₦airaland Forum

Good one, Deep Sight. This one actually was the same I had in mind as a basic (not for the 'technically philosophical'):

Deep Sight:
That idea is universal to humanity: a supernatural entity that is responsible for creation.

That works well at the basic level, and one that should not present any problems for the atheist.

You already know what follows, but let me add anyway for those who might be wondering: a supernatural entity that is responsible for creation works well for me because it does not include the Creator (ie., God) as part of that creation. Hence, the question 'who created God' does not arise. But the one who is convinced that it is both necessary and dialectical has the amiable task of pointing us to 'the creator of the Creator' - if he may. Given that, I might also stake out to bite off my wrist!

I accept your statement on "created all that exists. . . what about who created God. . ."

This has been pointed out severally. But without dealing too extensively with that question for now, let me simply state that by the term 'all that exists", i am referring to the finite world, matter, and observable things.

Apt. Well done.

Deep Sight:
So please digest it if you can (i will be surprised if you do) and provide cogent point-by-point rebuttals to each argument (i will commit suicide if you are able to.)

Statement in red: hmmm. Don't you think that's too much of a line to stake out? Lol, kidding.

Anyhow, having tried to read through the thread before commenting, I must say I like the way you started, Deep Sight. Quite logical, and calling the shots straight with no room for games. It didn't surprise me that the dialogue would be stalemated and not survive the first few lines of the first page, though. Even that, coming to the third page leaves a smile on our faces.

However, it may seem that your initial definition of God as Creator (post # might've been intended to simplify things for banom - which is a good thing. Otherwise, if one was to be quite technical and deeply philosophical, then the weaknesses in that definition would have immediately surfaced. As stated there: "That is the best definition we can work with, - a Supernatural Entity that Created all that exists." The clause that may not work so well is 'all that exists'. Of course, even the Creator Himself exists, for He is part of 'all that exists'. The weakness in that definition is what some have tried to exploit by proposing a question: who then created God? Not that the one who asks that question may be interested in seeking an answer (explains why the questioner never ever even attempts to provide an answer about existence in the first place).

I'm not trying to drag us back or put a clog in the progress of the thread. Just wanted to remark that your style is quite appreciated, and your reasoning quite logical. Perhaps one reason why others may not be able to appreciate yours is because they wanted the discourse to turn out into a 'game'.

chukwudi44:
Do you mind telling me any pentecostal church that does not preach mandatory tithing?

Did you say 'any'? Then here's just one example I know of: Calvary Chapel:

[list]As far as giving is concerned, you will not find most Calvary Chapels placing an excessive amount of time on asking people to give financially to the church. Chuck Smith's philosophy is "Where God guides, He provides." Even though Calvary Chapels believe and teach that tithing and giving are a very important part of a believer’s life, people are not made to feel that they must give under compulsion.
http://www.aromaofchrist.com/calvary_chapel.htm [/list]

Am yet to see one at least here in Nigeria where I live

You don't have to judge the Body of Christ or any group of people on the basis of what happens in the small locality where you live. I have made that mistake in the past, and I'm not in a hurry to repeat it.

Zikkyy:
I think from my discussion with Viaro, He/She is not in support of this as well. The part i dont understand is it appears she does like anti-tithers trying to make the tithers see church actions from this perspective. Maybe, Viaro feels its an attempt to make them stop tithing. I might be wrong but thats what i read from some of Viaro's posts.

(the edits are mine, apologies).
Yes, you captured it in a nutshell. It's true that I disapprove of the typical anti-tithing arguments to make all believers completely stop tithing - that is unnecessary and quite unspiritual. That does not mean on the other hand that pro-tithes must make all believers tithe. . or else! Either extremes are to be avoided.

Zikkyy:
Maybe you take life too seriuosly Viaro. Is it worth it? You can still engage in a serious discussion and have fun (enjoy) as well. As long as you are not dont insult or disrespect others. Make everything you do fun and you be a better person.

Nada. . I don't take life too seriously, lol. I was just wondering what I might've done to deserve your lawn tennis grand slam! Don't worry, I'm just recovering - it's got to be fun afterwards.

Zikkyy:
I wish. I am working all weekend. But thanks. have fun yourself

I don't envy you!
_{Look at me, I'm supposed to be on break and dread going back to the office. But enjoy!}

Zikkyy:
Let me clarify. When I said Non-Jews, I meant modern day Christians and not people that lived over hundreds/thousands of years before Christ. What I meant to say was “God did not speak about tithe to Christians either?” Maybe you can direct your comments at this. Ignore what I said earlier as your interpretation differs from what I had in mind. Thanks.

That's okay.

To improve your understanding of my position, i think its best I give you a summary.
1. I don’t attempt to force my belief on others (pro-tithers you might say). In any forum where the issue of tithing is discussed, we all share our views. Persuading a tither to change his/her belief system could result in calamity for the tither. It has to be a personal thing (to tithe or not to tithe). If you ask me Viaro, it’s the other way round. i.e. prosperity (tithe taking the center stage), is being preached by various churches/ministers with such passion,  it begins to feel like they  are on a mission to tithe the world. Tithing was not really an issue in the past (say fifteen years ago).
2. I don’t and never had issues with people that chose to give a percentage of their earnings to the church out of personal convictions and believes there is a benefit for doing this. It’s their money.
3. I don’t have issues with people inspired by the fact that even Abraham tithed also chose to give a % of their earnings to the church. It’s their money.
4. I will disagree when the other party attempts to either convince me to tithe or convince me of the benefits by referring to the Mosaic Law as justification cos its not true.
5. I will comment/disagree with any church or minister that preaches the need for tithing based on the “irrelevant” Mosaic Law cos it to fraud. It’s used to compel members to tithe.

That's fine with me, and your position is noted and respected.

From your posts, I can infer the following;

1. You don’t agree with church members being sweet-talked, compelled or put in a state of fear by the minister in an attempt to convince tithing.
2. You believe tithing should be based on personal conviction (and not because Moses told the Israelite to render a tenth of their farm produce to the Levites)

That's just about it, thank you.

The only aspect I can I cannot easily infer from your post is if I would reap benefits (financial, spiritual, health e.t.c) that ordinarily will not accrue to me as a non-tither. Apart from for this, I can say that if my deductions are correct, then there is no basis for us to be arguing.

That's okay, and indeed there should be no basis for the long discourse (although quite an interesting dialogue). As earlier, I consider the great divide between anti-tithers and pro-tithers quite unnecessary, which was why my earlier statement that 'it does not matter to me one way or another what anyone does or argues about the subject, both anti-tithers or tithers alike'. No single argument (whether anti-tithing or pro-tithing) on this subject holds sway as law for the Body of Christ.

chukwudi44:
The act is is there any pentecostal church that preaches this version of tithing ?,they all insist on a percentage of 10 and a mandatory obligation of all members this is what I am preaching against

That is quite sensible - and there was no need for the initial misrepresentations and frayed nerves. I may not agree with you that 'ALL' Pentecostal Churches preach a mandatory 10%, though. However, I understand what you are preaching against; but that is not the same thing as condemning tithe completely altogether.

Zikkyy:
I don’t understand.

I meant to say: how is it that most people who see themselves as anti-tithers are often asking questions but not willing to oblige answers themselves? That was not directed at you personally, and I should have set it in a different paragraph.

If all pro-tithers agree that materialism is not an issue we will not be having this discussion.

ALL pro-tithers? We both know for a fact (I assume) that nobody ever agrees on any single issue! I know many, many anti-tithers who hardly agree on what they seem to chorus; so I can well understand that not all 'pro-tithers' are agreed on this materialism. I do know, however, that some who preach tithes to their congregations are not about materialism (Assemblies of God and some of the Anglican Churches). For these two examples, materialism is not an issue in the clauses of their tithes.

I guess my discussion with you has been based on the general perception of tithing by pro-tithing community. It appears your expectations was i stick to your personal views only. My apologies.

Lol, that's not a problem. While my personal views are not the only thing to see here, I plead to not be tarred with the brush of the 'general perception' that many people hold, just as I've made clear that I don't generalise on the various views that anti-tithers hold. (subscript: again I should mention that I'm not casting you in the typical 'anti-tithing' mould).

You can refer to my response above here. It forms the basis for my quote.
We are all aware that Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils of war to Melchizedek. It’s been agreed that the practice of given a tenth was before the time of Moses. But do we have complete information about this practice?

Having 'complete information' was not the basis of my question. You cannot base Abraham's tithes upon the Mosaic Law that was not even existing in his day! That was why I querried your assumption of trying to see the believer's tithing as "complying with the mosaic Law on tithing".

Maybe you can answer this; what then is the basis of the tithing practice in our churches today?

I don't know, for I can be sure that not every Church preaches tithes on the basis of the Mosaic Law. Some do, others do not.

What is the justification provided by Ministers and tithers for tithing?

Same answer as above. It would be futile for anyone (including yourself) to generalise here, since we don't know for a fact that ALL ministers are clones of one another. It is just about the same error to make generalisations about all anti-tithing theologians in their arguments. Again, generalisations are not helpful here.

Except you want to deceive yourself Viaro, we all know our practice today is drawn from the Mosaic law on tithing.

That's not my view, thank you. I don't think you can be that assuming, and no - I have shown you that Abraham's tithes are not drawn from the Mosaic law. Yes, there are some pastors I've heard who point to Abraham's example; they do not make people bend back to the literalism of the Mosaic Law. So if you want to deceive yourself on that note, you're free to keep it to yourself as I don't share in such misplaced generalisations.

Whats this all about? I don’t understand this as well. Kindly help clarify. Thanks

How do we make Abraham's tithe (as an example) to comply with something that came long after he was dead - that was the point in my quote there.

Maybe i should repeat your quote one more time below.

God didn't speak about tithes to those who bear no concerns about His Kingdom;

and my response below

And God did not speak about tithes to non Jews either.

In which case, maybe I should then expound on my question which you haven't answered as yet. Abraham was NOT a Jew when he gave tithes to Melchizedek. Please go and find out the meaning of a 'Jew' before assuming that just because God didn't speak to any Gentile about tithing, therefore. . . what?

By that, I don't mean to slight you - no, not at all. But I usually start out by asking people a simple question: "Was Abraham a JEW when he tithed to Melchizedek?" as a response to the objections of making tithes rigidly compliant with the Mosaic Law. Let me explain further:

We cannot argue Biblical tithes in all its ramifications on the basis of the Mosaic Law - that would make the Law the 'origin' of tithes, which is not true. The Law only incorporated it; and it did so, in the absolute recognition that it does not supercede what Abraham did in giving tithes to Melchizedek. If the Law supercedes all other forms of tithes that we read of in the Bible, then the Law indeed would have been greater than Melchizedek! Since that is not the case, this was why those (the Levites) who had a commandment to receive tithes of their brethren Israel (Heb. 7:5) are said to also have paid tithes IN ABRAHAM (Heb. 7:9). Why? Because 'without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better' (Heb. 7:7). The Law was not the 'better', and that being so, it cannot supercede Melchizedek. It is in this same instance that we can understand what Jacob was pointing to in his statement about giving a tithe to God (Gen. 28:22), without having to wait for a Mosaic Law on tithing.

In all three instances (Abraham, Jacob and Levi), their tithes were not made in compliance with the Law that did not even then exist! None of these scenarios point to a 'Jewish tithe', nor are we to assume that tithes are founded on the basis of Judaism. That was why I had teasingly asked you (as I usually did in other fora) this question: "Was Abraham a JEW when he tithed to Melchizedek?" Since Abraham was not a Jew when that tithing occured, your inference that 'God did not speak about tithes to non Jews either' is very weak and unsustainable!

When people assert that God did not speak about tithes to non-Jews, I often ask them to think about Abraham as a starting point: surely, Abraham was not a 'Jew' when Genesis 14:20 occured. Melchizedek was NOT a Jew either! If we're going to be honest, Melchizedek was a GENTILE! What do we then do with their own examples - ignore them? On what basis?

I am still trying to figure out how my comment justifies the kind of response i am getting from you.

My apologies, I did not mean to be read in any other way than amicable. At least, teasings aside, I've taken time to now expound a bit more on the issue of why I hinted that God didn't speak about tithes to those who bear no concerns about His Kingdom. That was not directed at you to derogate your person; but please bear my explanation above in mind.

Viaro, can you tell me where in the bible;
1. God told gentiles to tithe?
2. God specifies how Gentiles should tithe?
3. How Abrahams tithe to Melchizedek can be related to God message to Gentiles about tithing

I think my explanations above may be sufficient for the moment. If you need me to make more explications, I would be glad to do so. Let it suffice, however, that while I'm not given to assertive arguments on either side (pro-tithers or anti-tithers), I still don't think that the typical arguments that many anti-tithers present have any substance to them.

Once again, let me clarify that this is not about the origin of tithe; it is about the modern day tithing practice.  It obvious tithing by Abraham is used as an escape route to justify the reasoning for tithing.

I could care less what anyone wants to make of it. In just the same way, I could quip that the the bold in yours is a copout as well. I think people can allow others to hold their convictions without trying to shout them to oblivion. For most people, Abraham's tithes hold applicable principles for them - and that's good: I've heard very sound teachings on that, and very persuading, I might add. But for someone to just take a biased stand and write off other believers the way you did is quite misguided and far too assuming.

What i hear from pro-tithers is that even Abraham paid tithe. If you claim your tithing is based on the fact that Abraham tithed, I don’t see how we can relate our current practice to a practice we know next to nothing about.

Perhaps so. You see it the way you do probably because you're waiting to see "injunctions", 'commandments', 'laws', etc. given to Gentiles and Christians to tithe (remember, I am assuming - that is why I said 'probably'). Otherwise, I don't see where the arguments arises because others find principles for what they do on the basis of what Abraham exemplified.

Can we confirm that Abraham was paying a tenth of his income periodically (monthly, annual, weekly e.t.c) to any temple?

Can we confirm that Abraham was paying a tenth of his income periodically for Melchizedek upkeep?

Can we confirm that God told Abraham to pay a tenth of his income as there are certain rewards attached?

Can we confirm that Abraham tithed before and subsequent to giving a tenth of the spoils of war to Melchizedek?

If we have to look again at the body of our discussions, you'd immediately see your questions for what they are: non-essentials. The reason for that is because they project the idea of what tithes mean to the enquirer, otherwise I fail to see the raison d'etre for those questions.

However, one thing is clear: God's Word calls the very act of Abraham a TITHES in both the Old Testament (Gen. 14:20) and the New Testament (Hebrews 7:6). Whether it was done periodically, from his income, before or subsequent to anything, the presence of any temple, for Melchizedek's upkeep, etc., etc., etc., . . all those are non-issues in so far as the Bible calls it TITHES. Does it lose its value as tithes if none of those things are found in the narratives? Surely you can't make the vacant assumption that what Abraham gave was called 'tithes' on the basis of "confirming" that it was for Melchizedek's upkeep or because there was a temple!

Yes, I know you used those as "examples" ; but for me, those examples in question are misplaced - basically because they ignore the fact Abraham's tithes are not based on any of those assumptions in order to be Biblically called TITHES.

Even if we accept that modern day tithing is based on Abrahams act, is that the practice today?  Maybe you should consider going to war so you can pay your tithe out of the spoils of war. IRAQ or Afghanistan would not be a bad place to start.

Yea. . . and all the yada yada I've heard thereto. I could also bring up a whole lot of issues in Abraham's life that Christians base their faith on that are just too shameful to read! I wanted a discourse, but from that last note, it does not show me you're serious about engaging. If you poke fun at tithing like that, what is stopping pro-tithers from shaming anti-tithers with far more sinister remarks?

Anyways, if you're looking for substance, I'd be glad to offer them. Yes, we could jab each other with some funny lines, but not at the risk of misguided generalisations. Do have a great weekend.

Zikkyy, you would have to forgive me if my reply is going to be somewhat detailed. This is because your rejoinders seem to have made several oversights and confused my position, whereupon I would have to make several reminders and repetitions for clarification. So bear with me.

Zikkyy:
That’s not the way I see it, it’s the way the way pro-tithers see it. Pro-tithers believe there is a special reward for tithing. They don’t see it any other way. So please take your comments to the pro-tithing community.

This is hugely mistaking issues all the more. I don't think that attitude as highlighted helps to resolve anything in this discussion. At the risk of repeating myself, let me remind you: it does not matter to me one way or another what anyone does or argues about the subject, both anti-tithers or tithers alike. I said that several times already. But if you're given to a necessary divide by making such comments, how do you help the discourse? I should as well begin to make akin statements of 'take this and that to the anti-tithing community', no?

Anyhow, anti-tithers as well as pro-tithers believe whatever they would like to believe - and all are welcome to disagree on issues. For me, no single argument holds sway over the Body of Christ on this issue. If the many pro-tithers you've come across make you believe such generalizations of 'special rewards' are the norm, let me remind you: I already stated repeatedly that such is not my view. "Blessings" are not limited to material benefits one way or the other. For me, tithing or giving or anything else anyone may claim are not formulaic - that is why you won't find me making plastic statements or rigid assertions.

Many people have found some blessing for tithing; others may not have - that is just about the same thing as your praying to get yourself out of a situation, while that same praying did NOT at any time resolve other people's difficulties. I'm restating these issues to make you understand I don't generalize issues for anyone. That is why I feel your attitude is rather amusing with that repetitive 'take this to the tithing community'. That doesn't help anyone.

Let’s take Tonye-t recent increase as a case study. (I guess I will have to apologize later for this). Tonye-t recently got an increase at work and he is being considered as a branch head. He claims this was as a result of his tithing. Now my question is this; are non-tithers not entitled to increases or promotion in the workplace? If they are, then what is the basis for it? I hope this helps in understanding what I meant by “same blessings”

I get your vibes, and yes I respect Tonye-t's claims. The one thing I might say here is that tithing in all its revelations in Scripture is not made for only that kind of blessing. An example? I often remember Abraham's and Levi's tithes to Melchizedek - those were not made in reference to increase, promotion, or material benefit. Yes, Tonye-t's example is a good one and we cannot fault it. That was his experience from tithing; and there are many who have such experiences.

However, others who give tithes do so for various other reasons; and I pointed this out earlier as well: 'I know of some who are not doing badly, and yet they heard the call to tithe - they did, regardless of what anyone argued to the contrary. They did so, not because they were looking for multi-digit accounts.'

The problem with us is that we often see things in a linear lane - as if there's just only one way to interprete any subject in our lives. Therefore if any other interpretations come up, we are immediately turned off! That is not necessarily the way things work out in reality; and certainly not the way we should read them. Let me remind you again of what I earlier stated in this regard:

(a) "the issue of tithing for me is not a formula - it was not given in Scripture
as a plastic, one-lane traffic that must be interpreted in one way and only
that one way!" (post #436)

(b) "I think the problem here is that some of us are strung up on the idea that
to give is to receive - that is formulaic, and that is not what I hold." (#436)

Perhaps it would be easier to keep these things in mind and understand my position better, than try to lump me up broadly with either of the opposing parties of pro-tithers and anti-tithers. Some may not be convinced about tithing, good for them (I don't call them 'anti-tithers', just non-tithers). But the anti-tithers' arguments are not law for those who are convinced about tithing. The sad divide in the Body of Christ stems from the fact that each one of us is trying to push our own agenda to make it law for others to live by - and after decades of the heat, how has it helped us as Christians?

Please provide examples from the scriptures on how people were led by the spirit and tithed to get themselves out of a difficult situation. Testimonies of other people are what they tell us. We cannot validate.

Please don't cut corners there, lol. If you're not going to take their testimonies, then I should have no reason to accept that you prayed to get yourself out of any problem. In the same way that your own testimony or attestations are to be taken for it, so you should be willing to acknowledge those that other believers hold.

However, please keep the question in context as I have stated earlier: this was what I was pointing to -

'Would you like to see some references in Scripture where the poor can give of what they have even though it is hardly enough for them, and yet they are declared blessed far above others who seemed to be affluent?' [post #436]

If that resonates with you, then I can go ahead and show you several examples AND the testimonies of other people ('other people' because I don't want to push my own to the fore). It was not just on tithes I had obliged to exemplify, and you can see this in the highlight above. Yes, I could share with you if that resonates with you.

Finally, we have agreed that we cannot rely on what we hear from others. We can only speak for ourselves. Thanks Viaro.

Lol, I asked you about what is wrong with others telling you about their own experiences when you could find the platform to tell yours? Unless you're saying that your attestation cannot be relied upon, I don't see how that scores on the 'agreement' you proposed.

True, I agree. So also with tithing, there are many tithers with un-resolved difficulties.

Yes.

smoothman:
Thanks Broda.
But one thing you didnt answer me is this, does he have the ability of getting me a working permit in the company he is working in?

See here:  https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-338305.0.html#msg4747337

He have a good position there and have the ability to fix me a job in the same company, Do you still believe that is never possible to get a working permit as long as am on visiting Visa?

Not impossible; but difficult.

smoothman:
Viaro@

Lets forget about the Price, Lets talk about the Visa and the backup documents will be rendered to me,
Please do help me ask people around you, Is it possible for him to get me the working Permit if he have a good position in the company where he is working
Also do you have doubt that he will be able to do what he had promised?
Do tell me from a brotherly Mind

Okay, I'm sorry about the repetition on the price - I won't highlight that again. Promise.

The documents: yes, I will find out the updated info and see if I can send you details. How about that?

Then, I don't doubt that your relative is capable of doing what he promised. However, the reason I expressed a bit of concerns there was because things don't work out the way you see them. Like I said, it would be difficult (not impossible) for him to get you a work permit once you are there. It is difficult to do so on a visa that is just for one month, and a visa for visit/tourism.

Thirdly, is it possible for someone in a good company position to get a work permit for you? Yes, it is possible - BUT not the way you are thinking. A good position in a company is not enough to get any document; because if that is the case, then with a good position the same person could have got you a visa. The work permit is stamped in your visa (at least, in the UK it is in the same visa that is called 'Leave of Entry').

But don't be discouraged - take the above as tentative (that is, not the final gist). I have to take time and source out more useful info and then get back to you. Meanwhile, let me know if there are other questions you wish to know about, so that I can find out more during my sourcing.

chukwudi44:
@zikky

Pilgrim 1 knows fully the problem at hand but is merely laying to the galery,she is obviously an accomplice in this whole scam.

1)first she wil say hat tihing is not compulsory,next she goes ahead to criticize people who condemn criminals like Mathew Ashimolowo and Creflo Dollar ,who fleece their embers of their hard earned incomes by telling them that there are cursed if there don't pay tithe since there are robbing God.

Nobody has said people should not financially assist their churches ,but criminals have latched on the obsolete mosaic law of tithing to steal billions of dollars worth of money from their ignoarnt and hypnotised congregations,this is what we are fighting.Pilgrim 1 knows this but has simply chosen to be playing pranks ,she is a member of this criminal cartel that has been using the bible to rob innocent victims of their hard earned money in the name of tithes.


The crux of this whole matter is[b] must[/b] christians pay 10% of their incomes to their churches in The name of tithes
The answer can either be YES or NO there is nothing like sitting on the fence,any one who sits on the fence is a criminal

Lol, perhaps you had a serious malady with pilgrim and that is why you're hell bent on making me into her. Good sport. Anyhow, for your info, I have not been sitting on the fence - and just incase you don't know (you hardly know anything anyways), I have not made paying any percentage a "MUST". Please go and read through my discussions with others; and if you are too challenged to reason, no need misrepresenting anybody here. Besides, you haven't advanced beyond your complaining - that sounds rather childish. If the way I lay your "confirmation" of Ernest L. Martin's tales to waste is giving you nightmares, that's okay - it just teaches you to stop recycling the fictitious tales of "Christian ministers" who add shame to their anti-tithing arguments to easily fool chaps like you. For all that, please leave that sad blot aside and get done with it. I have not sat on the fence, nor did I make paying anything to anyone a "MUST" - unless you just have not bothered to see that I was the one who has been discussing that our giving is neither a "requirement" nor a "demand".

If you have anything more sensible to say, it would be great to read. If not, please do something else.

smoothman:
OAM4J@
Accroding to what he told me before, He applied for a Letter Of Invitation for me from Immigration over there in Austria, they gave him the Form which he filled his part and sent me my part, But on the confirmation cert which they are supposed to send to me, they said that they dont accept Travellers travelling with a Virgin Passport,
so he then told me to go and apply for a visa through an Agent, And when my Visa is out, I will book a flight and on arrival, he will pick me up and we both will go to the company were he works and find me a job there, With that i will apply for a Working Permit, And while working i can then go for other backing up documents on my residence,

But even at such a fee/price (500k), it is hugely unreasonable!
Anyhow, I don't think applying through an agent is going to make any difference IF the Embassy already has your profile on their database. Say I was refused in the first application as "Viaro Viaro" (with my picture in pasport), would it make any difference paying an agent 500k to fix me a visa of just ONE MONTH?

What I'm seeing here is a simple matter, and it doesn't matter that you've been refused once. The Austrian vignette is a Schengen visa - which means that you can use the same visa to travel around the Schengen states in Europe. So, if Austria is showing you a narrow passage, my advice is to look elsewhere. Build up your profile (bank account, insurance, etc - where those apply), and look to places like Finland. Find out about the Schengen instead of putting all your eggs in one basket. Just a thought.

European:
Why dont you go to kenya or south africa.

dont come to europe, you are not wanted, we have enough of you africans sailing on boats trying to get here illegaly.

The bold: that's not a sensible thing to say. You can't say that someone is "not wanted". We often forget that Europeans plundered African treasures to make themselves what they are today. There are legitimate means that people can apply through which to get to Europe; people have enough worries with the sailing-boats mentality already!

funsosweet:
Viaro,
I am going for a training and the date was booked by our customer. I just got info and ticket and hotel reservation etc. They told me interview is Monday.
I also learnt that it is pretty difficult for an unmarried man to get visa easily. How true is it?? I was in germany last year, for personal purpose (business though) Now my company is sponsoring this one to Austria.

Please pardon me - I didn't realise that was the case. I wish I'd seen this much earlier, because right after I replied yours, I called my girlfriend if she knew how to get you the application forms (she once helped someone to process a visa from Nigeria). Unfortunately, she said that the only info she had off the top of her head was that applicants are to apply in person at the Abuja office. I guess that wasn't much help, mate. . sorry.

As regards the second question, all the sources I tried said that is not true. I don't know firsthand; but a few said that it had nothing to do with whether or not one is married, as long as the requirements are met and there are no loop holes for the Embassy to exploit in the belief that the application is not genuine. This should not dampen your spirits; I shall keep sourcing to see if there's a way to get the application forms to you (that is, if promise2 had not sent it over by then). I wish you the very best and all confidence.

Zikkyy:
I agree with you. Its not just about tithe. But for now tithe is the big money takings. Other forms of giving are not as abused as the act of tithing. maybe its because its easier to convince people to tithe due to the perceived "returns" to be derived.

Glad we can agree there. But please do a bit of research for yourself. Maybe in your part of the world, that statement holds true. However, in the many places I've been to, tithes are not the big scamming formula - there are other things BIGGER than tithes that leave the saints damamged! The real problem is that many people assume that tithes are the biggest issues that are easy to exploit - that is what they think; but that is not what is factual.

Zikkyy:
If i tell you i was led by the Holy Spirit to buy my MOG the 2010 Range Rover SUV, i honestly dont know how you are going to validate that statement. Its what i tell you, as your evaluation of my person can be wrong. Maybe you have some special powers i am not aware of.

There's always a basis for 'validating' what anyone would claim under the leading of the Holy Spirit. If your example is one that addresses this one for you, I don't have any worries thereto. The question is that your own conviction does not become a law to all believers.

No i am not wrong. But i let this go because you relied on the names i gave as examples of men "blessed" with wealth to respond. I dont even know if they tithers or non-tithers, christians or non christians. They have money which is what most tithers seek, hence the reasoning for citing these names. Also, these people are not the basis for my saying non-tithers also receives similar blessings as tithers.

I'm also willing to let it go - which was my point exactly that wild statements are not helpful on this topic.

I agree i have done some bit of generalizing here. But i will say i was refering to whatever reward (blessing) a tither might receive. I dont tithe so dont have the details, so its safer for me to generalize. Maybe if you tell me what these rewards are then i can be more specific. Being a tither, you must have been receiving these rewards  

You would have to agree along the way that generalizations in this regard are not helpful - especially when you stand on the other side and trying to remotely sense what others are doing. That was why I repeatedly asked you what blessings you were referring to, seeing that you were inclined to re-state it several times. For my part, I've clearly said that I don't think the blessings attached to our giving (whatever we want to call it) are limited to just material wealth - they go beyond that, remember?

I meant tithers are not "singled" out and given special blessings for tithing (financial or otherwise).  As a tither i am sure you have received blessings that some non-tithing christians receive by simply praying.

Your assumptions sound like you already know what those blessings are, and therefore you would conclude that others have obtained the same blessings by just praying. You again, my dear guy, are mixing up issues terribly. Let me wrap this up for you so we don't keep bantering back and forth: the issue of tithing for me is not a formula - it was not given in Scripture as a plastic, one-lane traffic that must be interpreted in one way and only that one way! That is the huge mistake anti-tithers make and repeatedly bring up in discussions. If that is how you see it, I don't have any quizzes about that; and I would oblige you a further discourse on that point if you may - because I have noted repeatedly that it is no big deal to me personally, even though it may be so for anti-tithers and tithers alike.

My position is that we get our blessings not because we give a particular percentage of our income to the church. It goes beyond that. To better answer your question maybe you can help with some examples of rewards received by tithers (being a tither yourself).

Yes, I tithe. Do I get blessed thereto? Yes. So, if it goes beyond that, please enunciate - then I can adduce from there how you've been misconstruing issues for yourself.

That aside, what blessings are you referring to? You keep making this blanket statement that we get our blessings, not because we give a particular percentage of our income to the church. So, what blessings are you referring to; and how do you get "the same blessing" regardless of whether or not you do what others are doing? It sounds like one can just sit down with folded arms, closed eyes, mutter some formula - and woosh! the "same blessings" are thereby obtained. Please, I would like to know what you mean by the same blessings, then I shall go on and enunciate other types of blessings in context and see if they apply. You cannot just sit there and make assumptions every time, and then turn round and ask me to answer your own roll-call for you. It doesn't work that way. You don't tithe - good; but at the same time you know that as a non-tither you're getting the "same blessings" as tithers. My simple question is: please tell me what you mean by "the same blessings" and the we shall compare notes. I hope I'm not asking too much?

or maybe i can use your statement about people "led by the spirit to tithe" as a means of getting themselves out of difficult situations.

If you want examples, I can discuss further - both from Scripture, and in the testimonies of other people. I said so before, and I'm inviting you again. Would you like to see some references in Scripture where the poor can give of what they have even though it is hardly enough for them, and yet they are declared blessed far above others who seemed to be affluent? That was the example I had in mind; there are others. If you're still wondering about this, I'd be glad to show you.

I dont have details on the nature of difficulty in your example, but there are also non-tithers who find themselves in similar situations or even worse.

I don't contest that; but the question that begs answering is what they are doing about it. It is okay if they do nothing and are still blessed - I don't doubt that. But their anti-tithing arguments are hardly the basis for others to live their lives.

Some have gotten out of these by simply going down on their knees and praying.

Conjecture - or you want me to flag the question of "validation" as well? If you can make statements like this, what is wrong with others also telling you that they knew for a fact that the Holy Spirit asked them to tithe specifically for something? I think the problem here is that some of us are strung up on the idea that to give is to receive - that is formulaic, and that is not what I hold. I know of some who are not doing badly, and yet they heard the call to tithe - they did, regardless of what anyone argued to the contrary. They did so, not because they were looking for multi-digit accounts, to borrow a familiar phrase from you.

Yours truly "Zikkyy" being a very good example.

Good, Zikkyy, good. You know, of course, that is not a formula for all believers - there are indeed many who have done that same thing, and they didn't get their problems solved that way.

Tithers dont find themselves in situations exclusive to them and their breakthrough is not exclusive either. You can provide examples of these special/exclusive rewards if you have any (cos i dont know of any) so we can compare notes.

Read above what I already stated - I cannot answer your own roll-calls. You have assumed already that you know non-tithers who get the same blessings, and that being so it would be nice for you to tell us what these "blessings" are. I ahve asked that same question several times, and am asking again. Not that I don't have answers or anything to share; but I just wonder that anti-tithers are always in the business of asking other people to do what they themselves should have done.

Secondly, itis rather funny that you're attaching tithes and 'breakthrough'  in such a manner. Huh? Lol. . how different is that from what we already discussed? Need I repeat myself one more time amongst many: "materialism" is not my focus on this issue or any other aspect of our giving. I already pointed out that if materialism is what we should be looking for, then other people may use other means that do not mention tithes - such as Luke 6:38 - to the same effect of what we complain against. Just out of curiosity: why do you seem to be making that same mistake repeatedly?

Other than the heavens opening up and the tither being washed away in flood of blessing (only God knows where) for complying with the mosaic law on tithing, I cant think of anything else the tither will take out from the scriptures. Is there anything else he is seeing that am blinded to? please help out as i dont want to be left out.

Dear Zikkyy, let me offer this little tip: tithing was not given in Scripture to "comply" with the Law of Moses! Repeat that statement until it sinks in. The moment you make that huge mistake, nothing else would be meaningful to you in this discussion. Let me ask you: was Abraham's tithing to Melchizedek taught in Scripture as "complying with the mosaic Law on tithing"? Just start from there. Why do Christians like to bend everything back to the Law of Moses?   M-e-n! Set your thinking free from such linear strains - that is not helpful at all.

And God did not speak about tithes to non Jews either.

Hahaha! Zikky, you're such a spot! I don't know how many times I heard that from others; but let me give you my typical answer. It is a question, actually:

            Was Abraham a JEW when he tithed to Melchizedek?

M-e-n! I never for once thought you'd fall into that trap!  Brodaly, please. .  release your mind from that idea and understand that TITHES are not restricted to whether you're in Jerusalem or Jericho! You don't have to check whether or not you're a Jew before considering the issue of tithing!

funsosweet:
I need austrian embassy (Nigerian) website where I can download visa application form. It's urgent pls. Interview is Monday.

Just curious. Is that the normal proceedure? How do you get an interview when you have not filled in an application? If you're in Abuja, you could obtain application forms from their Consulate:
Austria Embassy , Nigeria Plot 9, Usuma Street, Maitama - Abuja.

Zikkyy:
For e.g. We can rely on the content of the Holy Bible. Agreed our interpretations might differ, but we have the written (& authentic) words to base our discussions on.

It is on that same basis that we can validate the speaking of the Holy Spirit to any believer.

So, are you saying that weath should not be considered a blessing? What i am trying to say here is that non tithers still get to reap that same reward that tithers claim to receive. So, the question is this

First, no - I did not state that wealth should not be considered a blessing; rather, wealth is not the "only" or primary blessing a believer could obtain. Second, you're absolutely wrong to infer that statement in bold, because I was pointing to the examples you gave earlier. The fact stands that blessings for tithers are not conferred upon those who do not concern themselves with God's Kingdom. If you advise otherwise, please feel free to show the same - using the very examples of the names you listed.

do we necessarily have to tithe to receive that blessing? i.e was the blessing as a result of our tithing? (becuase non tithers also benefits),

No, we do not "necessarily" have to tithe to be blessed; but if a believer wants to be blessed in context of what he has seen in Scripture on the subject, then he should apply its principles thereto. When you say "non tithers also benefit", what exactly do you mean?

or was the blessing simply because we have lived our live in a way that the Almighty approved of.

What blessing are you referring to, Zikkyy? I hope we are not generalizing issues and blurring the distinctions?

My position is this, if we all get to receive similar blessings, the basis for getting blessed goes beyond just tithing or not tithing.

I understand your position; but what blessings did you mean by "similar blessings"? Please keep in mind that I'm still commenting on the part you quoted from mine: "God didn't speak about tithes to those who bear no concerns about His Kingdom; so the idea that they "get their blessings" is a misconstruction" - that is what I would have you bear in mind when you refer to "similar blessings". And that is why I keep asking what you're on about. Generalizations here are not quite helpful.

Good. I am happy to note you added "other forms of giving and offerings". It goes beyond just tithing. Please take this info to the pro-tithing community. I guess they will listen to you. They take you as one of their own.

Lol, I don't know if anyone takes me as "one of their own" - whether anti-this or pro-that. As I've tried to maintain, 'big deal if it matters to anti-tithers or tithers alike. But if we're so caught up with what terminologies to use, it may take us a while to realize all these arguments are futile indeed.' So, for me really, it is not a matter of whatever anyone wants to call it - tithe, offerings, freewill specials, etc. I don't think the divide in the Body of Christ on this subject is helpful.

I like this Viaro. This has always been my position. Based on my various interactions with pro-tithers, i would suggest you take the issue of the Limo to them (they have the good life in mind when they are dropping that tithe). The act of tithing or any other form of giving should not be seen as a capital market investment. Also take this info to the pro-tithing community. But i am sure the MOGs/Ministers will  not be happy with you as it will result in material decrease in tithe collections

Lol, I get you bro. I actually have been a thorn in some people's flesh from both parties when I tried reasoning with them. The point is not just about tithes, but as highlighted above, it's not just about tithes - there are abuses coming from other forms of giving as well. For us Christians to just single out tithes for a life-long arguments is doing us no good whatsoever.

I have been wondering why the Holy Spirit will select christians to advise on tithing? or does this mean these are the people recognised by the Almighty as pleasing in his sight. What happens to other christians yet to receive "advise to tithe" and as a result not tithing? Me i am afraid ooooooh. It means there is problem if this is true.

Relax, Zikkyy - there's nothing to be afraid of, lol. It is not as if the Holy Spirit "selects" certain Christians in rejection of others. He does not violate our wills - and since our giving is not compelled nor required in a statutory way, He is free to act according to His will. It is not just the claim that someone makes about being led to tithe; but I've actually witnessed many people who were given a word from the Spirit to tithe in their difficult moments - and when they did, they found Him true to His word to them to get them through their difficulties. This may be beyond some of us to grasp, but I could share more if needed - both from Scripture and their testimonies.

When i made the statement about the change of name, i was only trying to  take away some seriousness from the thread. But after seeing your very long response, i will say that it does require a change of name if the tithing community keep trying to justify tithing by reference to a totally unrelated & unnecessary (for christians) practice under the mosaic law. i.e tithing=malachi 3=compliance=food in Gods house=swimming in a river of cash.

That still does not solve the problem - and that was why I got serious in my reply. There are also many "totally unrelated & unnecessary" OT verses quoted in the NT that have absolutely nothing to do with the subjects being discussed. Earlier, I've made reference to Christian marriages - but nobody likes to look at this issue squarely. I don't see what sense it makes that we should stop using a certain word just because some people are abusing it. The Name of Christ Himself has been abused - should we therefore stop using His Name just because of those abuses?

There is no correlation  between what is practiced now and what the jews practiced. It quite misleading and a lot of tithers today dont really know why they are tithing.

It may be argued either way - many tithers and anti-tithers have no clue what they are trying to argue; that is why for me, it is a totally useless argument to take one side or the other, drop tithes for 'freewill offerings', or argue about correlations here and there, while there are far more important issues in our faith to occupy us. If we argue the way of correlation, we would sadly find that such linear thinking would remove half of our Christianity before our very eyes. What do we do then?

Eggyloo:
A friend of mine(BSc Holder) that stays close to Ogun State has been called to resume work in a company on the Island. Salary is between 31,000 and 37,000.

Just curious. How much is a good start worth in any job in Nigeria?

Hahaha! C'mon guys. . that couldn't be Nigeria's incumbent presido!
I mean, there are so many 'things' missing around the drama!
But m-e-n! it sure was super-fine piece of comedy to watch!

Zikkyy:
I dont understand what you mean by "DEMAND" above. Maybe you can help me with some clarifications. Thanks.

The part, I assume, that you may be referring to is this:

It does not have to be "required" before you see it as a DEMAND. Perhaps if we learn to refrain from these confusing connotations, then we shall be able to better appreciate the aspects we are missing in all this.

Let me outline them:

1. I don't think our giving should be a requirement. If some of us are waiting to see it as a "requirement", then the necessary question is: what does it fulfill as a 'requirement' in regards to anybody's salvation - OT and NT?

2. I also don't see our giving as a matter of "DEMAND" either. For someone to see it as a "requirement" in one way or another would necessarily bring about the idea of DEMAND. That is not what I understand about the subject of our giving.

3. But someone may ask: do you mean to tell me that there are no "commandments" about our giving? My answer is yes, there are indeed commandments about our giving in both the OT and NT. For one thing, the Levites had a commandment to take tithes of Israel their brethren (Heb. 7:5); and we as Christians should understand that the Lord has commanded us to give in the same way to those who preach the Gospel (1 Cor. 9:14) - but these do not amount to either "requirements" or "demands".

Let me take up point #3.
Not many Christians are aware that in the NT, the Lord Jesus actually COMMANDED that those who preach the Gospel should live from their calling; but that is essentially what that verse states. Here is how the ESV renders it: "In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel." Although He "commanded" (or "ordained", KJV) it so, He did not make it a "requirement" nor did He "demand" it. In other words,

(a) "required" does not mean "demand" in this regard
(b) "command" does not mean "required" or "demand"

If that verse were saying that our supporting Christian ministers is to be regarded as a DEMAND or a REQUIREMENT, then even the con artists would have been absolutely correct and the rest of us should zip up and thank heavens for it! But that is not the case, thank heavens! It is for this reason that the apostle Paul declares in verse 15 that:

'I have used none of these things:
neither have I written these things,
that it should be so done unto me'

Paul made it clear that he was free from the idea of "demanding" anything from Christians - it was not a "requirement" even though the Lord 'commanded' that such should be observed. How then can the minister live or be sustained if we don't see it as something to be demanded or required? Among the several things he could do, the one thing he ought not to do is preaching 'giving' for his own personal, self-centered gain (1 Tim. 6:5). If he is a minister who understands his or her calling, then their dependence on God and the quality of their ministry will speak on their behalf - the recipients would be moved to freely give of their own accord.

I hope this helps.

Hi Zikkyy,

Zikkyy:
There is that possibility that it is the demonic spirit of MOG that is speaking to the so called "believers" (being so gullible). Just a thought.

There is indeed a "possibility"; but the way you crafted your presupposition on that is not what I had in mind.

I dont know and cannot speak for them. I dont think you can either. You can only speak for yourself. So lets stick to what we can validate.

True, we may speak in terms of what we know, not what we have no clues about - and what I held in that regard is what I have verified on many occasions - if we are to stick to 'what we can validate'. But there again, WHAT can anyone truly "validate"? Arguments on either side of the anti-this and pro-that? The arguments are mere theorizing which can easily be countered one way or another.

My understanding of the above is that there is a special blessing attached to tithing. People get their blessings whether they tithe or dont tithe, be you Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Carlos Slims, Aliko Dangote, Femi Otedola, Jim Ovia or even Erastus Akingbola.

Lol, that is simply mischievous, sorry. Where do all the names you mentioned get their blessings from when some of them are not known to be Christians anyway? God didn't speak about tithes to those who bear no concerns about His Kingdom; so the idea that they "get their blessings" is a misconstruction.

And if you're wondering, I happen to be one of those who knows there are blessings attached to tithes and other forms of giving and offerings. Good luck if you don't, but that's just us (you and me). The blessings of which I speak are not to be misconstrued for materialism, so please don't begin to aim your arrows just yet.

The Almighty in his infinite wisdom decides who, when & how to provide these blessings. If the heavens were to be opened for everybody that currently tithe, the street of Lagos (for example) will be lined with Limos (no more molue, danfo or okada) and Nigeria will be a better place to live (foreigners will be queueing up in Nigerian High commisions abroad to get visa).

Okay, so it appears that for you, the 'blessing' has to be materialism in one form or the other - else, I don't see the relevance of your examples of Limos, etc. are dealing precisely with what true blessings are. I think as believers, we need to be far more matured in our outlook than thinking that way. There are blessings that are beyond material gains, even as you might have quickly noticed below:

Except of course it goes beyond cash in the pocket or multi-digits bank account (but that's the general tither's perception of tithing, due maybe to the way tithe is preached).

I understand that so many people have a false perception of tithes, offerings, giving, etc. Indeed, if no one ever mentioned tithes and merely preached from Luke 6:38 ('Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom'), wouldn't that on surface value make people think the same way as you opined? Wouldn't preaching from that verse make people think that giving is all about getting "multi-digit bank accounts" in return? Yes, that is another verse that has been abused as much as the tithing verses - and people have developed a hard-to-fade idea about getting back "100-fold" in return if they gave "5-fold".

But no, that is not what Kingdom blessings are all about - it is not all about materialism.

I think we should stop using the word tithe to describe this type of giving as Tonye-t's view of tithing readily comes to mind.

Haha. . that is one complaint I have read a zillion times. Now, for those who have testimonies that the Holy Spirit urged them to tithe, I wonder what it would be if they turned round and rather responded: "I pray Thee, let it please Thee to stop using the word tithe. . . use any other word, and thy servant shall obey Thee!" Lol. In the same way, when people abuse Luke 6:38, we can then apply the same measure: let's stop using the word: "Give"! Just because people tend to abuse some term does not bring about an abandonment of the term - if that is the viable solution we can think of, then we need to abandon every single thing that has been abused through the history of Christianity. What would we be left with in the end?

This usually result in heated debates. Lets call it "freewill contribution from income" or "special freewill offering" or any other term you can come up with.

Lol, in the spirit of fairness and brotherly love, call it whatever thou mayest - that's just okay with me.

But just look at those constructs and ask yourself, what is the difference between that and someone else coming up with a term like "freewill tithes"? Huh? Isn't it the very same thing? It just appears that we are too busy downing the pro-tithers and making up our own specially crafted nomenclatures.

Let me even tease you further: have you ever found the word "freewill" in the ENTIRE New Testament?  Yeah, someone might point to one of 'em modern paraphrases and holla, "there it is!" But in all honesty, that term does not occur a single time in the entire New Testament.

Now, if you turn to the Old Testament, you find the term you suggested ("freewill offerings" used several times - most times pointing to animals sacrifices connected with the burnt offerings. Examples? Please see the following:

     *  Leviticus 22:18 -
         'his freewill offerings, which they will offer unto the LORD for a burnt offering'

     *  Leviticus 22:21 -
         'a freewill offering in beeves or sheep, it shall be perfect to be accepted'

This is not to turn the tables and upset our comfort zones. My point is rather that the word does not matter to me - big deal if it matters to anti-tithers or tithers alike. But if we're so caught up with what terminologies to use, it may take us a while to realize all these arguments are futile indeed. We don't achieve anything in throwing the word 'tithes' behind us for convenience sake, while yet take up some words you cannot find in the NT but rather associated with the burnt offerings of the OT Mosaic Law! It is like saying someone hates water but prefers aqua!

The word to me does not matter - do from your heart what you are led to do by the Holy Spirit. If He speaks to you to set aside what amounts to a tithe (more or less), then it is to Him that your obedience should go without the arguments back and forth here. If He also calls thee to give a "freewill offering" (or, as you say, 'special freewill offering'), again it is to Him that your obedience should go - it does not matter what viaro says about the word being associated with animal sacrifices! Ah there! Enough of me already!

I dont understand what you mean by "DEMAND" above. Maybe you can help me with some clarifications. Thanks.

I shall do so in my subsequent reply.

Babs T:
thts tru ma guy then i suggest u also come back home people in glass house dont trow stones

Hahaha!!

I tried to comment on this in the other thread:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-338151.0.html#msg4740234

smoothman:
JUSTWISE@
HE IS MY RELATIVE,MY UNCLE IS MARRIED TO THE WIFE'S SISTER,HE IS WORKING THERE AND HAVE BEEN LIVING THERE FOR MORE THAN 7 YEARS NOW, SOMETIME LAST YEAR HE RETURNED,HE PROMISED TO GET ME THE REQUIRED WORKING DOCUMENTS, ACCORDING TO WHAT HE SAID , THE COMPANY WHICH HE WILL ATTACH ME TO WORK IN WILL GIVE ME A LETTER WHICH I WILL USE IN GOING FOR A WORKING PERMIT OF ONE YEAR, PLEASE DO A LITTLE RESEARCH AND GET BACK TO ME,

First of all, have you visited the official site at vfs-austria.co.in?? If not, perhaps it's a good place to start, if for nothing else but to give you a picture of how things are meant to be over there.

Second, it is going to be tough luck to get there with a visa of ONE MONTH and hope to quickly get a work permit through that after you arrive there. In other words, if a work permit is what you're aiming for, the Embassy of Austria would require that you obtain that during your initial application before you even step over to Austria. It is not impossible for you to get the work permit once there; but it is not going to be easy to do so with one month's visa.

But there are questions to ask: since your relative has made some promises, he should be in a better position to know what's on ground and how things work over there. According to you, "HE PROMISED TO GET ME THE REQUIRED WORKING DOCUMENTS". . Okay, but something is wrong there. If he is going to do anything for you, he should not expect you to first try to meet a travel agency which is only hoping to get you just one month's visa. One should expect that the one who promised you a work permit is also able to help you source out the visa that would be necessary for the work permit as well.

I do hope everything goes superb for you. .  but please don't let anyone bleed all your resources (500k) for just a month's visa - that is awful!

justwise:
If u are not going with working visa or permit then don't even dream of it.
How can u go with one MONTH visa and get a job withen that one month?

I was wondering about the same thing - ONE MONTH visa. . for all that doh?
In my opinion, it is not even worth a second visit to that travel agent.

smoothman:
Please i really need your assistance.Am about travelling to Austria and as been told i will be staying with a relative who will come and pick me up at the port of Entry,He is working in a company.And he promised to get me a job when i get there,
I have gone to a travel Agent and she requested 500k,Payment after visa is out and confirmed.
I will be travelling with a Month Visa, I want to know whether it is posoble for him to get me my papers needed so as not to be an illegal immigrant.
Please i really need your assistance.Hope reading from you

This doesn't sound good. If I were you, I'd keep my money, because 500k is a lot of doh for a month's visa! However, that is not the end of the whole story - juts try sourcing around for good info that may benefit you so you know where you doh is going to.

[quote author=J-Puppy link=topic=337394.msg4731095#msg4731095 date=1255523423]Please what are the requirements for Austria Student Visa do i need to understand German before i could enroll for any Austria University?[/quote]A visit to the official website at vfs-austria.co.in is your starting point. Second-hand info is your last resort.

[quote author=J-Puppy link=topic=337388.msg4731056#msg4731056 date=1255523125]Hi everyone please who knows about Sweden visa cos i was denied once due to the fact that they said my statement of account prove false and i was denied visa, and on the embassy site they said if you have be denied before you might be denied again so am asking is that through so i wont be wasting money. Please help me peeps can i reapply or i should just let go?[/quote]Your account was proven 'false' - how do you mean? False - in what sense? Fake? Not up to the expected balance that guarantees your stay in Sweden? Or what?

Why don't you try sourcing around for yourself? Perhaps the Swedish website is a good place to start: there you will find most of the info you need on the issue of "requirements" at the migrationsverket.se website (the welcome page is in Swedish, but look for the English botton). So long as you're seeking legit means, I don't understand why they would figure you out for a denial everytime. You may want to look elsewhere though.

Hmm, Tonye-t, nice reasoning there; but I'm sorry to disagree with the premise of your conclusions. In other words, I'm more inclined to take some of debosky's position than what you have tried to convey. There are beautiful things you have said, but here is essentially where I differ:

[quote author=Tonye-t link=topic=307798.msg4738839#msg4738839 date=1255615340][li] Your view of not seeing tithing as an instruction given by Jesus is a blunder in the first place, because the statements of Jesus in that verse explicitly xrayed tithing as an injunction , see it again [/li][/quote]Lol, not so. "Injunction" is a very strong word, don't you think? To me it speaks of a serious and weighty command that is binding upon the hearer. But it does not appear that is what Matthew 23:23 is pointing out. Tithing is not an "injunction" - at least, not an "injunction" to the Christian under the new covenant. It is almost the same thing as the word "requirement", which again is a weak reading of that verse.

What does this verse seem to you I ask again doesn’t it look more of an instruction than a suggestion? The problem I see is that most times we rarely even read the scriptures before we claim/emphasize a point. If one translation would not explain to your understanding it would be best you check thru’ another

True, various translations may help towards a better understanding. However, the verse does not seem to convey a strong sense of what men MUST do as an "injunction". Rather, as in the KJV, this is what men "ought to do" - not what men "MUST" do. I'm not an expert on the Greek; but if you study it a bit more closely, you find it carries just about the same weight as we find in Mark 14:7 -

    "For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good. ."

Note: 'ye may' - language like that is NOT an "injunction", but rather a sort of test to the believer in the recognition of their own freewills. The poor are all around us: if we are willing, we MAY do them good - that is the sense there, and that is just about the same weight in Matthew 23:23 in the construct of "this ought ye to have done".

I hope after carefully going through these, the sense will become clearer to you - and indeed to us all.

Hehe. . guys, it's a good digest to note how we all differ - not only on this subject, but on so many, many other subjects. Please allow me to me pick some of y'all brains a bit more.

ogajim:
Tonye-t, you need to stop this nonsense! Did Apostle Paul live off the Gospel?

Technically, it could be argued that the apostle Paul actually lived off the Gospel - basically on two premises:

(a) there are passages to show that he received sustenance that came to him from the Gospel
(b) he also taught that others are to live off the Gospel.

Perhaps you may not have seen the fact, so I'd let you do a bit more search. You don't have to go off the tangent: just ask, and I shall be quite glad to share some references for you to consider.

If tithe was such a requirement Jesus would have DEMANDED it as well as the Apostles that took over spreading the Gospel afterwords.

No, tithing was not taught as a "requirement" nor as a "demand". We many times argue this confusion of "requirement" and end up muddying the waters unnecessarily. If we use the language of making something a "requirement", then the big question is: what exactly does it FULFILL as regards anything having to do with anybody's salvation? Just what does this "requirement" point to?

However, let us not ignore one aspect I don't see anyone talking about; and that is, the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps we all too forget that the Holy Spirit can (and has continued to) speak to believers to tithe - and as they have responded (not as a matter of "requirement" or "demand", He has also glorified the Name of Jesus and blessed those who obeyed. It does not have to be "required" before you see it as a DEMAND. Perhaps if we learn to refrain from these confusing connotations, then we shall be able to better appreciate the aspects we are missing in all this.

The devil is a very smart dude to the point that he has taken over some of the so called "churches" to the point that they're preaching nonsense instead of the true Gospel of Christ.
Nothing stops a "pastor" from taking a real job instead of running a scam that has no Scriptural ground, no wonder Jesus Christ pointed out that even some of them that performed miracles in his name will be denied on that great day, if someone wants to give 10% or more out of their own conviction, that is fine but they should not be "shamed", cajoled, or even scared into thinking that 10% tithing is a requirement of Salvation.

Excellent observation. Precisely my point: tithing is not taught in Scripture as having anything to do with anyone's salvation - from Abraham to the end of the NT. Sadly, many people on both sides of the debate (pro-tithing and anti-tithing) have tried to use all sorts of dubious means to the same effect of cajoling people. Propaganda works both ways and should be deplored on either side.

Being a "pastor" should not be because you couldn't get a real job, it should come out of a true desire to serve God and not profit from the Gospel of Christ. Our God doesn't dwell in temples built with human hands, support your "pastor" if you can but you face no condemnation if you are unable to support the pastor, the orphan, the widow or the stranger. Enough of this heresy!

Thank you - I like the way you wrapped it up neatly. As long as the tithing itself is not a heresy, we can simply say that those who use it to "profit" from the ministry of Christ are bordering on heresy.