also as the priesthood changed?

How do you expect the new priesthood to feed and cater for the church when they don't even have farmers in the church?

The old priesthood received tithes of agricultural produce. The new priesthood receives tithe of ALL, which includes money because all means all and all is what all means.

Luke 18:12 KJV
I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of ALL that I possess.

They as priests receive tithe of ALL on behalf of Jesus Christ the high priest just as Abraham gave a tithe of ALL to the same Jesus. That is the same essence of Hebrews 7 which you couldn't comprehend.

You see why I mentioned that you are a comedian?

So the Pharisee that was boasting in Luke 18 v 12 gave a tithe of all he had under a new priesthood? Haba!

At that point in time, nothing had changed under the Mosaic Law. The Jews still gave their tithes according to the Law of Moses.

Or are you implying that the Pharisee in Luke 18 v 12 gave his tithes to Jesus? Or that the change in the Law/Priesthood happened prior to Like 18 v 12?

alBHAGDADI:


Genesis 14;20 KJV
And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of ALL.

Dubious interpretation of the scriptures. Why didn't you quote Genesis 14 v 21-24 which showed that what Abram tithed to Melchizedek were spoils of war...as opposed to all his possessions which you're falsely claiming that he tithed!

alBHAGDADI:


Hebrews 7:2
To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

Another dubious interpretation of the scriptures.

Hebrews 7 v 4 clearly stated that Abram tithed from war spoils...and not his entire possessions!


Hebrews 7 v 4;
Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder!

alBHAGDADI:


Perhaps you are an unbeliever, that's why you failed to answer my questions which have shown why you didn't understand those statement I made.

Your deflection strategy is not working!

Anyone following this thread obviously knows this discussion has nothing to do with whether I'm a believer or not.

Stick to the discussion and stop looking for exit routes.

I've had discussions with pro-tithers, and this is the last card they play when their lies and falsehood no longer sticks...

OkCornel:


Your deflection strategy is not working!

Anyone following this thread obviously knows this discussion has nothing to do with whether I'm a believer or not.

Stick to the discussion and stop looking for exit routes.

I've had discussions with pro-tithers, and this is the last card they play when their lies and falsehood no longer sticks...

Answer the question or keep shut.

Why are the questions too difficult before you to answer?

Perhaps you are a Satanist.

OkCornel:


You see why I mentioned that you are a comedian?

So the Pharisee that was boasting in Luke 18 v 12 gave a tithe of all he had under a new priesthood? Haba!

At that point in time, nothing had changed under the Mosaic Law. The Jews still gave their tithes according to the Law of Moses.

Or are you implying that the Pharisee in Luke 18 v 12 gave his tithes to Jesus? Or that the change in the Law/Priesthood happened prior to Like 18 v 12?



Dubious interpretation of the scriptures. Why didn't you quote Genesis 14 v 21-24 which showed that what Abram tithed to Melchizedek were spoils of war...as opposed to all his possessions which you're falsely claiming that he tithed!





Another dubious interpretation of the scriptures.

Hebrews 7 v 4 clearly stated that Abram tithed from war spoils...and not his entire possessions!


Hebrews 7 v 4;
Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder!

What is wrong with you? Is there anything wrong with the spoils of war? Didn't he work or risk his life for it? You are acting as if he stole it.

If there was something wrong with paying tithe of the spoils of war the Bible would have told us. The Bible never said such in the book of Genesis neither did Paul says such in Hebrews. Now, who are you to say such?

In the parable Jesus spoke of a Pharisee who boasted of paying tithe, did you hear Jesus condemn him for paying tithe? No. Rather, he was condemned for exhalting himself.

Yes, Jesus said he paid tithe of ALL, which could have included money because money falls into the category of ALL things. That was a nice opportunity for Jesus to rebuking him for paying money or whatever as tithe of ALL, but Jesus did not. Now, who are you to rebuke us for paying money as tithe when our master has not rebuked us?

alBHAGDADI:


What is wrong with you? Is there anything wrong with the spoils of war? Didn't he work or risk his life for it? You are acting as if he stole it.

If there was something wrong with paying tithe of the spoils of war the Bible would have told us. The Bible never said such in the book of Genesis neither did Paul says such in Hebrews. Now, who are you to say such?

Follow the trail of the discussion. Who mentioned anything about tithing from war spoils is good or bad?

You lied that the new Priesthood received a tithe of all, and then quoted Hebrews 7 v 2 alone to claim Abraham gave a "tithe of all"...

Now that you were busted with Hebrews 7 v 4 which clearly stated it was war spoils Abraham tithed...you're bringing up the issue of whether tithing from war spoils was right or wrong.

alBHAGDADI:


In the parable Jesus spoke of a Pharisee who boasted of paying tithe, did you hear Jesus condemn him for paying tithe? No. Rather, he was condemned for exhalting himself.

Yes, Jesus said he paid tithe of ALL, which could have included money because money falls into the category of ALL things. That was a nice opportunity for Jesus to rebuking him for paying money or whatever as tithe of ALL, but Jesus did not. Now, who are you to rebuke us for paying money as tithe when our master has not rebuked us?

1) Was the Pharisee paying his tithe under the new Priesthood as you earlier claimed? Yes or No?

2) When did this new Priesthood commence?

Answer these questions and see the folly of your claims...

alBHAGDADI:


Answer the question or keep shut.

Why are the questions too difficult before you to answer?

Perhaps you are a Satanist.

Keep on guessing who I am...

Perhaps Sciencewatch or bloodofthelamb can help you out on who I am...

I am not going to waste time answering such silly questions... I am fed up with shallow pro-tithers using this technique to run away like the cowards that they are...

OkCornel:

Follow the trail of the discussion. Who mentioned anything about tithing from war spoils is good or bad?

You lied that the new Priesthood received a tithe of all, and then quoted Hebrews 7 v 2 alone to claim Abraham gave a "tithe of all"...

Now that you were busted with Hebrews 7 v 4 which clearly stated it was war spoils Abraham tithed...you're bringing up the issue of whether tithing from war spoils was right or wrong.



1) Was the Pharisee paying his tithe under the new Priesthood as you earlier claimed? Yes or No?

2) When did this new Priesthood commence?

Answer these questions and see the folly of your claims...

First and foremost, I hope you agree that it was Jesus who received the tithe Abraham gave from the spoils of war. The reason that you keep hammering on the spoils of war is simply because you want to use that to rubbish the fact that tithing existed before the law of Moses. But you fail to realize that you insulted Jesus in the process, who received the tithe of the spoils of war from Abraham.

Didn't Jesus know that the tithe Abraham was paying was from the spoils of war? Of course he knew because he is Ominiscient. Then why did he receive it when someone like you believe the spoils of war is something bad? He received it because you and your deceived kind are the only one who think the spoils of war is bad.

Remember the story of how some kings ganged up against another set of kings and won in a battle which saw them posses their belongings aka spoils of war. Abraham was drawn into the battle because his nephew Lot was taken hostage by the victorious kings.

When Abraham engaged them in a battle, he defeated them. Guess what? The spoils of war now belonged to him because he fought for it and risked his life. The Victor becomes the owner of the property, hence winner takes all.

That's why Abraham could comfortably give Jesus 10% out of it. Also note that Jesus didn't rebuke him nor reject it which is because he knew there was nothing wrong in Abraham's action. He knew Abraham gave out of his property, the spoils of war he risked his life for.

If Jesus didn't see the property as Abraham's, he won't have collected 10% out of it. So, who are you to insinuate that the spoils of war wasn't his?

Oh, because he gave the rest to the formerly defeated kings? He gave it to them because he didn't want a situation whereby they will say they made him rich even though it was his sweat and blood that earned him the property. Remember that they didn't hire him to help them fight and recover their goods. He got pulled into the fight because of Lot his nephew. It's just like Cameroon defeating Nigeria and owning all our oil. If America comes and defeat Cameroon, all the oil will belong to who?

Abraham had every right not to give them the goods, but he decided to because he didn't want unnecessary rumors. He had the power to keep the goods for himself just as he had the power to pay tithe to God out of it and also feed his men from it.

Go back and read the story again. The goods were Abraham's.


1. Did I tell you the Pharisee was paying tithe under the new priesthood? I only said he paid tithe of all which Jesus didn't condemn him for. So who are you to condemn him for paying tithe of all which could have included money?

2. It commenced with Jesus.

alBHAGDADI:


First and foremost, I hope you agree that it was Jesus who received the tithe Abraham gave from the spoils of war. The reason that you keep hammering on the spoils of war is simply because you want to use that to rubbish the fact that tithing existed before the law of Moses. But you fail to realize that you insulted Jesus in the process, who received the tithe of the spoils of war from Abraham.

Didn't Jesus know that the tithe Abraham was paying was from the spoils of war? Of course he knew because he is Ominiscient. Then why did he receive it when someone like you believe the spoils of war is something bad? He received it because you and your deceived kind are the only one who think the spoils of war is bad.

Remember the story of how some kings ganged up against another set of kings and won in a battle which saw them posses their belongings aka spoils of war. Abraham was drawn into the battle because his nephew Lot was taken hostage by the victorious kings.

When Abraham engaged them in a battle, he defeated them. Guess what? The spoils of war now belonged to him because he fought for it and risked his life. The Victor becomes the owner of the property, hence winner takes all.

That's why Abraham could comfortably give Jesus 10% out of it. Also note that Jesus didn't rebuke him nor reject it which is because he knew there was nothing wrong in Abraham's action. He knew Abraham gave out of his property, the spoils of war he risked his life for.

If Jesus didn't see the property as Abraham's, he won't have collected 10% out of it. So, who are you to insinuate that the spoils of war wasn't his?

Oh, because he gave the rest to the formerly defeated kings? He gave it to them because he didn't want a situation whereby they will say they made him rich even though it was his sweat and blood that earned him the property. Remember that they didn't hire him to help them fight and recover their goods. He got pulled into the fight because of Lot his nephew. It's just like Cameroon defeating Nigeria and owning all our oil. If America comes and defeat Cameroon, all the oil will belong to who?

Abraham had every right not to give them the goods, but he decided to because he didn't want unnecessary rumors. He had the power to keep the goods for himself just as he had the power to pay tithe to God out of it and also feed his men from it.

Go back and read the story again. The goods were Abraham's.


1. Did I tell you the Pharisee was paying tithe under the new priesthood? I only said he paid tithe of all which Jesus didn't condemn him for. So who are you to condemn him for paying tithe of all which could have included money?

2. It commenced with Jesus.

Jesus is Melchizedek? Is this another joke or something?

Where was it written that Jesus is Melchizedek?

Read Hebrews 7 v 11 and see whether Jesus and Melchizedek are the same person...

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

If Jesus was Melchizedek...then why would the author of Hebrews mentioned Jesus as a Priest in the order of Melchizedek?

Also read Hebrews 7 v 17 which repeated this again...
For it is declared:“You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”



Now look at these verses and tell us if Jesus and Melchizedek are the same person...
How can you be lying that Jesus received tithe from Abraham?



Let me make it very simple for you. Read Hebrews 7 v 11. There are two orders of Priests i.e. that of Aaron and Melchizedek.

1) If a Priest e.g. Abiathar is a Priest in the order of Aaron...does it mean that Abiathar and Aaron is the same person?
2) If Jesus is a Priest in the order of Melchizedek...does it mean Jesus and Melchizedek is one and the same person?

alBHAGDADI:


First and foremost, I hope you agree that it was Jesus who received the tithe Abraham gave from the spoils of war. The reason that you keep hammering on the spoils of war is simply because you want to use that to rubbish the fact that tithing existed before the law of Moses. But you fail to realize that you insulted Jesus in the process, who received the tithe of the spoils of war from Abraham.

Didn't Jesus know that the tithe Abraham was paying was from the spoils of war? Of course he knew because he is Ominiscient. Then why did he receive it when someone like you believe the spoils of war is something bad? He received it because you and your deceived kind are the only one who think the spoils of war is bad.

Remember the story of how some kings ganged up against another set of kings and won in a battle which saw them posses their belongings aka spoils of war. Abraham was drawn into the battle because his nephew Lot was taken hostage by the victorious kings.

When Abraham engaged them in a battle, he defeated them. Guess what? The spoils of war now belonged to him because he fought for it and risked his life. The Victor becomes the owner of the property, hence winner takes all.

That's why Abraham could comfortably give Jesus 10% out of it. Also note that Jesus didn't rebuke him nor reject it which is because he knew there was nothing wrong in Abraham's action. He knew Abraham gave out of his property, the spoils of war he risked his life for.

If Jesus didn't see the property as Abraham's, he won't have collected 10% out of it. So, who are you to insinuate that the spoils of war wasn't his?

Oh, because he gave the rest to the formerly defeated kings? He gave it to them because he didn't want a situation whereby they will say they made him rich even though it was his sweat and blood that earned him the property. Remember that they didn't hire him to help them fight and recover their goods. He got pulled into the fight because of Lot his nephew. It's just like Cameroon defeating Nigeria and owning all our oil. If America comes and defeat Cameroon, all the oil will belong to who?

Abraham had every right not to give them the goods, but he decided to because he didn't want unnecessary rumors. He had the power to keep the goods for himself just as he had the power to pay tithe to God out of it and also feed his men from it.

Go back and read the story again. The goods were Abraham's.


1. Did I tell you the Pharisee was paying tithe under the new priesthood? I only said he paid tithe of all which Jesus didn't condemn him for. So who are you to condemn him for paying tithe of all which could have included money?

2. It commenced with Jesus.

Oh great... we are back to Abraham's example of tithing. Now answer these questions;


1) Was Abraham compelled to tithe to Melchizedek?

2) If Abraham did not tithe out of the war spoils to Melchizedek, would any devourer come after his possessions?

3) Did Abraham's tithe extend beyond the spoils of war to his personal wealth he worked for? i.e. cattle, sheeps and other possessions he had prior to the war?

4) Should Abraham's once in a lifetime tithe from war spoils become a reason for Christians to part with 10% of their monthly income?

OkCornel:


Jesus is Melchizedek? Is this another joke or something?

Where was it written that Jesus is Melchizedek?

Read Hebrews 7 v 11 and see whether Jesus and Melchizedek are the same person...

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

If Jesus was Melchizedek...then why would the author of Hebrews mentioned Jesus as a Priest in the order of Melchizedek?

Also read Hebrews 7 v 17 which repeated this again...
For it is declared:“You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”



Now look at these verses and tell us if Jesus and Melchizedek are the same person...
How can you be lying that Jesus received tithe from Abraham?



Let me make it very simple for you. Read Hebrews 7 v 11. There are two orders of Priests i.e. that of Aaron and Melchizedek.

1) If a Priest e.g. Abiathar is a Priest in the order of Aaron...does it mean that Abiathar and Aaron is the same person?
2) If Jesus is a Priest in the order of Melchizedek...does it mean Jesus and Melchizedek is one and the same person?

Do you know what your problem is? You lack the Holy Spirit to teach you how to understand things. You also lack ordinary understanding, that's why you don't understand Hebrews 7:11.

That passage is talking about a priest in the order of Melchizedek i.e a priest who will do things like it was done under Melchizedek. You expect the priest to be someone entirely different from Melchizedek himself, yet you are wrong because Jesus who is the new priest is still the same Melchizedek of old. He is the same Yesterday's Today and Forever. How do we know this? Read the below verses in

Hebrews 7 King James Version (KJV)
1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;
3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

Look at the titles attributed to Melchizedek above. Aren't they the same titles Jesus is often called by e.g King of righteousness, peace, without beginning nor end etc?

If Jesus is not the Melchizedek, then who was Melchizedek who had no Father, Mother, beginning nor end? Can that even be a human being?

Verse 3 above says Melchizedek continued to be a priest i.e forever and it never ended. Hebrews 7:17 says Jesus is a priest forever. Isn't that enough for you to see who Melchizedek is?

OkCornel:




Oh great... we are back to Abraham's example of tithing. Now answer these questions;


1) Was Abraham compelled to tithe to Melchizedek?

2) If Abraham did not tithe out of the war spoils to Melchizedek, would any devourer come after his possessions?

3) Did Abraham's tithe extend beyond the spoils of war to his personal wealth he worked for? i.e. cattle, sheeps and other possessions he had prior to the war?

4) Should Abraham's once in a lifetime tithe from war spoils become a reason for Christians to part with 10% of their monthly income?

The Bible says Abraham saw the greatness of Melchizedek and gave him tithes.

Hebrews 7:4 King James Version (KJV)
Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

We see the greatness of Jesus and so we give him tithe as well, just as Abraham did, who is the Father of our faith.

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Stop hammering on spoils of war, I've trashed that already. He owned the spoils of war, except if you want to tell me that Melchizedek the priest of the most high God received fraudulent tithe from Abraham. That's insulting to God to say such.

Stop saying Abraham tithed once in a lifetime. Are your expecting the Bible to just be about the amount of times Abraham tithed? If the Bible says he tithed every time, would you tithe? So because the Bible only mentioned him tithing once, you now feel it was just a one time thing, so we shouldn't do it. Okay, the Bible never mentioned that he nor Jesus went to the toilet. So, why are you doing what they never did today?

alBHAGDADI:


Do you know what your problem is? You lack the Holy Spirit to teach you how to understand things. You also lack ordinary understanding, that's why you don't understand Hebrews 7:11.

That passage is talking about a priest in the order of Melchizedek i.e a priest who will do things like it was done under Melchizedek. You expect the priest to be someone entirely different from Melchizedek himself, yet you are wrong because Jesus who is the new priest is still the same Melchizedek of old. He is the same Yesterday's Today and Forever. How do we know this? Read the below verses in

Hebrews 7 King James Version (KJV)
1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;
3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

Look at the titles attributed to Melchizedek above. Aren't they the same titles Jesus is often called by e.g King of righteousness, peace, without beginning nor end etc?

If Jesus is not the Melchizedek, then who was Melchizedek who had no Father, Mother, beginning nor end? Can that even be a human being?

Verse 3 above says Melchizedek continued to be a priest i.e forever and it never ended. Hebrews 7:17 says Jesus is a priest forever. Isn't that enough for you to see who Melchizedek is?

You know what your problem is? You see a straightforward truth but twist it to create a lie.

Your answer to these questions will show you that Jesus and Melchizedek are different persons.


1) The Bible mentioned Melchizedek was without father or mother. Are you saying Jesus never had a father?

2) The Bible clearly mentioned in Psalms 110 and in Hebrews 7 that Jesus is a Priest "in the order of Melchizedek".

(a) If Abiathar for example was a Levite Priest in the order of Aaron, does it mean Abiathar and Aaron are one and the same person? Yes or No?

(b) Jesus is a Priest in the order of Melchizedek. Does it mean that Jesus and Melchizedek are one and the same person? Yes or No?

alBHAGDADI:


The Bible says Abraham saw the greatness of Melchizedek and gave him tithes.

Hebrews 7:4 King James Version (KJV)
Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

We see the greatness of Jesus and so we give him tithe as well, just as Abraham did, who is the Father of our faith.

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Stop hammering on spoils of war, I've trashed that already. He owned the spoils of war, except if you want to tell me that Melchizedek the priest of the most high God received fraudulent tithe from Abraham. That's insulting to God to say such.

Stop saying Abraham tithed once in a lifetime. Are your expecting the Bible to just be about the amount of times Abraham tithed? If the Bible says he tithed every time, would you tithe? So because the Bible only mentioned him tithing once, you now feel it was just a one time thing, so we shouldn't do it. Okay, the Bible never mentioned that he nor Jesus went to the toilet. So, why are you doing what they never did today?

1) If Abraham tithed more than once in his lifetime, then show us where in the scriptures he did so.

2) If Abraham gave a tithe of any other thing beyond warspoils... open the scriptures and show us.


Even the author of Hebrews did not insinuate that... unless you want to add that to the scriptures.


We are awaiting scriptural references!

OkCornel:


1) If Abraham tithed more than once in his lifetime, then show us where in the scriptures he did so.

2) If Abraham gave a tithe of any other thing beyond warspoils... open the scriptures and show us.


Even the author of Hebrews did not insinuate that... unless you want to add that to the scriptures.


We are awaiting scriptural references!

Are you trying to nullify the tithe he gave simply because the Bible didn't mention he did it a second time? Since the Bible didn't record that Jesus nor his apostles when to the toilet to pass out faeces, then you shouldn't pass out faeces again. Can you see how dumb your question is? You expect the whole Bible to be filled with the amount of times Abraham tithed, as if there aren't other stories to write about. Even if the Bible shows that Abraham tithed 9 times, you and your ilk will still demand for the 10th time he tithed. A word is enough for the wise. Only fools want something drummed into their head before they believe.

I've told you before, stop hammering on spoils of war. It only shows how much you are eager to insulted God and his Most High Priest who recieved tithe from such. If it was bad to tithe from the spoils of war, just as you have been claiming, then Melchizedek being have collected it from Abraham. But since he's greater than your foolishness and sees better than you, he accepted it, meaning it wasn't a bad thing. How dare you label as bad what the Priest of the Most High God never labeled as bad?

OkCornel:


You know what your problem is? You see a straightforward truth but twist it to create a lie.

Your answer to these questions will show you that Jesus and Melchizedek are different persons.


1) The Bible mentioned Melchizedek was without father or mother. Are you saying Jesus never had a father?

2) The Bible clearly mentioned in Psalms 110 and in Hebrews 7 that Jesus is a Priest "in the order of Melchizedek".

(a) If Abiathar for example was a Levite Priest in the order of Aaron, does it mean Abiathar and Aaron are one and the same person? Yes or No?

(b) Jesus is a Priest in the order of Melchizedek. Does it mean that Jesus and Melchizedek are one and the same person? Yes or No?

Jesus never had a biological father just like Melchizedek. That's what Paul was talking about. But your blind self believes he does and have stupidly placed Melchizedek above him, who had no biological father. You are so blind to the point that you can't even see that all the titles of Melchizedek are what Jesus bears.

The order of Melchizedek is simply a priesthood that does things how things were done under Melchizedek. It's not saying Jesus is taking on Melchizedek'd position. Jesus is never taking another person's position but his own. The priesthood has always been his, that's why Melchizedek bears his titles, which means he was Jesus.

Even when the Bible says Jesus will sit on his father David's throne, you might foolishly think David is his father and that he is assuming David's position. But when you read how David himself called Jesus his Lord, then you will understand that the throne was always Jesus's throne.

Psalm 110 King James Version (KJV)
The L ORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.


The Bible says Melchizedek had no beginning nor end of days. Isn't that a title attributed to God which Jesus is part of?

Yet you say that passage was talking about just a man.

alBHAGDADI:



Jesus never had a biological father just like Melchizedek. That's what Paul was talking about. But your blind self believes he does and have stupidly placed Melchizedek above him, who had no biological father. You are so blind to the point that you can't even see that all the titles of Melchizedek are what Jesus bears.

And yet Jesus had a biological mother, but Melchizedek had none! How can they be one and the same person?

alBHAGDADI:


The order of Melchizedek is simply a priesthood that does things how things were done under Melchizedek. It's not saying Jesus is taking on Melchizedek'd position. Jesus is never taking another person's position but his own. The priesthood has always been his, that's why Melchizedek bears his titles, which means he was Jesus.

Even when the Bible says Jesus will sit on his father David's throne, you might foolishly think David is his father and that he is assuming David's position. But when you read how David himself called Jesus his Lord, then you will understand that the throne was always Jesus's throne.

Psalm 110 King James Version (KJV)
The L ORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.


The Bible says Melchizedek had no beginning nor end of days. Isn't that a title attributed to God which Jesus is part of?

Yet you say that passage was talking about just a man.

What sort of blasphemy is this? Why didn't you go ahead to quote Psalms 110 vs 4?
The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”


Even David and Paul recognized Jesus as someone distinct from Melchizedek!

But alBHAGDADI sees them as one and the same person!


Keep adding to scriptures.


I'll ask you this question which you keep dodging.

1) Abiathar was a priest in the order of Aaron. Does it mean Abiathar and Aaron are one and the same person?

2) Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Does it mean Jesus and Melchizedek are one and the same person?

alBHAGDADI:


Are you trying to nullify the tithe he gave simply because the Bible didn't mention he did it a second time? Since the Bible didn't record that Jesus nor his apostles when to the toilet to pass out faeces, then you shouldn't pass out faeces again. Can you see how dumb your question is? You expect the whole Bible to be filled with the amount of times Abraham tithed, as if there aren't other stories to write about. Even if the Bible shows that Abraham tithed 9 times, you and your ilk will still demand for the 10th time he tithed. A word is enough for the wise. Only fools want something drummed into their head before they believe.

I've told you before, stop hammering on spoils of war. It only shows how much you are eager to insulted God and his Most High Priest who recieved tithe from such. If it was bad to tithe from the spoils of war, just as you have been claiming, then Melchizedek being have collected it from Abraham. But since he's greater than your foolishness and sees better than you, he accepted it, meaning it wasn't a bad thing. How dare you label as bad what the Priest of the Most High God never labeled as bad?

You're just getting emotional over nothing...

1) Show me where I mentioned Abraham tithing out of warspoils was a bad thing.

2) Why should Abraham's once in a lifetime tithe out of warspoils become a basis for Christians to part with 10% of their monthly income?

Add your 1+1 and see why I'm asking you the second question.

You pro-tithers are trying to dance around Mosaic tithing and Abraham's example of tithe whenever it suits you.

OkCornel:


You're just getting emotional over nothing...

1) Show me where I mentioned Abraham tithing out of warspoils was a bad thing.

2) Why should Abraham's once in a lifetime tithe out of warspoils become a basis for Christians to part with 10% of their monthly income?

Add your 1+1 and see why I'm asking you the second question.

You pro-tithers are trying to dance around Mosaic tithing and Abraham's example of tithe whenever it suits you.

1.) Then stop emphasizing on how Abraham tithed from war spoils, because rubbishing his tithe is what you are doing by that. I've showed you why it is an insulted to God to belittle Abraham's effort which God never did.

2.) Stop dancing in circles. The Bible is not a book for the amount of times Abraham tithed alone. The Bible contains so many things for it to just be about Abraham's tithe. If you can't believe tithing existed in Abraham's days, then don't believe it. But trying to rubbish it when shown that it did exist is something horrible.

We tithe because Abraham is the Father of our faith. All the things which he did, we are to do today. The only things we are exempted from are those things the new testament clearing warned to stay away from e.g polygamy, animal sacrifice. Or can you show me where the new Testament wanted against tithing?

When we show you guys that Jacob also showed that the concept of tithing existed before the law, you also try to rubbish it by saying he never fulfilled his vow to tithe. Whether he did or not is not the case but the fact that he proves the concept to have existed before the law. Just as God hated homosexuality before the law of Moses stated it expressly, is the same way God accepted tithe before the law of Moses stated it. So if God still hates homosexuality even after the law, what makes you think he has changed in tithe?

OkCornel:

And yet Jesus had a biological mother, but Melchizedek had none! How can they be one and the same person?




What sort of blasphemy is this? Why didn't you go ahead to quote Psalms 110 vs 4?
The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”


Even David and Paul recognized Jesus as someone distinct from Melchizedek!

But alBHAGDcADI sees them as one and the same person!


Keep adding to scriptures.


I'll ask you this question which you keep dodging.

1) Abiathar was a priest in the order of Aaron. Does it mean Abiathar and Aaron are one and the same person?

2) Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Does it mean Jesus and Melchizedek are one and the same person?

So according to you, when Jesus was born by Mary his biological mother that was when he started to exist.

Don't you get it? The "no Father nor mother" talk is saying he has no beginning nor end of days. Jesus had been appearing in flesh right from the garden of Eden and even in Abraham's days. He just had to come through Mary so it won't seem as if he dropped from the sky. That doesn't mean his beginning started with Mary giving birth to him.

Did Abiathar and Aaron share similar titles asides just being high priests? No

But Jesus and Melchizedek had the same titles asides just being high priest. They are both without beginning nor end of days. Are you trying to tell me that Melchizedek (an ordinary man according to you) whom the Bible says is without beginning nor end of days is another God on his own quite different from God Almighty and Jesus? He's even called King of righteousness and King of peace which are Jesus' titles.

alBHAGDADI:

So according to you, when Jesus was born by Mary his biological mother that was when he started to exist.

Don't you get it? The "no Father nor mother" talk is saying he has no beginning nor end of days. Jesus had been appearing in flesh right from the garden of Eden and even in Abraham's days. He just had to come through Mary so it won't seem as if he dropped from the sky. That doesn't mean his beginning started with Mary giving birth to him.

Did Abiathar and Aaron share similar titles asides just being high priests? No

But Jesus and Melchizedek had the same titles asides just being high priest. They are both without beginning nor end of days. Are you trying to tell me that Melchizedek (an ordinary man according to you) whom the Bible says is without beginning nor end of days is another God on his own quite different from God Almighty and Jesus? He's even called King of righteousness and King of peace which are Jesus' titles.

And after comparing Jesus to Melchizedek...The author of Hebrews concluded they are one and the same person abi?

Some people are just reading their Bible upside down.

The same Hebrews mentioned clearly Melchizedek had no mother or father...according to alBHAGDADI... perhaps Jesus had no father or mother too...


Maybe we should also believe in reincarnations too... perhaps, Elijah and John the Baptist are one and the same person as well...

And for the bolded part of your quote, just see how you're contradicting yourself in just a paragraph...smh

alBHAGDADI:


1.) Then stop emphasizing on how Abraham tithed from war spoils, because rubbishing his tithe is what you are doing by that. I've showed you why it is an insulted to God to belittle Abraham's effort which God never did.

2.) Stop dancing in circles. The Bible is not a book for the amount of times Abraham tithed alone. The Bible contains so many things for it to just be about Abraham's tithe. If you can't believe tithing existed in Abraham's days, then don't believe it. But trying to rubbish it when shown that it did exist is something horrible.

We tithe because Abraham is the Father of our faith. All the things which he did, we are to do today. The only things we are exempted from are those things the new testament clearing warned to stay away from e.g polygamy, animal sacrifice. Or can you show me where the new Testament wanted against tithing?

When we show you guys that Jacob also showed that the concept of tithing existed before the law, you also try to rubbish it by saying he never fulfilled his vow to tithe. Whether he did or not is not the case but the fact that he proves the concept to have existed before the law. Just as God hated homosexuality before the law of Moses stated it expressly, is the same way God accepted tithe before the law of Moses stated it. So if God still hates homosexuality even after the law, what makes you think he has changed in tithe?

Show us where I criticized or rubbished Abraham's tithing from warspoils or keep shut forever.

One simple question you've been dancing around...

How does Abraham's once in a lifetime tithe from war spoils become a basis for Christians to part with 10% of their monthly income?

And blessed be God Most High, who has defeated your enemies for you.” Then Abram gave Melchizedek a TENTH of all the goods he had recovered. The king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give back my people who were captured. But you may KEEP for yourself ALL the goods you have recovered.” Abram replied to the king of Sodom, “I solemnly swear to the Lord , God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth, that I WILL NOT TAKE SO MUCH AS A SINGLE THREAD OR SANDAL THING FROM WHAT BELONGS TO YOU. Otherwise you might say, ‘I am the one who made Abram rich.’ I will accept only what my young warriors have already eaten, and I request that you give a fair share of the goods to my allies—Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre.”
Genesis 14:20‭-‬24 NLT

Abraham gave only 10% and returned the rest to the king of Sodom.

If we are obligated to follow Abraham we will have to give 10% and return 90% to employers or clients. .

If you really want to be rich go to business school. The only thing you can get from Jesus is the salvation of your soul for the new world he's gone to prepare.

Prosperity Gospel is pure heresy and not what Jesus preached. There is no earthly reward apart from piece of mind about the second coming of Christ.

Do not be deceived.

OkCornel:


Show us where I criticized or rubbished Abraham's tithing from warspoils or keep shut forever.

One simple question you've been dancing around...

How does Abraham's once in a lifetime tithe from war spoils become a basis for Christians to part with 10% of their monthly income?

Because Abraham's faith has been a model for generations after generations. He didn't keep his only son when God told him to sacrifice the child by slaughtering him with his own hands. He obeyed God by going ahead to do what God requested of him. He earned God's love by showing that he feared him.


Genesis 22:12
And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

If a man like Abraham hadn't given 10% to Jesus, do you think he would have had the willingness to offer his one and only son to God, the promised child whom he waited decades before he had? That act by Abraham made God to bless him to the point that God even swore by himself.

Genesis 22:16-18

16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the
L ORD , for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

How can you give God your child when you can't even give him 10% of your earnings? Yet you claim you are a child of Abraham. Aren't we supposed to do the things Abraham our father did? You might say are we suppose to offer animal sacrifices and have concubines like Abraham? No, because the Bible ruled those things out in the new testament. Can you show me where the Bible ruled tithing out in the new Testament? You can't, neither can we, that's why we tithe today.

Now, you keep on saying Abraham's tithe was once in a lifetime. Who told you he never gave tithe again? You foolish people always speak where the Bible is silent. Who are you to state boldly that Abraham only gave tithe once? Okay, the Bible doesn't record that Abraham ate food. Why are you eating food today?

Abraham tithing wasn't a once in a lifetime thing. Saying so is to lie against the Bible cos the book didn't say such. The Bible doesn't say he tithed more than once neither does it say he didn't. So remain silent on the issue as the Bible has remained silent on it. Speaking where the Bible hasn't spoken is the same as speaking when God hasn't spoken. God's wrath will fall on you for that.


Lamentations 3:37 King James Version
Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not?

OkCornel:


And after comparing Jesus to Melchizedek...The author of Hebrews concluded they are one and the same person abi?

Some people are just reading their Bible upside down.

The same Hebrews mentioned clearly Melchizedek had no mother or father...according to alBHAGDADI... perhaps Jesus had no father or mother too...


Maybe we should also believe in reincarnations too... perhaps, Elijah and John the Baptist are one and the same person as well...

And for the bolded part of your quote, just see how you're contradicting yourself in just a paragraph...smh

1. Kindly tell us who Melchizedek was?

2. Why didn't he have a Father nor mother?

3. Why did he go by the same titles Jesus is known by?

4. When was he appointed high priest of God?

5. Why doesn't he have a beginning nor end of days?

6. Where is he now?


Answer the questions one after the other .

OkCornel:
And after comparing Jesus to Melchizedek...The author of Hebrews concluded they are one and the same person abi?

Some people are just reading their Bible upside down.

The same Hebrews mentioned clearly Melchizedek had no mother or father...according to alBHAGDADI... perhaps Jesus had no father or mother too...

Maybe we should also believe in reincarnations too... perhaps, Elijah and John the Baptist are one and the same person as well...

And for the bolded part of your quote, just see how you're contradicting yourself in just a paragraph...smh

alBHAGDADI:
1. Kindly tell us who Melchizedek was?

Melchizedek didnt know and never acknowledged he is a priest of YHWH
All Melchizedek knew was that he is a priest of El Elyon (i.e. a priest of God, the Most High)
The one and truly El Elyon, whose personal name is Yahweh, Melchizedek doesn't know
and he so unable to recognise El Elyon's name (i.e. Yahweh) as being good or important enough to mention

Evidentally Melchizedek had no relationship whatsoever with Yahweh. Melchizedek Evidentally and in the real sense, had no relationship whatsoever perse with Yahweh

alBHAGDADI:
2. Why didn't he have a Father nor mother?

He had but what no had any record of his birth and death

alBHAGDADI:
3. Why did he go by the same titles Jesus is known by?

You have just read how Abraham's El Elyon is quite distinct from Melchizedek's El Elyon and this is confirmed when Abraham publicly acknowledged Yahweh by stating clearly and without doubt letting it be known that he, Abraham had sworn to Yahweh, God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth. Besides, pagan gods bear same titles by which the true God is known by too, dont they?

alBHAGDADI:
4. When was he appointed high priest of God?

He was never appointed high priest of God,. Where did you get this false or inaccurate information from, deliberately told and intending to deceive with huh?. Melchizedek was priest of God Most High, not and never was a high priest

alBHAGDADI:
5. Why doesn't he have a beginning nor end of days?

Already above responded to this

alBHAGDADI:
6. Where is he now?

Six foot or so under

alBHAGDADI:
Answer the questions one after the other .

[img]https://s1/images/MuttWipesHandSmile.gif[/img]
Easy peasy lemon squeezy QED Mr Prooftexting
Come back for more, if you havent had enough

MuttleyLaff:


Melchizedek didnt know and never acknowledged he is a priest of YHWH
All Melchizedek knew was that he is a priest of El Elyon (i.e. a priest of God, the Most High)
The one and truly El Elyon, whose personal name is Yahweh, Melchizedek doesn't know
and he so unable to recognise El Elyon's name (i.e. Yahweh) as being good or important enough to mention

Evidentally Melchizedek had no relationship whatsoever with Yahweh. Melchizedek Evidentally and in the real sense, had no relationship whatsoever perse with Yahweh

He had but what no had any record of his birth and death

You have just read how Abraham's El Elyon is quite distinct from Melchizedek's El Elyon and this is confirmed when Abraham publicly acknowledged Yahweh by stating clearly and without doubt letting it be known that he, Abraham had sworn to Yahweh, God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth. Besides, pagan gods bear same titles by which the true God is known by too, dont they?

He was never appointed high priest of God,. Where did you get this false or inaccurate information from, deliberately told and intending to deceive with huh?. Melchizedek was priest of God Most High, not and never was a high priest

Already above responded to this

Six foot or so under


[img]https://s1/images/MuttWipesHandSmile.gif[/img]
Easy peasy lemon squeezy QED Mr Prooftexting
Come back for more, if you havent had enough

I've seen enough already.

This one is even saying Melchizedek was confused.

Goodbye