₦airaland Forum

JeSoul:
Great. Kunle where are you?

Tonye, I repeat for the 3rd and last time, this thread is not for you or I unless Noetic changes the rules.

Jesoul, I ask for the 3rd time and the last time, explain what you meant, wow, today seem to be revealing another side of your personality, this cannot be true!

JeSoul:
You give yourself way too much unmerited credit, modesty certainly did not set up room in your house.

1 Cor 15:10-11
10 But whatever I am now, it is all because God poured out his special favor on me — and not without results. For I have worked harder than all the other apostles, yet it was not I but God who was working through me by his grace. NLT

1 Cor 8:2
2 The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know
NIV

ogajim:
Tonye-t

This is the kind of twisting of the Gospel that many so called "anti-tithers" fight against, giving to the poor, widows, strangers, orphans, etc. I don't see where the Bible said the "church" knows better how to spend your money for you.
Each of us will have to "work out his/her salvation with fear and trembling", I don't have a problem with members who decide to "bless" their "pastor" with something but it should not be forced, cajoled, etc.
The only Christian condition fulfilled by going to a "Church" is fellowship because "iron sharpens iron" and is not the "enchilada", some get "saved" in a "Church" but the heart and Soul is where Christ dwells in which is why the devil is after that, I am tempted to tell Tonye-t to get a job but I don't know if he just moonlights as a "pastor"

MOG, was reserved for Angels right?

@ Ogajims,

1. All you've been saying so far are TWISTING TWISTING TWISTING, cant you just come up with a bible verse that reject the practse of tithing explicitly rather than arguing baselessly so far, becos i just promised not to do any biblical quoting for you again as it appears i know you type

2. If you come up here to tell me that the only essence of going to church is to get sharpened by another iron, then bro, you're far behind

3. Bro, i aint no pastor, as it appears you just came along and joined the bandwagon of anti-tithers without standing abase with happenings from the origin

God bless you!

KunleOshob:
I have amended the post so stop ranting

ok so you truly took that tombo i warned you not to, no wonder,am glad you back to ya senses

JeSoul:
I don't want to sidetrack Noetic's thread so I won't go into this. I know you're slighted cos I did not jump on your tithe bandwagon - the liberal christian that I am. But simply put, you cannot go to China and preach in English, or to a remote village in the Amazon and speak yoruba.

Believe me my lovely sister, my tithing and its wagon has got nothing to do with my question, why do folks jitter each time i write or ask just but a simple question, or could it be becos peeps just post with rethinking? hmmmm, well i dont know

[li]The topic when paraphrased: Did Jesus teach that whoever does not accept his teachings will still make heaven by just showing love to one another?[/li]


[li]You came in with this when paraphrased: that whoever does not believe in Jesus stands condemned, but only for a group of folks who's got the chance to hear and understand but would either accept or reject it[/li]


[li]And i asked still paraphrased: That Jesoul, if you're saying that that only those who hear and understand but reject it are they that will be condemned, so what then happens to those [U]WHO HEAR AND DOES NOT UNDERSTAND[/u][/li]

i wont spot your error i will leave you to ponder keenly and come uo with a CORRECTION. Sis how are you today?

kellorah:
Tonye, don't 4get it was an example, I didn't assume u were talk about equality in that sense.
Seems like u want to start something or wot?
Sha na mistake I do to reply your thread. No wahala.

No it was no mistake, you were making a nice point and now you're backing out, na wa o, i thought you just likened women to men? be bold na, i aint dissing u pls, you're my sister ir aint you?

JeSoul:
But this holds true for only a certain group of people who got the chance to hear, and more importantly understand the gospel enough to either accept or reject it.

KunleOshob:
Yeah! they were not born equal but Jesus said the poor shall inherit the earth!!! And the so called rich would find it more difficult to enter the Kingdom of God than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Be care ful how you interprete scriptures. All men are equal b4 God.

Always so quick to jump into topics any how!

KunleOshob:
All men are equal b4 God.

kellorah:
I know, I just used the sexes to try illustrate my point. Sorry.

what have you done that you're saying sorry, hmmm, sorry too, this topic requires that you think first before you talk

1Cor.9:14 - In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

How are they to live without the support from the gospel, . . dont act hypocritical, read scriptures b4 you talk

And to Mr.KunleOshod,

Bro, dont you have points again, or are you dry, mr.Anti-tither  

Mark 10:21- Jesus felt genuine love for this man as he looked at him.[b] "You lack only one thing," he told him. "Go and sell all you have and give the money to the poor , and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me NLT

Quote from: Deposky on October 09, 2009, 08:34 PM
In my view, Jesus in this case wasn't giving instructions on tithing per se, but castigating the Pharisees for being meticulous in 'obedience' to the law, but failing to do things that would improve the lives of fellow people. While you might regard it as tacit support for tithing, this is a flawed view.

Jesus was clearly NOT against the practice of tithing - he wouldn't be because it served a clear role in providing for the priesthood as specified under Mosaic law.

In all his teachings about the KINGDOM of heaven/Kingdom of God, no tithing is mentioned - that is a clear omission that is telling in my view.

The tithing (as under the law) which Jesus was speaking of related primarily to bringing food items to the temple, not money, and to the Levites who had no inheritance. He mentioned tithe of dill and cumin not money, and definitely did not teach any of this to his disciples. We hear of no collections of dill and cumin monthly, weekly or at any other frequencies.

chukwudi44:
sorry there is no where God directed christians to pay tithes that was why Paul did not dmand it and had to fend for himself by building tenths.Is it not amazing that paul who operated without tithes did more works than thesee criminals who steal money from their pre programmed victims in the name of tithes

direct these your sermon to your greedy pastors who twist the scriptures to fleece their equally greedy and ignorant congregatioins of their hard earned money.

tales of a desperate catholic brother wanting to contribute his quota, at least we all have freedom to expressions, right?!!! , like KunleOshod like son - all cries against how MOGs spend church money and nothing more

KunleOshob:
@gentleidiot
Lets even assume becos of your deluded peanut sized brain that there are two types of tithes in the bible, is there any instruction in the bible to practise abraham's tithes to the Jews talkless of believeres who were nevere asked to tithe any type of tithes. It is pure 419 for any preacher to askanyone to tithe based on Abraham's one of example that he did of his on volition and not under any instruction from God. There is also no instruction to his descendants to repeat this his one off practise. Also the how does the tithe of cummin, mint and herbs[agricultural produce of the land] that Jesus spoke about to the pharisees have any semblance with the criminalized version of tithes from money or income which crooks preach today. Unto whose authority did they twist pruduce to mean money? Even the pharisses did not tithe of their money and they were the most "holy" in those days. That is apart from the fact that tithing is not applicable to christians as we have proven several times on this forum. I am still waiting for the "inspired" teacher that would come and twist why tithes as explained and practised in deut 14:22-29 was discontnued for our modern day version that as no semblance with the defunct biblical version.

Now from this translation is there any part that talked of giving farm produce, as that's been your baseless arguments you coined from your protege(Chukwudi44) argument ever since , even of some other translations it puts it this way --- "you tithe of mint, cummin and so on, now simple english language of that statement will simply mean you tithe from the profits you make from mints,cummins and so on, or if i am wrong let a grammarian correct and explain better. Now let me ask you, in the OT was there any place that said we should give our offerings in moneys (currencies), answer is no, people who gave offering did so with bulls, goats, cows, rams, yet as of Jesus' time jews have started paying theirs in money (mint - old word for coin search the dictionary). Now since they gave in money their offerings, doesnt simple common sense tell u that they must have been giving their tithes in money too. muct i teach u everything?

KunleOshod, i have had enough laughter to your posts alreasy, let me stop here for now

huxley:
I have agonised over many years about whether, in addition to holding an atheistic worldview, I should also hold a materialistic worldview. For many years, I have called myself a naturalist, disavowing all forms of the supernatural. A naturalist basically claims that everything that exists in the universe (or metaverse) can be explained in purely natural form. Thus, a naturalist claims that if it turns out that a "supernatural" realm does exist, this realm is actually a manifestation of the generality of the natural, and would become subsumed into the natural.

On the other hand, a materialist makes the claim that ONLY the material world exist and everything in the universe (or metaverse) is a manifestation of matter in one form or the other. I have found it hard to square materialism with my knowledge of the feature of the universe?

Over the last few months, I have been looking at some research in what is generally term the paranormal, and am quite impressed with some of the results of work in this area. What stands out clearly is that the paranormal is amenable to being studied by naturalistic means. What also stands out is that there is a lot which cannot yet be explained using existing materialistic theories. Checkout the following two lectures:

1) Dean Radin

2) Rupert Sheldrake


I recommend you watch at least one of the videos above before commenting.