Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev
|
Reading these versus IN CONTEXT reveals the fact that the thrust of these passages was in relation to a measure of the priesthood of Christ in relation to the pristhood of men, and therefore that the preisthood of Christ is superior to man's priesthood. Not one passage in that section of scripture upholds the idea of a continuance of the tithe.
Now, if you can show me such a passage, or point out where in the CONTEXT that a continuance of the tithe was what the writer had in mind, then I will certainly give it another look.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev
( Mat 23:23) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. |
Jesus also told one of the men He had healed to go and offer up burnt sacrifices at the altar in thanksgiving for the healing. Are we, then, to follow that as well. After all, Jesus said it, right?
Quite frankly, ignoring the fact that Jesus was addressing a people who were still required to obey the Law....to the letter....makes me wonder about the agenda behind the pro-required-tithing dogma.
Now, let's put this in perspective, shall we: The Law NOWHERE demanded a tithe of anyone's wages. Not one verse can be shown to define the tithe as being a measure of monetary wages. The implication of this fact is that no wage-earner was required to hand over to the Levites a portion of his wages.
Now, if you can show me that I'm wrong, then please do so. I won't hide behind opinion and feelings about this. Simply show me the evience in support of your words. That's a reasonable request.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev
Tithing didn't start under the law, it started in Genesis.
If you are Abraham's seed you will also pay tithes just like he did!
|
First of all, you made use of the plural when uttering the term "tithes," as if you're privy to some special information to which no other man walking this earth has access; information that allegedly proves that Abraham
tithed continuously to Melchizedek or anyone else. We're told of only
ONE instance where Abraham handed over a tenth of the
spoils of war, which was not at all a
tithe similar to what's taught and practiced today. Nowehre in that text are we told that he ventured up to his home in northern Canaan, collected a tenth of his own personal property, brought it back and handed it over to Melchizedek. He handed over a tenth of other people's stolen property he retrieved from those five thieving kings.
Just in case someone wants to try and argue the foolish notion that the spoils of war were Abraham's property, well, please give thought to the fact that Abraham knew from whom the spoils were stolen. He did the noble thing by returning the stolen property to its rightful owners....apart from the portion he gave to Melchizedek in thanksgiving for the victory, and in recognition to God's provision of that victory.
Also give thought to the fact that if YOU retrieved someone else's stolen property, would YOU keep it for yourself, or would you do the Christian thing by returning it to its rightful owner? Why, then, are there so many people, who claim to be Christian, willing to villify Abraham by assigning to him a character that is LESS than Christian?
Come, now. Let's be honest, shall we.
