₦airaland Forum

ajia23,

Maybe I'm wrong about you hating Christainity.  But your posts give the impression of someone who has already made up his mind about his stand, and is just out to forment more trouble.  You already concluded that Christianity encourages injustice without providing proofs, so what stand do you expect me to take?

Anyway, the bible says righteousness, justice and peace are the foundations of God's throne. So why would He encourage injustice?  

You say Sharia States are the most peaceful?  Well, I guess Afghanistan (pre-911) must be your ideal state then, abi?  Or kaduna where you can just lose your life at the whim and caprice or a man who thinks you are "incorrigibly aggressive and bellicose as well as belligerent"?

If you are truely trying to find the root cause of dissent to God's law, then you can't put the blame at Christianity, rather you will put the blame at the feet of the one who gave man a freewill.  If you understand that God actually gave us the freewill to choose or ignore His laws, then you need to find out why in His infinite wisom, He chose to go that route.  If you have no answer for this, I will oblige to give it to you.

OlaAjia,

You need to understand that Isreal, as potrayed in the Old Testament is a Theocratic State. That means that God is the Kind, law giver and judge (that is where democracy hails from).

In other words, God has a right like every secular Governmet to prescribe laws for the good of the society. These laws were promulgated just as we have in the U.S, for instance where the death penalty is the punishment for some crime. It is not the perogative of any member of the society to kill another for such crimes. Such people have to be judged first, then the society takes the appropriate action through legislated authority.

If you care to read through the Book of Joshua, we find a situation where someone broke God's law and had to be stoned. No one did that until the guy was judged and the appropriate authority sanctioned the death.

Worshiping another god apart from Jehoveh was high treason to say the least, and that meant death.

But when it comes to our personal relationships with others, LOVE is the keyword and the attributes are found in 1 Cornthians 13 if you care to read it.

Your accusations against Christians should perhaps be directed at Jesus whom your Qu'ran esteems. Why didn't He encourage the sroning of the woman caught in adultery? Why didn't he respond 'fire for fire' against the Roman Soldiers? Perhaps you have more to learn from Him than your Qu'ran will want you to know.

Love is a greater force than revenge.

ajia23,

Your level of understanding and triviality amazes me. You must be having fun wallowing in your ignorance, and it seems to me that you are not here for answers but to vomit your vile resentment.

If you indeed want answers, I'll give them to you. But so far, I don't want to cut your fun short. Take a few more laughs, maybe it will help cleanse some darkness over you which confusion has brought.

ajia23,

Your hatred and lack of understanding of christianity's value is so apparent in your statement. Christianity does not encourage retaliation in whatever form. The Bible clearly says "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord". God is the one that will justify and avenge His own.

On the other hand, the Bible clearly teaches that Government is meant to do its duties when a crime is proved. The Bible upholds the laws of the land and tells us that Governments are God's authority on earth and they are meant to punish the law breaker. Imagine if we all go around retaliating for every perceived wrong done to us? The society will be in chaos to say the least.

Your Allah who encourages personal vengeance and retaliation must not like law and order. Who determines what point a person is "ncorrigibly aggressive and bellicose as well as belligerent"? Jesus encourages us to forgive someone 70 times 7 times within a single day if we are provoked. I guess Allah, whom you claim to be oft forgiving is not that patient.

ajia23,

Find below a quote of yours on the topic "Similarities and Differences between Islam and Christianity".

Re: Similarities And Differences Between Christianity And Islam
« #242 on: June 28, 2006, 03:56 PM » 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abdul fata

Wait a go!!! YOU SEEM TO be specialised in comparison. It's good you quoted those verses you did, but I dare warn you that instead of respond to them, you will observe an escapist tendency in the responses by those who hold on to strictly dogma, and refuse to open their minds. SO, it will be rather expected to see them relapse to how violnt Muhammed (SAW)  or Islam is.

I was surprised to see that even the bible (that is whatever part of it that is still credible) sanctions the exhortations and prayer for Muhammed (SAW) and Abraham. In the past, mlks_baby would have everyone believe it is "necromancy", and the bible forbids it. Thanks for that expose.[/color][color=#990000][/color][color=#990000][/color][color=#990000]

I must also advice you to tread carefully because subtle personal attacks are also a trick employed to get you off track and allow them to avoid the contentious issue and instead look for appelations that support their stereotypes.  IT WOULD NOT BE UNUSUAL to see statements such as, stop using invectives, or thank you for being peaceful, as f to reinforce their believe that Muslims are unduely aggressive. BE PREPAred  for all those.

Meanwhile I wish you best of luck in trying to convince some of them that indeed Islam is from God. It is no mean task especially in Nigeria, but Allah's word which he has sent forth will definitely be fulfilled. Ma Salam

Do I still get you wrong?

The Bible never sanctions prayers to or for the dead.  Judgement (the judgement seat of Christ) awaits every Christian who has fallen asleep, and judgement (the White throne judgement) awaits those who have died without Christ.

Donnie,

It actually happened in Somalia.  See:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5150118.stm

beyonce1,

Are you remotely scared of een 419ed?!!!!!!!!!!

ajia23,

Could this be another escapist tendency which you've accused others of? I am still waiting for your response and references to your accusations that Christianity encourages necromancy. You've not returned to the thread where you made that pronouncement because I asked you to provide references. Anyway, I am still waiting for your response, and you are allowed to take back what you wrote as a slip of the keyboard.

4get_me,

Thanks a bunch. I hope allom\nym sees this distinction and respond appropriately when he's done with his thesis.

What I'll want you to understand is that a thousand years before God is as one day. If God says today, it might be 50 years down your life time. sooner or later, His words will be fulfilled. We see examples of that throughout the scripture and if you want, I'll show them to you.

allonym,

Please concentrate on your thesis for now. Nairaland will be here 12 days from today if Jesus tarries.

Honestly, I think you have muddled things up quite a bit. I only hope someone else can explain my position to you better than I do. However, let me try to explain once again.

First, I never said anything about out Pastors accepting tithes. The tithe is given to God through the agency of the Priesthood. This is seen in both the dispensations of the law and of Promise. According to at least 3 verses in the Book of Hebrews, a Priest must necessarily perform 2 functions: offer gifts and offer sacrifices. Jesus, it is witnessed is our High Priest today and the Bible says He already offered the sacrifice of His blood once and for all. My question is why would He offer a different gift (i.e. the tithe) which we see the Priesthood of Melchizedek and Levi offer?

Please be informed, I am not the one who states that Jesus' priesthood is after the order of Melchizedek, you will find that reference in the Book of Hebrews. Infact, I think you should go back and read my earlier submissions. Maybe that will clarify issues for you. In the mean time, I feel you do not understand what I have been saying and I think I am just repeating myself over and over agian.

The role and value of women in Christianity is just immense.  While it may be impossible to share all my thoughts with you on this forum, I will try as much as possible to show from the Bible, how women have always played and continue to play important roles in God's agenda.

Enter Genesis:  In order not to be too technical and therefore defeat the purpose of this write-up, I will not so much dinstiguish between the 'Female', and the 'Woman' as revealed in the Book of Genesis.  Instead, both terms will be used interchangeably in the hope of simplicity.

The male Adam was created in the garden as a type of Him that was to come - Jesus Christ.  After a look into the future however, God made this proclamation about His man: "It is not in line with divine revelation that the man should be alone, I will make him an helper suitable for him" (paraphrase).  The only reason why God made this statement  is because Adam on his own typified the man Jesus, and God knew that the man Jesus would become the Christ.  In order for Adam to fully represent the Christ, he must have a 'body' which the woman represents.  So we see in this instance, that not only was the woman created for the man, she was actually created to be God's helper to point to His Christ.

A study of the word Help MEET used in that 18th verse of Genesis chapter 2, suggests someone who is actually there to protect you.  That same word is used of God in at least 11 places in the Book of Pslams (check out pslams 20:2, 33:20, 70:5 & 146:5 to name a few).  I guess this explains why Adam just fell flat as soon as Eve was beguiled by the Devil.  His defence was gone, and he just gave in easily to the devil even though the New Testament says he was not deceived.

A further study of Genesis also saw God proclaiming that the only way He can crush the devil's head is only through the seed of the WOMAN.  This shows also that without the woman, there won't be salvation.   Evidence exists all over scripture to back up these claims and I believe we should have these in perspective when trying to discuss the value of the woman in Christianity.

"They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death." Revelation 12:11.

I was blessed yesterday in church by one of the Associate Pastor's testimony. The above scripture readily came to my mind, and I thought sharing our testimonies could be a lot encouraging and such a powerful blessing to the Believers here. So therefore, anyone got a testimony to bless us with? Here is the testimony that blessed me so much.

The Pastor got a call from his Daughter after she went for a scan of her pregnancy. She reported that the Doctor told her she had to abort the pregnancy because the baby would be a genetic mess if at all it made it throgh nine months. Of course, they changed Doctors because of his negative stance.

The next Doctor confirmed the first result and told them the child is not likely to make it through nine months. He said if at all it does, it will only live for a few hours and they should prepare themselves for the emotional stress that will accompany that.

On hearing this report, they turned over to God's word and throughout the pregnancy, they kept speaking God's Word over the baby and the mother and believing God for a miracle. The pregancy progresed quite better than the Doctors anticipated, and when it was time to deliver, the entire hospital staff were in a bad mood because they felt the family didn't deserve to be burdened by what they anticipated the baby would be.

In preparation for this birth, an Ambulance and a number of Specialist were placed on stand-by to help keep the baby alive for as long as they can, so that the family can hold it and say good bye. On the other hand, God had a differenet plan, Hallelluyah.

When the babywas born, the Doctor examined her and said to everyone: "You may all go home now, we have a perfectly healthy baby girl."

Moralle of the whole story? God still heals today, and His Word is as dependable today as it has always been!!!

Anymore testimonies in the house? God bless!!!

It's July 4th tomorrow - America's independence day. The Pastor preached along that line talking about the fact that the nation was built and is still being built on the blood of heros. He drew a parallel with Christianity, calling our attention to the fact that we have been called to be heros. Heros, he said, are those who lay down there lives for others.

Jesu laid down His life for us, and we have been called to do the same for others, beginning with our household.

So the question is: Are you a hero?

@Drusilla,

I never intend to be harsh on you, and I am very sorry if my words were taken to be cruel.  Please accept my heart-felt apologies.

@alloynm

TayoD, are you seriously suggesting that there are NO dietary laws in the bible.  Ok. . .I will provide a scripture here:  Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee. - Leviticus 19:19.
So, we don't follow this scripture now TayoD.  So, why is it that we must tithe (as directed in the old testament) but we can wear clothing made of linen and wool?  The new testament does not say that we should tithe, in fact, according to the new testament, the priesthood of old has been abolished.  We no longer need priests as we can directly present our prayers to God.  (If you need scripture backing of this, let me know).
Many times I see people attempt to say that pastors today are analagous to the priests of old.  This demonstrates ignorance of many things, 1) What priests are and their role in society, 2) What pastors are and their role  3) What the bible says about the priesthood's influence in our lives after the death and resurrection of Jesus christ.

I never suggested that there are no dietary laws in the Bible.  However, I have pointed out that everything we see in the O.T. is a shadow of what we have in the N.T.  For instance, Paul talking about compensation for men of God in the New Testamnet refered to a law written down in the Old Testament.  See 1 Corinthians 9: 9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? 10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. 11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?.  Likewise, the issue of designating some foods clean and others unclean, and not mixing up wool and linen is just to point us to a reality in the New Testament, as exemplified by Paul's writings in 2 Corinthians 6: 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.[/color][color=#990000][/color] If you read Romans 14, Paul said he is persuaded of the Lord that no food is unclean in itself, and he ended up saying the Kingdom of God is not about meat or drink, but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.

In addition to all these, please read what Jesus had to say in [color=#990000]Mark 7: 18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; 19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? 20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. 21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: 23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

Your response to the tithing issue suggests you have not read my arguments about tithing before now.  I have stated according to the Book of hebrews that a Priest has two functions: 1. To offer Gifts, and 2. to ofer sacrifices.  We see Melchizedek offer Gifts in the form of the tithe, and we see the Levitical priests offer gifts and sacrifices as well.  Jesus, being a Priest must necessarily offer gifts and sacrifices as well.  If the sacrifice He offered is His blood, which He did once and for all, what is the gift that He now offers?  If the gifts we see before and during the law (the tithe) were a tenth of an increase, why would it be different with the High Priesthood of our Lord today which the Bible says is after the order of Melchizedek?  I have plainly stated my positions based on scripture, and i'm yet to get a satisfying answer from anyone.  If you have any, please be kind to share it with me.

Maybe it's your experience, but I have never known anyone today comparing Pastors to the Priests in the Old Testament.  I hope you will explain this further.

@TV01,

Hi TayoD, When one views the outworking of a "divinely mandated" tithe as detracting from the grace of our Lord and sullying the Glory of God, not to mention the bondage and suffering being caused to untold numbers of God fearing people, anyone with an ounce of reverence and compassion would be emotional. At the very least lets admit the issue is emotive. I think for the most part contributors have been judicious in their choice of words and at the same time accomodating of the "literary style" of others. Please go easy on Dru'.  Kindest regards.

I have been immensely blessed by your scholarship on this forum.  However, I must say that I am a little dissapointed by the argument you put forth above.  How does tithing take away from the grace and glory of God?  Mind you, God only deals with every man on the medium of grace.  Even Abraham, paid his tithe through grace and I believe the same applies to the Believer today.  Your statement also suggests that it is always convenient to serve God, and anything that brings some suffering and sacrifice can't be of God.  I believe you know better than this, and you probably didn't weigh the full import of your statement when you wrote it.  So, I will not labour to refute that argument unless you insist that you are absolutely right.
As to Dru, I have mentioned that I didn't mean to offend her and I thank you for bringing my attention to that piece.  Thanks Bro.

Drusilla,

I am not a Preacher and I find the need to pay tithe in the New Testament. Concerning the dietary laws, I will advice you go through the Gospels and find out what Jesus had to say about it. Till then, please try to provide biblical refernces to back up your claims. It appears your emotions have run ahead of you in this case.

Cheers.

@Logical,

From my understanding, the Qu'ran wasn't written down by Mohammed because he was an illiterate. If that is so, I assume that his recitations must have been recorded by the very same people around him who wrote down the 'Hadiths".

If what they have documented in the hadith (which should be what they've observed with their eyes) is supposed to be taken with a pinch of salt, why then should I rely on what they wrote down and compiled as the Qu'ran. Was the same Qu'ran proof-read by Mohammed? Or was different sources compared and one of them picked? Or was there an harmonisation of all the various writings? All of these questions are begging for answers, and I will appreciate a truthful response from your person.

@TayoD
Well maybe you might want to direct that question to the person that started the accusation?
All sources of the hadith are suspects, thats where for every hadith there must be a check on its chain of narrations.

I am not interested in the valiodity or otherwise of the Qu'ran, much less the hadith. The basis of my faith lies entirely within the Bible, and it is the validity of the Bible that is of any importance to me. On the other hand, the hadith is one of the foundations of your faith and the onus is on you to find its validity. As an extension, you owe it to yourself also to discover the Gospels that Mohammed validated in the Qu'ran. The process is very simple. Just find the Bibles and the manuscripts that constituted what was known as the Bible during Mohammed's days. Compare them to the Bible of today and see if any corroborates Mohammed's claims as laid out in the Qu'ran.

The ball is in your court.

When you talk about evil, you are actually talking about sin. To understand how evil came into being, then we've got to understand how sin developed and is still developing.

Sin, according to the Bible, is a transgression of the law. If we understand that God is a God of law and order, then we must realise that this entire cosmos was created by God to be governed by certain laws. Obedience or disobedience to these laws will always have repercussions. Obeying God's laws means everything goes well, and there will not be evil. However, disobeying His law sets Evil into motion that cannot be reversed except by a higher law.

Evil therefore, came into beign the day a creature of God (Lucifer) verbalised things that God's law forbade him to say. Please be reminded that God did not create the Devil, instead, He created Lucifer who became the Devil because he broke God's law and set evil in motion.

For instance, there is a law of gravity which forbids me to jump off a 100 story building. If I choose to jump off, the law of gravity will take its course and the consequence of my action will result in death (if Jesus tarries beyond the time I land on the pavement below). But as I said earlier, a higher law of lift can be put in motion (such as using a rocket propelled back-pack) which can ensure that I fly and overcome the effect of the law of gravity, despite the fact that the law of gravity is not suspended.

I chose to mention this issue of higher law for us to understand what God is doing today with respect to the situation mankind has found himself. While the law of sin and death was set in motion by Adam, a higher law: the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus was put into motion by God to counter-act this law. So in the world today, we see sin and we see death, but this law of sin and death can be overcome by engaging the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus. This is how we overcome evil with good as the Bible as commanded us Christians.

Logical,

Can you provide us with the source of the information that Mohammed married an 8 year old girl? And why is that source now suspect? What makes these other sources you quoted more acceptable than the one that gave the world the age of 8?
I hope we won't get a new information now telling us Mohammed's first wife was not actually decades older than he was.

cammax7,

You can go here: http://www.nigerianmuse.com/important_documents/?u=Political_Parties_Nigeria.htm&PHPSESSID=04584553cbc2402f7b55159bb4b6a83f

Logical,

It's very simple Adam (may the peace of Allah be upon him) wasn't conceived, and that does not make him Supernatural.
Be and surely it was, of the past, why should it be treated different on another situation?
If we are using the basis of source to existence, to judge, then Adam should be more greater. I think?
According to Islam Jesus (may the peace of Allah be upon him)  never died  Rather he was replaced and he ascended to Heaven. So really comparison is unwarranted, and Islamic preachings never claim there are similarities nor do they preach it, rather they necessity to acknowledge and believe in the message of both as a pre-requisite.
So really we are not trying to prove anything in regards to similarity, rather we are passing a message of Islamic teachings across, and clearing the doubts and inaccuracies.

How can you compare Adam to Christ.  First Adam was created to foreshadow Christ.  The fact that he had to 'sleep' and a woman created from his side was to bring him to be a better representation of what He typifies - Christ and His Church.  For your information, Adam and all creation was created by Christ who only entered the realm of time into a body we know as Jesus. Hebrews 1:[/b]8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness F3 is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: 11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
This is the mystery of godliness: [b]1 Timothy 3:16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory
Be it know unto you and others that Adam's spirit was created as we saw in the Book of Genesis, however, Christ's goings forth has being from everlasting, from of Old, as the Bible puts it.  Adam is not worthy of that honour.

However, Adam also walk in the capacity or the office of the federal head of mankind.  Whether you like it or not, the sin nature you acquired was because Adam passed it down to you.  He was your representative and that is why you acquired his sin nature.  Jesus Christ also walked in a similar capacity.  Anyone who makes Him the Lord of their lives acquire His nature and righteousness.  That's why we are told in the Book of Romans 5: 17 For if by one man's F19 offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore as by the offence F20 of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

It is Mohammed who passed on innacuracies to the Qu'ran through the stories he must have heard about the Bible.  Going by what you guys say, he was said to be illeterate.  If he can't read, then he must have been going by what he must have been told which was outright fables and innacuracies.  

I have always maintained that if Muslims are sincere, all they need do is to find the Bible mauscripts that existed in the days of Mohammed, and compare it to what Mohammed says.  If both are not the same, then only one person must be a liar: Mohammed, and all you people must have been led astray.

On a more serious note, my understanding of this scriptures goes like this:  A lot of people today will like to be called Christians, but are not ready to submit to the Lordship and the requirements of being a Christian.  Like those women, we want to be identified with Christ and be called by His name, but we are not willing to make Him Lord of all.

4get_me,

IBB, you be correct man! Problem is, my wife is the best thing (outside of salvation) that ever happened to me! No woman - by prophecy, revelation, babalawo, or astrology - comes close to the jewel God gave me. Kai, she's more that 77 x 7 women to me!!

I hope you didn't say this because of the possibility that your wife might come across your post again o.

Syrup, TV01,

May I say that I have been immensely blessed by the knowledge and insights you two have brought to this discussion.  I have passively followed your discussions before now because I have been extremely busy.  However, I feel I need to respond to a common 'gray area' with respect to the codification of tithes into the New Testament, which seems open to so many interpretations.   

As a background, permit me to bring to your attention something which I believe you all know, and that is the fact that the Old Testament is a shadow and an adumbration of the New.  Every thing we see in the Old Testament (which is a shadow), must have it's reality in the New Testament.  With this in mind, the functions which the Priests carried out in the Old Testament (that is offering of gifts and sacrifices) must necessarily have its fulfillment in the New Testament.

We see a progressive revelation of the job of the Priest when Melchizedek stepped into the scene.  We see him receiving a 'tithe' of all the increase which Abram had.  The blood sacrifice was introduced in the levitical priesthood without the neglect of the tithe.  Both these Priesthood were shadows of the reality - the High priesthood of Jesus Christ which the Bible says is fashioned after the order of Melchizedek.

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.

The above list is not by any means exhaustive, but I will like to get a feedback on them.

My best regards.

In the Old Testament, we read about GOD Almighty promising to create "Great Nations" from Ishmael, Abraham's first Son and the father of the Muslims: Genesis 12:1-3
1 The LORD had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you.
2 "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you."
The quote "go to the land I will show you" is referring to the city of Paran (Mecca). See the Biblical proofs here.
The quote "I will make you into a great nation" is quite interesting. How can GOD Almighty call the Muslims, who came from Ishmael, a "great nation" if they are as the modern Christians of today consider them to be "Satan's followers"? How can we be a "great nation" in the eyes of GOD Almighty if we are hated by Him?
The quote "I will bless those who bless you" perfectly fits the Muslims. As you probably know, we Muslims worship Allah Almighty by prostrating to Him. Every time we pray and prostrate, we end our prayer by sitting on our knees and say the following exact quote:
", and bless Prophet Muhammad and the people of Prophet Muhammad, like You blessed Prophet Abraham and the people of Prophet Abraham, "
As you clearly see, we bless Prophet Abraham every single day of our lives when we pray to Allah Almighty. We also do say "peace be upon him" or "peace and blessings be upon him" when we refer to his name or any other Prophet's name. My open challenge to any Jewish Rabbi or Christian Priest or Minister is:
How can the Muslims be cursed and considered satan followers when GOD Almighty in Genesis 12:3 blesses them because they bless Abraham?
How can the Muslims be cursed by GOD Almighty when they bow down to Him and only Him in prostration?

You have so many issues muddled up into these, and I'll try my best to give you answers. May I first bring to your understanding that Ishamael is Abraham's son of the flesh while Isaac is his Son of the promise. Every promise that you find God giving to abraham in the Book of Genesis, is actually meant for his descendants through Isaac. God indeed promised to bless Ishmael and his descendants. [b] Genesis 17:[/b]18 And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee! 19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. 21 But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year. 22 And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham. I hope you noticed that God's covenat will only be established through Isaac.

The land God showed Abraham is actually the land of Canaan which the Children of Isreal came into after the soujourn in the wilderness. It is that same land that they are in today and it includes the Gaza strip which the Palestines are dying for. Do you ever here Isreal make a claim about mecca or Saudi Arabia? The promise they have from God is cannaan which includes part of the Palestinian territory today. You really need to get your facts strainght.

Christians do not believe Muslims are Satan's followers. Rather, we believe that they have been deceived by an angel that the Bibkle warned us against.

With respect to blessing Abraham, I have told you before that the promise is actually to his descendants via isaac. Guess what that means, whoever curses isreal is cursed of God and whoever blesses them is blessed of God. See why the general Moslem population and countries are under God's curse now? They are all in favour of wiping isreal off the map. You all have Jehovah to contend with. Blessing Abraham goes beyond empty words because like it or not, Abraham himself is already blessed and has taken his place in God's hall of faith. Blessing Abraham means supporting his seed and being of assistance to them. That is why Jesus said in the new testament that those who gave drink, shelter or help to an isrealite, has done the same thing unto him.

May I state categorically that though you prostrate to Allah, Allah is not Jehovah as revealed in the Bible. Your worship is to a god who denies the existence of the Son of God, and here is what the Bible has to say about that: 1 John 2: 22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. Don't deceive yourself, you serve not the true God and your worship is neither to Him.

Quransearc,

I have chosen to answer your questions or dilemma not because I feel that your post was scholarly, but to nullify the impressions by ajia23 that Christians tend to be escapist. While what you have written may appear profound to men who are unlearned in the scriptures as ajia23, but a closer look only show how confused and muddled up you are about christianity. I understand that Islam and the Qu'ran cannot stand on their feet without corroboration from the Bible, and that explains the new found desire by Muslims to read meanings into the Bible that wasn't there.

As a matter of fact however, the Bible did prophesy about Mohammed. Here is what the scriptures say about him: Galatians 1: 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. 2 Corrinthians 11: 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. We have already been warned here that Satan will turn himself into an angel of light and bring another Gospel to us. Doesn't that sound like exactly what mohammed did? The Bible says here that such a person is cursed, and no matter how many times you all say "pbuh", it doesn't nullify God's word that he is an accursed fellow. I am sorry if I offend you by this statement, but God's word is no respecter of persons, and I have only quoted the scriptures here - which your Prophet validated anyway.

In Deuteronomy 33:2, we see Moses peace be upon him predicting that GOD Almighty will execute His Holy Judgement in the city of Paran by 10,000 of Believers:
"And he said, The LORD came from Si'-nai, and rose up from Se'-ir unto them; he shined forth from mount Pa'-ran [Mecca in Arabic], and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. (From the King James Version Bible, Deuteronomy 33:2)" We also read about the same prophecy by Prophet Enoch peace be upon him:
"And Enoch [Idris in Arabic, one of Allah Almighty's Prophets peace be upon all of them to the people of Israel.] also, the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14-15)"
Now, according to the Islamic history, the city of Mecca (Paran) was liberated by Prophet Muhammad's 10,000-men army. The irrefutable historical proofs for this are located in this article: The story of the 10,000 Muslims who liberated Mecca (Paran) in the Bible. Now, since these prophecies were foretold in the Bible's Old Testament, I would like to openly challenge any Jewish Rabbi or Christian Priest or Minister to answer the following question for me:

May I start by pointing out that the Book of Jude is actually in the New Testament and not the Old. The prophesy was revealed to Jude and I find it rather amusing that you guys will quote from the New Testament when you claim it's false. Could you please provide the proof that Paran in the Bible is actually Mecca? From all the information available online and otherwise, it is only stated that some people believe that Paran in the Bible is actually Mecca. I guess we all know who those 'believers' are: Moslems. I am not surprised by that because you try to claim that the Comforter in the Bible actually refers to Mohammed. Sacrilege!!!! If you are honest with yourself, you will know that the law refered to in that passage is actually the Ten Commandment. Or Mohammed has now become Moses ehn? na wa o. From your claims, Mohammed actually came with sword, but the third verse here talks about 'loving' the people after the law was giving. Sword, Love, these are mutually exclusive dont you think? The Lord as revealed in Deutoronomy and Jude is actually refering to Jesus. Just thought you should know that. I could go on and on about this verses, but I have to go on to the next issues.

Who in the Bible was the Prophet that rode the camel to fulfill the Prophecy of Isaiah 21:7? The New Testament only fulfills the riding of the donkey prophecy in John 12:14, and it claims that it only fulfilled that prophecy.
There is still a missing fulfillment of the riding of the camel in the New Testament. Why?
If Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him wasn't the one who fulfilled the remaining of Isaiah 21:7 prophecy, then who was that Prophet?
Please visit Isaiah's Vision: He saw Jesus riding a donkey and Muhammad riding a camel. He also saw the destruction of Babylon (i.e. Iraq today) and its idol gods, and replacing them with a Divine Religion (i.e. Islam today).

Your ignorance just shines through these statements like no man's business. Jesus riding on the donkey into Jerusalem is not a fufilment of the prophesy of Isaiah 21:7, rather it is a fulfillment of the prophesy of Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.. If you can read very well, you will see that Isaiah 21:7 talks about CHARIOTS of ASSES, HORSEMEN and CAMELS. These are in the plural and not singular as in the case of Jesus. Besides, so who is riding the horse? Your blindness and desperation to prove a point makes you ignore this portion. And for all you know, the event in Isaiah 21:7 happened at the same time, there is no time differnce between the horsemen, asses and camels. Please try and be more credible next time.

For space and time, i'll respond to the other two submisions subsequently.

ajia23,

I was surprised to see that even the bible (that is whatever part of it that is still credible) sanctions the exhortations and prayer for Muhammed (SAW) and Abraham. In the past, mlks_baby would have everyone believe it is "necromancy", and the bible forbids it. Thanks for that expose

Can you please provide references for this assertion? Necromancy has never been supported in the Bible. We all know the fate of King Saul when he practiced this devilish act. I await your response with all anticipation. And by the way, no escapist act is permitted from your person.

TV01,

I'm glad we are able to have a conversation here. I am also happy by the challenges you give, especially since they seem to be Biblically based. Contrary views like yours makes one go back to the scriptures to either get better informed or to get a beter understanding of one's belief. Good understanding, the Bible says, gives favor and a better understanding of the sacred practice of tithing will only bring more favor and reward of the practice my way. This I believe is the missing link to many christians prosperity. We are in the practice of doing what the Bible say, but we lack understanding of what the practice is all about. And it is only a good understanding of our practices that provide benediction at the end of the day.

I will now get to your rejoinders.

Hebrews 7:12 – For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law

Tithing was introduced 1. for the Hebrews/Jews. 2. As part of the Mosaic law and 3. specifically for the Levitical priesthood (in absence of a physical inheritance along with the other 11 tribes). Said law and priesthood have now being changed. I fail to see how one can conclude that tithing must as a rule always accompany priesthood? We are agreed that tithing predates the law. Historical records show that it even predates Abra(ha)m’s time. Does this and the fact that it was incorporated into the Mosaic law mean that it has to be retained under the covenant of grace? NT reference to tithing is always on the basis of 1-3 above.

There is no change of the Priesthood in this case. The Priesthood we have today is fashioned after the order of Melchizedek. So everything we see in the Priesthood of Melchizedek must necessarily be present today. You will notice Melchizedek didn't offer any sacrifice in the Genesis account. I believe this could be the Spirit of God's intention to make us see that the sacrifice in the New Testament will be something done at one time and not a daily sacrament has practised in the Levitical Priesthood.

Tithing wasn't just introduced for the Hebrews/Jews. First, Melchizedek was a Gentile, and the bread and wine with him were tokens of the covenant which we find in the New Testament in the form of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. This indicates that tithing is actually meant for anyone in covenant relationship with the Lord. While I agree that the tithe was meant for the upkeep of the tribe of Levi, it wan't introduced for that purpose. Abraham paid tithes even before Levi was born. The reason why tithing is carried over into the New Testament is that we saw Melchizedek receive tithes and the Priesthood of the new Testmanet is of the Melchizedek order.

The Lords Priesthood is “after the order of Melchizedek” => Eternal. The Lord is a High Priest (typified by Aaron in the OT), but priesthood is universal to all believers in this age. And please note Levites where not priests, they did not minister to God. Only the house of Aaron (taken from the tribe of Levi ministered to God as priests)./quote] These are statements of fact. Likewise, our High Priest today is taken from amongs us - Jesus christ the Lord.

The tithe was primarily for the Levites (for the sake of simplicity lets ignore the orphan, widow, stranger and feasting aspects for now), of which a further tithe was given to the High Priest. How do you conclude that the tithe was a gift to God? The High Priest only ever received 10% of the 10%? Kindly explain how the tithe is offered to God as a gift by The Lord in the current dispensation?
In His role as High Priest, The Lord is at the right hand of God making intercession for the saints. Your stance seems to suggest He is also offering physical gifts in the form of tithes?

Within the Mosaic law, the tithe was meant primarily for the levites. The tithe is offered to God now through the local assembly which represents God's house (remember where the tithe should be brought according to Malachi). Do you realise we have no direct access to God even in this dispensation? Our access is Jesus Christ and that is why we pray in His name. Likewise, our gifts are offered to God through Him. Though the gifts are given to the local assembly, we have a messenger of God within that Assembly who receives it and disburses it as required by the New Testament for the administration of the church and to meet the needs of the poor.

Your argument (at least in part) is based on your opinion that “tithes equate to gifts”? The tithe was a legal requirement. Gift would more aptly describe, offerings termed “heave”, “freewill”, “thanksgiving” and the like. Gifts are always freely given.

The fact that the tithe is a 'legal' requirement does not make it less a gift. It is morally required of me to take care of my household, but at the same time, the recipients of my God-given duties consider my gesture as a gift. Even though we are to pay our tithes, we are supposed to do it with a willing and gracious heart. God will not force anyone to pay it.

Please offer additions/corrections/alternatives if you will, but as a NT Christian I see only two gifts I can offer to God (apart from my self).
1. Hebrews 13:15 - Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. ~Thanks & praise!
2.The only other way to give to God is to give to the poor and needy. The orphans, the widows and the strangers mentioned earlier.
NT Christians give, nothing more and nothing less. It is always according to one’s hearts desire and expected as a normal part of the Christian life, particularly as one grows in grace. Giving is actually a spiritual grace in direct contradistinction to tithing, which is a work, based on the law of a fleshly commandment. 2 Corinthians 8-9 expounds this beautifully.

Tithing is still a work of grace. Abraham was not under the law, but he paid his tithe. There is work through grace. Paul said he worked harder than others because of the grace of God. Grace prompts you to do good works, though you are not justified by the works. I agree with you that we are meant to give to the poor and needy. However, I see in the New Testament that this giving is done through the church. That is why the Seven were appointed in the Book of Acts to administer the church finances to serve the poor. We are meant to give to the church with the church administering these gifts as required.

As for paragraphs 5-7 of your post, it sounds plausible, but is mostly conjecture and supposition. Scripture always bears itself out. If you care to support this with scripture, we can talk more. Paragraph 8. No, Abram did not inquire, you then link that to a “set-man” and the local assembly concept of ask no question? There is no scriptural mandate for this “set-man” idea. An assembly of believers is never accountable to or led by one person. It is always a plurality of elders, except in Gods basic unit, which is the family, led by the husband

The scriptural basis for the set-man is there in the New Testament. In the Book of Revelation, Jesus made a dinstinct separation between the Chruches and the Pastors/Messengers. This sghows that He has appointed one person (the Pastor) as the overseer of the local assembly. In the Book of Acts, we saw a deliberatiion of the church in chapter 15, that the final say was by the pastor of the church in Jerusalem - James. The elders may have had something to say, but the final decision was with James. By the way, all the five-fold ministries are subject to the Pastor. Every action of any christian must be done via a local assembly. That's the revelation of the New Testament.

mrlawng,

Keep your sentiments in your pocket and try to restrict yourself to making objective intelligent posts.

I can see you still wont follow your own advice.

@dearzi,

Be reasonable, and don't let your emotions overule your sense of judgment and fairness. I think I can read english as well as you do, even though I may not be a student of the language. My understanding of the word 'MAYBE' suggests a hypothetical situation. Is that a wrong use of the word? If that is so, please let me know so I can learn to properly use the word subsequently.

@mrlawng,

I can see how your inputs have helped. And I can see how objective and intelligent your post is. Please listen to your own advice when next you write.

dearzi,

coolu coolu coolu temper!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Breathe in, and out. In again, and out. Get a cup of ice-cold water and take a big gulp. Feel better? Now go back and read what I said again. I am sure you omitted the word 'Maybe' which is a key to interpreting my statement. Now that you've seen it, I suppose that all is well now. Take it easy o. I am for you and not agianst you. okay? Interesting that I did not see you react like that on this forum when Jesus was maligned, but you become so angry when 'men' are supposedly accused of what 'men' are susceptible to.

Maybe you do not see it that way, but saying there is more to the story aside from what has been stated clearly by a person, is a subtle way of saying this person is lying. Saying he has something else to hide and is not giving us the full picture is calling him dubious. While I have no problem with you doing that, and I do not have to defend him in that arena, I just pointed a simple fact to you, which I see that you have interpreted wrongly. You obviously find it inconceivable that your Pastor or any one of your spiritual advisors can stay on the pulpit and intentionally tell lies, well I consider the same to be true with Okotie, not just because he is my Pastor, but because I know that there is no clebrity in naija, either in or out of the church whose life is as open to the public as his is. and at no time has it ever been proven that he tells lies or he intentionally deceives people.

I have told you that the best way to deal with anybody is to believe the best of them. I hope you will do that now.

@slimnike,

I think you will do well not to try to fan a flame of discord has you seem to do. Dearzi and I are much closer than it appears on this forum due of our difererent stance. At the end of the day, we will be as good a friends as we've alwsys been and your stance will only make you look ridicuous. This is just an advice.

Hi TayoD,

Saw your post. I thought it made interesting reading, but I can't say I agree with your conclusions.

Are you saying that tithes are the "gift" part of the priestly ministry? and/or, that tithing is for the priesthood? and/or, that tithing is a reflection of what we think of ourselves as His work and our place in His creation?

You also seem to be saying that there is a mystery to the tithe, which goes something like this;
~ God spoke ten creation commands
~ one of which pertains to mankind
~ to "identify" with the creation (God as Creator?) we must "identify" with this particular command
~ We do this by giving a "tenth" (the best tenth)
~ The fact that a "tenth" was stipulated in the Levitical law "suggests" this is correct
~ It is expected of "each one of His creation"

I haven't read the book you referenced, but this explanation is totally new to me.
In fact, maybe I don't disagree, maybe I just don't get it?

I'd appreciate if you could elucidate some more.

God bless.

TV01,

I do appreciate  your open-mindedness.  I'll try to explain further what I have stated previosly.  However, I'd also like to point out that no where in the New Testament is it stated that tithing was now anachronistic.  It is unwise to come to that conlcusion when the Bible does not state that exclusively, especially considering that tithing predates the law.

Indeed, I am of the opinion that the gifts offered by the Priesthood is actually the tithes.  However, we are also encouraged from other scriptures to go beyond that, and give offerings.  

If we do accept that a Priest's job is to offer gifts and sacrifices, then a study of the Priesthood of Meklchizedek suggests that the gifts that he offered was the tithes that Abram brought to him.  No other gift exchanged hands between Melchizedek and Abram in the story as presented in the Book of Genesis.   Jesus being our High Priest must also offer gifts and sacrifices because His Priesthood is after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:27 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. [/color][color=#990000],  This scripture makes us understand that Jesus has offered a once and for all sacrifice, but it never says the same for the gifts.  Consequently, I believe the offer of gifts is on-going as long as the priesthood is on-going.

Abram's decision to give a tenth can be linked to the Divine Decalogue, because Melchizedek actually called God the creator at the time he met Abram.  Why did He use that name of God when He could have just used another?  I don't think that name was used without a purpose or without consequence.  Abram's understanding of what Melchizedek said is why he gave the tenth.

I believe Abraham rightly understood his role and what portion of his increase that he was to give.  That is why I believe the same percentage was required in the levitical Priesthood.   if he had wrongly interpreted what Melchizedek said, then i believe God would have corrected him either instantly or through the law.  but the law corroborates Abram's righteous action.

All His creation should pay tithes.  The book of hebrews even suggests that Levi who wasn't born at the time Abram met melchizedek actually paid through Abram.  The principle of tithes runs through the entire Bible if you are careful to see it.  In the Garden of Eden, we had the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  The whole earth God gave to man, but he kept the garden of eden to Himself.  We are now owned by God as Christians and our bodies are not even ours.  All these show that we are only secondary possessors while God who is the primary possessor is acknowledged through the gift of tithes.

One other thing I thought I should say is that Abram never inquired what Melchizedek did with all that gift.  He had done his part by offering the gift to God through His Priest.  While it may seem logical to want to question the use of the tithe by the set-man within the local assembly, I still find no basis for it in the scriptures.

I hope I have been coherent enough to clarify some of these isues.  I've been rather busy and wrote all these in a hurry.