₦airaland Forum

@Afam,

I am sure his plans made sense and it is sad he is not in charge to follow through his promise.
Olmert on the other hand believed that war was a first option in resolving a conflict, and now we are going back to what they should have done in the first place, do a prisoner exchange.

It is obvious from your statement that you are either blinded to the facts or you just intentionally neglect them because of whatever reasons or pre-dispositions you may have.

On what manifestoe did Olmert run for office, I ask?  Was it not on a faithful implementation of Sharon's policies?  Olmert's plan was to define Isreal's border permanently by withdrawing from those lands even though Isreal has a greater claim to them.  War was the only option he had since the withdrawal was seen as a sign of weakness and the land now became a launching pad for the Palestinians.

Some have said he is thinking of resigning.  Well, I see no reason why he should remain in office because he cannot implement his manifestoe anymore.  No right thinking Isreali thinks that withdrawing is now the answer to their safety has it only makes them more vulnerable to those whose ultimate desire is to wipe them out.

And by the way,, the prisoner exchange you are talking about will now be offered to Hezbollah  from the POW from the last war and the bodies of other militants taken during that war.  For those two, Hezbollah, is getting dozens in return.  Who is at a loss here I ask?

And by the way, if Sharon was still in charge, he would have gone to war, and would have likely done a better job than Olmert did.  Hezbollah leader is in the news now saying he regretted capturing those two soldiers.  That was part Isreal's plans as well.  To make Hezbollah think twice in the future before going on such mad escapades.

Hi TV01,

I do appreciate your kind words and you know the feeling is mutual.  I knew you will definitely have problems with my conclusions based on your pre-dispositions.  However, I do have my scriptural reasons to believe what I believe, and this I will share with you.

The Book of Timothy provides the answer to your questions.  It is obvious from the letters that Timothy was Pastor over the church at Ephesus and the letters were written to him to help him in the proper administration of that local assembly.  The tone of the letter suggests that Timothy was the final authority within the Church, and I can prove this as we go.  In the mean time however, let us give our attention to the fact that the elders too were subject to the authority of Timothy.  See 1 Timothy 5:1 Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;

See also 1 Timothy 5:17-21 17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. 18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward. 19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. 20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. 21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.

It is obvious from these scriptures that the elders were well under Timothy's authority, and that is the way the church is set up.  And may I bring to your attention that every chain of authority must always peak at one person.  See the government, even the house, or the judiciary.  See the home, offices etc,   Final authority must be vested in one person to avoid chaos.

@grailife,

Are you speaking in tongues or what? Even God makes His higher thoughts known in such a simple manner. Don't try to obscure issues with some kind of hypothetical thesis and hifalutin knowledge that does not augur well for salvation.

In any case, I have never seen scriptures murdered in so few words as I have seen in your posts. I'll tackle them each as soon as I have the time.

In the mean time, I will like to bring your attention to the term "mother of God" which you ascribed unto Mary. Please be informed that God does not have a Father nor a Mother. God is not begotten, and He does not have a beginning and ending of days. You will be right if you refer to Mary as the mother of Jesus, but she is not the mother of Christ. Mary was only involved in the humanity of Jesus Christ, and not in His deity. You should please correct this erroneous statement, as you have no clue how much you are blaspheming by stating such.

@Afam,

Isreal is the victim but by its own very actions lost the sympathy and became the aggressor solely based on the level of disproportionate force used in response to the Hezbollah attack.
If you find the above statement one sided or biased what do you make of the Israelis that the PM fought for when 63% of them (Israelis, not Nigerians) want him to resign for the mistakes in handling the conflict? What more can one say or write for you to know that some of us that disapprove of Israel's over reaction do not hate Israel but are pointing out the actions that are not fair.

You have still not described what the proportionate force should be. How can you deal with a militant force that can withstand the Isreali aggression for months with a slap on the hand? Do you agree that diplomacy won't disarm them? If you do, then you will realise that it will only take force, and I'm perplexed that Isreal never got the chance and the spine to finish them off.

The Isreali referendum is not about the "Cause" of the War but about the "handling" of the war. These are two differnet things altogether. Isrealis are pissed that the war cost them so much in human life without fully achieving their goals. No one complained that the force is disproportionate (except maybe the Isreali Arabs), but they complained that the goals were not met.

Now let me give you a wider picture of why the PM's rating is so low. If you will remember that he came into power by offering a plan to withdraw back from all occupied territories and to draw Isreali border permanently. Now, this manifestoe suffered a major set-back when the Palestinians now used the Gaza strip as a lunching pad for rockets into Isreal. The same programmed now suffered a pre-mature death with the dare-devil action of Hezbollah inside Isreali land. based on these, the average Isreali now realise the fact that withdraing into Isreal is not the way to saty alive in the middle east. They now feel they need someone who is strong militarily to defend them. That is why this PM is in a political mudslide right now. I doubt if he will last his full term.

But anyway, the bottom line is that the nation believes this PM cannot keep them safe, and they need one who can. Don't let that poll deceive you, it is not a call for peace, it is a shout for war.

@TV01,

James pastor over Peter? How on earth did you arrive at that conclusion?

Historically, James is known to be the Pastor of the church in Jerusalem of which Peter was a member. Peter was obviously an elder in that church, and since an elder is still subject to a pastor, then we can safely deduce that Peter was subject to the authority of James within that local assembly.

@Hnd_holder,

You do yourself and the catholic faith a great harm by claiming that Mary is the Queeen of Heaven.  Do you ever read the scriptures in context?  See what you wrote and see the entire context:

Mary was named the queen of heaven or who is the queen of Heaven. look at this Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to provoke me to anger.

Jeremiah 7:16-20  16 "So do not pray for this people nor offer any plea or petition for them; do not plead with me, for I will not listen to you. 17 Do you not see what they are doing in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? 18 The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to provoke me to anger. 19 But am I the one they are provoking? declares the Lord. Are they not rather harming themselves, to their own shame? 20 "'Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: My anger and my wrath will be poured out on this place, on man and beast, on the trees of the field and on the fruit of the ground, and it will burn and not be quenched.
Do you realise that God is saying that the people provoke Him to anger by offering up sacrifices to the Queen of heaven whom the scripture refers to as other god?  How blind can you be to see this truth?

You also quoted Jeremiah 44:25

Jeremiah 44:25 This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: You and your wives have shown by your actions what you promised when you said, 'We will certainly carry out the vows we made to burn incense and pour out drink offerings to the Queen of Heaven.' "Go ahead then, do what you promised! Keep your vows!

Jeremiah 44:20-26 20 Then Jeremiah said to all the people, both men and women, who were answering him, 21 "Did not the Lord remember and think about the incense burned in the towns of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem by you and your fathers, your kings and your officials and the people of the land? 22 When the Lord could no longer endure your wicked actions and the detestable things you did, your land became an object of cursing and a desolate waste without inhabitants, as it is today. 23 Because you have burned incense and have sinned against the Lord and have not obeyed him or followed his law or his decrees or his stipulations, this disaster has come upon you, as you now see." 24 Then Jeremiah said to all the people, including the women, "Hear the word of the Lord, all you people of Judah in Egypt. 25 This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: You and your wives have shown by your actions what you promised when you said, 'We will certainly carry out the vows we made to burn incense and pour out drink offerings to the Queen of Heaven.' "Go ahead then, do what you promised! Keep your vows! 26 But hear the word of the Lord, all Jews living in Egypt: 'I swear by my great name,' says the Lord, 'that no one from Judah living anywhere in Egypt will ever again invoke my name or swear, "As surely as the Sovereign Lord lives."
Again, reading further down this verses will reveal that God intends to punish the people for this practice.  He encouraged them to go ahead and carry out their intentions while he carries out His intended judgment as well.  This scenario reminds me of Prophet Balaam whom God warned several times not to curse Isreal but he intended to do what was on his mind.  The Lord told Him eventually to go ahead but he suffered the consequences of that disobedience.

One other thing I will like to point your attention to is the fact that Mary was not even born at the time this event took place.  Are you now trying to tell us Mary was also reincarnated like Jesus?  Are you trying to tell us that she is also from of old, from everlasting?  Are you placing her in the realm of divinity?  Can you provide more proofs for that?  And may I also point to your attnetion that no where in the scriptures is mary regarded as that Queen of heaven.  This exists only in the realm of your imaginations.

The problems I've had with some people's contributions so far is trying to potray Isreal as the Aggressor. Nay, in my honest opinion, they are indeed the victim. They ere dragged into a war that they would otherwise have distanced themselves from, they are still surrounded by enemies who have sworn never to rest until Isreal is annihilated, their actions (justified or otherwise) is always considered wrong, yet no one who condemns their action is ready to stand up to defend them.

In any case, I am also waiting to hear your suggestions on what Isreal's proportionate response should have been. Perhaps you expect them to also sneak into Lebanon to kill 8 Hezbollah fighters and kidnap 2 more to retaliate for Hezbollah's unprovoked action. Your stand about the many Hezbollah prisoners in Isreal's prison would have been justified if there was a possibility that the crimes commited by these people would be punished by the various Government hosting them. But you and I know this will never happen.

As unfortunate as the war is for all parties concerned, I view Isreal's actions as corresponding to the united State's when they had to go into Afghanistan in search of Osama, and subsequently overthrew the Taliban. While Isreal does not have the intentions to overthrow the Lebanese Government, it's intention to wipe out Hezbollah was very clear and the best way to do that was not diplomacy, but war. The war may have come short, but diplomacy would not have got on the starting blocks.

Deal concluded. Obafemi Martins now a Newcastle player.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=376917&cc=5901

@TayoD
yes we also pray for the dead esp those in purgatory. and no you are not assuming that they are omnipotent or omnipresent, afterall i don't know what goes on in heaven. of course praying to jesus is good enough but please tell me you've never asked anyone to pray for you before.
if you want to believe these practices are anti scriptural even though I gave you bible verses, all good and fine because you choose to inteprete those scriptures differently. however the church does ascribe utmost importance to the bible, without the church you wouldnt have your bible anyway. however, the church also uses tradition in its catchechism. this is because peter is believed to be the first pope and that line of continuity was never broken, so things that the disciples and early christians did that were not recorded in the bible are considered to be tradition and as such are put in the catcechism (this is why a lot of people say Catholics do stuff that isnt in the Bible, The bible isnt the end all and be all of the church, i.e we don't do sola scriptura)

Where is purgatory in the Bible I ask? This is not just tradition, but anti-scriptureal. There are 3 compartments under the earth that the Bible preaches and purgatory is not one of them. And by the way, how do you know which deoarted Saint is in purgatory for you to intercede for? This is nothing but making for commandment the traditions of men as Jesus mentioned. Also, making the word of God of non-effect by such traditions.
The Bible verses you gave me were stretched to accomodate those traditions. It does not in anyway encourage it. May I ask, did Paul send a copy of the letter he sent out to the church to purgatory as well, so that all in purgatory will oey the command to pray for those who live?

This Peter thing as being the Pope is another thing I do not see in scripture. You guys have stretched the scriptures to accomodate your traditions and the references to Peter in the New Testament does not suggest him to be acting as any Pope. He called himself a fellow-elder and he was a member of the Church in Jerusalem where James was pastor over him.

I don't have any problems with traditions, because we all do have traditions. However, when traditions are elevated above the word of God, then i will have problems. It doesn't matter if the Bible came through the catholic church, even God uses the devil for His own glory.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with racial profiling. Infact, I support it whole-heartedly. Why should we neglect common sense just for the purpose of being politically correct?

The trend shows that terrorism is a muslim problem, especially Arabic muslim in nature. I see no reason why we shouldn't be extra cautious when they come on our planes. It is better to be safe than to be sorry.

If these people are sick and tired of the attendant inconvenience and possible embarrassment it brings them, then they should work extra hard to get their fellow brothers to quit this evil practice.

Nigeria is known all over the world for the menace called 419. Don't you think it is common sense for anyone outside the country to relate to a Nigerian with sceptism until the person proves he is honest? My green passport means I get checked more closely at the Airports and while it is inconvenient, I do not blame the security men, rather I put the blame on the Nigerians who have soiled our country's image and on the rest of us who are doing next to nothing about it.

In any case, those 3,000+ people that died on 911 would have supported racial profiling if it could have saved their lives.

That is the fruit of disobedience. Wasn't she aware that she was not to take the fluid on board? She is the one that should apologise for the discomfort she brought on other travelers and consequently the cost to the airline and the airport, not to talk about the tax-payers.

firdaus4us,

May be you should start by finding out and presenting to us, the Gospels and Torah that Muhammad by revelation claimed were sent down by Allah.  When you have produced that and we do a compare and contrast, then you can begin to have a point.  Until then, I will advice you to stop multiplying ignorance on the world wide web.

@babyosisi,

Good to hear from you again. I thought you were really so pissed of with me that you have chosen to stay of this topic. I hope you were able to read my apologies to you earlier anyway.

This tithing issue does not give room to love any body less than we would have done if they stand on same or opposite sides of the argument. But nevertheless, my heart is beating with love for you right back.

Addressing your concern, our prayers at the end of it all is that God may open the eyes of every man's understanding. I truely believe in tithing as much as I believe in Love. Both were encouraged under the law but not subject to it.

My problem with the neglect of the scriptures that talks about the gifts and sacrifices stems from that fact that I do not believe that there are any idle words in the Bible. The statement means something, and while some have disagreed with my conclusions, no one has been able to provide a better one. If a better understanding comes to me, then I can be rest assured that I have not let any of God's Word falls to the ground by obeying it to the best of His ability within me.

@OBJ,

but donmayor, my message is, do not generalise. otherwise u will be justifying those who say that blacks are common criminals. what happened recently in the US. a woman was arrested ,embarrased only for them to announce that she is no threat to the people. what was her offence. i can tell u, she is of pakistani origin.

I don't know why some gouys like you just blatantly peddle lies. The woman was arrested because she carried a bottle of fluid on board. Initial tests of the bottle indicated that it contains materials for making explosives, a second test by a trained dog also arrived at the same conclusion.

What do you expect security to do when people have being told not to carry anything fluid on board and this woman disobeyed? I would say arrest the hell out of her be she pakistani or isreali. Please, let's be objective in our opinions and try not to intentionally mislead others.

I think there is a link to that story here: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/184364.php

And where is the command to stop tithing?

If you agree that Jesus is your High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, and you agree that the job description of a Priest is to offer sacrifices and gifts, then you need to ask yourself what gift is Jesus offering up on your behalf? The Bible says He offered the blood sacrifice once and for all. Where did it say the gift was also offered once and for all? What would you say the gift is going by the example we see in Melchizedek? These are the questions you need to answer before you start making a claim that tithe is done away with.

And by the way, where is it written that the tithe is done away with? You guys are just going beyond that which is expressly written when you say all that. No one has told be what the reality of the tithe is in the New Testament, though we agree on the reality of the blood offering.

I am still waiting for genuine answers.

@TV01,

You make a big mistake when you claim the reality of the tithe in the NewTestament is that God is the owner of all. Wasn't that acknowledged by Melchizedek when he met Abraham? Despite this reality in that dispensation, they still paid the tithe. So you have even corroborated my points with your statement.

When I said Abraham paid tithe of all, I was refering to his increase from the spoils of war. Is it that you really do not follow my reasoning or you have just chosen to quote me out of context? Better still read Genesis 14: 20: 20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all. I hope you can now see that "tithes of all" is actually not my own words but the scriptures. Besides, I made it clear that the tithe is of the increase and not his assets.

2.The tithe when it was in effect was given to the priest, who in turn passed a tithe of the tithe to the high priest. How many times must we repeat that there was no divine ordinance behind Abraham's one time act of tribute of the spoils of war to Melchizedek.

You have basically described how the tithe is practised under the law. Are we or Abraham under the law I ask? What other Priest was Melchizedek supposed to pay a tength to? You are beginning to add to the scriptures my friend, and you should be very careful.

You are yet to show me where the Bible says that Abraham only paid the tithe once. Who told you it was just a tribute? Where do you get your information from? So a simple act of tribute was made part of the law to the extent that God used strong words against those who failed to pay it? You make me laugh my friend.

I'm sorry if you find my dogged hold on the 'gift' part of the priestly function offensive. I personally think that there is no idle word in the Bible, and I cannot wish you godspeed if you choose to willingly discard a divinely inspired statement.

If indeed Hezbollah was getting re-stocked with weapons when terms of the ceasefire actually include the disarmament of Hezbollah, then Hezbollah broke the truce first and Isreal has every right to attack and disrupt this illegal action.

I think our focus should first be to find out if the Isreali accusation is true or not.  We can then make our judgements when the full information comes to light.

I am not certain about this, but does the scriptures make a dinstinction between the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of Heaven?

My inconslusive studies of both terms a few years ago left me with enough information to think that they may not actually mean the same thing. I think I ended up thinking the Kingdom of God refers to the kingdom of Christian believers while the Kingdom of Heaven refers to the coming earthly kingdom on earth.

Does anyone have anything to say to this?

The principle is that Abraham paid tithes of all his increase. Whether the increase comes by way of the spoils of war or the fruits of the ground is insignificant. If it is an increase and you have a High Priesthood, then the tength of the increase is paid to the High Priest.

I don't know much about what else Duke has achieved, but I am really impressed by his innovations with respect to the tourism sector. I went to Obudu cattle Ranch for my honey moon and my wife and I can't wait to go back there.

I can only say he should keep up the good work.

George Bush never told you he believes in being a Matyr.  Rather, he believes in the executive power and that is exactly what he is using.

Mmmmm, the statement above sounds familiar; Luke 18:12 ,  I give tithes of all that I possess.'

That is a very good one TV01.  I'm happy we can at least get some laughs out of this.  I actually think it's funny, though you largely ignored the background behind my statement.

When I said Abraham gave tithe of all his increase, I was refering to his increase from the war.  Evrything he got from the war were newly acquired and he paid a tithe of all.  And as I explained previosly, the Hebrew word used signifies the best portion of the whole lot.

With respect to babiosisi's question, the farming aspect I was refering to was the fruit of the ground.  This is what those who are so intent on following the tithe according to the letters of the law are demanding.  I am not into tithes according to the law, I am into it according to the priesthood of the Lord Jesus which is after the order of Melchizedek's.

TV01, you have labored and huffed, and puffed but still have not told me what the gift is.  Is it so insignificant despite taking up at least 3 verses in the Book of Hebrews?

I am only taking the pains to answer TV01's rebuttals because he appears to be the only one making some seemingly relevant biblical references to the topic at hand.  Others are just peddling accusations that have absolutely no biblical perspective and I don't think I should waste my time trying to respond to personal opinions.

1. That was always in reference to an earthly priesthood

Hebrews 8:1-5  1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; 2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. 3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. 4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law
Are you telling me that this scripture is not refering directly to Jesus Christ?  it is clear here that Jesus is also expected to offer gifts and sacrifices, so your point falls flat to the ground.

3.TayoD, are you really that misguided or are you simply being mischievous? Your statement here is a nonsense! Of course a gift will come out of what you earned, worked for, or your time or energy. Why on this occasion have you conveniently omitted to call this tithe? You have also consistently failed to show any basis from scripture or language for making this immutable (in your own mind) connection between gift and tithe.

Do I sense some sly invectives here, or am I imagining things?  Anyway, I did not conveniently omit calling the gift the tithe.  I was building up my points up to point no 6 which gives the reasons for my conslusion about the tithe.  Okay, here is the connection, AGAIN!!  Melchizedek as a priest must offer gifts and sacrifices, right?  However, the instance we saw in Genesis did not reveal him offering sacrifices but we see him receiving the tithe.  In other words, the tithe must represent an element of his job description (sacrifice or gift), and if it isn't the sacrifice, then it must be the gift.  Isn't that plain and simple enough?

4.Your point here contradicts your next point, why? because it's wrong. "The order after",  refers to it's eternality and nothing else.

I have answered this question before TV01, here was my response:

At this point, I feel I need to clarify TV01's concern about the fact that the emphasis in the new Testament is on the eternal nature of both priesthood (Jesus' and melchizedek's).  Please note that when the Bible talks about the "eternal"  aspect of both Priests, it is a reference to the nature of the priests (in Hebrews, the Bible talks about an endless life).  This has nothing to do with the functions of the Priests. Jesus being a priest, must  necessarily offer 'gifts' and 'sacifices'.  The sacrifice was offered once and for all with, by and through His blood and this is fore-shadowed in the Old Testament by the blood of bulls and rams.  If the gift offered in the Old Testament was the tithe (and please note that this is consistent in both the levitical and melchizedek's priesthood), why would it be any diferent with the Priesthood of Jesus?
Now there are at least a few things you will need to clarify if you maintain a stand that the tithe is not the 'gift' that should be offered in the New Testament.
1.  The New Testament must reveal what the tithe foreshadows.  
2.  What exactly is the gift that Jesus offers today (and please, this is not to minimise the efficacy of His blood.  The sacrifice and the gifts are two different things altogether).
3.  If we see only the gift offered with melchizedek, and both gift and sacrifice offered in Levi, then why should Jesus offer only the blood and neglect the tithe which is the first revelation of the Priestly duties?  Logic and revelation dictates otherwise.

5. If your point in 4. was right then your premise (based on exactness) falls down. Melchizedek did not offer blood, therefore Jesus should not have. Again your point here is in conflict with your premise in 1. If Melchizedek did not offer a sacrifice, that disqualifies him as a priest. TayoD do you realise that in your blind insistence on tithing, your interpretation of scripture renders whole swathes of the Bible (and most of your own statements) contradictory. Are you for real?

What you need to understand is that the Bible offers a progressive revelation about the job description of a priest.  In Melchizedek, we see him receive the tithe, in Levi, we see the sacrifice without neglecting the tithe.  Now in the new Testament, we are told that the Priest must offer both gifts and sacrifices.  Melchizedek was a priest as far as the Bible called him such, and even if we did not witness him offering sacrifices, the Bible job description for his office suggests to us that he must have done so.  And based on your arguments, does that make Jesus less a priest if He does not offer gifts as you keep reiterating?

6. I have repeatedly explained, it was an act of thanksgiving/tribute. A practice widely documented as extant in antiquity. Tithing the spoils of war to the priest or warlord of a  region was common practice. The scriptural significance is to show that the order of Melchizedek is superior to the Levitical. May I also add that Abraham did not take a plugged nickel for himself. Just upkeep for those who rode shotgun, and the rest was appropriated by the King of Sodom. 10% t God and 90% to Mammon! Mmmmmmm, Could that be why you are so keen to serve the state with the same or greater vigour than you serve God? May I additionally add that there is nothing to suggest that that one time act was in response to divine mandate or to be a ongoing commandment. Both circumcision and the sabbath pre-date the law, but by divine commandment. And both are now done away with, aren't they? Tithing never having been divinely enacted, requires no abrogation.

You are being cynical TV01,  however, I'll still give you answers.  Maybe you should tell us all the reason why Abraham gave out the other 90% to the King of Sodom.  Don't take the scripture out of context to establish your point.  It is very obvious that what you do with the rest of your money is up to you as long as the tithe is taken care of.  And did you notice that the portion he gave to his men was from the 90% and not of the 100%?  He understood that the tithe must come first ahead of evrything else.  And your use of the word mammon is completely wrong.  Mammon refers to money and not to Ceasar!  Circumcision and the sabbath were adumberations of a reality in the New Testament and I agree that they are done away with.  Please tell me, what is the reality of the tithe in the New Testament?  You need to show us how abraham's offer of the tithe to Melchizedek was meant to be an act of thanksgiving and a tribute.  Where is the tithe documented in the New Testament as being anachronistic?  You are making for law the commandment of men, my dear friend.  If it's not in the scripture, it is jut the opinion of men!

I have taken the time to scrutinise your position, would you be so kind as to answer my questions as follows;

While you have said a lot of things, you are yet to clearly provide answer for the only question I've really asked of you.  What is the 'gift' that Jesus our High Priest must offer today as part of His High Priesthood function?  We can not go on to the other issues you raised until we sort this out.  And please remeber that the gift cannot be the sacrifice since sacrifes are basically for atonement.

@Enigma,
The "spoils of war" are legitimate increase. You cannot give what isn't yours.

I pay tithes on all my income.  My income from my shares, professional endeavour, real estate etc,   The tithe is paid on all my increases.

Was Abraham a farmer?  He paid tithe of all his increase.  Your reference is based on the law which is a fundamental error that you have failed to correct. And why do you keep neglecting the job description of a priest to offer gifts? Is it that you have no answers for it?

You know, until someone answers the question of the gift aspect of the Priesthood of the Lord Jesus, all you have is just mere speculations.

Some are even changing the words of the scriptures to prove a point. The scriptures you all have to deal with is in Hebrews with regards to a Priest being required to offer both gifts and sacrifices.

And while you all will like to assume that tithing is subject to the law, every Bible student knows it predates it. Though love, righteousness and justice are required by law, it does not mean they are subject to it. Same is true of tithing. Though it was required by law, it is not subject to the law.

And for those who think that the tithe is being demanded because of an organizational set-up, please show me what organization Melchizedek had to cater for when he received the tithe of Abraham.

Could it be that I see hypocrisy here, or just plain disregard of obvious facts?

@carmelily,

The epitome of Islamic faith is found in its prophet. Going by his adventurism with Aisha, i would say he must have had a 'virgin' in mind as well when he gave had those revelations.

Can someone please enlightene me, was Mohammed actually killed by a Jewish woman?

Hnd_holder,

Now you have completely lost me! What are you talking about?

To Tithe!!!!!!!!!!

oops!

@firdaus4us,

I personally do not think that Mohammed is a prophet of the God we know as Jehovah, so I can say shit about him.   To me, he is an impostor, a 'thief' according to Jesus, and 'anathema' according to Paul.  Further more, I think he is a sword wielding pedophile who is not worthy of the appellation of prophethood better than Adolf Hitler.

One thing that is central to all the messages of the real prophet is Jesus Christ.  And for someone to claim that the messages of those prophets have been corrupted and that only what he has to say is law, amounts to rubbish.  I wish he led such an exemplerary life for us to even begin to consider what he has to say, but he didn't.  He was deceived by a demon masquerading as an angel, and I have always asked, how many people witnessed the angel talking to him?  All the biblical prophets had witnesses of the supernatural happening in their lives, but not this bedoiun 'prophet'.

Anyway, I do have more to say about him as long as you guys try to read meaning into the bible that is not there.  and by the way, you talk about respect for the Prophets.  How much repect do you hae for them when you do not even believe what they have to say, and you make them out to be liars.  Don't get me started dude.

Hi TV01,

I made my stand known to dearzi when she implied that the statement was only talking about order. I quickly pointed out that if it was order, then why would Jesus mention Ceasar ahead of God? The order when it comes to worship must be God first before any other person.

So if Jesus wasn't trying to show an order in the statement, then He must be doing some comparisons. He said "give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's, and give unto God that which is God's". My understanding of the english language suggests to me that he wants us to give to each one what is required of us. I know God requires nothing less than our all, and I believe Ceasar also requires the same.

So my poser has always been this: Can you give to both without jeopardising your allegiance to one over the other? What exactly are we to give unto Ceasar?

These are issues I wanted us to tackle here and I dare not say I have all the answers.

@TV01,

Gifts in this dispensation are the sacrifice of praise, worship and thanksgiving. Freewill offerings by the Saints (Priests all) to God through Christ Jesus (High Priest).

The fallacy of your statement equating the gifts to praise,worship and thanksgiving is evident in the qualifying word "sacrifice" which you have in front of them. Since when did the sacrifice become the gift? Here you claim these elements are the gifts and you subsequently claim the blood of Jesus takes care of both the gift and the sacrifice. What exactly is your stand?

@Hnd_holder,
I can see that you are really zealous about this whole tithing issue, and that is commendable. But you are getting something very wrong. You are consistently comparing the law to grace with respect to tithing. Please understand that my arguments are not based on the law. They are based on the dispensation of conscience which Melchizedek and Abraham were living examples. Your comparisons should be with the dispensations of conscience and this dispensation of grace.

While you both are talking about the fact that the tithe is meant to build temples and co, can you please show me what temple that Melchizedek was to build with the tithe that Abraham gave to him? While I have tried to keep this discussions to determining if the tithe is the 'gift" element of the priestly offeratorial duties, you guys are jumping the gun going to the use of the tithe. We shall get there if God determines, but for now, let us deal with the issue at hand.

My stand is stated briefly here again.

1. A Priest must necessarily have to offer both gifts and sacrifices.
2. The sacrifice must be blood because it has to do with atonement
3. The gift must be money or the fruits of one's labour.
4. Jesus' High-priesthood is after the order of Melchizedek's. He must therefore carry out the duties that Melchizedek carried out.
5. Melchizedek never offered the sacrifice of blood. He however received a gift from Abraham - the tithe.
6. If the gift that Melchizedek received was the tithe, why should Jesus receive something different?

And may I bring your attention also to verse 8 of Hebrews chapter 7: And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. Does jesus forever liveth? So why shouldn't He get the tithe?