₦airaland Forum

Joagbaje: Every one who practice giving recieves

Receive what? why don't you allow the man to defend himself. He came here boasting that he does not touch his salary anymore. Your salary is your entitlement (including benefits in kind), and it reflects the fruit of your labor. If he is not touching his salary, then he is getting free money. so what is the nature of that free money? we know the money is not falling from the sky abi? we know there can be one-off free benefits but living without touching your salary implies a steady flow of such funds.

Joagbaje: Every one who practice giving recieves

Receiving could be stolen money. receiving might be in the form of getting a job with a decent pay or more success with your business if you are self employed, but it must come come from your sweat. or are you saying the man been successful with the lottery?

Joagbaje: When grace work in your life, with less effort you have much result.when there's absence of grace , with much labour there's little or no resul

Yes, i can agree with this. but to say you receive a steady flow of funds with no effort is something that is not possible (other than being a beneficiary of a of something in the form of a will).

Joagbaje: That's what folks don't know. Living by your sweat is a curse.

So they should steal abi?

teeo: Congratulations, i do same and i pay my tithes but i dont live on my salary cos he opens the windows of heaven and blesses me on daily basis

If you don't live on your salary you must be collecting egunje. That cannot be from God.

Joagbaje: Psalm 35:27
...Let the Lord be magnified, which hath pleasure in theprosperity of his servant

Job 36:11 declares of God’s children: "...They shall live their days in prosperity, and their years in pleasures."

God has called you to a life of prosperity. You’re not meant to struggle or labour to live a prosperous life; it’s your birthright. If you’d serve the Lord diligently and delight yourself in Him, you’ll live your days in prosperity and your years in pleasures. This is the heritage of every child of God. Not only is prosperity God’s desire for you, it’s been given to you freely as the seed of Abraham. Abraham, the Bible says, was blessed in all things, and so are you

, Galatians 3:29 ,
"And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."

You didn’t have to struggle for this blessing; it was bequeathed to you as an inheritance, being an heir of God, and a joint heir with Christ (Romans 8:17). It’s important to realize that prosperity is more than having money. Being rich, wealthy, or affluent is just an aspect of prosperity. Prosperity is all- encompassing; it means to be safe, well and sound; to fare well in life, and to live happily in health, peace, riches and favour! It also means to have an excellent life, and experience wholeness in every aspect of your life being successful in all you do:

"3 John Vs. 2
Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth" ().

The words of the psalmist in Psalm 1:1-3 further describes the beautiful life of prosperity the Lord has given you:

"…And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper."

Pastor Anita

What exactly is the message here? The Christian should be loaded. Okay, what next? You have not told them how to achieve it. They should go back to bed abi? The money will fall from heaven abi? And you call this a sermon? Excite the crowd enough to make them reach for their wallet and empty it in the offering box.how they end up prosperous is their bussiness.

Joagbaje help pastor Anita to complete the sermon na

Joagbaje: The book keeping has to do with tithe record na.

That's your interpretation who told you the pharisees & scribes were recording their tithe of vegetables

Joagbaje: That's what he is saying. "keep good record of your tithing ". It's as simple as that.

The gospel according to Joagbaje. Jesus was only referring to the act of keeping good records; nothing more

Pastor Kun: Did they use nickels and dimes in the time of Jesus don't worry your cup is almost full;

Lol! you did not read the part indicating the pharisees were very competent accountants and writers

.....Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required. Do you have any idea how silly you look, writing a life story that’s wrong from start to finish, nitpicking over commas and semicolons?

Jesus had issues with the pharisees 'nitpicking over commas and semicolons' This is the kind of bible Joagbaje been reading and quoting in church. The congregation don suffer am getting myself a copy so i can match Joagbaje quote for quote

Joagbaje: How can the income for vegetables be tuber of yam!

I did not say income for vegetables is yam o! Read me very well here; income could be his harvest of agricultural produce like yam, vegetables or even additions to his livestock. income could be anything, so don't assume the chap is a salary earner paid with cash.

Joagbaje: They tithed from all possessions and income.

They did not tithe from all possessions and income o! These are just different translations of the same word. It's either the tithe was from possession or from income. It's very wrong to give the impression that they tithed of everything. What qualifies as possession/income is something you don't know.

Joagbaje: They pay tithes of their income.


Matthew 23:23 (NLT)
. . . For you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens, but you ignore the more important aspects of the law—justice, mercy, and faith. You should tithe, yes, but do not neglect the more important things.

Paying tithe on their income is not the same thing as paying cash. Your quote from Mathew 23 above referred to herbs.

Joagbaje: Matthew 23:23 (message)
. . You keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime you get, but on the meat of God's Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment-- the absolute basics!-- you carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required.

Lol! na wa for you. The extent you will go show that the Jews tithed money. Well i hope you are aware this same translation of Mathew 23:23 make nonsense of your position that Jesus encouraged or told us to tithe. There is nowhere in Mathew 23:23 that Jesus stated tithing to be something we should practice.

Matthew 23:23 The Message (MSG)
23-24 “You’re hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime you get, but on the meat of God’s Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment—the absolute basics!—you carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required. Do you have any idea how silly you look, writing a life story that’s wrong from start to finish, nitpicking over commas and semicolons?

Image123 should be reading this What Jesus said was that "careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required" no mention of tithe here. i wonder where you guys get the impression that Jesus encouraged tithe

Joagbaje: Concerning other income ,Luke 18 is clear on this

Luke 18:12
I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

They tithed from all possessions and income.

Luke 18:12.( Amp)
I fast twice a week and tithe on all my income. '

Luke 18:12 (message)
I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I gain.

Luke 18:12 ( GWT)
I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my entire income. '

The problem with this is that you assume income to mean cash. *tithing from his entire income does not equate to tithing cash. His income could be 200 tubers of yam, the addition to his livestock in the year, it could be anything. It could just be his vegetables.

*Edited

Joagbaje: people gave tithes of money from their income .

two issues with this;

1. It is not what people gives that matters, what matters is what was commanded
2. It is not stated anywhere that peeps gave monetary tithes of their income. This has to do with what you understand by income.

Joagbaje: And people also redeem tithes with money. It's not every plant,crop or animal God accept for such money is given.

Yes, this is possible.

you give Joagabje a metre and he takes a kilometre because i agreed with you that cash was accepted you are coming up with funny posts. Now you see why peeps come at you with sliding tackles from behind even before you land just to ensure you don't make posts that will raise their blood pressure

Joagbaje: That's a different one , it's a love feast. It's not the annual tithe . This is a special tithe of tithes every 3 years that they bring together to eat as a feast

There are three tithes. The third tithe is done once every three years. The requirement in Deuteronomy 14:22-27 is an annual tithe read verse 22 again;

KJV - Thou shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed, that the field bringeth forth year by year.

NIV - Be sure to set aside a tenth of all that your fields produce each year.

Let me also add that there is nothing like special tithe of tithes.

Joagbaje: Genesis 14:20
And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.

I still don't understand how Abraham giving a tithe of war loot explain the reasoning that people give tithe of all things. Abraham did not gave tithe of all things; what he gave was a tithe of (all) war loot. You need to understand that when you say 'all things', it actually mean all things including their wives and children

Joagbaje: Luke 18:12
I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

Tithes of all were given in cash. Cash is a general medium of exchange

You never bothered to ask yourself if all the man in Luke 18 posses was just 15 cows or a barn with 20 tubers of yam. you assume he owns the world and therefore tithed the world. We need to be careful how we interpret what we read.

Joagbaje: Tithes of all were given in cash. Cash is a general medium of exchange

How did you arrive at this conclusion?

Joagbaje: Tithe generally was substituted with cash. Not every thing is acceptable in the temple that's only a part. People gave tithes of all things . There's things that are indivisible . You only tithe from its equivalent.

The fact that we agree with you on some aspect of tithing as practiced by the Jews does not mean you should come and cause confusion here o! First you say 'tithe generally was substituted with cash'. You talk like you were on ground to witness the substitution, where is the evidence for this

You are causing more confusion by claiming that people gave tithes of all What is all? You Joagbaje cannot even explain what you understand to be 'all' you are playing with words here with the intention to further confuse readers. Did Leviticus 27 stipulate that peeps should give tithe of all? Is there anything in the bible, in the Leviticus, Numbers or Deuteronomy book that was stated to be indivisible and therefore cannot be tithed or this is just your creation? Please provide examples of indivisible tithe-able items the Jews had issues with and resorted to paying equivalent.

Enigma: ^^^ Bros, correct but clarification and amplification as below.

In respect of the tithe of animals and livestock --- cash substitution was NOT acceptable at all. It had to be the tenth animal under the rod or nothing else. That tenth animal could not even be substituted for another one; if there is an attempt to substitute it, then both the original tenth animal and the intended substitute "become holy and cannot be redeemed". (e.g. Pesin wey say ah this number 10 animal na im fat pass and wan substitute am with thin number 11 --- e go lose the two both be that )

No dispute sir, the reason i said 'some' agric produce. Thanks for the 'clarification and amplification' (so readers don't end up more confused) .

I want to add that Joagbaje is right to the extent that the Jews could substitute cash for 'some' agric product, but with a penalty of 20% of the value. Maybe the penalty was to discourage substitution.

^^^ so you agree that nobody paid cash of 10% as tithe. Tithe in cash was always 12.5% (+ penalty).

Image123: you don't know if Jesus told a lie and i need to ask Jesus! Do you understand the implications of your statement in the light of being condemned or justified by your words? or you just think this is all about Image123 and I must go the opposite of what he says? please oblige me, i do not recall me tendering parables as exhibits on any thread. Do remind me of it please,

See wahala which one be 'implications of your statement' for this one? i've not gotten to the stage when i analyse Jesus parables to determine if they are truths or not, 'till i get there i will not know. abi no be so? am not even thinking about it. You have been having sleepless nights on this matter so i expect you to know

Image123: what's the purpose? if a lie is used to teach a lesson, does it further the gospel?

I take this one as another (follow-up) question the first question was "what is wrong with a parable?" To answer your question:
1. What's the purpose (i assume of the parable) - It depends on the person telling the parable na i don't understand how you expect me to know that one.
2. if a lie is used to teach a lesson, does it further the gospel? - i will tell you i don't support the idea of telling a lie, but from a pastoral perspective it appears to be effective o! or is the tithe takings not used to further the gospel? You know the number of churches built with tithe money?

Image123: i hope you don't read the Bible the way you read my posts, selectively that is? or picking and choosing. Jesus will not tell a lie or you think He would? He is the Truth and i expect everything He says to be truth, do you? I don't wait for Him to claim "I'm saying the truth now oh" before I believe He always says truth.

You still don't gerrit it is only a lie if there is a claim that the parable is based on real events when in actual fact the parable did not happen. Being a parable does not make it a lie na! or what's your definition of lie? Jesus did not tell you that the story happened somewhere, why are you bothered? If i tell you that what you are trying to achieve here is like somebody driving to third mainland bridge, ties a large rock to his feet and jump off the bridge (with the rock) i don't see how the issue of lie comes in here. We can only consider if it's a lie or not if i tell you it happened to Mr. 'I'.

Image123: I strongly believe that everything Jesus said in parable must have happened somewhere sometime. This is a strong possibility. i hold this position for different reasons but i will mention two. First reason being that Jesus will not lie.

Before you start saying that Jesus will not lie, we need to know if Jesus claimed that these events happened somewhere. if he did not what's ya own

Image123: So, since its JUST a parable, what is wrong with a parable?

If it serves its purpose there is nothing wrong with it.

Image123: And is a parable a white lie of some kind?

My brother i don't know. You have to ask Jesus.

I remember you tendered some parables as exhibits to support your position somewhere and the opposition fought hard to ensure it was never admitted into evidence e be like say you never recover

Image123: it used to be outsiders, unbelievers, atheists that had something against God's Word and swore to tear it down like Voltaire. Today, the enemy has found his way into the fold. There's so much wolves in sheep clothing. They have no goal of bringing others to the Saviour but to themselves. They is no more self -effacing, just a cunning but vicious creeping in. Their mission is to destroy the Word of God. Their goal is to accuse everything. They have every excuse under the heavens to excuse themselves and others from the Word of God.

Appears you have issues with some peeps around here. do you have names?

Image123: Show them God's Word and what they want to deal with is translation issues and Greek and Hebrew lexicons.

Before nko? when you read 'A' and call it 'B', you want peeps to just accept that it is truly 'B' abi?

Image123: From translation, they delve into testament issues. And even when shown the light in the new testament, the excuse is that its just a symbol, metaphor or parable.

of course it's just parables, or you think Jesus was just gossiping about other peeps. i.e. "are you guys aware that Mr. 'A' was robbed on his way to Jericho yesterday, beaten and left for dead? he was rescued by a good Samaritan"

Image123: Another specie of wolves go on about words before Jesus died and after, and about Jesus talking to Jews only, or Corinthians only.

i suspect this has to do Mathew 23:23 i can see you are still not happy that your 'theory' (abi na hypothesis self) on Mathew 23:23 was shot down by the so called wolves using laser guided (precision) missiles

Image123: There is nothing wrong with the Bible but you.

Who? mention names jor

newmi: burnt offerings and animal sacrifices was not identified with the priestly order of Melchizedek a priestly order that transcends time without beginning without end

What is the basis for saying the priestly order of Melchizedek transcends time? You are just as confused as Joagbaje. What is without beginning and end is Melchizedek occupation of office. There is no evidence to show that he was removed from office or evidence to show that he died thereby creating a vacancy. This is what you fail to understand; it is the qualities of the person occupying the office that defines the office and not the other way round. The levitical priesthood is one where the priest were prevented by death from remaining in office while Melchi is seen as a priest that continues in office because there was no record of his death.

Hebrews 7:3 (KJV)
3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

Hebrews 7:8 KJV)
8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

What am saying is that Jesus did not take up an office whose features were already pre-defined, it is Christ's nature that defines his priestly office and that's what makes his office different from that of Melchi. Christ's priestly office only resembles that of Melchi in having a priest that continues in office forever (that's the way the Jews saw Melchi's office).

So Newmi, the order of Melchizedek (as you interpreted it) does not transcend time. You don't find this in the bible.

newmi: whatever that priestly order accommodates by default extends beyond time and dispensation.

This is because you are defining the priestly order (or office) by the activities performed under that under (office) and not by the qualities of the person occupying the office. Christ is not required to comply with the requirements or activities undertaken by Melchizedek or let me say that Melchizedek activities is not the standard for what operates under Christ priesthood. What you guys have done is to elevate Melchizedek to equal status or in this case made Melchizedek superior to Christ by saying activities to be undertaken by Christ must comply with what Melchi did.

newmi: If burnt offerings and animal sacrifices were in identified with the priestly order of Melchizedek just like tithing then we should in fact be busy practicing them but no only the practice of tithing was identified with that timeless priestly order.

You have only succeeded in rejecting Christ and accepting Melchizedek as your high priest. The bible did not command that we practice activities in Melchi's era. What you practice is the gospel according to pastor chris.

We have a priest who was made one with an oath, we have a priest that lives forever to intercede (Abraham did not need Melchi for this), we have a priest who offered himself as sacrifice for all. Can you say the same for Melchi?

BERNIMOORE: Zikky,

where have you been since, nice to see you again!

Thank you my brother. I have been around.

Joagbaje: Hebrews 7:17
For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Christ is high priest in after order of Melchizedek . I didn't write the bible. Or is there a christ order. Ok let's say christ is high priest in the order of Jesus . Is that ok with you ? Since you can't accept the bible.

You assume it is the bible i am disputing. I don't remember saying i have issues with the bible The problem i have is your 'interpretation' of what is is written.

Joagbaje: Christ is high priest in after order of Melchizedek . I didn't write the bible. Or is there a christ order. Ok let's say christ is high priest in the order of Jesus . Is that ok with you ?

You don't have to write the bible to understand and properly interpret it. Let's take another look at the bible verse you quoted:

Hebrews 7:17
For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever [size=14pt]after[/size] the order of Melchisedec.


Below are some dictionary definition of the word 'after':

so as to resemble: as
a : in accordance with
b : with the name of or a name derived from that of <named after his father>
c : in the characteristic manner of : in imitation of <writing after the manner of Hemingway>

in imitation of; in the manner of a statue after classical models

Your interpretation is very important as you can end up sending the wrong message. The bible did not say Christ is continuing the priesthood or priestly office of Melchizedek (your very false interpretation). 'Order' as used here refers to a priestly type. Jesus priesthood is only similar (or possesses some features similar) to that of Melchizedek, and the Hebrew passage highlighted those similarities. Sir, Christ priesthood and and that of Melchizedek are not of equal status, so please stop trying to rubbish the priesthood of our Lord.

Joagbaje: Ok let's say christ is high priest in the order of Jesus . Is that ok with you ?

Yep. Christ priesthood or office is not a continuation of Melchi's. They are two distinct priesthood.

Image123: there is woe for anyone who neglects the important things, and for all who subtract or cut off the Word of God. why did you cut that verse to suit your taste?

You no see anything talk. Se you go post the complete bible anytime you want to quote, as quoting a verse or two amounts to cutting off the word of God

As a Pharisee you should position yourself for more woes that's all you get instead of blessings.

newmi: When we receive something from God it is important that we recognize that there is one of whom the scriptures descriBes as "the accusal of the brethren (Rev 12:10) who is always seeking opportunity to discredit the works of God's hand that in mind it suffice to say that we have some measure of responsibility to keep ourselves in the vital reality of that which we may have received from God because you see the Devil is always busy seeking an opportunity to question thE authenticity of what we may have received the bible say ". . . Having done all to stand stAnd. . ." It now went further to share thoughts on how we can achieve it you state thing "the breast plate of Righteousness, the shield of faith, the sword of the Spirit" etc.
Now that's responsibility little wonder the bible says in Jude 1:21 "21 Guard and keep yourselves in the love of God. . ."It is interesting to note that the Greek word translAted "keep" in that context has such synonyms as keep, "to hold fast", "to watch", "to attend to carefully" or "to take care of" Now that's reponsibility. The apostle described it as a "Fight of Faith" where you insist on the what the word of God says concerning an issue regardless of the opposing present condition. The bible says that whatever the Lord does is forever meaning that the problem if any couldn't be from Him but from us. When situation and circumstances come to question the word what do you do you insist on the what the word

You are not helping matters. You are not helping cec. You need to fetch pastor Chris to come defend himself.

truthislight: In the new covanant that is in operation men that are dying dont collect tith,

Congrats You succeeded in eliminating pastors from the tithe collecting equation. They fall under this category meaning they belong to old covenant and should not be collecting tithe

i think we need pastor chris on this thread. Joagbaje & co obviously lack the capacity to manage situation here

ijawkid: Then take an airplane , go straigth into the heavens and pay your tithes to Jesus who is now the high priest...

Are your pastors priests??......

SMH!!!!!!!!!

The reason pastors been investing in private jets to take the tithe collections to Jesus. They are collecting the tithe on Jesus behalf.

Joagbaje: Giving to the poor existed under the law, so why don't you assume it's wrong now in the new testament?

How can it be wrong when you know Jesus don't joke with the poor. It is everywhere in the NT that we should love our neighbor (including the poor). But where is it written in the NT that we should love in fixed percentages or give in fixed percentages?