They have no shame

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

The New Testament doesn't need to reiterate an established line. When the precept is through the word. There is by your reasoning also, no New Testament scripture that takes away from its practice for us today.

It's the same as 'thou shat not kil'l. We needed, apparently an explanation of the extent of that command. For Jesus said that if you even speak against your brother you have committed murder in your heart.

So likewise teaching on giving in the New Testament also reinforced the heart issue when it comes to giving. We are to give cheerfully.

But neither mean can we now go and kill our brother physically as long as we don't speak about him. Neither does it mean we should stop giving our tithing as long as we make an offering with a cheerful heart.

For just like murder will still send you to hell if it is not repented of, so will robbing God send us to hell if it's not repented of.

Respectfully.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Sean

My conclusion is tithing is of the Law and God will not honor it, no matter what you try to do.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Originalist

You cannot prove where the tithing as you preach it was EVER established in the Bible. If you are using Mosaic tithing as your proof, then it was abolished with the Levitical system, else there would have been something added by the apostles saying it wasn't. If you are referring to "pre-Law tithing", nothing was ever recorded as being instituted by God. Claiming that tithing was established and thus not necessary for debate is like saying the same thing about the Trinity.

Thus you are going to answer to God for the false doctrine you teach.

The father of faith, Abraham gave his tithe hundredths of years before there was Law and so did Jacob, who probably learned the precept from his father Isaac.
The tithe preceded the Law.
then it was added, explained and expanded in the Law.

Yes the death of Christ did away with the precepts of the Law, and the tithing precepts of the Law, but the foundation of the tithe was before the Law so it remained.
In Hebrews we find that Jesus is the new priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven

Because Jesus is our high priest, we following the example of Abraham with Melchizedek likewise offer up our tithe unto him.
We offer the tithe thru our church, because the church is the body of Christ, so when we give the tithe to the church we are indeed giving it to Christ, for what we do to the church we do to Christ.

[J.A. Perez]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

The father of faith, Abraham gave his tithe hundredths of years before there was Law and so did Jacob, who probably learned the precept from his father Isaac.
The tithe preceded the Law.
then it was added, explained and expanded in the Law.

Yes the death of Christ did away with the precepts of the Law, and the tithing precepts of the Law, but the foundation of the tithe was before the Law so it remained.
In Hebrews we find that Jesus is the new priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven

Because Jesus is our high priest, we following the example of Abraham with Melchizedek likewise offer up our tithe unto him.
We offer the tithe thru our church, because the church is the body of Christ, so when we give the tithe to the church we are indeed giving it to Christ, for what we do to the church we do to Christ.

Galatians 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed,.......

John 8:39
They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

The father of faith, Abraham gave his tithe hundredths of years before there was Law and so did Jacob, who probably learned the precept from his father Isaac.
The tithe preceded the Law.
then it was added, explained and expanded in the Law.
Yes the death of Christ did away with the precepts of the Law, and the tithing precepts of the Law, but the foundation of the tithe was before the Law so it remained.
In Hebrews we find that Jesus is the new priest after the order of Melchizedek.
Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven
Because Jesus is our high priest, we following the example of Abraham with Melchizedek likewise offer up our tithe unto him.
We offer the tithe thru our church, because the church is the body of Christ, so when we give the tithe to the church we are indeed giving it to Christ, for what we do to the church we do to Christ.

Amen: Abraham gave tithes to Melchizedek.

"And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into
thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the
goods to thyself.
And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the LORD,
the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,"

When did Abraham "...lift up mine hand unto the LORD"? When he
"...gave him tithes of all."

[J.A. Perez]

Told u, us boys from the west bring it.

Rata-tat-tat!

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

The father of faith, Abraham gave his tithe hundredths of years before there was Law and so did Jacob, who probably learned the precept from his father Isaac.
The tithe preceded the Law.
then it was added, explained and expanded in the Law.

Yes the death of Christ did away with the precepts of the Law, and the tithing precepts of the Law, but the foundation of the tithe was before the Law so it remained.
In Hebrews we find that Jesus is the new priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven

Because Jesus is our high priest, we following the example of Abraham with Melchizedek likewise offer up our tithe unto him.
We offer the tithe thru our church, because the church is the body of Christ, so when we give the tithe to the church we are indeed giving it to Christ, for what we do to the church we do to Christ.

Abraham payed tithes ONCE on items that belonged to other people, and that he returned to them. Nowhere does the Bible say God commanded him to. Your theory is therefore invalid and based on something you are trying to read into the text.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

Galatians 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed,.......

John 8:39
They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

Two can play at that game.....

9And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.

10For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him. (Hebrews 7)

Since I am a son of Abraham, I already paid my tithes while in his spiritual loins.

[Originalist]

. First, you must take time to read the entire context of Genesis 14:8-24, plus also read Hebrews 7:1-10. After reading these passages, you should take time to go thru them, and determine who paid tithes, where did the tithes come from, to whom were they given and why.


Genesis 14:8-12 The kings of Sodom and Gomorrah (Plus their allies) fought a battle against king Chedorlaomer king of Elam (plus his allies). Chedorlaomer king of Elam and his allies won the battle and took all the food supply and other goods from Sodom. They also took Lot, Abram's nephew, and his possessions and departed, for he (Lot) was living in Sodom.

Genesis 14:9-17 The incident was reported to Abram and he took 318 of his trained servants and defeated Chedorlaomer king of Elam. The Abram brought back all the goods, and also brought back his relative Lot with his possessions, and also the women, and the people.

Genesis 14:18-20 After his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer, Abram was met by Melchizedek king of Salem and a Canaanite priest of God Most High, refreshing them with bread and wine and he blessed Abram. The blessing was given to Abram, a very important fact to remember. In response, Abram gave ONE-TENTH (10%) of all the goods of Sodom that were stolen by Chedorlaomer to Melchizedek. Abram did NOT tithe from his own possessions, an essential fact to refute tithing practices in the new covenant.


Genesis 14:21-24 The king of Sodom offered to give Abram all the goods of Sodom that were recovered for himself, but Abram refused, taking not one single item, to give honor to Yahweh, lest people say this pagan king of Sodom made him rich. This is a very important point, because Abram took NO INCOME and the tithe he gave to Melchizedek did not come from his goods, but those of the Sodomites and 1/10 of Lot’s recovered goods.


CONCLUSION: If Abram’s aforementioned encounter is used by your pastor to justify the practice of tithing from one’s gross income, then he is justifying Christians paying 10% of goods and money they do not own! Even worse, paying tithes this way means they have to find someone who has be robbed and recover the stolen goods. For example, if jewelry was stolen in a burglary, the tithing Christian must first return the stolen goods to the rightful owner, who must not be a Christian, (in keeping true to the symbolism of Abram and Melchizedek) and then use 10% of the recovered goods as a tithe to the church. This is an outlandishly absurd example and it ought to be ample proof for rejecting this false doctrine of church tithing. There are a few other reasons why Abram’s tithe to Melchizedek cannot be used to justify church tithing as a practice.


REASON #1 – The reason why Jesus is said to be a high priest ‘after the order’ of Melchizedek simply relates to the manner of succession, in that both Melchizedek and Jesus hold a priesthood that does not have a traceable human genealogy, but equally important, both have priesthoods that are non-transferable, meaning the cannot be passed on to successor.


Hebrews 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron? KJV

The Greek word meanings for, “after the order of,” Melchizedek in most Bible translations are misleading because it makes the two priesthoods of Melchizedek and Jesus seem alike and they are not alike. The wording of the original Greek text differs greatly and is rendered literally as, “arranged down in successive order in time as.” Below is the KJV with the literal Greek inserted to replace the words, “after the order of.”

Hebrews 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise, arranged down in successive order in time as that of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron? KJV

Like Melchizedek Jesus has been arranged down in successive in time with priestly descendents that follow his exact priesthood position (i.e. – as High Priest). Neither Melchizedek’s birth or death, mother or father were recorded, although he was born, died, and had parents. Because Melchizedek’s parental line is omitted in the Genesis text, and because he is only a, “priest” and not a “high priest” he typifies Christ in that he cannot be connected genetically to the Levitical priesthood. To be included as a Levite priest, your father must originate from that bloodline. Jesus’ does not relate to the Levitical priesthood either because his Father is God. However, Jesus became the final “High Priest,” in his role and function as the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5).

The only other similarity, which occurs often in the Old Testament scripture, is the meaning of names. For example, Melchizedek was the king and high priest of Salem (later Jerusalem). The name means “king of righteousness” or “the king is righteous.” Christ is king of God’s heavenly kingdom at this time, and he makes us “righteous” thru his blood that was shed.

Jesus Christ is THE “High Priest” to God, whereas Melchizedek is NEVER called a, “high priest.” In Genesis 14:18, Melchizedek king of Salem, (later called Jerusalem), is called, “… the priest of God Most High,” and again in Hebrews 7:1, Melchizedek, king of Salem is also called, “… priest of the Most High God.” The parallels or similarities between Jesus and Melchizedek do NOT relate to their actual function as, “priests.” Jesus became “THE High Priest,” in that his propitiatory sacrifice for sin ended the Levitical priesthood and its mediatory functions forever. Melchizedek’s role as, “a priest,” is a TYPE (symbol) of Jesus Christ, but only in respect to the relationship of his lineage (or descent).

Jesus Christ obtained a ministry and priesthood far greater than that of the Levitical, whose priests died year after year, requiring a replacement, whereas Jesus was resurrected from the dead and made alive again for the PURPOSE of becoming the eternal High Priest forever. Melchizedek on the other hand is mentioned as a “mortal” man, and therefore it is wrong to compare him as a priesthood to Jesus Christ. Melchizedek was a priest to the Canaanites, but not priest to God’s covenant people Israel. Jesus became the High Priest to both Israel and Gentiles.

Once Jesus sat down at God’s right hand, he mediates for and on behalf of any past, present or future Levitical priests, and his relationship as God’s only high priest to Israel shows a mediatory relationship to them, which Melchizedek did not possess or exercise. Thus, the priestly symbolical similarities between Melchizedek and Jesus are mentioned only because each is uniquely separate and distinct from the Levitical. Therefore, it is wrong to use this symbolic priestly example as a proof text to justify or rationalize the practice of new covenant tithing in the church.

REASON #2 – Abraham paid a tithe of his nephew’s recovered goods to this Canaanite priest of the Most High God. He did not tithe a tenth of his crops, herds, etc, as the Law commanded. In fact, Abraham was not even giving tithes of his own stuff! So it is totally wrong to use this passage to justify tithing in the church. Hebrews 7:9-10 reads, “A person might even say that Levi, the father of the priestly tribe, himself, who received tithes (the tenth), paid tithes through Abraham. For he {Levi} was still in the of his forefather Abraham when Melchizedek met him [Abraham]. AMP

[Originalist]

In the Law, which God gave to Moses, certain statutes required a tithe from every person that belonged to the tribes of Israel (Jacob). They were to set aside a tenth of their crops, herds, and fruit, and then bring their tithe to the Levites; this is how God made provision for the Levites, the lone tribe that comprised the priesthood. The reason God made provision for the Levites is that they were not allotted a land inheritance as their counterpart Israelite brethren were given. So to compensate them (the Levites) for fulfilling their priestly duty, God made provision in the Law in this manner. However, you MUST understand and factor into your consideration is that the Levites, who were the priests, were also commanded by God (in the Law) to pay their own 10% as a tithe.


There was also measurable difference between the quality of the tithe that God required the Levites to give versus the quality of the tithe that God required the average Israelite to pay. The average Israelite was allowed by God in the statutes of the Law, to give any one of ten apples harvested, or any one of ten bushels of wheat, or any one of ten cattle, sheep, or goats raised, etc. The tithe required of the Levites by God in the statutes of the law required a much better quality 10%. In fact, the tithe required of the Levites judged according to the top 10%. This meant Levites had to tithe the very best of the best 10% of whatever they had received from the people of Israel. If you read Hebrews 7:4, you’ll find Abraham gave Melchizedek the “choicest goods” as tithe.


Hebrews 7:4 Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the choicest spoils.

If Abraham paying a tenth of Lot’s recovered goods to Melchizedek represents proof of new covenant tithing practice, then to be fair, the type must be brought to its furthest conclusion. Abraham in Hebrews 7:9-10 represents LEVI the priest paying tithes through Abraham! The Levites being spiritual leaders therefore represent spiritual leaders in the church, and in your case Your PASTOR should be the one paying tithes here! I’m being facetious, but doing so to prove a point.


The Levites as priests were required in the Law to give the very best one of ten sheep received; they had to give the very best one of ten apples received, they had to give the very best one of ten bushels of wheat received, etc. The text of Hebrews 7:9-10 confirms this interpretation, “… LEVI, the father of the priestly tribe, HIMSELF, who received tithes (the tenth), ALSO PAID TITHES through Abraham.”

The Levites, whose tithe is mentioned in the Book of Malachi 3:8-10, were commanded by God in the Law to give their tithe and place it inside the temple “storehouse,” where it would be used to feed the widow, orphan, gatekeepers, and strangers that visit. Malachi is a rebuke to the LEVITES at the time because they had selfishly neglected paying the choicest tithe and therefore Malachi represents church leaders and pastors who selfishly take tithes and offerings from church members, and don’t give back to help the needy. If indeed the Levites were required to pay their choicest tithe of whatever they received, as spiritual leaders, their New Testament counterpart would be the church pastors!


Of course tithing is not a new covenant requirement, and if you continue reading the Book of Hebrews, the New Testament scriptures affirm that even Melchizedek is only intended to foreshadow “heavenly” things, not earthly tithe. The Law and Melchizedek are done away for something far more excellent in the person of God’s son, the man Christ Jesus, the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5).


In Hebrews 7:6-7 we read, “ But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed the one who had the promises. But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater. Recall I mentioned earlier how important it was to note that Melchizedek “blessed” Abraham in the Genesis 14:18-20 account, and here we read that even though Melchizedek RECEIVED THE “TITHE” FROM Abram, yet Abraham is called the “greater” because he was the one that had the promises.


What this means typologically is that Abraham symbolizes Christ MORE than Melchizedek does! Now how does that line up with your pastor’s teaching about tithing? If he uses Abram’s tithe to Melchizedek to justify why the church should give tithes to the church, then followed to its final logic, without realizing it he has inadvertently made the church “greater” than Christ. Again, this is absurd, but so is using Old Testament typology to build new covenant doctrinal exegesis.

http://bibleanswerstand.org/QA_tithe.htm