₦airaland Forum

garyarnold:
Wordtalk admits that he is not a finance teacher yet he tells me that "One doesn't have to be an accountant to know that budgeting is involved in finances."

Simple, people who are informed already know this -

- "Budgeting lies at the foundation of every financial plan. It doesn’t matter if you’re living paycheck to paycheck or earning six-figures a year, you need to know where your money is going if you want to have a handle on your finances."

http://financialplan.about.com/od/budgetingyourmoney/tp/budgeting-101.htm

All you needed to do was show me how budgeting is not involved in finances - that was all. But should it be surprising that you would yak on for attention rather than calmly reason things through?

^^ Funny.

garyarnold:
Everyone, please notice how wordtalk responds to me.

Wordtalk admits that he is not a finance teacher yet he tells me that "One doesn't have to be an accountant to know that budgeting is involved in finances."

You often find an appeal in your jingoism. This is not about you or me - and if you don't want comments about what you do, then find a personal thread to yak all you want about them!

The simple thing to do is not yell for 'everyone' - rather, show how teaching finances DOES not involve budgeting. That's all. If budgeting is not involved at any point in finances, you would have made your case rather than yapping for attention.

And what I said is that I don't teach budgeting.

And what did I say?

No matter what I say, wordtalk is going to come back and say something to try and make him look smarter than me, and to make me look like I am a dummy.  That's wordtalks character. He has been doing this for many months on many different blogs where he uses different names.

There's no need to bring this down to my person or character - it does not make you half-smart.

Wordtalk NEVER admits he is wrong.

That's just plain silly. If you show me something that bears clear substance with reality, there would be no need for me to point out how shallow your assertions are in the first place. At least, once I have said 'I was wrong'  to zikkyy where I misread him. But you?? How many times have you accused me of a 'lacking understanding' in things which you could not sustain?

On one blog he argued a simple math problem and kept telling me I was wrong.  Over and over and over and over again.  It went on for quite a while.  Either someone showed wordtalk that his answer was wrong and mine was right, or he finally figured it out.  Did he admit he had made an error?  I mean, we are all human.  No, once he got the right answer he said he was just giving me a hard time!  That's his character.  He has to always be right.

You brought that same silly calculation of 1% in Numbers 31 here, I showed you how incorrect you were. Did you cough after that? Besmirching my character is plain dense - you can hit the panic button as many times as you wish.

Notice how when you criticize anything he has said, he ALWAYS comes back with justification.

And after all the noise, where have you shown me that budgeting is not involved in finances? You like to cheat up and down with all this noise and then try even harder to sling mud - but where does it get you?

Just let it go, people.  Pray for him.

You've been on that 'prayer' forever - but your calculations are both dumb and wrong! Go and read Numbers 31 again to the end!

nlMediator:
It goes beyond language use. There are people here that believe that a tenth of your income belongs to God. That being the case, when you put the money in an envelope, you're not giving to God, you're paying what you owe. I understand that both words can be used - as in Hebrews - to refer to voluntary giving. But that's not the case I'm referring to here.

I'm quite aware of the use of either terms ('give' or 'pay') in relation to tithes, even where you're referring to something other than the language or expression - as I've observed in commenting to k.c1.

So, if you don't mind, do you think it's a payment as they use the term and why (not)?

I may not speak on everyone's behalf; but this is what I hold: it's okay to 'give' tithes rather than assume it should be 'paid' as a legal debt. Although I already commented on this, perhaps i should repost that article with the link so you understand what I'm trying to say:

I Don’t Pay Tithes

For some of you who have been following this blog, the title of this post may come as a surprise, if not rather confusing. My apologies, I don’t mean to shock, dismay or confuse you – perhaps you’ll understand better after reading this post.

The Tithe Is Not a Payment

There are many things in life that we pay for on the basis of a law. Basically, we understand payment as settling a debt we owe for services received or for purchases made – and to refuse to settle a debt on such legal basis would invite punitive measures of some kind.

In that context, we therefore pay our taxes (Rom. 13:6-7); pay the wages of salaried workers (James 5:4); pay the required fees or tuition for education, as well seek to settle any debts, all of this for which we are admonished to ‘owe no man any thing‘ (Rom. 13:.

However, expressing my giving through tithing is an act of worship and a demonstration of my stewardship to God. It is the cheerful and voluntary bestowing of my resources for specific purposes on a spiritual basis. In this context, it is an entirely different matter from the payment of a legal debt.

Tithes are Not Taxes

For some strange reason, some sources interpret the Biblical tithes as taxes. For instance, John MacArthur argues that ‘Tithing was always taxation so that the programs of the government could run‘ – and he is not alone in that persuasion.

However, while the Levitical tithing system may have looked like a taxation by a surficial reading of the texts, it is not so regarded in Scripture. In Numbers 18:24, God clearly identifies Israel’s tithes for what it was to Him -

‘But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance.’

The ‘heave offering’ in that verse is ‘terumah‘ in Hebrew, and bears a different meaning apart from the idea of taxation. In both the Easton Bible Dictionary and Brown-Driver Briggs’ Hebrew Definition, the term ‘terumah’ is defined as a gift, not a tax.

What’s the Difference?

While some arguments conclude that the tithes were taxes by simply drawing similarities in them, the former is never prescribed in Scripture as the latter. There are other terms describing the idea of taxes in the Old Testament including tolls, levies, custom, tributes, exactions, taxation, etc. (1 Kings 4:6; 9:15; 2 Kings 23:33 & 35; 2 Chron. 8:10; Ezra 4:13 & 20; Neh. 10:31) – and these are distinct from tithes.

However, the tithes in Scripture (Abraham, Jacob, and the Levitical) are always connected with priesthood and worship rather than with political or civil government taxations. The Jews under the old covenant paid some form of taxes to kings and rulers, rather than to priests (1 Kings 12:4; Esth. 10:1); while their tithes went to the priesthood for purposes connected with worship (Deut. 14:22-23; 2 Chron. 31:6).

Obligation to Pay Taxes

In the NT, Christians are enjoined to pay their taxes to their respective political governments (Rom. 13:5-. These are not tithes; and as the passage itself makes clear, the term there is ‘to pay’ (Gk. τελέω – teleō) in the sense of a legal obligation. This is the same sense as appears in Matthew 17:24-25 where the question is about paying tribute, custom or taxes.

Why I Give Tithes

My giving is not limited to alms but extends to tithing – the voluntary giving of a tenth of my income, set apart as my priestly act of worship to God. In principle, the NT nowhere condemns tithing; nor does it present the subject as a taxation.

This is why I do not ‘pay’, but rather voluntarily give tithes. Even though my giving is partly expressed in the form of tithing, it is not a legal debt I owe to God – rather, it is a willing and cheerful expression of my commitment in worship to Him.

http://givingtithes.com/i-dont-pay-tithes/

I hope that helps in some way.

garyarnold:
And just what are your credentials to teach finances?

Please quote me where I said that I teach finances. This is the kind of strawman you like to argue. If I stated anywhere that I teach finances, then I would see the relevance of your question.

One doesn't have to be an accountant to know that budgeting is involved in finances. Talking cheap by blowing your trumpet here doesn't change that fact - unless in your 'retired' certification the opposite is what you were taught!

^^ Indeed, there are people who would rather 'give' tithes; but that is not to forget that others think about it as 'paying tithes'. Whatever the case, the more important point is that we give from willing hearts.

garyarnold:
A Budget is part of a Financial Plan, and it is hard to see the substance of teaching only one aspect.

A budget is part of a financial plan for those who need a budget. For those who are not disciplined in dealing with their finances any other way. The same as a diet is necessary for someone who is not disciplined to eat properly.

Teaching on finance will involve a budget - there's no pretending about that. To then say that you do not teach budgeting makes absolutely no sense - unless, of course, to people who do not know what they should know.

My teaching has been highly praised by many ministers when I have given my classes AT THE CHURCH on Saturdays, at NO charge. If it wasn't for my belief that tithing is NOT a requirement in the New Testament, I would have been teaching finances in Sunday School. I was asked to, but refused because the pastor said I would have to teach that tithing is required.

No need to blow your trumpet - there are many people in various teaching ministries of various kinds who do not charge a dime for their ministrations, even though it costs them a huge lot.

garyarnold:
Some still do not understand what I teach.

I am a Money & Finance Minister. I teach finances according to Biblical principles.

I do NOT teach budgeting as I believe a budget, like a diet, is a short-term fix. I teach changing the way you look at finances. Changing the way you look at needs vs wants. To make changes in your life so that you do not get yourself in deep debt. To teach the power of interest - how it can enrich you, and how it can destroy you financially. I teach fiscal responsibility. I teach to live BELOW your means if possible SO THAT you will have more to give to others less fortunate. I teach against selfishness. I have a whole website dealing with nothing but giving. I teach that true giving is to give from the heart with no expectation of receiving something back. If you expect something back, does it even meet the definition of a gift?

I teach that those who give TO GET blessed are INVESTING, not giving.

I teach that pastors who teach that tithing is a requirement of Christians are false teachers. I teach that pastors who say that your giving starts at ten percent are false teachers. I teach that money has corrupted the church just as it has politicians, businesses, and so many people in general.

etc. etc. etc.

A Budget is part of a Financial Plan, and it is hard to see the substance of teaching only one aspect.

Most of the things you mention are also taught by many pastors who encourage tithing, and it is not 'breaking news' that they do not teach it as a "requirement", even though they encourage their congregations to tithe. That is a totally different thing from the anti-tithing campaign to argue all against any hint of tithing among Christians.

nlMediator:
So, who's right, in your opinion - those who say 'pay' tithes and those who say 'give' tithes? And in the universe of tithe preaching, there's no contest between the quantum of preaching on tithes as required and tithes as voluntary giving.

This is not rocket science, lol.

Instead of arguing who's right or wrong, one should look at the context of language use. Some people tend to say 'pay tithe(s)' from traditional use of language; others understand it simply as an act of giving ('give tithes'). Both expressions are valid, although neither use of term ('pay' or 'give') should translate into a form of legalism.

Take Abraham's experience, for instance: Genesis 14:20 says that Abraham 'gave' tithes to Melchizedek; and in Hebrews 7 it uses 'gave' (vv. 2 & 4); yet, referring to Levi in Abraham, it uses the word 'pay' (Heb. 7:9). In all this, we know that Abraham's act was voluntary rather than obligatory.

Even preachers that are big on grace abandon that when it comes to tithing. You can be a LovePeddler or fraudster and prosper because God is a merciful God who has forgiven you your sins. But you can't prosper even if you live a pure life, pray a lot, clean the church premises so long as you do not pay your tihes. God's grace ends at that point. There must be something about this tithe. If only the man with the deepest revelation, Apostle Paul, had taken time to give a detailed exposition on the subject.

It is not every thing that the apostles tried to explain in detail, for that would tend to our being spoon-fed. Yet, I know that not every pastor who encourages tithing would tend to forget 'grace'. It does not help to make sweeping generalizations about people.

nlMediator:
Not been called for? That's a central part of this discussion. Should christians 'pay' tithes or not? Every other thing is tangential. Yet, you've not done much to address that other than post a link buried in a long post, while you quibble over such minor points as whether 1% of 10% is a tenth or tithe or whether giving done after taking care of family responsibilities constitute a tithe so long as it called that.

That again is strongly unfair, if not patently misguided. I have not been quibbling on minor points - unless you're asserting that anti-tithers have been quibbling over non-essentials, for it is what they have argued that I have responded to. I think you've rather not read my comments before jumping to conclusions - if you missed them, please go and read again.

- - - - - - -
Edit

nlMediator:
Not been called for? That's a central part of this discussion. Should christians 'pay' tithes or not?

As far back as post #259, I said this:

One who believes is free to give a tithe of what they choose if they so wish. To strain far too much on the letter of the Law tends only to legalism.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria?topic=724424.msg8869922#msg8869922 

- and also in post #264, this is what I said:

There's nothing against a Christian giving a tithe or tenth if they so please - but to argue all against tithing is simply erratic reasoning.

I therefore don't understand why you're suddenly making unjustified comments that I had "never" given a direct response! This is why I urge you to please check carefully before you make untrue statements.

^^
I was actually going to edit that line, but since you commented on it before I could.

nlMediator:
Read mine again. I think we're saying the same thing - that you do not require tithing for salavation, blessing or protection. Others do. Why not show them why they are 'wrong'?

I think there's a difference in what we're saying. If we were close, there would be no arguments sustained between garyarnold and me up until now - would we not have simply left it at saying that Christians could tithe as long as they do not suppose that tithing procures salvation?

However, when he goes on and on completely and vehemently disavowing any hint of tithing among Christians, that takes the cake! That is why I have kept my comments on the issues he raises rather than on other things.

Instead, you've never given a direct response to the claims about 'paying' instead of 'giving' tithes.

At least I posted a link - and if there are questions, I would oblige answers. To whom would I be responding to when such 'direct responses' have not been called for? I think your comments are rather unjustified.

nlMediator:
If you ask me, I'd think it would have been more appropriate to respond with the same level of graciousness that the gentleman extended. Your persistence in 'fighting' even when it is clear there's little basis for these arguments suggests that you have something else in mind beyond your claim to voluntary tithing.

What do you call unfounded accusations from the 'gentleman' you're inferring - graciousness? I've tried to accommodate dialogue as much as it can be given; but when they turned the discussion into ridicule, where's the graciousness in that?

FYI, I'm not 'fighting' anyone - those who feel a 'fight' only show us how much of a dialogue they desire.

If anything, your position is much closer to his than those who argue that tithing is required for blessing,salvation or protection from physical and financial ruin.

I think you mistake me for someone else. Not in one place would you read such an idea even remotely suggested in my comments.

Maybe, you should spend more effort explaining to those people why you do not 'pay' tithes, but instead 'give' tithes. That would be a more fruitful debate.

I'm not 'debating' - there's nothing here that looks like a 'debate'. I have given a link to the article for anyone interested to see what I was on about - unless someone specifically calls for a reposting of it here, which I will oblige.

Febup:
God gave a commandment that the sons of Levi should take tithes and He did not say pastors should take tithes, if pastors can not obey this simple command by God then, it just goes to show the kind of conmen we have today claiming to be pastors

29.Hebrews 7:5
And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham

^^ How many times are you going to repeat that complaint? Please show us how God personally comes down to receive your own offerings with His own hands - if you give anything at all. Only then will your repetitions be of any interest.

kalokalo:
Notice that pastors cannot tell anyone to 'give' tithes, they will always tell you to 'pay' tithes and 'give' your offerings. You pay for something as an obligation while you give something with free will. That means tithing is obligatory payments (monthly) which has no place under the new testament dispensation of grace and free will.

Some teach tithing as obligatory or 'required'; many others do not teach it as such even though they encourage tithing in their churches. At least, I know of one church (among several others) - the Assemblies of God Church: they use terms such as 'pay tithes' as well as 'give tithes', but they stress that tithing is not a legalistic obligation.

^^ Relax. The 'hot juicy gossip' of your doings will come later.

garyarnold:
wordtalk is a good talker.

Sorry for your loss! This is not a personality contest, so stop having headaches for being a poor communicator.

Seems those who talk best get elected President (of the US), and to other government offices because they sound so good and knowledgeable.

There goes the usual jingoistic pity-party again! And you didn't consider yourself 'knowledgeable' when you kept bringing up the slogan of 'lack understanding' because your views were shoddy? Sorry again.

The good talker is believed by many.  The good talker can convince both the ignorant and those who are educated that the world is flat, or the earth is going to end on a certain date.

Is this about the flat-earth theory now? Is tithing at par with the end of the world? More clutching at straws.

Each has to account for his own actions and beliefs.  We are accountable to God, not to each other.

Good - that's why you should let others account of themselves to God, rather than fidgeting about their choice to tithe. For all that, God is not going to judge anyone for tithing.

What is right for one may not be right for another.

Your choice, their choice - everyone is free to choose whether to tithe or not.

Although I believe it is misleading if not flat out wrong to use the term tithing when we are giving, all this debating is a waste of time.

It has not been a 'debate', so stop pampering yourself. It would not be a waste of time if folks like you had shown some deference to those who are persuaded contrary to your arguments.

As long as we agree that tithing is not REQUIRED for Christians, and that tithing has NOTHING to do with salvation, we'd be better off using our debating time with those who teach that tithing is a requirement in the New Testament.  That is the real message we need to get out.

You're sounding like a convert. Miles ago on this thread, some have already expressed that tithing for them is not a rigid law; but anti-tithers did not let it rest at that point. Hiding behind this excuse of 'the real message' is nothing short of a make-over.

EVERY church I have attended here in the central part of California teaches that tithing is a REQUIREMENT of Christians by God, and that we are robbing God if we don't bring a tenth of our income to the church.  I have NEVER attended a church that teaches that tithing is an option with one exception.  After meeting with several pastors, ONE of them started teaching that tithing was not a requirement but voluntary.

I'm just wondering how many such churches count on your list of 'EVERY'. Have you never heard about the recent survey by the NAE (National Association of Evangelicals)? While about 58% of Evangelical leaders say that tithing is not 'required', yet "about 95% of those who responded to our survey said that they at least tithed – they give 10% or more. So, they do tithe even though they think that it is not a requirement" (NAE President, Leith Anderson).

This is just to show that there are many Christian leaders who encourage their congregation to tithe without making it a requirement in legalistic terms.

In conclusion, if wordtalk wants to give a tenth of his income to the church (or to the poor, or anywhere else) and wants to call it tithing, I will try to refrain from debating the issue.  But we don't want anyone to think that wordtalk tithes because he believes it is a requirement by God.

If you want to understand something about my persuasions to tithe as a Christian, read this article:

My giving is not limited to alms but extends to tithing – the voluntary giving of a tenth of my income, set apart as my priestly act of worship to God. . .

This is why I do not ‘pay’, but rather voluntarily give tithes. Even though my giving is partly expressed in the form of tithing, it is not a legal debt I owe to God – rather, it is a willing and cheerful expression of my commitment in worship to Him.

http://givingtithes.com/i-dont-pay-tithes/

I will continue to encourage that Christians avoid using the word tithe when they are giving.

Lol, is that not the 'real message' in your anti-tithing campaigns? Those who choose to give tithes understand what they are doing - they do not have to wait for you to "encourage" them to avoid using that word. Many people who oppose tithing also use another word: "freewill offerings", even though that term does not once appear anywhere in the NT.

This game of words where anti-tithers have a problem with 'tithes' is conveniently hidden behind fancy talk of 'encourage' this and that - soon we will be reading how you don't have problems with people tithing "per se".

At the same time, I will continue to encourage Christians to be generous givers. By generous, I mean according to what they have.  For most, I believe they (me included) can and should be giving far more than a mere ten percent of their income.

Oh pleease! How many of your recruits have become "generous givers" above a tenth of their resources? If 1 out of 10 is a problem, who would you convince of your "generosity"?

ogajim:
Anyone is free to do as he/she pleases with his/her resources, the only point some of us have argued against is the notion that if you ain't doing it, you've got to be robbing God,

That's pretentious talk, since that is not 'the only point' some of you have argued. Those who are 'ministers of anti-tithing' are not just concerned with the notion you're highlighting - they are bent on arguing against any notion of tithing among Christians.

Today's governments don't have any semblance of the Levitical system either!

What has today's governments to do with your musings?

^^Lol, more of that would make you sleep well at night.

Enigma:
Yet, you never hear any of the tithe-mongers agree that tithes can be shared with the poor and needy.

That is probably because you've not listened to many others who encourage tithing. You can call them all the names you want under the sun so you can sleep well at night, but it doesn't strengthen your own ministry more than your complaining.

Zikkyy:
the bit highlighted, where is that from let's read zikkyy's post one more time

1. what has zikkyy's comment that pastor's 'advise people to stick to a tenth' got to do with what the payer actually pays/give?

It has everything to do with a wrong view expressed. I don't know pastors that 'advise people to stick to a tenth' as if that is what tithers do - 'stick to a tenth'. That was why I noted that the 'tenth' is not the end of all the giving expressed by those who choose to tithe.

2. why would zikkyy assume that tithers stick to a tenth (no more or less), when i already recognized pastor anita's advise that peeps should remit their tithe, first fruit, seed and other offerings in my first post

The 'no more, no less' is misleading - a tithe is a tenth, and besides that, there are other ways and occasions where tithers give. Nobody here started this fallacy of 'stick to a tenth' and 'no more, no less' - other than zikkyy.

madam/sir wordtalk, biko, abeg you, i was only only referring to tithe as a source of giving and not the totality of giving. what you've done was 'to assume zikkyy assumed' you know that's not right

Okay, I was wrong. And you're also not helping matters to have argued the 'stick to' when that is not the case with many who choose to tithe. When someone begins to argue the 'no more, no less' idea into these things, it creates ideas that have no bearing with what people do in their lives - and that was what I had thought you assumed in your comments.

This is news to me. I never knew that an objective of the anti-tithing campaign was to bring about an increase in Christian giving.

I was also surprised when I read that in the arguments of some anti-tithing theologians, trust me.

i personally do not think giving should be the focus, rather the motive behind every giving should be our concern.

I stand with you on that - and I'm not alone in that cue on 'motive'. Although not every person who encourages tithing has been careful to remember that motives are far more important, a majority of those I have listened to and read from actually put motives first and above what we give.

I would like to ask if an explanation was provided for the huge decline in giving

Depends on who is explaining what. I noted that whenever the issue is raised, many anti-tithers would have nothing to say on such things - they explain nothing thereto while pretending that anti-tithing has made 'many people' to be 'better givers'.

Yes, it would be a wasted effort, seeing that you derive some joy mis-interpreting zikkyy's posts

I take no prisoners, sir. I just wondered what joy you would provide in reading when you tar someone else with a brush.

I will only question the reasoning behind somebody's giving when it's made public. I am not going to squeeze it out of that person. read my post again, i did say it's likely to be when that person attempts to sell that reasoning to a third party (in public). That said, i will agree that i do question the reasoning behind what people do but never questioned WHAT THEY DO! in the course of any discussion, i am very likely to provide my own reasoning for seeing it the other way. IT'S ALWAYS A TWO-WAY TRAFFIC DIALOGUE What i don't provide is WHAT I DO. If you want reasoning, i'll give it to you

Em, sir. . . in all that explication up there^^, it still boils down to being open so that others may question you. That is not saying that they are questioning what you do - you question their reasoning, then be open to others questioning yours.

I don't interfere in matters that should be between somebody and his/her God that's why i focus on message from the pulpit (or when wordtalk attempts to preach tithe on NL), that's information for public consumption. I have every right to give my opinion on such matters

Everyone has a right to voice their opinions on any matter - no line expressed is paid for to be consumed 'privately'.

garyarnold:
Since the tithes belonged to God in Scripture, did He accuse men to be stealing for receiving tithes from His people?

YES, He did.  In Nehemiah 13 he accused the PRIESTS of stealing a portion of the tithe that belonged to the Levites.  THAT IS THE ROBBING GOD REFERRED TO IN MALACHI 3.

I knew you would jump at that!
Please be specific (so that I don't misread you) - show me exactly what verses you are referring to before I comment on that.

GOD, not me, GAVE THE TITHE TO THE LEVITES.  If anyone else took His tithe, they were robbing God.

Oh, and the Levites were also MEN who received the things that belonged to God, weren't they? This is why I have said again and again: EVERY offering that people presented were received by men, even though the offerings were meant for God. So please show me where your own offerings to God were NEVER received by the hand of men!  

PLAIN AND SIMPLE.  GOD gave that command long AFTER Abram gave a tenth to Melchizedec.  GOD has given no one else permission to receive His tithe since He gave the command to take His tithe to the LEVITES.

In other words, Abraham made a mistake to have given his tithes to Melchizedek who was NOT a Levite and did not descend from them? Before Levi was born, to whom did he give tithes?

What happened BEFORE God gave that command is irrelevant.  Once God gave His command, the issue is settled.  The tithe goes to THE LEVITES, per GOD.

This is another red herring. What happened BEFORE God commanded the Levites is VERY RELEVANT - otherwise Hebrews 7 would be completely silent on Abraham's tithes. Anti-tithers argue the fallacy of "irrelevance" into what they are uncomfortable with, so that they can cheat here and there.

That is the LATEST command God has given as to where to take His tithe.  Take it elsewhere, and YOU are robbing God PER THE SCRIPTURES.

That again shows you don't understand Biblical exegesis. When God says something, in most instances the so-called 'latest command' does not supercede the earliest providence. For example, when God gave a promise to Abraham, we are told that the Law that came 430 years later did not annul the prior promise (Galatians 3:17).

The 'latest command' argument is a fallacy in Biblical exegesis. God never said a word about robbing Him on the basis that the tithes were taken 'elsewhere' - we know that anti-tithers find their fallacies to be appealing so that they can cut corners and cheat here and there.

garyarnold:
Is that the way you do it in church today?  Do you give the tithe to the ushers, musicians, singers, etc. etc. who do the work, and then let them give a tenth of what they get to the pastor?

That is classic legalism!

When Paul referred to the Levitical system as a principle of support for those in ministry, did he apply a legalistic interpretation when he said "IN THE SAME WAY"? ("In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel", see 1 Cor. 9:13-14).

Like Joagbaje said, if people like you had encountered Paul in his day, you most probably might have argued in the same manner - asking Paul the same question of whether that is the way he would do it in church. You would remind him of all the different postures and positions of porters, janitors, swimmers, etc., . . . and then you would blow hot and cold about how it was done in the Law!

My dear friend, it is not rocket science to understand the simplicity of Scripture. The OT provides us with veritable principles for our Christian lives today when it comes to practical things. That is why the apostles could draw from the Law of Moses to teach practical Christian doctrines without worrying too much about pedantic details to foster the legalism of anti-tithing campaigners.

The Levites were to keep up the Temple.  Now our bodies are the Temple.

NONE of the OT tithe was used for buildings, supplies, missionary work, etc. etc.

Abraham's tithes to Melchizedek was not based on arguments for the Levitical system - and there's no verse where God complained against anyone who received tithes in a manner that did not follow the Levitical pattern. So, when you grumble about this and that in tithing, do not base everything on just the Levitical system - for Scripture does not show that the Levitical tithes superceded the tithes of Abraham.

Are those who receive the tithe today allowed to own land?

Did the Levites not own landed property in your copy of the Bible? Why do we read these shallow arguments from you?

Today's tithe is a joke.  It has NOTHING to do with the purpose and use of the Biblical tithe.

Stop joking around - you simply have no clue about 'Biblical tithes', that's why you argue half-truths here and there!

garyarnold:
1 Corinthians 9:13-14 has nothing to do with tithing.

That again is an ignorant statement - because you fail to see the parallel passage in the OT where Paul was drawing his teaching from.  

The tithe didn't go to the Temple to begin with.  It went to the Levites who lived in the Levitical cities.  Then the Levites took a tenth of the tithe to the Temple.  Therefore, only 1%, not a tithe, went to the Temple.  But there were many different types of offerings that went to the Temple.

Please be consistent and refrain from contradicting Scripture with your excuses. Whether you call it 1% or not, Scripture is clear that what the Levites offered is a TITHE of the TITHES (Nehemiah 10:38 - "and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of the tithes unto the house of our God". That is like saying 'a tenth of the tenth', unless you're trying to argue either that Scripture was wrong to call it a 'tithe' or that there's another thing that Neh. 10:38 should have said in order to please you!

Isn't it odd that even though Abram gave a tenth directly to Melchizedek, the king/priest, that some Christians think they can give directly to God by giving it to their pastor?

ALL GIVING were received by men, even though such offerings were meant to be given to God. Your complaining has absolutely NO SUBSTANCE, unless you can show me where God came down to receive your own offering with His own hand by Himself! Have you ever given anything to God? Who received it from your hand - God or men? Please find another excuse!

I find it quite offensive that pastors have appointed themselves to be the receiver of what belongs to God.

That is sounding like a broken record. WHERE have you ever given ANYTHING to God that did not pass from your hand into the hands of other people? WHO received your own offerings (if you ever give anything to God)? It is hypocritical to find offence in what others are doing when your own actions are no different - for MEN receive your own offerings in the same way that other people receive from men!

After all, the pastor says the tithe belongs to God.  Then he appoints himself to receive the tithe!!!

Please show me what you offer to God that does not pass into the hands of men!

God never gave any pastor or church permission to receive his tithe.  God commanded His tithe be taken to the Levites, FOREVER, in Numbers 18.

It is not only the Levites that received tithes in Scripture. Melchizedek was not a Levite, nor was his descent counted from the Levitical lineage when he received tithes from Abraham.  

Since the tithe belongs to God, if a pastor accepts it isn't he stealing it from God?  Can someone just appointment themselves to received God's tithe?

Since the tithes belonged to God in Scripture, did He accuse men to be stealing for receiving tithes from His people?

When you cannot give, you find problems with those who are doing so - and your argument is that men are receiving the things of God. Please show me where you have ever given anything to God that did not end up in the hands of men!

ogajim:
Pastor JoAgbaje: I don't think you understand the CONTEXT of this quote because if Jesus Christ paid the ULTIMATE debt to free us from the BONDAGE of SIN and DEATH, aren't we the TEMPLE of God? Do you have another type of Temple in today's Christianity? Aren't we Royal Priests of God?

Please just stop making noise. You obviously don't have any clue about the connections of tithing in the Bible. TITHING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REDEMPTION FROM SIN! That is why those who are arguing tithing in connection with the Cross or sacrifice of Christ are desperately clutching at straws! Please show me any verse in the Bible where tithing has a dot to do with our redemption? 

You wake up one morning, follow some jerry curled dude about and proclaim you have been called and now we are supposed to pay for you?

Another fallacy. Nobody is asking you to pay for anybody who chooses to follow anyone's teaching. Clutching at more straws does not make your arguments sound intelligent. That is why Joagbaje is inclined to infer that you're clowning.

Why can't you "eat" from the free will offerings since you want to be fed? Why must you impose a non-existent requirement on your flock?

Are you the only person who has never read what he said in this thread? Did he not say that 'There is no rigid law about tithing'? The typical anti-tither refuses to see what others are saying so he can argue his own strawman fallacy.

Judgment day go though no be small.

Free your thinking: God is not going to judge any believer for giving tithes.

nlMediator:
That's a completely irrelevant question. Increased giving out of fear is no better than little giving out of love. Reminds me of pastors that tend to measure the success of their ministry by the increase in revenues, when a cursory look suggests that the bulk of the money is coming from thieves and other immoral sources. Why should a pastor preaching the truth and receiving less money be made to feel inferior to the pastor of questionable wealth? How sad our priorities are in the church today.

The question I asked is a very relevant question - because enough evidence is out there that anti-tithing campaigns do not encourage better giving among Christians. This is not at par with assumptions of 'pastors' who receive bulk money from robbers, etc. One often hears and reads from many anti-tithers that they are all for giving - a bogus fallacy that bears no reality! And talk about 'priorities'? Please just leave that aside - is it not the same anti-tithing folks in their campaigns that are making a career out of their 'anti-this-and-that' arguments?

Zikkyy:
Do you tithe 20%? show me a tither that tithe more than or less than 10%

No, you assumed that tithers 'stick to' a tenth, not that tithers 'tithe 20%'. The usual anthem sung by anti-tithers is that tithers 'stick to' nothing more than a tenth in all their giving - and I merely commented that the 'stick to' issue is an anti-tithing fallacy of their own fancy, since it is not true.

You are not saying anything new. we are fully aware that people give 10% and still give first fruit, special seed, general offerings, offer 7, and any other pastoral demand

It is again a strawman you're bringing up. You can't just lump everyone into the same box and then make unjustified conclusions. Yes, people who tithe also give in other ways; but that is a very different thing from the idea that tithers 'stick to' a tenth - no more or less!

Good you said 'anti-tithers'; not zikkyy

I wasn't picking bones with you or personalizing my comments about you.

well, i don't know anything about this i don't think have ever talked about my giving on NL

Again, it was not personalized against or about you - which was why I said 'many' and 'they', rather than 'you' or 'Zikkyy'.

Maybe the purpose of the argument was never to drive increase in giving but to encourage pastors to stop twisting the scriptures to discourage the 'milking' of the congregation discourage the fleecing & 'skinning' (applicable to sheeps with little or no wool ) of the flock

If that was your own purpose in arguments of this nature, I stand with you. However, I have encountered so many anti-tithers in their arguments and efforts to see a complete end to any mention of Christians tithing - that is the thrust of their campaign. It is not about fleecing, for there are many ways that people are being fleeced or milked. Yet, after all said and done, those afore-mentioned anti-tithers who pretend that their campaign would bring about an increase in Christian giving have rather seen a huge decline! Whenever this issue is raised, you find only a deafening silence from those who pretend they can teach others how not to give a tenth while assuming that anyone who even remotely mentions tithing should be black-listed!

If you've ever taken time to read my posts, you will observe my focus is the message from the pulpit and from any other pastor wanna-be (like you, when you sometimes defend the preaching of the tithe on behalf of the pastor).

True, I have not read all your posts; but I know enough to conclude it would be wasted effort. Trying to tar someone with a brush simply because they are not in your bandwagon is not a good way to promote or invite dialogue. FYI, I am not a pastor, even though I'm persuaded to tithe as a Christian.

I have no reason to mock what others are doing, i question the reasoning maybe, (especially when it is being recommended to a third party) but not how you chose to give and let me repeat that i have never discussed my giving here and i don't intend to.

If it is okay to question the reasoning behind what people do, you should also be open to being questioned yourself - it is a two-way traffic in dialogue. It doesn't bring out good reasoning when someone tells another how not to give and yet they themselves are not open to being questioned.

You want me to give you 'hot gist' bout my giving abi nothing for you It's between zikkyy and the Almighty

You can leave others to let the matter be between them and God, rather than try to act like you were His personal secretary!

^^ "though they come out of the loins of Abraham"

- and what does Scripture say that they did in Abraham?

- "And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham" (Heb. 7:9)

Enigma:
And always implicit in the message of these thieves is that the "giving" is to be to "church" or to "pastors". They never mention that the "giving" that God truly wants people to do and that He empasised again and again in the Bible is giving to the poor and the needy.

Lop-sided arguments only provide the poison of half-truths.

There are many cases in the Bible where giving is BOTH to the poor AND to those who are not poor! There is a balance!! It depends on the situations and purposes. Melchizedek was not 'poor' when Abraham gave him tithes; David sent gifts to men who were not 'poor'; Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 9 is not about giving to the 'poor'. But in all these, there are instances of giving to the poor - which Scripture does not make an issue above giving in other situations.

Half-truths are not even half-intelligent to begin with.

Zikkyy:
so why do you guys advise people to stick to a tenth when they can give 99%.

Lol, you get it all wrong! Many people who tithe are not sticking to a tenth - you will find in most cases that their giving exceeds a tenth of their resources. Anti-tithers often bring up a strawman argument that 'tithers' stick to 10%, which is not true; whereas I have found many anti-tithers claiming they 'give, give, give far greater than 10%' where in fact their arguments betray they are very stingy. A question I often ask is this: have anti-tithing arguments increased giving in Christianity?

Do you give 99% of your own resources? I'm not putting you on spot; but then there's no reason to mock at what others are doing when you yourself cannot show how you exceed what you're complaining about in reality.

@Febup,

You have not told us how and where God came down personally to receive your own offering by His own Hand. Have you ever given God anything, or do you have anything to offer at all? Are your own offerings not received by MEN WHO DIE as well?

Febup:
We are told that the sons of Levi have a commandment to collect tithes in the new Testament.

Where in the Bible does it say that pastors have a commandment to collect tithes from Christians

Where in the Bible does it say that pastors are condemned for receiving tithes?

You see, all your doctored 'questions of convenience' are mere excuses to justify your position and fallacies. There are many doctored 'questions of convenience' that people can use to deny something in order to justify their preconceived arguments. For example, if a believer is not comfortable with and does not believe in the Deity of Christ, he or she may formulate a doctored question like, 'where in the Bible did Jesus say that He is God?' No matter how much you try to help such people, they will always come up with a doctored question.

Meanwhile, perhaps you have never read in Hebrews 7 that the Levitical tithes do not supercede the tithes of Abraham. That is why that chapter presents two types of tithes - one from Abraham, the other from Levi. Guess what? Even Levi also paid tithes in Abraham (Heb. 7:9 - "And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.".

Snowwy:
@Wordtalk,
I have actually had a discourse on other threads with them and I try to respect others opinions.
If you have strong reasons from the bible to prove you should not tithe, then way to go. If you have strong reasons from the bible to tithe then go ahead.

I didn't realise you already are familiar with these folks.

What I find strange is saying tithe is unbiblical/unscriptural then coming back and saying you have nothing against tithe per se or start claiming you tithe.

Right on target! My dear friend, you have just highlighted the biggest fallacy ever in the anti-tithing argument/movement! Not only are they forever inconsistent, it makes me wonder why they would even bother to argue against something while yet pretending to not have any problem with what they condemn. It's like condemning adultery and then turning back to claim that they do not have any problem with the same adultery "per se".  

Most of the reasons I see against tithe are actually excuses.

I've said it before in other blogs - and I said it again here: anti-tithing arguments are mere excuses! Thank you for voicing out the same thing.

Anyway, there is more to Christian living that all these debates.

Very true. I sometimes wonder that most anti-tithers often have very little or nothing to discuss in other matters of the Christian faith.

Oluti:
Should I have stayed back in the church when it was obvious the G.O would not have tolerated my critical view of his wanting to send his wife away? I had written a book on his exploits which a publisher had accepted because it is a very unusual story. What do I do with this book? Do I tell the publisher to go ahead and publish even though I don’t believe in what I wrote anymore?

It is easy to 'advise' people whose experiences we have not tasted. But advise is one thing, experience is another. If I were in your shoes, how would I feel? What would I have done?

I don't think you should be filled with regret or guilt for having left him. It was not your "critical view" he rejected, for you were trying to show him just one thing: the Biblical foundation of your fellowship in Christ. When he rejected that, he as well may have indicated he was no longer interested in letting Biblical truth guide his personal life. After all the efforts you and others have made to reach out to him, it was best to have left him alone in his chosen path - there's very little you would have been able to do to help him.

The behaviour of Christian leaders in their personal lives is vital to their ministry. When you notice someone whose life contradicts Biblical godliness, there's very little substance in his ministry if any at all. Leave such men to their shameful lives - but don't treat them as enemies (2 Thes. 3:14-15).

As for your yet-to-be published-book, do not aim at attacking or ridiculing that man's ministry - remember Romans 14:4. Don't focus attention so much on him as if you have axes to grind with him: the effect may turn round upon you. I would rather that you focus on the ministry that God has placed upon your own life - that is true and authentic ministration. Have you noticed that those who attack other people's ministries out of ridicule are never able to show as much impact as those whose ministries they attack unjustifiably?

Think about these things - and let God speak to your heart.