They have no shame

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

Slow down,

Genesis 4:4
And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering.

Exodus 13:12
That thou shalt set apart unto the Lord all that openeth the matrix, and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast; the males shall be the Lord's.

Exodus 34:19
All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.

Leviticus 27:26
Only the firstling of the beasts, which should be the Lord's firstling, no man shall sanctify it; whether it be ox, or sheep: it is the Lord's

Nice try there brother. I specifically was referring to Cain and Abel because you insisted "God always wanted his portion" and cited Cain and Abel as proof. But Gen 4:4 say nothing of God requiring anything. These offerings were Cain and Abels' idea. God did not command anything from them.

Then you jump thousands of years into the future, pull a commandment from the Law, and try to link it to Cain and Abel. Where did you study hermeneutics?

[Rudy]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

Yes sir,
The principle learned is that God has always required his portion.This is what made Abel's offering acceptable. It was the firstlings of his flock. Just like in the case of the nation of Israel, God gave free reign to the devil over every people but he reserved one nation for his name.
Deuteronomy 32:9
For the Lord's portion is his people;
Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

Why wasn't Jacob already tithing?

Did Able give 10%.

With your own words "Abel's offering"

[Rudy]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Nice try there brother. I specifically was referring to Cain and Abel because you insisted "God always wanted his portion" and cited Cain and Abel as proof. But Gen 4:4 say nothing of god requiring anything. These offerings were Cain and Abels' idea. God did not command anything from them.

Then you jump thousands of years into the future, pull a commandment from the Law, and try to link it to Cain and Abel. Where did you study hermeneutics?

They tend to jump back and forth a lot. It is vitally important that we have a COMMAND from God's word to obey. Not speculation of what we should do. If you don't comply then you are not in unity. It got so bad with Jim Jones he threw the bible away and he now speaks for God.

Good Samaritan said we should comply to what they ask for in giving as long as they don't threaten you. But says we are not in unity if we don't.

OH MY!!! is that not a threat????

[J.A. Perez]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Nice try there brother. I specifically was referring to Cain and Abel because you insisted "God always wanted his portion" and cited Cain and Abel as proof. But Gen 4:4 say nothing of God requiring anything. These offerings were Cain and Abels' idea. God did not command anything from them.

Then you jump thousands of years into the future, pull a commandment from the Law, and try to link it to Cain and Abel. Where did you study hermeneutics?

This principal comes from the beginning before Cain and Abel ever existed. God gave Adam and Eve the entire garden and reserved one tree from them.

I'm sorry I just expected that you already understood this concept without explanation. It is in fact from Genesis to Revelation.

[Rudy]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

This principal comes from the beginning before Cain and Abel ever existed. God gave Adam and Eve the entire garden and reserved one tree from them.

I'm sorry I just expected that you already understood this concept without explanation. It is in fact from Genesis to Revelation.

Are you referring to tithing or giving?

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Rudy

They tend to jump back and forth a lot. It is vitally important that we have a COMMAND from God's word to obey. Not speculation of what we should do. If you don't comply then you are not in unity. It got so bad with Jim Jones he threw the bible away and he now speaks for God.

Good Samaritan said we should comply to what they ask for in giving as long as they don't threaten you. But says we are not in unity if we don't.

OH MY!!! is that not a threat????

You are misrepresenting what I said. First of all I don't even teach tithing as mandatory. My words is, that If a pastor unthreateningly asks (something that is good) the congregation should "seek" to comply. Yes, there is a such thing as being rebellious. I am not talking about people in hardships, but I am referring to people who just don't want to cooperate as a church in its efforts.

I would think some of you think tithing is an abomination
.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

This principal comes from the beginning before Cain and Abel ever existed. God gave Adam and Eve the entire garden and reserved one tree from them.

I'm sorry I just expected that you already understood this concept without explanation. It is in fact from Genesis to Revelation.

Again, horrible hermeneutics.

Tithes come from something that one possesses. The tree was never in their possession. They weren't allowed near it. It was not something they gave to God.

To say that we see tithing in the Garden sounds like something Kenneth Copeland would have puked up, not an apostolic minister.

[J.A. Perez]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Again, horrible hermeneutics.

Tithes come from something that one possesses. The tree was never in their possession. They weren't allowed near it. It was not something they gave to God.

To say that we see tithing in the Garden sounds like something Kenneth Copeland would have puked up, not an apostolic minister.

Brother,
At the root of tithing . Is the reality that all good and precious gifts come from God. In all that he gives you and all that you prosper and increase God requires his portion first. Not as an opportunity to curse you or to throw you in hell, but as an admonishment to recognize where our blessing comes from. This concept is talk over and over throughout the scripture. I don't think you need me to hermeneuticaly lay it out, it's undeniable.

I learned everything I know at the feet of good men, honorable men.

If you do not see the types and shadows in the scriptures that I have given then I apologize but I can't help you. (Please see post 277) You're writing really comes across as though you have a very bitter mean spirit and I'm sorry but I don't want to discuss this with you any longer.

I love you but this discussion is useless.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Rudy

They tend to jump back and forth a lot. It is vitally important that we have a COMMAND from God's word to obey. Not speculation of what we should do. If you don't comply then you are not in unity. It got so bad with Jim Jones he threw the bible away and he now speaks for God.

Good Samaritan said we should comply to what they ask for in giving as long as they don't threaten you. But says we are not in unity if we don't.

OH MY!!! is that not a threat????

Good Samaritan is not speaking directly to you and your situation because I don't even know you. I am simply reasoning together. I don't think the personal attacks are necessary. I am sorry that some tithe teacher has bewronged you but I certainly am not that person.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Rudy

They tend to jump back and forth a lot. It is vitally important that we have a COMMAND from God's word to obey. Not speculation of what we should do. If you don't comply then you are not in unity. It got so bad with Jim Jones he threw the bible away and he now speaks for God.

Good Samaritan said we should comply to what they ask for in giving as long as they don't threaten you. But says we are not in unity if we don't.

OH MY!!! is that not a threat????

You speaks of threats, but are you not the one advocating violence against tithe preachers?

Are you not the one vilifying them and dragging them thru the dirt?

Telling people to be sat down and so forth.
Where do you get off saying that?

now you are comparing them to Jim Jones, what is next tithe preachers are Hitler?

you speak of unity but in your own terms.