₦airaland Forum

toba:
Well if u are indeed viaro, toba has missed u greatly and i hope odunnu delivered my numerous messages to u

At this point, I will not hide - indeed I am viaro. I got all your messages and that of odunnu. It's a long story - but I thank God I am alive after a very serious accident. I signed in with a different ID because I lost the details of my viaro login. I did not deny the connection - only did not think it was that important and did not want it to deflect from the topic being discussed.

This one stands over and above everything I have tried to say:

debosky:
. . . but we are not called to conformity, beyond one Faith, one Father, one Lord and one Baptism.

God bless you very much for that!

This is where (and perhaps why) I like to allow people to hold their own opnions and conclusions - especially because I learn awhole lot from everyone.

debosky:
This may be a matter of semantics, but I'll leave linguistic experts like WT to handle this better. From my perspective, the 'principle' is giving a tithe, the 'application' (that should be determined by each giver in his heart) may be paying it out of every income.

That line in your comment is very captivating and exhilarating for me! Good point about the 'principle' and 'application' - you have a way of putting things in perspective and in very few words.

However, I do not hold so much that tithes (even voluntarily given) be out of every income. I recognize that you didn't say that it must be so; but in some other practical situations it may be all well to give from some sources of income. That's just an opinion, as I'm only speaking from experiences I've seen in some Christians' lives.

Zikkyy:
If they believe the tenth can be given to widows or orphans, they would be doing it

I feel personally that tithes (ie., voluntarily given) are ALSO used for the care of widows. I use "ALSO" because that is not the "ONLY" point of tithing voluntarily in or outside Church. I know a lot of people who claim the same thing as succinctly put by Tunde Bakare that: "Tithes are to be used to take care of widows, the helpless, and services in the house of God" - but that is NOT THE ONLY point of voluntary tithes. We cannot be emphasising half-truths and make one half the most emphatic factor in any expression of our giving - whatever that giviing may be.

People sometimes narrow their thinking to the point where they lose sight of more important matters - just like when people have issues about the Law to such extent that they build multiverses and multiplanets from minor issues and then lose sight altogether of far more important issues (in Jesus' own words: "the weightier matters" - Matt. 23:23). People should be allowed to give as well as fell free to do so as they choose - as well as make their own choices to NOT GIVE AT ALL IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT TO DO!

Edited:

If this is your problem -

Enigma:
. . . that the "voluntary" tithing can be given to e.g. widows, orphans etc.

- have I said anything anywhere that they CANNOT?

- have you read any line in my comments that I made tithing or giving a matter of "ONLY IN Church"?

- have I argued otherwise to make "voluntary tithes" something that CANNOT be given to widows, orphans, etc?

- have I made any assertions ANYWHERE that voluntary tithes are not meant for care that included the poor or widows?

What you have tried to argue is that my idea of "voluntary tithing" is not "voluntary" unless I bend to your own terms. I WILL NOT bend to please you. I have said that I find it really callous for people to to go about hunting other believers in order to tell them what to do and not do so that you can then be satisfied - whereas YOU are not willing to dialogue and show people what YOU do.

Since I did not argue any hint of "compulsory tithes", why all the heat to force that into my position? Just WHY?

Those who want to know what I stand for can go through my articles on my site, or read them in all the threads I have posted on in this forum. NOWHERE have I made giving in Church the "ONLY" acceptable means of Christian giving. What I do not do is confuse between the various types of giving among Christians.

Second, no one asked me why I feel that tithes "SHOULD" be be given in Church. Apart from garyarnold who sought a red herring to force "SHOULD" as meaning 'obligatory tithes' into my comments, I wondered why NO ONE ever asked that question. Not interested? No problem - but that should not then mean that all I have said and shown that voluntary tithes and giving lead to any idea of "compulsory" or "obligatory" tithes or giving, whereas that is NOT TRUE,  I have shown clearly that I do not agree with those who preach any form of "obligatory" or "compulsory" giving. I have shown this on this forum, and also quoting articles I wrote on my site.

Now, again I ask: if your problem is about this  -

Enigma:
. . . that the "voluntary" tithing can be given to e.g. widows, orphans etc.

- I have not argued to the contrary. So why do I feel (my POV) -  why am I persuaded that voluntry tithes should be given in Church? Because -

(1)  it COULD BE a channel of meeting the same ends and uses as you guys have argued for: that is, to meet the care of widows, orphans and other needy causes. Perhaps some might object to this and question WHY? My answer is that the care of widows is taught in Scripture to include what happens in Church. I do not mean that there are no widows outside the Church; but I think it should be pretty obvious to any reader of 1 Timothy 5:9-11 that Paul spoke about care of widows who meet certain prerequisites. First, Paul says "Let a widow be enrolled IF she (has done or meets certain criteria)". . . but then he says: "But refuse to enroll younger widows, . . ."

Now, I do not make hard and fast rules about these things. But the reason why I felt that voluntary tithes be given in Church is simply that the ends for such offerings could be (not "MUST BE" met - widows, ophans, the poor, etc., could be taken care of. This does not mean that there are no widows or orphans outside the Church; but I express my opinions based on what I see in Scripture and can stand for them. If someone asks me what our voluntary tithes and offerings are used for, my opinion is the same that you are arguing for: that includes widows and orphans and what nots!

Now, IF you are arguing that others might decide to do otherwise DIFFERENTLY from what I feel and gave in my opinions, I did not object - I reiterated that AGAIN and AGAIN, for example:

That is simply because I believe that tithes should be given in Church where they could be used for the very same ends and purposes that you and your lot desire to see. The problem here is that even if I were to write everything in A-B-C fashion in your dialect, you still will never be satisfied - as long as I am not joining your drama to start hunting other Christians to prevent them from freely expressing their giving through tithes. My position is not a law for any believer - and I have said over and over again that I do not have a quarrel with anyone who wants to do as they wish!

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.288.html#msg8983801

If people feel that they do not want to give tithes or offerings or anything else in Church, I am happy to let them feel free to do as they wish. And if some feel pressured to make me force anyone to bend to certain rules or definitions, I WILL NOT PARTAKE IN SUCH - because that is contrary to the true spirit of liberty in voluntary giving that we are all preaching! I cannot change anyone's perception - NOR will I allow for anyone to try to force their own definitions upon anyone else in order to satisfy them, especially where such people who sit themselves as judges over other men's affairs are not showing what they themselves do!

Feel free to give - and also feel free NOT TO GIVE!! To presure someone to give is as diabolic as forcing them to give according to some capricious idea of definitions that some people have made for themselves! My view of "voluntary" may not (and will never) satisfy some people - that is all well. But I will not be put on spot to please some party loyalist on their own terms.

Sweetnecta:
in the view of the above, is anything said by Paul worth its weight in a single grain of salt?

We know already that Muhammad prayed for forgiveness for his sins seventy times a day - and I definitely cannot listen to a man who is that much loaded with sins! If he could ask for forgiveness 70 times a day for all the years I went to University, that would make about 102,200 sins for just 4 years! I don't read of Paul praying for sinning seventy times a day, do you?

Sweetnecta:
a person who thinks will know that God will never be flesh, like His creations/made; what maker makes.

Thinking people know that Romans 1:3 was describing the human lineage of Jesus Christ - I guess that is beyond you if you are struggling to even think.

What I am still wondering about is that none of you have been abe to show any verse of the Quran that explains how or why Mary was "sister" of Aaron. The excuses that I read from you guys are just fanciful tales. Arabic and Islamic cultures do not describe people as brothers and sisters who lived in generations FAR APART from each other! O' comon guys - just either admit you don't see any explanation in any verse of the Quran for that conundrum rather than trying to fill the gap for Muhammad.

Joagbaje:
Nice Article, but there's no biblical evidence for it that's why I don't quote such. But certain truths are universal .

It is true that certain truths are universal (Religious Giving Is Universal). But it is not helpful to say that you cannot quote such outside sources just because you feel that there is no Biblical evidence. In very fact, there is - only some men do not see them by careful study. However, the use of external sources for buttressing Biblical truth was well known among the prophets - see Daniel 9:2 for example. We can cite other references as long as we do so without confusing matters all the more.

So the spirit of men even in it's dead state can still pick some spiritual truths even though they may go about it wrongly.

That's true, and is confirmed in many places in the Bible. Romans 2:14 says that Gentiles who do not have the Law can do by nature the things contained in the Law; and Romans 3:29 affirms that God is also the God of the Gentiles and not only of the Jews.

But the idea that Abraham was influenced by Babylonia culture is not acceptable , he would have copied some of their evil culture also.

Good point. Abraham was not unaware of tithing among the Babylonians; but Scripture does not argue that he gave tithes as a matter of such an influence.

chukwudi44:
where is the biblical evidence dat christians paid tithes

There are many things in Christianity that Christians love to practice and will die for that have no Biblical evidence. The Catholic Church is full of them aplenty.

frosbel:
Mohamed Elsanousi adamantly disagrees, saying it’s good for the country to know churches like these are extending a hand to Muslims.

Elsanousi is National Community Outreach Director of the Islamic Society of North America. He says "allowing people the freedom of worship is respectful and strengthens the relationship."

Elsanousi says there are many churches and even synagogues in America where Muslims share space with Christians. “We feel good about it,” he says.

What strikes me here in Elsanousi's remarks is this: how many Muslims have allowed Christians to use their mosques for Church worship? How much effort has his society (Islamic Society of North America) made in Muslim countries to "allow [non-Muslim] people the freedom of worship" so that relationships between Christians and Muslims can thereby be "strengthened"? How would the Muslim community react if some Muslims opened doors to Christian worship?

LagosShia:
why dont you think that the "sister of Aron" is figurative?

All you should have done is simply explain the conundrum of Mary being the "sister of Aaron". That line is not answered by posing a question in anger. If you wanted to know how and why Jesus is called the Son of David, at least the Bible explains that in Romans 1:3 -  "Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh." I don't know if the Quran explains how and why Mary is called the "sister" of Aaron - and you are not helping your case by reacting angrily with questions about Jesus which the Bible well explains.

Besides all this, it is not Arabic or Islamic culture during Mohammad's time to address people of different generations as "sister of"  or "brother of" - even where you think they did, the speaker would have left some explanation. For the Quran to just say that Mary was the "sister" of Aaron without explanation in the Quran itself is simply begging the question.

Kenyy:
. . .but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.

Not true. Most of the people who hold themselves to be good actually do not need religion of sorts before they do bad things. History is strewn with them.

nuclearboy:
@wordtalk:

I know you are not an advocate for anti-tithing! I have said that EVEN me am not whist being thought so because I argue against the COMPULSORY "legalistic" thrust it carries today!

What I meant with my statement was that your clarification about the "voluntary" nature it ought have takes the wind out of the sail of those who lay heavy loads upon God's people and who sought to use your initial statements as a prop for their avarice

I deeply apologise where I might have misread yours or come across in a manner not intended. I was just put off by the attitude of those who cannot be rest content with the simple matters I have made plain for myself. Thanks for your understanding.

debosky:
Without holding brief for Wordtalk (again ) I think I can answer this based on the responses I have seen. WT clearly expressed his preference by saying he/she believes tithes should be given to the Church - I don't think the purpose of the site is to share all the various shades that tithing can take on, but to express one person's opinion.

[size=14pt]However, if the site claims that this is the ONLY way of tithing permitted, then feel free to take him up on that.[/size]

Very much appreciated, thanks a gazillion! I just marvel at his restlessness in reading his own problems into my comments or website!

@garyarnold,

I have said again and again that this thread or the topic thereof are not about persons or personalities or even about you or me. Nothing a tither does will ever satisfy you - and all your hunting around the globe to bend people to your anti-tithing arguments will not mature your spiritual life! It is not even as if you know what you are arguing - nevermind that you are not inclined to answer questions before advertizing your accounting career without budgeting! If your whole life as a Christian is set upon what I have said for myself, then let me know how I can help progress your spirituality. Other than that, please stay on focus and refrain from having hypertensions on what you find on my website.

garyarnold:
I have gone through most of wordtalk's website and do not find where he ever says that voluntary tithing can be on anything other than one's income. I also have not found in all his articles where he says tithing can be giving anywhere except the church.

Why is that?

That is simply because I believe that tithes should be given in Church where they could be used for the very same ends and purposes that you and your lot desire to see. The problem here is that even if I were to write everything in A-B-C fashion in your dialect, you still will never be satisfied - as long as I am not joining your drama to start hunting other Christians to prevent them from freely expressing their giving through tithes. My position is not a law for any believer - and I have said over and over again that I do not have a quarrel with anyone who wants to do as they wish!

It certainly appears that either wordtalk doesn't want to expose to others that tithing can be a tenth of anything they desire, and can be given to whomever this wish.

I certainly will not be pressured to play your games, sorry. I leave others to do as they want: I do not harangue them to bend to certain anti-tithing dogmas which even anti-tithers themselves do not obey! telling others what to do and not do while you yourself are not doing what you recommend is grand hypocrisy - that is why I will not bend or yield to your drama. Sorry.

It certainly appears that worktalk has an agenda, and that agenda is NOT telling the whole truth but rather to tell only that which fits his own tithing preference.

I have said things as simply as they are - without any anti-tithing agenda. I do not find your own version of complaints any nearer to "truth"; and if what I say is not sounding like what you want to hear, tough luck - I can't stand for your erratic assertions as "truth".

If wordtalk is sincere and really wants the tell the truth, he will revise his website and tell the whole truth - that tithing does not have to be a tenth of one's income, and that the tithe does not have to be given in church. Otherwise, wordtalk is guilty of manipulation by withholding a big part of the issue.

Lol, I am not guilty of your own manipulation. Because you do not read what you want to see on my website, you go about laying accusations just so you can sleep well at night. What I have said can be easily understood by those who do not have an anti-tithing agenda.

debosky:
Which is the way I think it should be - frankly I think many of us are too concerned with defining what others do/should do when it is of little benefit to do so.

You took it right out of my mouth!

debosky:
Again I don't see the benefit of this inquest. Wordtalk is not (I believe) holding brief for all voluntary tithing advocates out there, so why should he/she be asked to defend this position on behalf of all who preach it? There is no answer he/she can provide that will be fully satisfactory.

Thank you for reiterating my point exactly! God bless you much!

First of all, how do you define tithing? How do you define voluntary tithing? What does it mean to you? Is your own definition the same as the "man-made" definitions you like to accuse others about on this subject?

You see, garyarnold - this discussion is not about you or me. Nothing I do affects your life as a Christian; but I do find it diabolical for Christians to be hunting other believers around the globe in hope of telling them what to do or not do! I have stated my views as simply as can be. Since there's no hint of tithing for you and your lot, why is my tithing a huge problem for you at all?

garyarnold:
Since wordtalk has either said or inferred that he knows of many pastors who teach voluntary tithing, maybe (but I doubt it) wordtalk will tell us how many of those pastors say that voluntary tithing IS a tenth of your INCOME, and should or must be taken to the church.  And how many say you can voluntarily tithe by giving a tenth of whatever you want, to wherever you want.  Can we get an HONEST answer to these questions from wordtalk?  Just base this on YOUR experience - how do pastors who teach voluntary tithing define tithing?

I have given the example that people can read for themselves - Pastor Tunde Bakare:

Tithes are to be used to take care of widows, the helpless, and services in the house of God. . .

But it’s never compulsory. . .

Do I pay tithe? Definitely. But I don’t make it a law for everybody.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.64.html#msg8972672

For some that I know personally, these are the three things that often feature in their voluntary tithes. I don't bother myself trying to superintend over the details of how their tithes should be defined as 'voluntary'. I don't try to dictate strictures for them so that they can bend to some predefined ideology in order to satisfy me or you! I find it indeed callous to be meddling too deep into how people have chosen to voluntarily give or tithe.

Besides Pastor Tunde Bakare and those that I have spoken to and learned from, there are other churches outside Nigeria that encourage their churches to tithe without demanding such tithes to be compulsory. Here is another example -

Clarifications on Tithe and Offerings
On 15 April 2009, Matthew Kang, the Honorary Secretary of the New Creation Church, posted a reply to The Straits Times on the church's website stating that the New Creation Church was not a public charity and did not solicit public donations. He asserted that "there is absolutely no compulsion to give whether in tithes or offerings, and any giving is done out of a willing heart", and that "every giver is appreciated and it is taken in good faith that he believes in the elected leadership and will trust them to make good decisions for the particular church he has chosen to attend, whether as a member or a visitor."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Creation_Church#Clarifications_on_Tithe_and_Offerings

There are many other examples and testimonies of Christians and Churches that tithe - and they have expressed that their tithing is voluntary, not obligatory or by compulsion. If that is not sufficient to bear the point out, I don't see how you ever would be satisfied with all the evidence that people can read for themselves. This is why I distance myself from any suggestion by anybody that I were closer to "anti-tithers" - I AM NOT and DO NOT SHARE in their attitude! Let people be free to choose as they want to express their giving - whether in the form of tithes or freewill or alms or donations.

MrBible:
[size=13pt]Church is not a temple, church in other Bible translations is a congregation or assembly while temple is a place of worship. [/size]

1 Corinthians 3:16 from a few English translations/versions

ESV ^^ "Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? "

CEV ^^ "All of you surely know that you are God's temple and that his Spirit lives in you."

EMTV ^^ "Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?"

ERV ^^ "You should know that you yourselves are God's temple. God's Spirit lives in you."

GNB ^^ "Surely you know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you!"

GW ^^ "Don't you know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?"

KJV ^^ "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?"

NIV ^^ "Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst?"

NLT ^^ "Don’t you realize that all of you together are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God lives in you?"

ASV ^^ "Know ye not that ye are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?"

AMPLIFIED -
"Do you not discern and understand that you [the whole church at Corinth] are God's temple (His sanctuary), and that God's Spirit has His permanent dwelling in you [to be at home in you, collectively as a church and also individually]?"


Dear MrBible, these are a few that make the matter clear. The Church is God's Temple - yet, Christians have places of worship where they gather together for worship. This is not even an issue at all as it is one of the elementary things that believers should know.

tpia@:
in the bible, wasnt judas the one who was always shouting about offering?

Lol, I wonder! And he was the one who was also loudest to tell others how money should be spent "for the poor" - whereas the guy had no heart whatsoever for "the poor" (John 12:5-6).

debosky:
My view is that the crucial aspect is that the spoils of war belonged to Abram, hence he had control/ownership over it and hence could give it to God as tithe, essentially as an act of worship.

Glad to read the bold above. Some have argued forever that the spoils did not belong to Abraham. That would have been more problematic in reading Genesis 14. We do not find anyone giving tithes from something that they did not have any ownership or claims upon.

Edited:

MrBible:
[size=13pt]I think it is better you write your own bible Since you have your own explanation for everything the Bible says. Have you asked yourself why chucrh was never mentioned in the Old Testament[/size]

Have you been reading another book? Is it not the same Bible that I have been showing you what you read in my posts? You may not find the word "church" in the Old Testament - but in Acts 7:38, was Stephen not referring to the people of God in the OLD TESTAMENT when he spoke of Moses among them? Hear Stephen: "This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness. . . ". The church in the wilderness was referring to people in the Old Testament.

Living the Christian life is not about trying to find certain words which occur or did not occur in the Old Testament or New Testament. It is when people become so occupied with that kind of exercise that questions begin to emerge like the ones you ask!

MrBible:
[size=13pt]And also the only tithe Abram paid was from the spoils of war, the question now is, is our income spoils of war [/size]

Oh Lord! Why do people have to get so rigid like this? It is like saying also that since the only passover in Israel were animals, is our Christian Passover supposed to be an animal as well?

wordtalk:
When people miss this fact, they then argue that we cannot use the Law as the basis of our giving in the NT! That is because they most probably do not realise that it is the same Law of Moses that NT giving is based!

Even so, the new covenant is based on the foundation of the Old Testament. As Christians we cannot begin to disenfranchise ourselves from the Old Testament as Scripture for the very reason that Christianity is based on the OT!

debosky:
I disagree - if we take other actions of Abraham as evidence/symbolism of things to come - his faith, his circumcision, his encounter with Melchizedek, why can't a tithe (albeit recorded as a one-off) by Abraham serve as inspiration for people today?

Ah! Thank you for being so simple and full of good sense!

What I would say is that it is unlikely that 'modern tithing' (whatever this specific definition is) could have arisen solely from Abram/Abraham's example, without reference to practices under the law, just as any aspect of Christian doctrine (including broader giving) cannot be completely extricated from practices under the law.

Wonderful! I wonder why this is sooooo difficult for some to grasp! The reality is that MOST Christian doctrines taught by the NT apostles were derived FROM THE LAW OF MOSES and from the lives of the OT prophets and covenant people. We cannot deny that. When people miss this fact, they then argue that we cannot use the Law as the basis of our giving in the NT! That is because they most probably do not realise that it is the same Law of Moses that NT giving is based!

No, the analogy is not helpful between prayer and tithing or any other type of giving.

In a Christian's walk with God,

1. Giving is not compulsory
2. Prayer is not compulsory
3. Marriage is not compulsory
4. Eating is not compulsory
5. Singing is not compulsory
6. Fasting is not compulsory
7. Going to Catholic mass is not compulsory
. . . and a whole other things that are not 'compulsory'.

The problem with many people is the effort to either side to force each person's own belief upon others - one side says because they don't do this or that, therefore every Christian MUST or MUST NOT do likewise! Just because you are married and your brother is not considering married life, should the married start castigating the unmarried therefore? As long as the unmarried is not commiting fornication or adultery or any other vice, why does his or her unmarried life become an issue for the married?

If you don't eat and I enjoy a good feast, why should my eating become a problem for those who feel that I must go about like them for not eating? The person who does not eat would argue from Genesis to Malachi that eating is not for Christians - and he may sound right and accurate and correct in all his or her arguments! But oh dear me - why should my eating become a problem to you who does not eat simply because you have chosen to not eat based on some arguments about Genesis to Malachi?


After all the heat, people begin to compromise with suspicions at one another. The non-eaters or anti-eaters say that "it is okay" to eat "voluntarily" and not "compulsorily". Those who enjoy their meals with thanksgiving say that they do so voluntarily. Then all hell is let loose because for the anti-eaters, "voluntary" is not "voluntary" unless the eaters bend to the terms and definitive manipulations of the anti-eaters!

For God's sake!! When will Christians move past this self-destructive arguments and let others feel free to enjoy how God leads them in their daily lives?

Zikkyy:
one has to be careful when defining 'voluntary' for most people, 'voluntary' could just be tithing or not tithing. it has nothing to do with where you render your tenth (i.e. church or charity).

Bless you.

MrBible:
[size=13pt]But Jesus did not say that on this "Rock I will build My Temple" . The church is not a temple, so your example is not relevant to this topic. The true believers of Jesus are the Church He was referring to.
Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.[/size]

Please stay on course. I don't see the relevance of your argument in that - because it is like seomeone trying to argue that Jesus never taught about 'GRACE' just because in all His preaching He never once mentioned the word "grace". If your argumentis shifting to whether we are the Temple of God, there's enough in the NT to confirm that the Church is the Temple of God (I Cor. 3:16; 6:19; II Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21) - so the idea that just because Jesus did not say that He would build His 'Temple' does not therefore deny the fact that the Church is His Temple.

nuclearboy:
Wordtalk has a position which if not well articulated could end up being turned against him - he simply wanted to avoid such in future, and he's not likely a "turncoat" - such cautious people rarely are.

Best, his stated stand does even MORE damage to the argument of the compulsory tithe advocates than ours -> BECAUSE BOTTOM-LINE, it shows that AT THEIR VERY BEST, the compulsory-tithe arguments reside in quicksand!

While I appreciate your observation of my cautious approach to matters like this, I don't think my aim was to cause anyone damage. Although this is not an issue in the bigger picture, I've said earlier that I'm not an anti-tither by any measure. Anti-tithers, at least in my POV, have a stated premise to be totally out and against any hint of tithing among Christians: that is not even close to what i have tried to argue.

Reason why I make these observations are that:

(a) I don't want to leave anyone in doubt as to where I stand - so that people don't mistake me for an anti-tither (or even close) just by reading some of your comments;
(b) I don't want to be mistaken for someone who is out to take sides and further divide the Body of Christ. I believe we can reason out issues, even where we disagree or agree - but that should not warrant the idea of "us vs them" culture among us as believers.

You're cool, so I have nothing personal against you or your views - and I hope you can understand what I'm saying here.

Joagbaje:
I didn't say anything contrary either. You are too sound to be manipulated by their schemes. God bless.

Lol, I know - that perhaps explains why some of them are still unsatisfied with the simple things I have said for myself even though there's nothing they find of substance to complain about.

dare2think:
Wordtalk, as much as I appreciate and accept your view on the Tithing subject, it is statements like the one I highlighted that I find really disturbing.

It is as though the author is insinuating that Non-tithers dont have a relationship wit God. It seems to me as a tactic to draw people to pay Tithes.

I haven't shifted from or changed my views, and I'm sorry if my previous remark on Joagbaje's comments seemed unclear. Let me reiterate:

1. Tithing and any other type of giving (freewill, donations, alms, contributions, etc)  are not the basis of our salvation or justification in Christ. That is why I have said and maintain that tithing (or not-tithing) is not a salvation matter.

2. Relationships with God are founded on premises that He Himself has given at a particular time. The gifts, offerings and giving of tithes are simply the demonstration of those relationships - they are not the basis for establishing those relationships. To be clear: Abraham did not give tithes or any other offerings in order to have a relationship with God - he gave them because he was already called of God to have a relationship with Him. The same with Israel.

3. Nobody should be lured to give something (tithes, freewill, firstfruits, contributions, alms, donations, etc.) so that they can thereby have a relationship with God - Christians give what they give because they already have that relationship with Him by faith in His Son, jesus Christ.

4. Will a person lose their relationship with God because they do not give anything (whether tithes, freewill, firstfruits, contributions, alms, donations, etc.)? No, I do not find such a thing taught in the Bible.

These are the things I have tried to maintain - so if I remark on what others are saying, it does not thereby mean that I had abandoned or shifted from the position I hold.

Joagbaje:
@ wordtalk

I really commend your strong stand on truth.

That's just simple enough. We don't need to go into the nitty gritty of the circumstances by which they gave tithes. The bible didn't indicate the details . important thing is the fact that tithing is a spiritual deed in relationship with God.

^^
It's not a problem - simple matters are not difficult to see unless people choose not to see them.

MrBible:
[size=13pt]17.Genesis 13:2
And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.

The Bible tells us that Abraham was very rich in cattle, silver and in gold, but apart from the tithe on the spoils of war he did not pay any other tithe. This is an indication that tithe before the law was not as it is practiced in churches today, if it was then the Bible would have told us that Abram paid tithes on his cattle, silver and gold before he went to war and returned with the booty of war he pay tithe on. Let no pastor deceive you that you are robbing God by not paying tithes of your income to them, these pastors are the ones robbing you. Be free in Christ, God loves a cheerful giver.[/size]

This is like asking: Why are Christians not taking their offerings to altars in Jerusalem exactly as it is done in the Levitical system? Afterall, Paul used the Law of Moses to justify Christian giving to support ministers, did he not?

1 Corinthians 9:13-14
Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

If you want to read the Old Testament in a legalistic manner, then it won't be difficult to ask questions in the same manner.

debosky:
My personal view in this regard is that it is ultimately up to the individual. I may prefer to give the 10% into church, because I feel that is the best channel, others might decide to split it as they deem fit.

Would this be drastically different from this -

I reposted my reply several times to show that there was absolutely NO NEED for you to be drumming up fictitious cases. Since I don't stand in support in of manipulating people to tithe or give or not, I don't see any reason to start arguing to contradict my position. I have said in essence, among other things that -

(a) I believe that tithing should be given in Church
(b) this COULD provide a channel where ministry for the care of widows, orphans etc could be administered from
(c) - but others feel that they cannot give money in Church:
- that is, they cannot give tithes, they cannot give other forms of offerings
(d) IF THAT BE THE CASE, then IT IS UP TO THEM

The (d) above is to show that I do not believe they must be forced or manipulated to give anything at all, or be manipulated to define somebody's giving in a rigid pre-determined form. "It is UP TO THEM" - they should exercise their choice to do as they so wish! If they give something else that is meaningful (or if they feel they do not want to give in Church or elsewhere), I don't have a quarrel with them. If I then try to overwhelm them to change their minds, then I am no longer demonstrating my position of VOLUNTARY giving consistent with what I affirm.

I should not have gone this far to explain anything, since I thought my answer should have sufficed.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739830.96.html#msg8974839