₦airaland Forum

REPETITION FOR EMPHASIS

So you knew who did that and you pretended not to. Paste that verse here and show me where Isaac sowed in famine


Let me help you

Gen 26:12 (KJV)
Then Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year an hundredfold: and the Lord blessed him

What part of this verse says Isaac sowed DURING famine? Puny brained Christ Embassy rote-wits have to go back to verse 1
Gen 26:1 (KJV) And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar.

But did the verse 1 famine last all the way to verse 12? Nobody knows because we don't how how long it lasted. But we gat a great hint in verse 8
(KJV) And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac was sporting with Rebekah his wife

So Isaac had been in Gerar for a LONG TIME before he sowed and reaped in the same year a hundredfold. This does not mean that Isaac never sowed in famine just reduces the likelihood of the famine lasting a loooooooong time.

Secular history I learn places an average return at thirty fold. Sixty fold is fantastic. A hundredfold is clearly off the charts. But even a hundredfold is not the best. In Babylon there is a record of two hundredfold and even three hundredfold. But Palestine was not as fertile as Babylonia so it is unfair comparing the productivity of the two.

There is a great lesson in Isaac miraculously reaping a hundredfold while everyone else around him scored zero fold but we would be reading into the scriptures this. It may exalt God for the miracle but we have not been called to exaggerate and imagine His work where none existed.

Any questions?

Gombs:
Na wa o! Candour, you see the kind people I debate scriptures with? Oya, go to Genesis 26, from verse 1, especially veree 12. His name was isaac!

Shame on you! You claim to know, but you keep making simpleton outta yourself. Simple Bible studying o!

I'm done with you, neonates and sissies are not worth the time.

Cheers

So you knew who did that and you pretended not to. Paste that verse here and show me where Isaac sowed in famine


Let me help you

Gen 26:12 (KJV)
Then Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year an hundredfold: and the Lord blessed him

What part of this verse says Isaac sowed DURING famine? Puny brained Christ Embassy rote-wits have to go back to verse 1
Gen 26:1 (KJV) And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar.

But did the verse 1 famine last all the way to verse 12? Nobody knows because we don't how how long it lasted. But we gat a great hint in verse 8
(KJV) And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac was sporting with Rebekah his wife

So Isaac had been in Gerar for a LONG TIME before he sowed and reaped in the same year a hundredfold. This does not mean that Isaac never sowed in famine just reduces the likelihood of the famine lasting a loooooooong time.

Secular history I learn places an average return at thirty fold. Sixty fold is fantastic. A hundredfold is clearly off the charts. But even a hundredfold is not the best. In Babylon there is a record of two hundredfold and even three hundredfold. But Palestine was not as fertile as Babylonia so it is unfair comparing the productivity of the two.

There is a great lesson in Isaac miraculously reaping a hundredfold while everyone else around him scored zero fold but we would be reading into the scriptures this. It may exalt God for the miracle but we have not been called to exaggerate and imagine His work where none existed.

Any questions?

Gombs:
Na wa o! Candour, you see the kind people I debate scriptures with? Oya, go to Genesis 26, from verse 1, especially veree 12. His name was isaac!

Shame on you! You claim to know, but you keep making simpleton outta yourself. Simple Bible studying o!

I'm done with you, neonates and sissies are not worth the time.

Cheers

Nonsense. Nobody sowed anything during famine nowhere in the scriptures

You are yet to explain to us what Harvest in Genesis means not to mention seed time.

Please tell me why Jesus cursed a tree out of season

Gombs:
Redundancy.
There was this guy in the Bible that sowed in famine time-not a favorable time, a wrong time, the circumstances were against him, ...emm, sombody please remind me his name...he decided to sow into the land, he sowed anytime, there was always a time to sow. It is decided by the sower, God gives seed to the sower, it is the sower's job to sow. Moses and God were not playing grammar class when they wrote down "seedtime and harvest" instead of "seed time and harvest time" as a lot of you wish it was.

I am not mixing physical and spiritual, call nannymcphee, she was the one talking about seasons and natural course and semantics. When Isaac sowed did he consider weather, seasons and natural course? Was he being spiritual or carnal like you lot? When Jesus went to harvest fruits when it was not the tree's fruiting period, was he considering the harvesting season as you carnal lot keep bringing in natural seasons and course?

Meanwhile, I other new, you cunningly avoiding this question... for obvious reasons. See it here again

Can you explain why Jesus went to a tree and demanded for a fruit even when He knew it was not its time of fruiting?

You are wallowing in equivocation jumping between spiritual and physical.
Can you plant at ANY time of the year any plant like wheat or corn?

Gombs:


i don't practice redundancy! it is not my fault you have reading and comprehension problems.

Can you explain why Jesus went to a tree and demanded for a fruit even when He knew it was not its time of fruiting?

Gombs it is your turn
What does seed-time in Genesis means?
What does harvest mean?

Gombs:
You believe in the application of the Word? ok, Sowing and reaping came from where? OT or NT. if it's the OT, why like Bidam asked did Paul taght about it?




Semantics shey? Just semantics? Genesis was written by INSPIRATION of God, by Moses. Was God playing semantics? or Moses heard wrong and hence wrote wrong.



your opinion is noted though!
Cheers

What do you call harvesting?
I have explained above why there is no 'time' there plus I have indicated the word harvest time used in a parable. All this means lack of the word harvest up there is inconsequential. It your turn to explain to us WHY there Is 'harvest' and no 'harvest time'

Waiting but I KNOW you won't for obvious reasons. Wait for the resident arch- hooligan mbaemeka to save you

Gombs:
where did you now get harvest time?

It is sad that. WOFers misquote Paul to justify themselves.
1. Paul was talking about ministry where sowing means preaching the Word of God probably at the back of his mind was the famous parable of the sower and from 1Cor 9 we know Paul to be well versed with pathetic teachings of Jesus.

2. Seed time and harvest time are set by natural laws. You can't sow any time of the year and expect a harvest. Harvest time is different for different plants

Paul was simply saying that God is the sole Cause of growth in the church and not men. You need to quit stretching analogies out of their logical limits bro. I know this is a convenient excuse you give when tithers and other coerced givers don't recieve harvest/reap; remind them that it is 'up to God' to reward them whenever and wherever.

Bidam:
I am not a CE member, Let me help your scriptural ineptitude...Seed time is set by MAN, the time for harvest is SET BY GOD, whatever meanings you read into scriptures ARE your insinuations. Paul planted, Appolo watered, who gives the INCREASE

Nobody sets harvest time, you. Follow natural laws

Bidam:
I am tired of repetitions. Who set the time for harvest in that verse of scripture you quoted?

So there is harvest time after all? Wonderful

Bidam:
Calling people names here won't help your sorry pathetic case.Who set the harvest time? Man or God? Did you read my posts at all, or is it your projections into what i never said that is the basis of your contentions here?

Nobody said Paul was poor, that's your own invention probably not off your head
Once again,
Paul gave his
1. Time
2. Money
3. Privillege

Time is very obvious from the record of his journeying. Money is evident in that he is on record at least twice WORKING hard to maintain himself so as not to burden the churches. Paul partly funded his mission work. That means he gave his money to the ministry. No different from a minister who buys their instruments out of his savings. Paul was entitled to support for his work. 1 Cor 9. This is a right he waived.

You may ridicule his suffering and persecution but I won't join you. He did it for the sake of the gospel. So could you please explain to us how these immense sacrifices were rewarded given that there is a 'principle' of giving and receiving?

Bidam:
I am used to ur dribbles and deflections from posts. Paul persecutions and sufferings along with other apostles of old does nothing to your lame explanations on giving and receiving. Christian persecutions and sufferings is in no way giving and receiving.

Or you can tell us what Paul was saying to the corinthians in 1 cor 5:8?

To categorically make a bold claim that Paul was a poor man is a scriptural fallacy, yes he did reap his rewards.

Paul was prosperous in all his journeys

You are splitting hairs with your silly Oyaks semantics.
Seed is a noun. Sowing is a verb (action) to force a noun to be a verb, it is qualified by the word time literally meaning a time of seeds.
Harvest on the other hand can be a noun meaning what has been harvested or it can be a verb meaning the act of harvesting. So harvest does not need a qualifier to force it to be a verb

And besides,
Matthew 13:30 (KJV)
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

This parable definitely includes the word harvest time
Of course parables are based on realism. There was such a thing as harvest time being the period over which harvest was dome

Bidam:
What you said was seed time and havrvest time. Genesis never said such..it said seed time and HARVEST. There is a reason time wasn't included in the harvest,care to explain it to us?

Thank you, that's why I call them hooligans who are only fit for regurgitating Oyaks philosophies. No different from Jehovah's Witnesses who are actually trained to defend their doctrines. It doesn't matter whether a Witness is in Budapest or Boston, they use the same WORDS and same scriptures quoted and misquoted the same way

nannymcphee:
I'm sure you are from CE, what you just said about harvest not having a timeframe is what you were taught but you haven't really studied it for yourself.



The above scripture is talking about the natural events in life. If you claim based on this scripture that there is a time to sow seeds but harvest can be any time, can you explain why crops have seasons when they are available?

Can you sow cocoa & reap it any time or there is a time frame to harvest it?

even though the bible did not add "time" to summer or winter or day or night, aren't these seasons & time

Eg summer time, winter time, day time, night time etc will you now say these aforementioned words are wrong because time was not attached to it in the bible?

Ecc3:2

2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted

A TIME to pluck up that which is planted = HARVEST TIME

it time you start studying for yourself all the words/statements you have been taught in church

Since it is a universal principle, please explain to us what Paul reaped from giving;
1. His time,
2. His money
3. His privilleges

Bidam:
Whatever you call it. The principle is applicable in the word of God to every realm and level of human activity in the earth not only in finances. I didn't bring the Genesis up, you did, the onus is on you to give us your explanations, rather than the usual dribblings you are used to.

Am not looking for the meaning of Revelation 14:15 just saying that reaping means harvesting. Is there any other of reaping apart from harvesting?

Bidam:
Another silly post.Stop quoting revelations out of context. It is way above your pay grade.

1. Money
2. Time
3. Privileges

If you doubt and need scriptures to bck this I can provide

Bidam:
What did he give?

Silly semantics. Is REAPING not equivalent to HARVEST TIME?

Revelation 14:15 (KJV)
And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe. 16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

Bidam:
Did you ignore the fact that her post mentioned there is seedtime but nothing like harvesttime or are you being mischievious here? Take time to read peoples post before replying na.

Halfheartedly agreed. Let's imagine he taught it. What did he receive or expect to receive out of his own giving?

Bidam:
The question is actually irrelevant because Paul taught the galatians, corinthians and philippians a doctrine on GIVING AND RECEIVING. Address that first and stop raising red herrings here.

Oga, isn't reaping harvesting? And isn't sowing seed time?

Bidam:
Don't mind him, my post never mentioned seed time and harvest time but sowing and reaping, he doesn't even know how to address posts.

It's first mentioned in
Genesis 8:22 (KJV)
While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

For NT application of the same and specifically with regard to WOF and abuse of scriptures, ask your matey Bidam

LambanoPeace:
Olodo rabata, there is no such thing as the above bold in the Bible. Oya argue let me embarrass you with Scriptures. There is seed time, but nothing like harvest time. Where did you pull out seed time and harvest time law from?

Does/did that 'law' or 'principle' apply to Paul himself? Answer that and I will break down that verse in Yoruba,Greek and sign language if need be

Bidam:
So quit the snide remrks,side talks attacking people and straw clutching and tell us your interpretations on the law of sowing and reaping in Paul's epistles. Borrow a leaf from your ally candour and attack the message not the messenger.

The most startling bit is not that Pastors are wealthy, but that the source of their wealth is almost entirely from their members' giving and not any value addition activity. I wonder if these pastropreneurs are comfortable with their wealth seeing its dubious sources. You can bet deep down they are ashamed of it else they would gladly be less opaque with their income streams ( salary, honorarium,cumulative monthly prophet's gifts and so forth)

Paul gave the most. Care to share with us mortals o goD Bidam what he reaped or was expecting? Did the 'law of seed time and harvest time' apply to him? What about the 'reapers overtaking the sowers' anointing?

He gave up his comfort and status, was imprisoned, badly beaten severally nearly died so much that he exclaimed that he died daily, gave up his RIGHT to be supported by Corinthians and Thessalonians, gave up (re?)marriage- 1Cor 9.......what was his reward seeing Christ said we would reap hundredfold IN THIS WORLD? And what entitles you more than him? The fact that he lived 1950 years before you?


I don't mind if Christ Embassy hooligans can recite Oyaks philosophies backward, but when they misrepresent Holy Spirit/Scriptures, they sure are twisting Paul's writing to their damnation

Bidam:
I don't believe Gombs is of the opinion that given shouldn't be "love driven" or that anyone's act of love should be dependent on any rewards,

What i believe scripture teaches is that "GIVING IS TAUGHT AS RECIPROCAL. Hagin talked about the "Law of sowing and reaping on pg 181. This is conspicuosly absent in your post here.

He said Paul clearly teaches the law of sowing and reaping ( 2 cor 9:6- a far contrast to your "group" assertions that people should give without expecting anything in return which is no where found in scriptures.

Hagin quoted Gal 6:7-8 and Phil 4:14-19 to further drive home a point here. Paul specifically addressed the philippian church that "No church communicated with me concerning GIVING AND RECEIVING, but ye only". So it is in order to say the philippians actually anticipated receving from God because they ministered to Paul's needs.

We often hear folks misquoting Christ and assuming he said that we should "give, hoping for nothing in return", when actually that verse reads "lend hoping for nothing in return". There's is no confusing between "lend" and "give"- and both occur on the basis of Love in His teaching.

Let's take a look at the scripture closely in Luke 6:35 and 38.

To lend is NOT the same as to give.

Giving in a selfless manner does not negate or contradict the fact that it is reciprocal.

If a believer wants to give without expecting anything in return, he or she should clearly be willing to shun all dubious claims to "assurances" and "trust" in God for "rewards" however pretentiously worded. To have assurance or trust in God for His reward at anytime is the same as expecting something in return for giving. All the sweet-talk about 'selfless giving' are lame attempts to deny the obvious.

It is a sanctimonious fallacy often repeated that giving is 'WITHOUT' expecting anything in return from God or man. To maintain that fallacy is to ignore CLEAR teaching of scripture.

WOFers are professional exorcists and have the MOST experience in matters spiritual. You bet they can teach the Holy Spirit a thing or two about His gifts
I recall mbaemeka injecting his own experience in using the name of Jesus to prop his hollow argument. That's ignorance and pride rolled together

Gombs:
Was Hagin the first to have experienced it? If you haven’t, does that make it not of God? You have not experienced 1/1, 000, 000, 000th of the Holy Spirit, and I can understand that, for eg [b]You have never casted out demons, [/b]nor smell them, just because the Bible did not expressly say anything about them smelling, does that mean it is not true?

I do not have your time today or this week, but surely I will.

John came in the 'spirit and power' of Elijah. It means his job/assignment and that of Elijah had much in common. Of course John never performed any miracles but Jesus himself confirmed that John fulfilled Malachi's prophecy

nell07:
Recently a friend was saying that elijah had to come back as john the baptist... Gave lots of proof (including d hide clothing)
and also some passages...
Matt 11: 13-14
malachi 4:5

ok, usually i dont bother with such things, buh dis one caught my fancy enought to make me dust off my bible for a quick peek.

I'm begining to think he's right (my friend i mean)... But i'd love to get any additional views, if any.

Take all that BS and demonstrate it from the the innumerable angelic encounters recorded for us in the scriptures. When you will learn to lean on God's Word and not arm of the flesh('Christian books') the Kingdom will surely have come

Bidam:
You never know this guy, he has opened a thread already about mysticism inviting me.

I clearly remember a group of us praying together in the university when the Holy Ghost fell on us, we were laughing and crying at the same time, it is a realm that you enter into by the sovereign will of the Father, it doesn't come often though, i cannot forget that experience, i saw a white cloud of glory envelop us, we were drunk with the wine of the Spirit.


Do you know we spent 3hrs in that state without even realising it? It was as if it was 10minutes, after that a joy unspeakable flooded our souls and we kept prophesying to one another.

Let me clear the air concerning the issue of angels. Scripture is clear that they are ministering spirits dispatched by heavenly command to minister "FOR" those who are the heirs of salvation. The greek word "for"(dia) is very important. It indicates that there are two levels of sending in angelic activity. First heaven sends them to us to serve us, the church, and then they minister for(dia) us as we release them to perform their invisible spiritual functions in the warfare.There is a technology behind this really. The technology is further revealed in Psalm 103:20,21. We are told the angels "excel" in strength, the hebrew word means they are warriors. They are action oriented, their warfare is explosive and strong and their strength is released in active doing. They do His word.

The secret is that they heed the voice of His word, they do not respond to the divine intent of God by itself, but they need the spoken word of God to be released. The word "heed" is a hebrew word that means "to hear intelligently with an implication of instant obedience in action". The word "voice" means to call aloud and "word"(dabar) means a thing spoken forth.

This is to say that these mighty warring exceedingly strong angels who are obedient to act instantly in agreement with divine intent, will hear intelligently and obey in powerful action when the word in the mind of God is uttered forth aloud through human lips in the earth. They minister for us the church. If we speak out the things that is in the mind of God( praying in the Spirit and also with scriptural insights and understanding), then the angelic powers in the spirit realm with praises and blessing on their lips go out to fight and win.

Not only do they advance the battle for us, they also act as a security force in the spirit realm to guard against enemy backlash. God issues a specific command on this in Psalam 91:11-13.

I would have loved you to get a copy of Noel woodroffe on governmental prayer. My God! That guy is a blessing.

What is the point of scriptures if God reveals stuff to people outside scriptures? Are the 66 books incomplete?

trustman:
[size=6pt][/size]

I find NO scriptural justification for this your statement on laughter:
"That said, laughter is a potent, scriptural weapon of spiritual warfare, which has been effective for Hagin, me and others. I thank Bro. Hagin for his teaching on that. Because spiritual laughter inflicts damage to the devil, he hates it."

Nothing in scripture ties laughter to spiritual warfare not to talk of it being a POTENT WEAPON for our spiritual warfare. 

The Scripture says in 2 Corinthians 10 that: 
"3 For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh.
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds."

When as Ephesians 6:12 says: 
"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places." how do you think a human 'resource', laughter, becomes a potent weapon in a spiritual struggle?

No matter how fine-sounding an argument may be it MUST have a biblically sound basis for it to be a footing to live the spiritual life.

Experience not consistent with scripture should not be made doctrine. Reliance upon such personal experiences over and above clear biblical teachings is one of the things that has weakened Christian testimony today.

Protestants and by extension evangelicals base their theology on scriptures alone. There was a concept of SOLA SCRIPTURA that was pursued during Reformation. Any practice not backed by the Bible was discarded.

Catholics insisted on scriptures AND 'sacred tradition' as their source of authority. This means whatever is not found in the Bible can still be justified if it has been taught traditionally. They also believe that God is still revealing new things through the Pope/Rome. That's why they look up to him to know whether the condoms should be studded or scented or laced with a spermicide.

There is a danger if any Christian fails to test their subjective experiences against scriptures,they are no different from Catholics. And there is no point in having this discourse if we all drew from our experiences our theology. Somebody may just claim that God told them to offer Firstfruits or tithes. This is the course Joseph Smith took and out of his marvelous visions, LDS was born.

Bidam:
God still speaks through human lips today and that is what is called prophecy, so it's no business of yours if God decides to use the same human lips to Laugh..relate that with Psalm 2:4, God is Christ and Christ is God, we are sitted with Christ in heavenly places.

GoD mbaemeka,
Gibberish apart,
where did vooks claim that Paul rebuked Peter in Galatia? No proof. What kind of goD are you,the puny brained variety? That you can't quote me nor comprehend what I said? Galatians 2 was read to churches in Galatia and you can bet after it was read, everyone knew Peter tripped and Paul rebuked him publicly.

Now that you are just a goD over satan, that's a mighty trimmed down version that has no creative credentials behind him...but you have tried to slay me by car crash and suicide. A puny brained moronic negro shaman

If Christ requires your consent to take you home, without your consent you are immortal otherwise your consent is irrelevant..but I hear this Negro claiming he will live long

Christ never ascended to heaven with his blood in a jar or something, whatever He did at the cross was finished. double ascension is harebrained theology that has ZERO basis in the scriptures any more than Assumption of Mary has. In fact Assumption is better because it is an older tale.

mbaemeka:
Dear Misdirected groupie,

I know you convulse any time I fail to reply all the mentions you give me in a day. I would have felt the same way if I was this infatuated about a faceless moniker on NL. I would have loved to keep throwing the occasional jabs with you and reminding you of your numerous goofs, chief of which would be "Jesus didn't take his blood to the most holy place in heaven and there is nothing like without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins" but I would be dumbing myself down to engage with you. Unlike you, and the idiotic way you employ strawman's, figments of your poor imagination and facetious hyperboles, I am willing to discuss what I believe from the bible with copious references to buttress them. While I am certain that you may not agree with my interpretations (majorly because you are an ignoramus- scripturally and otherwise), you would not be able to gainsay that the words will be written in black and white for even someone with your level of intelligence to comprehend.

YES, I am a GOD. I am not a GOD over GOD neither am I one over my fellow men. But I am a GOD over the Devil, his cohorts and his works. I am a GOD over the principles and elements that this fallen world is governed by and I make no apologies for it. If you take me up on this (and I am in the mood) I would teach you from the scriptures and expect your pusillanimity to rear its very ugly bighead. Sadly, I cannot say the same for you and most of those of your ilk (the ilk of the misinformed). You offer no alternatives and like hypocritical yet ignorant churls, you insist that something is wrong because it is wrong and not because you know what is right. You are the one's who freely express how satan is the GOD of this world and even quote the scriptures that suggest so but I do not see you ask the bible or the devil himself how many planets he has created, yet when I say I am satan's God you start asking me moronic (borrowing your own words) questions like how many planets I have created. All such reasoning only betrays you for who you really are-a scripturally handicapped troll and I would do well to avoid you.

FYI I am not irked that you call me goD or what not. As you can see, I have gone many steps ahead of you by capitalizing the 'god' so you can ride on with your off-color jokes and snide remarks. What I do not appreciate is the endless mentions and lies like alleging that I said Jesus will have to Kneel and BEG for my consent to take me home or like the other failed writer and blogger claimed that "my life's motto is to be anywhere the money is" this is after I said true spiritual maturity entails submitting to the will of God and how that money follows me wherever I go.

I know you both have the memory of a formatted Z2 so I would try to do the impossible, by re-quoting myself for the sake of posterity and somehow hoping you both grasp what I said.





So if you want to quote me, you should at least do so exactly without forcing my posts to say what you want it to say after all, I am responsible for what I say and not how you choose to interpret it. Knowing who you are I expect you to evade all I have said and then ask me to show you where you claimed Paul rebuked Peter in Galatia. I have done so before and I would so again for posterity's sake:



Your exact words ^^^^ and I was even courteous enough by telling you to rephrase the above thus:



Now I expect you to ignore your own quote and then wait for the next 2 pages to pass before you resume asking me for the same post and claiming that I lied against you.

PS: Thanks to Bidam and Lordreed for vindicating me. Special thanks too to Image123 for impartially yet rightfully interpreting my posts. What more can I say about brother Gombs? God bless you all real good.

If anyone can decide what to do with the money, they would be following Paul's principle of giving as you purpose and certainly nobody should look down on those stuck with a fixed 10% or 5% or whatever they decide on. And this is the whole point, there is NO law on what and when to give

There also is no record of human sacrifices both in the NT nor in church history. If a sect decided to offer them since we lack ALL first century sermons, would they be justified? We have ENOUGH history both in the scriptures and outside of the first few hundreds of years on giving to conclude that tithing was never practiced at all and that gibing was along free will basis. You can't IGNORE all the evidence and rely on your fertile imagination to fill the gaps

About Matthew 23, Jesus was born UNDER the Law and that's why he kept the Law and he instructed the Jews to keep the Law. This point has been hammered so many times I don't understand why you insist on it. He instructed an ex-leper to offer sacrifices according to the Law. Nobody today offers animal sacrifices after they have been healed

Jesus also told one man to sell EVERYTHING he had and follow him. Do you practice or teach this? Not everything Jesus said is for the Christian or anybody who reads them, and there is a very simple test of confirming what's meant for you or not, it is not arbitrally

Image123:
Anybody can decide what he wants to do with his income. That Jerome or Luke does not write about it doesn't mean it DID NOT happen. It was said that someone usually gave 90% of his money to church, well that was said. What about others that were not said? What is so impossible about someone giving a tenth to levites and another tenth to the church. Didn't people give much more, even in the early church? If people are giving sacrificially, and selling their possessions, and giving graciously and in abundance of their joy and their deep poverty. Why then go to kindergaten to teach the persons about giving 10%? Why would i enter a JAMB class or WAEC class and insist on teaching them the times-table? Is it not taken for granted that they know much more than the 2 times-table? What practice was never revealed to the apostles and the early church? Do you have a copy of all their sermon outlines with you? Do you hear of John or Thomas teaching about the Holy Communion? Does it mean they(in particular) never taught it? Is it not implied in Jesus words to Teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. Wasn't Jesus clearly speaking to the multitudes and HIS disciples in Matthew 23v1? Would the multitudes and disciples be scot-free if they behaved like the pharisees(if Jesus wasn't talking to them)? Wasn't Jesus talking to a pharisee when He said to be born again, or to render to God the things that are God's?

.

Valid questions
If Jesus followers paid tithes, it MUST have been to the Levites as these were the only people mandated to collect it. And the tithers MUST have been Jews in keeping with elements of Moses among others Sabbath, visiting the temple,Feasts and so forth.

What is clear is at not point in early church history did Christians pay tithes to anybody either to support ministry or for charity. There is ample evidence of both their supporting ministry and charity so this is no argument from silence by any mean. This makes tithing a late tradition and as such questionable if for nothing else

I recommend this link for a brief history of tithing;
http://slaveoftheword..com/2013/05/tithing-and-church-history-response-to.html
Before you crucify me for stepping outside scriptures please understand my point; tithing practice was adopted hundreds of years after Pentecost which supports the Biblical silence over the same.

Does it bother you that such a practice with all the supposed immense benefits was never revealed to the apostles and the early church? They had the OT and Jesus injunction to the Pharisees not to mention Hebrews and Melchizedek yet the apostles and the Church Fathers stuck to Pauline formula of free will. Do you believe Holy Spirit deemed it not fit to reveal this to them?

Image123:
How do you conclude that Christ's followers did not give or receive tithes? As far as i know, some levites and priests were Christ's followers and people were still giving tithes and offerings at the temple in Jerusalem during the period of the early church.
Act 6:7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.


how do you know who stopped what? Paul clearly made an old testament vow and offered offerings in the temple, how do you conclude that all of humanity(Christians) for 1500years, NO Christian gave or received the tithe. Are you God or omniscient? Or you have the database on your computer there?

His puny brains will overheat. Let him answer my four questions first

mobuch:
I have challenge