Not sure if this was captured, but the oft flaunted wealth and lifestyle of the MoG to demonstrate the efficacy of prosperity gospel is a tad dishonest. The ministers wax fatter regardless of the junk they preach. Closely related to this is the impression of a pastor 'sacrificing' their salaries for the sake of the gospel. What they never reveal are the many non-official income streams they enjoy by way of 'prophet's seed','honorarium' and many gifts in kind they receive from members.
An average member is not entitled to these privilleges yet this is conveniently hidden from them. They end up giving even more looking forward to enjoy the same prosperity which is impossible.
You have not explained how you invented collection of Abrahamic tithe and payment of the same to Melchizedek through your church yet Abraham paid Melchizedek directly.
You are now BLAMING Holy Spirit for this structure by throwing 1 Corinthians. The reason is simple, you are trying to inject your fantasies into the Word of God. There is no place found for them.
Jesus Christ holds different offices. He is the Lamb of God and to walk in that reality, you don't offer lambs He is the first fruits, first born from the dead, you don't offer firstborn sons or first ripe crops to him
The ONLY thing Jesus commanded us to was the Lord's table to commemorate his death, not ANY of His Offices. As a High Priest, he does not NEED any sacrifices anymore seeing His own sacrifice was sufficient, otherwise you may want to take goats to your pastor for sacrificing to Melchizedek because of the gift of Administration
Image123: 1 Corinthians 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
You said that i invented administrations/administrative procedures, i simply showed you that the church has DIFFERENT administrations. Administration brings in management, direction, order, government and organisation. There are different levels and types of this in the Church. There is nothing wrong or unbiblical with believers having a structure or format of doing things, instead of everyman as it is right in his own eyes. Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. It is not my fault if you do not believe that. When you persecute the church like Paul, you are persecuting Christ. When you give to the church, you are giving to Christ.
1Jo 3:14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
Classic Image123 playing damsel in distress. They are out to infringe his right. Come Lord Jesus. When all your fickle arguments to prop tithing are shot down, you plead your RIGHT You are in bondage. Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? You are defending your captors, unless you are a tithe collector https://www.nairaland.com/2018730/tithing-walking-dead
It is pretty lame quoting that verse to justify tithing when it asked them to do ALL of the Law. It is intellectual dishonest to pretend that this verse has never been debunked in your eyes.
Confronting the pious fraud of manipulating believers to part with their money is what we are all about. If your church would starve of funds if people gave Freewill, then they need deliverance not extortion in the name of God
Image123: Luk 11:39 And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness. Luk 11:40 Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also? Luk 11:41 But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you. Luk 11:42 But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
The Pharisees were hypocrites because they made the outside clean but the inside was very dirty and wickedness. They dwelt on none essentials and were mainly driven by the letter of the law. Here were people who thought it is not lawful to put their 30pieces of silver in the treasury but had no problem using the same money to damn a disciple to betray the Lord's Christ. Did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also? Are not the silver and gold God's? What makes agricultural produce more God's and holier than silver and gold? Is God's holy Hill not laden with gold and precious stones? Give alms of such things as ye have. Mat 20:15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
Why would anyone attack and contest vigorously what i give of mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Why are antitithers more concerned than God about my tithes of mine own income? Antitihers are disturbed, they are uneasy, they are very worried, troubled and agitated. Almost traumatized to see me do what i will with mine own. It's perpetually amusing, is there a spirit of some sort behind these? It's not normal. You know, i've met non-tithers, and have met and have friends and believers who do not agree with or have the same opinions and Bible perspectives as i do. but antitithers, they are a different brand entirely. Ironically, antitithers are aware of the effectiveness and provision of tithes and gracious, bountiful giving. They make a lot of noise and publicity about how tithes make pastors the richest in the world, or something along those lines. i think a lot of their opinion is exaggerated though. But the point is that if tithes is so acclaimed and agreed to be saturating/overfilling in the church, why the bile against it? Why pass over the love of God as it were? 1Jo 3:17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? 1Jo 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
if we have this world's good, and we know the need of the Church. Why shut our bowels of compassion and make some groanings about agricultural products and levites and storehouses? You have the money, the Church needs the money, i want to give the money. But you are on about yam, wheat, cassava and turkey. How dwelleth the love of God in him? It's a valid question. Let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
A few facts. 1. Circumcision is not necessary for the Jew nor the Gentile. There is no requirement whatsoever to 'identify with the covenant' and there never has been. All the merits of circumcision are therefore nonexistent. wedding rings at least there is a tradition for those. There is no tradition for circumcision nowhere. A rite that was once a command, now deemed a burden,A rite Paul felt was unnecessary for Titus and one which he performed on Timothy out of pressure has zero value to nobody. God does not require any for of identifying with the covenant.
2. Circumcision was the true mark of a proselyte, a gentile convert to Judaism. Paul was accused of preventing the traditions of the Jews and if he walked with a circumcised Gentile, none of that would possibly be raised. Once again, the Council had just ruled that Gentiles needed not be circumcised. I don't see how they would still demand Timothy circumcision after this, that's why I stick to unsaved Jews. Any pressure to conform to Jewishness after Acts 15 could ONLY have come from unsaved Jews not circumcision party
3. The rest of your mishmash is unworthy of my response. Hope you don't mind
mbaemeka: You have NEVER asked this question before and my answer is still NO. Now please answer my question: what was the usefulness of circumcision in the past?
Awww, Men. This is nonsense. Pure Jews didn't even want anyone bar Jews to be circumcised. How would they then be expecting Paul to circumcise a Gentile? They could careless about Christianity as a whole let alone who is or not circumcised. On the other hand they accused Paul of taking Trophimus into the SYNAGOGUE because according to the law, NON-JEWS weren't allowed to go in to the place of worship. This is totally unconnected to Christianity.
Bogus point again. Nobody ever claimed circumcision had any religious or spiritual value but it had a fleshly one. You even claimed it was useful before but have since evaded my questions asking you what it's usefulness was before. As per the emboldened, not only did Gombs say it, I did too.
Romans 2:25King James Version (KJV) 25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law:
Circumcision was not the covenant God had with Abraham. God had a covenant with Abraham and gave promises in Genesis 12 & 15, and then circumcision became the seal of that promise, similar to a wedding ring which is not the marriage but a sign of the marriage. It shows that the woman or man wearing the ring identifies with whomever they are married to.
Romans 3 King James Version (KJV)
3 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, [size=24pt]because that unto them were committed the oracles of God[/size].
This is what we have been saying ^^^.
So why did Paul not coerce anyone into being circumcised? Simple, because the seal of the NT is the Holy Spirit and he is all that matters SPIRITUALLY. But he never said circumcision was TOTALLY DISMISSED or what not- word play or not, it is spurios and specious and should be retracted.
Just like the Jews, you too are confused about the promise. Let me belabor it again. The promise about owning the WHOLE WORLD was given to Abraham and his seed and not SEEDS. That seed is Christ and we (the body of christ) are that body and seed/heir of the promise. I hope I don't need to show the scriptures clearly averring this.
All Jews still circumcise themselves till date. I believe your question is directed at Jewish Christians and NO they are not obligated/mandated to get circumcised anymore- doesn't mean they don't do it.
The Abrahamic covenant gave birth to the NT. We who are of faith are regarded as the REAL children of Abraham.
Galatians 3:14King James Version (KJV) 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
The promises God made to Abraham is accessed by us via faith- faith in Jesus Christ. Meaning the agreement with Abraham is still intact. That is why we could usurp all the blessings from it by being in christ.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
Albeit God made the covenant with a man, nobody can disannull it-not even you mate.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Even the LAW (which came years after) could not disannull the Abrahamic covenant.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
This verse shows that the church is the SEED that God referred to in Genesis 17. So that rubbish talk about the covenant being for ISRAEL AND ISRAEL ALONE should be thrown away.
Acts 3:25King James Version (KJV) 25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
If you don't get it after seeing this ^^ particular verse, you may not get it at all. Peter said the church (because we are the REAL SEED as shown from Galatians above) represents the children of the covenant- the one God made with ABRAHAM that his seed will be blessed. So how can anyone not see that this covenant is everlasting?
Again NOBODY is obligated to get circumcised anymore than they are obligated to wear a wedding ring. But you cannot claim the ring like the circumcision is COMPLETELY USELESS because it is not. It is only useless as a condition for salvation. Period.
Hebrews 7:21-24King James Version (KJV) 21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec 22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: 24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
For Paul to tell his fellow Jews in this book that this man- Jesus, had an unchangeable priesthood which he got after the father swore that he will NEVER CHANGE HIS MIND concerning that. It means they (like you) "thought" the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods were everlasting- but they weren't.
I didn't insist on nothing. It is only in the NT that we were pointed out to the spiritual part of worship hence why I referred you to it since we are discussing spiritual values of things done in the NT. In actual fact I never said anything about the NT. The assignment is open to ANY BOOK of the bible. Show me the spiritual value of kneeling and clapping.
The emboldened is absolute nonsense. You can do the needful and quote the relevant scriptures saying so. And that you related it to lifting of hands is even nauseatingly disingenuous. The blue font flew over me. Maybe you should rephrase it. I have mentioned the 3 things that God related to praise and worship in scriptures in the NT, you are just making the absurdities and accusing others of it. Can you remember why I mentioned kneeling and clapping to you? To show you that just like circumcision and co, there are many things we do in Christianity that have no spiritual value but they are not wrong all the same.
Please just one quote from anyone on this thread that said circumcision has any spiritual value and if you cannot provide one then you are advised to stop employing it as diversionary tool. It is DOA.
1. Is a Christian Jew under ANY obligation to be circumcised?
2. You read too much between the lines. Paul was not saving Timothy from ostracization,Timothy a half-Jew was under no obligation to be circumcised. This came right after the Council so it is least likely the Circumcision party could have targeted a Christian for the very thing that had been ruled. Paul was avoiding his detractors unsaved Jews, the same guys who later accused him of taking a Gentile, Tophimus to the temple
3. It is your team that claims that circumcision has some value though it don't add righteousness nor save nobody. Gombs claim it is a means of identifying with the promise. That's garbage hopefully his and not CE because, such residual purposes were not sufficient to persuade Paul to circumcise Gentiles. Please let's stop word plays; when I say worthless, you know well exactly what I mean; ZERO religious value
4. Israel clings to an extremely small fraction of what Abraham was promised and you can bet in the next 3,000 years if Christ tarried,that won't change.
Exodus 40. Let's drop word play with (per)versions. Let's go Hebrews and ask us if the word EVERLASTING is used with regard to Aaronic priesthood. Can the word be qualified? The Jews MISUNDERSTOOD? Prove from scriptures that Abrahamic covenant is eternal, and while at it tell me whether a Jew is still under the circumcision obligation
About kneeling and clapping. I find it decidedly convenient that you insist on NT yet when it comes to tithing, you excavate dead things in Genesis to prove a point.
Clapping is a command from God, it is as spiritual as lifting hands. That hands can be lifted without spiritual value don't mean lifting them is no spiritual. You can do better than argue absurdities.
I will dig more on kneeling.
Circumcision is not only of ZERO spiritual value, it is of NO religious value, none whatsoever to a believer. Any value you ascribe to it is a measure of your creative imagination that escaped Paul and the Holy Spirit
mbaemeka: 1. That covenant still exists. Again I ask: what was the usefulness of the covenant in the past?
2. Moot sir. It is clear as day. Paul did it because he didn't want Timothy to be ostracised by the Jews. The same Jews would have done it to Titus but they didn't because Paul took him in the presence of James and co in Jerusalem (who didn't mind that he wasn't circumcised). And you are wrong again about the Nazirite vow. It had fleshly value and that is why Paul honored it. It is similar to a christian that borrows money from his fellow christian friend and then refuses to Pay saying 'it means nothing to my salvation'.
So it is pleonastic to keep telling us that circumcision added nothing to salvation. We never said it did. But one can benefit from it physically and that is in itself valueable.
3. Bland. We never said Paul was uncomfortable with any uncircumcised man. In 1 Corinthians 7 he said if you were uncircumcised before you received Christ, you don't need to be circumcised after and if otherwise, the same remains.
4. a)That was Canaan and not Israel and yes, it is forever owned by Abraham and his seed till date.
b) Exodus 40:15 didn't say the Aaronic priesthood will last forever. It said Aarons sons will be the only priests of God's people. How do I know? 2 reasons; 1) other translations like CEV and 2) in Hebrews 7, Paul said when God swore that Jesus will be a priest forever he didn't say it like he had done so about Aaron and the levites meaning you, like the Jews, misunderstood what God was saying in Exodus and Numbers and Hebrews 7 aptly proves it.
5. You were not commanded to do anything and Paul doing it suffices nothing my friend. Didn't you just claim that Paul observed a Nazirite vow even though it meant nothing? Didn't Paul not stay unmarried? Does it mean they had spiritual implications? NO.
The 3 ways God told us to praise and worship him in the NT are very clear. We are to lift up holy hands without fear and wrath; We are to sing Psalms, Hymns and spiritual songs while making melody in our hearts unto God; We are to worship God with the fruit of our lips praising his name. Full stop.
Clapping doesn't mean praise or worship spiritually. Kneeling doesn't mean it spiritually as well. If they did, then people who clap in football games are praising God and those who kneel are worshiping him as well. Clapping and kneeling are fleshly like shutting our eyes. It makes us concentrate; it shows physical obeisance and reverence BUT they are of ZERO SPIRITUAL VALUE. So understand that NOT EVERYTHING we do is spiritual and it doesn't make it wrong nonetheless.
Peter had a vision,was instructed by Holy Spirit to accompany the messengers,he had heard how he was supposed to deliver a message by which thy would be saved, he had it coming. His message was not indefinite, he would have finished and baptized them.......
This is a minor point. Let it rest, we have bigger fights ahead my broda
mbaemeka: You are intentionally misunderstanding him. Peter got the confirmation of their salvation by the Acts 10&11 accounts. This was before he narrated Acts 15. Why does it matter? Because up to that point, the Jews believed the gift of the Holy Spirit was for them only. So in seeing the Gentiles receive that same gift, they were certain they were saved.
The little that you purport to know should be scriptural not off your imagination. Only then can you even attempt to share it.
What has 1Cor 12:5-6 got to do with your response?
Image123: 1 Corinthians 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
i don't know everything, neither am i required to. i walk with the little knowledge i have of God and I'm very content with that.
Debate is a good way of arriving at truth. Jesus used it, Paul too, Stephen and so we have precedent. Tithing was a tax for the Jews not Christians. There was death penalty for adultery in the Law but you find none in the NT. If this was the case like in Muslim nations, then probably adultery cases would be much fewer. But that is not God's way of doing things.
Note Jews gave two tither S per annum coming to 19% and a third one every third year coming to 22% in total p.a.
asalimpo: While it is painful tht Help ddnt com to d man in his dark hour, we shudnt forget or misapply the word. The tithe is a tax on every kingdom citizen for kingdom work. It is ten percent on all your increase (gross). It shud b presented to God with the right attitude,thanks giving and gratefulness, then is the offering. Every earthly kingdom operates on some taxing principle which they levy on their citizens. With these taxes government can accomplish certain objectives like provision of amenities, running a military etc. Tax evasion is a a criminal offence. Against this backdrop tithe evasion is a criminal offence and a sin against God. because by not tithing you are obstructing the work of God as well as dishonourng God who blesses you with increase. Whether d church u tithe in misuses or steals d funds is not justifcation to discontinue giving ur tithe. Anoda issue is,the tithe belongs to God. It is God's money. Touchng God's money is stealing. Simple.
Arguing abt tithe is meaningless. If you can pay up to 40% in tax and not think about it with d government ever ready to pile on more and more levies , the complaining about 10% unwavering tax rate is hypocrisy.
My brother, I gave you a clear verse where none other than Peter says God bore them witness and you reject it? Note it was Peter recounting this episode again. I regard it and Paul's conversion special for the several times they are repeated in Acts.
What do you do when you preach to a sinner and lead them to repentance? Do you wait until they recieve the Holy Spirit to 'confirm' anything? We have believers who never received Holy Spirit yet they are regarded as believers. Walk in faith man
nlMediator: Yes, it may show effectiveness of what you're doing consistent with doctrine. Not always. But not never, either.
And you're quoting the wrong Scriptures. The right place to look is Acts 10 and Acts 11.
Acts 10:44-47:
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
And in Acts 11:15-18, it was confirmation to Peter and those not present:
15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
1 Cor 15:32 (KJV) If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die
My brother, please look at that verse prayerfully. Paul FOUGHT WITH BEASTS at Ephesus. Am convinced it was spiritual warfare
You don't have ANY objective basis of picking what to follow out of the Law and what to discard. Period
There is NOTHING unhygienic about menstruation to warrant isolating women in this present age for 7 days.
Bidam: Like i told shdemidemi if you had cared to read my post, for ease of understanding and clarity. Read and Study the constitution(Bible) the manual for life. The Holy Spirit is the teacher of the Word of God.David said your word have i hid in my heart that i may not sin against thee.
So what do you understand by principles drawn from the OT laws concerning hygiene? I think i told you that the principle applies didn't i?
So if they are written in the hearts of believers, what is the need for dividing them? Ceremonial vs moral? And how do I know whether what a believer is hearing in their heart is from the Spirit? What if somebody hears that it is OK to keep slaves and beat them just not kill them (Ex 21:20)?
About my wife? Why do you care? That's below the belt. Don't go personal unless your brains start overheating and you have nothing to add.
Bidam: Stoning represent the penalty for disobedience...Jesus paid the penalty. The curse of the law is related to the penalty.(Gal 3:13). As for wearing of fabrics, the laws are written in the heart of the believers( law of the spirit) who doesn't follow the letters of the law legalistically(Heb 10:16). Do you sleep with your wife in her menses?
Laws such as stoning disobedient children (Lev 20:9) or not wearing garments of different fabric (Lev 19:19)are NEITHER sacrifices nor washings. Where in the NT were they abrogated?
The ONLY circumstance under which you should not touch your wife is when fasting and even then it should not be for extended period. Any other time is game
Bidam: Yawn! The book of Hebrews makes it clear that various washings and physical sacrifices were done away.
The principles of the Law still applies. For example do you have intercourse with your wife when she is menstruating?
Does Jesus force anybody to get saved? Nope, the Spirit just convicts. If such serious matter of salvation are left to Spirit pleadings, what makes you think that we need a Law on giving?
The Jews had the whole tithing Laws, quite elaborate and from Malachi, they were UNABLE to keep it. If they couldn't keep express tithing laws, what makes you a Christian can keep it? This is why your pastor has to threaten you with hellfire, Devourer,shut-heaven,debts to make you part with your money.
The same Spirit who wakes you up to pray and intercede for your leaders is all you need to know what to give, not some external stimuli and set fractions
waldigit: I understand very well that emphasis on tithe has been high jacked very well in todays church for personal benefit. But the question arises again are, if nobody is on full time in Gods business will not affect our mandate to take the gospel to all nations before the end shall come? Then if some pple hav to be in it on full time basis, how do we renumerate such pple without paying tithe. NB Jesus created treasury dpt. In His ministry ably manned by Judas
Don't let nobody deride your attacks as madness. Remain strong in Jesus Christ my brother
lastmessenger: I am not jobless and am not deluded as most people think. Meanwhile am not forcing you to believe me. I know that God has given me a victory. I only pray that you won't be attacked by the enemy when you are vulnerable. It can be very fatal.
You have INVENTED administrative procedures in which Jesus our High Priest receives his tithes centrally through his body and you don't even know if there is any other way of delivering to him?
Look, under Moses, the tithe still belonged to God only his own appointed Levites collected it. Under Abraham, tithes belonged to God and He collected it himself, no mediators seeing Christ is God is Melchizedek. Why do you inject mediators called the church to receive the tithe?
Your point is premised on accurately isolating 'ceremonial' laws of the 613 and discarding them. How do you go about this sir? What if in the process you mistake non-ceremonial for ceremonial and you discard them as well?
Bidam: My point is the ceremonial laws that forbid a menstruating woman from the house of God is/are no longer useful.
Acts 15:8-9 (ESV) 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith
Actually, the Holy Spirit confirmed to them not Peter. Anyway, don't push your meanings onto scriptures. Numbers. can mean anything and at best they show effectiveness of what you are doing not the accuracy of your doctrine.
Cheers bro
nlMediator: Ha ha, but Peter was sent by God to preach to Cornelius' household and you agreed it was confirmation when the Holy Ghost fell on them? You're withdrawing that now? In fact, Peter himself saw that as confirmation and said so. That's also what convinced the apostles that were not there with him when he narrated the story to them. The vision served its purpose in making him go there but what happened there was what confirmed it to him. As I said earlier, feel free to believe what you want.
It doesn't confirm nothing. Peter had been sent specifically by the Holy Spirit to teach them salvation. He never needed any other confirmation. The fact that he had a vision of the clean and unclean animals was enough.
nlMediator: So many things are stated in the Bible as a matter of fact. Like Jesus telling Zacchaeus that salvation has come to his house. To you it may not be a confirmation of anything, because the word 'confirm' is not used. To me it confirms that all types of sinners, including tax collectors can be saved. You're free to see the Word as you choose.
1. Usefulness is restricted to the covenant Abraham had with God
2. Neither was Timothy compelled. Paul just did it. Some things can be dismissed WITHOUT being banned. Paul offered sacrifices per Nazirite vow. It is no sin to do such but they are on NO VALUE to nobody. So dismissal vs complete dismissal is a nonsensical dichotomy
3. Point was and remains, Paul was perfectly at ease with Titus the uncircumcised Gentile
4. Everlasting means up to and including eternity? Everlasting can by qualified. Will circumcision be carried out in regeneration? Does a Christian Jew need circumcision? Gen 17:8 (KJV) And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
Will the Jews inhabit Israel forever?
Exodus 40:15 (KJV) And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations
Numbers 25:13 (KJV) And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel
Is Levitical priesthood everlasting in any way?
Everlasting as used in Genesis appears to me to mean PERMANENT not eternal. The priesthood ended with Jesus Christ yet it was everlasting. Am strongly persuaded that circumcision NOW (after Christ) is completely useless for EVERY believer Jew or Gentile. It adds nothing to what the believer receives in Christ nor does it act as a sign of ANYTHING
5. Being commanded to do so and the Fact that Paul did it suffices. Or you wanted an epistle on kneeling in prayers?
mbaemeka: 1. What was it's usefulness before? That's how to help you see the flaw in your argument.
2. Rubbish. Nobody COMPELLED Titus to be circumcised. That's what Paul said. But when they compelled Timothy, Paul cowered and he would have not done so if he knew it was COMPLETELY DISMISSED.
3. Your point is not only moot but diversionary. Paul was saying that those Judaizers didn't put pressure on Titus in JERUSALEM and now they have come to Galatia (Gentile land) to put pressure on you. Showing that they're not interested in your spirituality- they only want to gratify the flesh because if that were not the case they would have preached their circumcision everywhere including Jerusalem. This akin to those who make women 'cover their hair' or not 'wear make up' yet they don't care if such women are even born again to begin with.
4. Nonsense again. God said it would be everlasting. Everlasting means even now. Paul said it is beneficial to you ONLY if you are obedient to all the laws or saved. You on the other say it was useful but not anymore. Please why was it useful before? If you can answer this,you will see the ccontradictions in your argument.
5. Thank you for those verses that Paul said 'he bows to God in prayer' and the Psalmist said 'clap your hands to God'. I am sure you thought I asked you for a verse that says such were ever done in the bible. Let me show you my question again:
Bidam: External rites like this are obsolete and should be discarded. I quoted Romans 13: 8-10, where did you see isolating women during their periods there? Moreso Love does no harm to it's neighbor does it? What do you understand by the spirit of the Law or the Law of the Spirit and the letters of the Law?
This is interesting. What do we do with all those parts of the Law which try as you may have no MORAL elements in them? A good example is isolating women during their periods
Bidam: Thus, the law retains its role as a code of moral behavior, but loses its role as a way of attaining righteousness with God.
James 4:17 King James Version (KJV) 17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
That is very true my broda. But not everything that you know is good are you obligated to do it.
For instance, John the baptist telling Herod that it was wrong to have his brother Philip's wife. He could do nothing other than point out the wrong. I may not be a Reverend like Oyaks, in fact I don't even have a church. This does not disqualify me from pointing out something that is clearly unscriptural in churches like a doctrine or practice.
Worthless things are things of no value to anybody. A good example is offering burnt offerings TODAY.
I didn't quite get your question but I said circumcision is not sin meaning you don't break ANY Law/Commandment in doing so. The fact that it was dismissed entirely as unnecessary on the Gentiles means it had NO benefits for them. So you have a practice you are not bound to do, that you just been told is unnecessary yet doing it is not sin.
Paul circumcised Timothy to avoid unnecessary distraction on his mission in Judea/Jerusalem. I believe there is no better explanation than this verse; 1Cor 9:20 20 (KJV) And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; And this is why I preach in a suit. The audience wants a suit, I don one but I hate suits, they just look good on mannequins and Mickey Stone
Gombs: Well, do you know if you know something right and don't do it, it's sin? For example, the true gospel preachers here, who seem to know how the church should be and hasnot done aanything in that regard, I hope the know they'd be sinning? But good news is, they're wrong.nso they're not sinning.
Define 'worthless things'! Paul was right to say circumcision did not bring righteousness, for Abraham was righteous before circumcision. The Jew thought it to be sin to ignore circumcision. How then did you conclude that it was not a sin to ignore it according to the jews? Remember you said " circumcision is not sin". A notion mba pointed out. If it was a sin in the day not to circumcise, Bringing us back to mba's question,
Why did Paul circumcise Timothy after the resolution in chapter 15?
My brother, circumcising NOW is as worthless as burnt offerings. That has been my point all along. It has ZERO benefits to nobody outside the supposed medical reasons.
You have been pushing for a theory that it 'identifies us with the promise' which is flat out wrong. It doesn't.
PS: Worthless things are not necessarily sin.
Gombs: That's what I was trying to drive home, but vooks don't seem to want to understand. Thanks buddy!
For the colored, vooks, I'd want to learn too...in all honesty I know about kneeling, but clapping is a no no. David once said Psalms 95:6 - Come, let us worship and bow down, Let us kneel before the LORD our Maker.
1. It is dismissed because it has outlived its usefulness. The elaborate animal sacrifices were fulfilled. They were not useless. God did not give Israel useless laws. Animal sacrifices are not sinful neither. I saw this analogy. Once you fill a bucket with water, adding anything else will spill the water. The bucket is filled and can't be used for any other purpose. But it is still useful. That's the Law.... circumcision & tithes for you
2. 'People' is misleading because it presents Paul as an advocate of circumcision among Gentiles. He was not. He stood by Titus in Jerusalem in the face of Judaizers and never bowed to no pressure. Circumcising Timothy was a concession (the only one) not borne out of some 'identifying with the promise' theory
3. Moot point. study that verse closely. How is it relevant to what Paul is saying? Bottom line, Paul hanged around uncircumcised Gentiles who couldn't give a hoot about 'carnally identifying with the promise' because that imaginary nonsense don't exist
4. I said circumcision HAS NO BENEFITS not HAD NO. Tenses my brother. It was instituted by God, is as relevant as burnt offerings. Zero benefit NOW not THEN. It is slightly less useful than washing hands with Dettol jel. heard it lowers chances of HIV infection...surface area stuff
5. Eph 3:14, Psalms 47:1----Spirit inspired acts of worship
mbaemeka: 1. So if circumcision is not a sin why will it be TOTALLY DISMISSED FROM THE NT? see the flaw?
2. Hair-splitting. Whether he circumcised Timothy and Timothy ALONE means nothing. He circumcised him after Acts 15. That's the point.
3. Wrong. Paul didn't say he resisted Titus from being circumcised. He said NOBODY FORCED/COMPELLED Titus to be circumcised even though he was a Gentile.
4. Please tell Genesis 17 and Galatians 3 or Romans 3 that circumcision has zero benefits. It is cyclical to keep mentioning spiritual benefits to it. I already said physical circumcision is physical. Period.
5. Please provide verses showing clapping and kneeling as spiritual.
1.Circumcision is not sin. Paul would resist all pressure to sin just to please men. Bad example.
2. Paul did not circumcise 'people', he circumcised Timothy and Timothy ALONE
3. Paul undertook an IRRELEVANT practice for peace sake, and he resisted the same elsewhere- Gal 2:3. 'to the Jews he became Jews'. When I visit naija, I will put on the traditional garb just to blend not that I care. They look horrible
So there is no spiritual nor religious value real or imagined in circumcision. Keep your 'consciousness'. Paul would scoff at that. Titus with his joystick intact was as 'conscious' as any man can be of his place in Christ and his relationship to Father Abraham
Clapping hands, kneeling are all spiritual exercises
mbaemeka: If the Jews had put pressure on him to commit sexual immorality would he have done it?
Your points are moot because Paul still went on to physically circumcise people "after he knew it was completely dismissed". Does this make any sense?
In the Jerusalem council they resolved to remove the burden of circumcision from the 'saved' Gentiles. Why was it a burden? Because the Christian Jews believed that one was not saved if they weren't circumcised (Acts 15:1), so Paul and Barnabas shared their testimonies of Gentiles getting and 'acting' saved who weren't circumcised and as such the Leader- James, conceded that circumcision was not necessary for salvation and told the Jews not to put pressure on Gentiles who believed in Jesus but were uncircumcised.
So why did Paul still cower to pressure atimes and circumcise some people even as he didn't do so at other times? It is the same reason he later taught his church in Corinth that eating meat sacrificed to Idols meant nothing as long as it was sanctified with Prayer and thanksgiving (somewhat contradiction to the resolution of the Jerusalem council).
There are some things you know (according to the word of God) are not wrong, but you still refuse to do them to appease fellow christians who have weak consciences. Paul said (concerning meat sacrificed to Idols) that as far as he was concerned, they meant nothing because he was only conscious of one God in heaven. But if he was in the gathering of babes (who still believe in idols/demons) he would turn down the meat so as not to make them think that since a 'whole Apostle Paul' could eat meat that was once sacrificed to Idols then we too can even visit their temples- which would be a sin and God would have held Paul responsible for that. So look at it from that angle.
Paul knew that if he didn't circumcise those Gentiles, the Jews around would have ostracised them like they did in Antioch. So to pander to their feeble-mindedness he did what he had to but in his heart he knew those Gentiles were saved as long as they believed in Jesus.
So what is the import of circumcision? As we have said before a) to carnally identify with the Abrahamic covenant b) to keep it (Genesis 17:10). Notice that God said to Abraham "between you and thy seed" in Genesis, and Paul making reference to that verse said the seed in question was Christ and not even the Physical Jews. So even if circumcision doesn't make me saved or seal my salvation as it were, it makes me 'conscious' that I am a child of Abraham and an heir of the promise. Also notice how I used the words 'carnal', conscious etc. It is because the significance of circumcision is now fleshly.
But it makes zero sense for you to ask me what spiritual value it holds. What spiritual value does clapping hold? What spiritual value does not kneeling to pray hold? Will God unhear my prayers if I stand? So because these things hold no spiritual value does it mean they have been TOTALLY DISMISSED from the NT?
the idea that you should give because they will be there for you when the going gets tough is dumb. Giving to church is not saving in a bank. He has every right to be frustrated at abandonment but demanding his offerings back? That's M0ronic incarnate
That negro is looking for anything to blame for his woes
frosbel: This is my experience in these institutions of babel, they know how to take but not to give. And of course the bible says it is more blessed to give than to receive, so they are cursed because they are forever receiving and never giving.
Friends, forgive my harsh tone this morning, I am just fedup with these people, I wish I had the political power to lock them away for good.
We all know it does not make you righteous. It is all about what it does, not what it doesn't.
Of course health reasons are not in question since they are accessed by everyone including SonofLucifer
Can we say circumcision has ZERO spiritual value?
Gombs: but his is what we've be saying na, Physical circumcision does not make you righteous, but spiritual circumcision. However, folks do physical circumcision for health reasons too.
Christianity Etc › Re: Word Of Faith - The Movement's Doctrine And Proponents by vooks: 6:33am On Nov 29, 2014
see the flaw?