₦airaland Forum

Enigma:
Actually Traugott, I have a simpler question for you: when somebody said here that those who don't pay tithes are robbing God and are going to hell, did you or did you not keep quiet?

I'm sure that we did not keep quiet but addressed olowolekan's comments about robbing God.

muhsin:
@Viaro,

I kinda of feel I can spend one more hour here. We can therefore continue. Beside, thanks for the good hope.

Well, sorry I didn't see that much earlier. Anyways, I should not be tedious to you - so concentrate and ace those exams.

Enigma: With this background and context, it really should be obvious that the statement "tithing is a scam" especially along with the context of the particular post in which it was made could not be intended to be absolute and/or incapable of qualification

When someone comes up to say -

ogajim:
TITHING IS A SCAM, yes I said it, now what?

. . should we stand by and look, wondering if that was "absolute" or 'relative' - especially if he does so in all caps??

Traugott:
Enigma, as much as I respect my guy Viaro, if he yarns dust about the Christian faith I will take him up on it.

A good friend is one who would rather not pat my back and urge me on in deceit. Thank you for not letting me slide.

But here you see KunleOshob and Ogajim saying TITHING IS A SCAM, and you keep quiet. Yet you guys claim you have no problems with Christians who willingly strike a covenant with God in the name of tithes, and you double-back and say its a scam?

Don't waste your time - anti-tithers have a huge problem with people who believe in tithing! That is why I have waited to see which anti-tither would simply declare that "tithing is NOT a scam" if they are genuinely having no problem with any Christian tithing.

ogajim:
TITHING IS A SCAM, yes I said it, now what?

I said earlier: Tithing is NOT a scam - yes, I said it: so heck what?

I asked MR(?) viaro the other day, " will you call people who REFUSE to give to the Haiti relief fund through the Red cross stingy even if they have given via other means or can't give because of their situations?"


I got insults instead of a simple answer which I guess is his own brand of Christian meekness. Our Lord Jesus Christ told us to LOVE even those we perceive as enemies.

I served you the very thing you asked for and will serve it again if you try that hypocrisy with me. Go back and post the exchange between us (you and me) on that very page and remind yourself of the games you were trying to play. I asked you to show me where I ever denied anyone the privilege of supporting the Red Cross or Haiti relief effort - just where did I ever suggest such a denial - but you never once showed anything for your false accusations.

I have thought you anti-tithing lot were reasonable, but it turns out to my surprise that the hallmark of your 'humility' is to lie up and down the street and then wait for the thread to progress so you can sneak in here to lie some more - that is the brand of your own "meekness" which you drag upon the name of Christ! Well done - but viaro won't buy the hypocrisy you're parading here.

I wrote something the other day about some Nigerian Churches calling their members to Church despite the storm in this area (Feds are still shut by the way) and he went on to call me "fair weather Christian", another example of his meekness, I could go on but why?

I also asked you why you were far too disturbed that some churches would be minded to worship if it does not disturb you, but what did you say?

Each of us can do what they please but at the end, we have to ANSWER to the Most High: Those of us (Kunle is the BOSS here) who want to spread the word about this new sale of indulgence should not be deterred by the name calling, intimidation, and other tactics they might come up with because stealing is stealing even those done in the name of the Lord.

Rather than show your boss that he has not been showing Christian virtue by his lying inconsistencies, you're waving your hypocrisy behind his back and pretending not to notice that he also has been castigating other Christians with name calling, intimidation, and other tactics unbecoming of the name 'Christian'? What have Pastors like Tunde Bakare stolen from you anti-tithers? Have you thought about how you in particular would answer before the Almighty for the derision you threw against others? Lying is Lying even though you flavour it with the name of Jesus or God Almighty!

The antics of a dude on PMS is not enough, if you're a QB and you see a Line backer like LT on your trail, you take a knee if you've got any sense, think about that for a minute omo iya (abi na iyawo?)

You ought to be on some expired drugs or meds soaked in Spanish liquor. Stop playing the joker with these games of who's your BOSS - lying twerps!

@muhsin,

Thank you for your reasoned answers. I would not like to keep you from gaining much towards your exams, so I don't know if I should just let this pass and wait another time. . or draw you ought on many issues that show up in your response.

With recourse to the former suggestion, I should just leave it here until when you might have much more time to hand for a discussion. Success in your exams.

@agathamari,

This one post makes me laugh:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/230553_untitled_jpgd623ce9a1a0757aab1bfefd9e267146b

Where is atheism represented in that pictogram?


____________________________

Edit

www.nairaland.com/attachments/230555_untitled3_jpge2f6431cb7eb2b73e410f2b48c30e0a3

Lol, was Albert Einstein an atheist?

uplawal:
he will definately deal with him in his own way

You seem to be Dr. Abu's personal assistant (pardon the pun, please). . but for someone to be so confident in this manner, you should know more than meets the eye, no? So tell us: how would Abu z-z deal with him?

@muhsin, maybe you didn't try to look at my questions before rushing a reproduction of one of your answers.

Here again are my two questions, if you may:

(a) What does it take to be a muslim?

(b) And how are folks at Nation of Islam not muslim?

And thanks, I read tpia's succinct comment as referred: 'Nation of Islam shouldnt be confused with general Islam', she said. That's great, but that does not tell us anything about my two questions, no? Not even in light of what is meant by "general Islam".

However, I should be quite amused by your penultimate comments:

muhsin:
For example, Farrakhan followers believe in racism and that the "black man" was the original man and therefore superior, while in Islam there is no racism and everyone is considered equal in the sight of God (i.e. Allah, the Creator), the only difference being in one piety.

Eh, I don't see how the discrimination you decry could be upheld in the face of current (and very real) Muslim hatred of the Jews. Care to show how that could be contained in light of what you're noting above?

agathamari:
talk less of palenologist theorys of similar practices in europe and asia dating back almost 20.000years due to artifacts found in coastal regions.

Pardon my asking, but what does Palenology have to do with the 'practice' of banishment, jail or punishing offences?

muhsin:
Are Nation of Islam followers Muslims? If yes, how are they?

What does it take to be a muslim? And how are folks at Nation of Islam not muslim?

[quote author=KunleOshob link=topic=391636.msg5479348#msg5479348 date=1265715643]
It is aperfectly logical question since tithe peddlers preach compulsary 10% of positive income, if the income goes into the negative would they reverse the tithe? [/quote]

Enigma: Indeed the bone of contention is that those who support "tithing" today are essentially saying, either directly or indirectly, that it is compulsory or that it is a Christian obligation. A lot of the debate would be unnecessary IF certain simple acknowledgments are made.

But. .

[quote author=viaro link=topic=391636.msg5478587#msg5478587 date=1265708895]
Some of us already know that tithing is NOT compulsory - and we have been bold to say it so many times already! Here again I have said it. BUT - Is it too much for an anti-tither to simply proclaim that 'Tithing is NOT a scam'??[/quote]

Enigma:
no need for semantic pedantry on that one I would have thought.

Anti-tithers should stop entertaining us with the hypocrisy of their 'semnatics' and shouting "context" on top of their lies.

techie:
Just a quick question if i pay my tithe religiously every month and my job ends and I have to borrow money (which gives me a negative in come) am I free to request for 10% of what I borrow from the church ?

Eh, just a quick question, sir: who is asking you to pay tithes religiously?

bilms:
why are u stressing urself to enlighten this people, ? they already know the truth, but deny willingly,

@bilms,

Perhaps the reason why there was no need to argue MyJoe's post is because it was plain and simply telling you "the truth" you try to deny. Shall I remind you?

(a)

MyJoe:
But from its garbled comprehension of Islam to its dating, the gospel of Barnabas is so laughable that if it were a play it would be classified as a farce.

Eh, bilms. . do you know what a "farce" is?

(b)

MyJoe: There are many reasons to dismiss this gospel as a "fake" (where "fake" means a gospel that was not written at about the same time as the canonical ones, or one that was written by someone with a clear agenda.)

Lol, bilms. . have you educated yourself on the meaning of "fake"?

MyJoe: For one thing, there is evidence suggesting that it was written after the 14th century, rather than the first century. One thing is the writing style. Another is its reference to nine heavens, with paradise as the 10th, an idea that was propounded by Dante only in the 14th century.

. . bilms - do you have comments to the above?

MyJoe: The oldest copies of the gospel are written in Spanish and Italian, not Latin, Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew. Some moslems have latched on to this gospel to show that Jesus preached about Mohammed. Many scholars, including some Moslem ones, are of the view that the gospel should not be taken seriously

No further comment is necessary - and bilms, if you have seen these, then you would not be wondering who's denying 'truth'.

Enigma:
@ Traugott specifically:

Which of the following do you agree with? Which do you disagree with?

Stop playing games - it is dense to be pretending you're in "agreement" with what tithers have been saying and yet trying not to notice the many inconsistencies and lies rapidly spewing from anti-tithers on this forum! Those who are inclined to tithe are not the ones coming back changing statements and shouting "context" - so you should be far more concerned about the underhanded methods of your anti-tithing gang.

g1:
for the sake of friendship and reconsiliation i leave u with the following goodwill message: may u, the other christians and muslims on nairaland remain blessed, peaceout

Thanks, man! And I wish you much, much more.

uplawal:
youre lucky hes not seeing you face to face,otherwise u will spell it

What would he use - a knife, a dagger. . or a bomb?

uplawal:
lmao, how can an African jesus put cross on his neck,this is hilarious,cant stop laughing so hard

What are you laughing about? Did Muhammad teach you guys to look at pictures? Have you taken time to study what Muhammad taught about pictures?

Traugott:
Imagine that I never drew attention to what he just said, and someone else sees that LIE. It will lead such a one astray and he too may keep spreading the false doctrine that TITHING IS A SCAM. Can you imagine that?

Tithing is not a scam - that much we know. But anti-tithers will make all sorts of excuses to play games and then come back with 'semantic pedantry' and now cry "context". Is it not funny that it seems only anti-tithers are the ones who fall all over themselves changing their own words every so often while waving the victims' card that nobody understands them? Why not be clear and stick to what they say?

Now supposing someone else should have said 'giving is scamming', what would these same people have said? Would they be indifferent? Are people not being scammed through messages of 'giving' as well? But we know that 'giving is NOT a scam', and those of us who know the difference take time to carefully choose our words and leave no one confused with any inconsistencies to then come back shouting 'semantics' or 'context'! Why would anyone with genuine and honest conscience be making very misleading statements and covering up with excuses repeatedly - even AFTER REPEATED corrections? Such attitudes are very suspect, and there's just no end in sight to all these games anti-tithers play.

It is not only "context" that we should be concerned about - we should also be careful about methods: and when anti-tithers are very proud of their underhanded methods of doubletalk, there sure is a serious problem somewhere.

This underhanded method is the hallmark of the anti-tither's games, and it is really laughable for Enigma to have quipped "you don't need to be conceited" but then pretend he did not notice what his mentor has been up to all along! How does he expect anyone to buy this puerile hypocrisy when it is obvious they are not seeking a genuine input on the subject? One minute they say that it is wrong for Christians to receive or give tithes; then when challenged, they turn round and say that "nobody" has ever claimed such a thing (@mabell, thanks for that link)! Is that not an OBVIOUS LIE well characteristic of the conceit that Enigma pretends not to have seen in his mentor??

It is not the believer's calling to be misleading the public with inconsistencies and manipulative doubletalk. Says the apostle Paul: "We reject all shameful deeds and underhanded methods. We don’t try to trick anyone or distort the word of God. We tell the truth before God, and all who are honest know this" (2 Cor. 4:2, NLT).

Enigma:
As a friendly gesture to some of our friends who support tithing (including those who already know or now know that it is not compulsory) but especially to those who are not yet sure and to those who still think it is compulsory, here is another one I made earlier:

Some of us already know that tithing is NOT compulsory - and we have been bold to say it so many times already! Here again I have said it. BUT - Is it too much for an anti-tither to simply proclaim that 'Tithing is NOT a scam'?? Why is that difficult to say, and why it is that no anti-tither has thus far come back to make that simple statement if they are actually seeking the best interest of both themselves and others? Why the pretences all along and then coming back to make excuses from semantics to "context"?

I emphasised "proper scholarship" to say that as this is a discussion forum to exchange, learn from others even as you teach others, you don't need to be conceited, no need to show off "scholarship" quoting 'commentator this', 'commentator that', 'commentator the other' or 'eminent theologians' to get very simple points across.

Anti-tithers like yourself don't need to be conceited and then come back with grandiloquent hypocrisy about "proper scholarship" that you don't have! It were better that you don't even make such statements than to put up these doublespeak while looking the other way pretending you have no clue that your mentor has been lying up and down the street in such a conceited manner that leaves no one in doubt!

If I quote commentators, it was for the benefit of guys like you who have no "proper scholarship" because you CANNOT find one single theologian supporting the arrant nonsense you guys have been noising here and coming back to make "context" excuses for. If you want to make a statement, make it plain and simple without underhanded methods for which you have to come back apologising and changing too many times.

Kay 17:
the discussion was primarily on the struggle of every organism to survive. that in itself proves the chaotic character of nature, NOT on some systems.

No worries, I understood the discussion and tried to contain my comments within the concerns of the thread. What is yet to come to light is how 'evolution "proves" creation' - and 'the struggle of every organism to survive' does not bring us any closer to 'proving' anything about the title/topic of the thread.

OLAADEGBU:
New Age cults and the various 'religions that permeate our societies today are in on the Pantheistic evolutionistic belief that Reincarnation explains the origin of this world's system. Don't be left out, that's the latest discovery even the New York times alluded to it. Haven't you heard of mother nature before

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?_r=4&pagewanted=1&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Oh well, although the link requires a subscription to view the article, I guess you've helped me to understand what you meant. Good job.

Traugott:
Deal, Viaro. Deal. Thanks!

Good man! Sometime this week will pass the list over. Cheers.

g1:
i used to do that like you said, my brand of atheism used to be live and let live but, then anytime i tell a christian that i am an atheist he then feels the need to tell me about the bible verse that god says the fool that says in his heart there is no god,

I understand how you feel. Many people say things which in their worldview seems to help them feel cool about themselves. Some of these things might be offensive either way - whether a religious person to an atheist or an atheist to a religious person: one is not better than the other and such exchanges don't help a good outcome. But the response is what we should be careful to observe, because it does not help any which way to retort with deliberate invectives . . just as it seems in this next part of your quote:

why then does that christian feel i dont have the right to insult him and telll him that it is him/her and his god that are fools?

thanks for your replies

A 'right' to insult others does not say very much about the person who does the insults - trust me, I know (and have been guilty many times). That is not what I would consider a "right" anyways, but again I should not make my own opinion a matter of an overbearing point upon you.

But do have a good evening and take things cool.

MyJoe:
Just seen this. The term "idiot savant" is now considered derogatory. Experts now use the term "autistic savant". Just thought I should let your readers know this.

I take the correction, and deeply apologise. You did very well to bring that up, and thank you so much.

Traugott:
KunleOshob, take my word for it. viaro is NOT pilgrim. I know the guy outside NL and not only is he male, he is not an ex-muslim. Remain the blessed of God.

Don't worry about it . . you know me, and that's okay as it is. Bless up.

KunleOshob:
Maybe heshe is a transvestite, i won't be suprised cos she certainly posts like someone with twisted values and loose morals.

That's okay - there's really no need for me to go down that route with you.

mabell:
@ viaro
This is one of KunleOshobi Many incosistencies. This was his defence in a thread:

Stop confusing issues nobody as said it is wrong to pay tithes what we have maintained is wrong is the falsehood that pastors preach about tithes being a compulsory 10% of your income given to the church. I am sure most pastors would frown at the idea of this man giving his tithes to the needy cos in their greediness and selfishness, they want it for themselves

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-203250.0.html

@mabell, well. . what can I say? I had wanted to believe very much that perhaps there was a possibility that he might've been misrepresented and his readers might not have understood him. So I tried to follow several of his posts, and wasn't convinced. .  until today when he sealed it.

That said, I would not like to encourage the sad state of affairs that has resulted in this thread - and I acknowledge it is partly my fault. My apologies again. _{(there's someone around me that has thoroughly whipped me for letting down my guards at a crucial moment)}

Traugott:
@VIARO: No vex, I know what to do next time. Oya, sharp, sharp, you can edit the unwanted part out of your post. I am doing same.

Hehehe. . Traugott, take it easy - I was not vexing. I learn by my mistakes and ignorance, and perhaps would just leave that there. But if you insist, then I'll edit.

BTW, when we talk sometime later, I have a list I'd like you to help straighten out for me. Deal?

g1:
as for banom i dont know who he is, i probably joined nairaland after whatever took place with him, so i cant comment

That's okay. I wasn't asking you to know everything and everyone on Nairaland - nobody is a walking archive. Yet, the point stands that your quip was incorrect about atheist reactions on their own cognitive dissonance.

well if people are scared of opening your door kudos to you,

Eh, dude. .  I didn't talk about "opening" doors - I rather hinted that no atheist with a thinking head would DARE my door. Newbies are always welcome with a smile, but they quickly learn not to brag their hollowness around me (and no, I don't snarl at them. .  I rather take the time to educate them on their bragado around me).

when christians and muslims try to ask me why i dont give their religion a look in and i respond with my answers which they claim is blasphemy after which they dont dare approach me anymore, so maybe you have your own points or response like mine which stops people from knocking on your door

Nope, I don't do the 'blasphemy' thing - it may suit you, and that's the best shot I noticed you often pander about on Nairaland. As you can see in the few exchanges we've had in this thread, viaro prefers pointing facts out to you that attest to what atheists are doing that you have had no clues about hitherto.

you hit the nail on the head when you said my brand of atheism is different, i cant care if one becomes atheist or not, but if a christian approaches me and tell me how cant i believe in jesus since he was miraculously born of a virgin, then i have a right to reply that i dont agree he was born of a virgin but rather his mother had intimacy with someone, same way that muslims who now know i am an atheist tell me how can i leave islam after i have tasted it dont i know the quran is an infallible book, then i have a right to respond that i dont agree the quran is infallible and i can produce a book like the quran,

It is okay to simply say that you don't believe in Christ, and you don't have to put up untrue statements simply because you want to annoy your discussants and get them quickly away from your door. That shows weakness rather than calm resolve and resort to intelligence, I'm afraid.

Now as regards your brand of atheism, it may help next time to simply qualify yours and not stick it out in broad terms for 'atheism'. Since you asked me to stop saying "join atheism", you had no clue that other atheists have been very busy actually advertising, soliciting, campaigning, and actually proselytizing religious people to join atheism. Indeed, Dan Barker's "Evangelistic Atheism" was tagged "Leading Believers Astray in Freethought Today", and I wondered why any sane person would be so mischievous trying to lead any other person astray. I don't know how true this is (and please don't go by any rumours), but I hear that when Barker was challenged and called up on that, he promptly removed it from his website - a click there would show 'Page Not Found' (as I just checked to verify).

But in all this, I'm not out to dumb your worldview. .  no, that is not my strain. I like people to have their say and live their lives as long as they don't go out of their way to castigate the worldviews of other people - which is why I'm not rodiculing yours.

thanks for your replies and they are very thought provoking and intelligent

Thanks for your consideration. Cheers.

Traugott:
@viaro: It looks like whoever makes a statement with reference to you , needs to have done his/her homework thoroughly first. Are you a human encyclopaedia or homo google (that which comes after the sapiens) or something?

Yep, I live in a neighbourhood where some rascally atheists have learnt never to approach my door (or any door marked "viaro" or "gwms", lol. We play football when I have the time, but they've learnt to just zip it around me (that doesn't mean I can do anything to minimize their swearing and sneering, hehehe). And nope, I told you before I'm just an ordinary fellow with no extraordinary acclaimed 'scholarship', hehehehe!!

By the way, amebo means "gossip", or at least it closely refers to one that intrudes into a conversation, refusing to mind their business (like I just did, and like you did earlier on)

Oh shooks! I'm outa here! You should've told me by email!! M-e-n. . what's wrong with you?!?

KunleOshob:
@Pilgrim.1
I only stated that I did not say tithing began in mesopotamia" becos of your penchant to grab at trivialities and and make big arguments out of them whilstignoring the weightier matters of the subject being discussed so i made that consession to pull the rug off your legs and get you to disccus the weighteir matters i was emphasizing in that thread. I want to repeat for emphasis that from all the biblical and extra biblical evidence that we have, tithing did indeed start in mesopotamia several centuries before the Jewish civilization and it is of pagan origins, if you have any evidence to the contrary present it here now instead of grabbing at straws and playing with semantics so as not to expose your folly.

Oh please end your career of LYING through your teeth and falling all over yourself. You've shown me the 'real' KunleOshob is a gutless liar and nothing more to add. The day you start telling the truth is the day dinosaurs will come back to Hyde Park!