Do we have to pay tithes?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

That weight was equal to money yes. Of certain metals, and materials yes. But it wasn't a coin. It couldve been a sapphire or whatever, but it wasn't a coin. But it was the cash so to speak of that day in age I'll agree. But so were animals and produce so your argument is proving what I'm saying. Because all of it had a trade scale. So all the things given would've had a monetary value, if they weren't given to the priest and sold elsewhere. It was all as good as money.

Brother, If you want to convert me, quote one verse where the Bible said money and meant animals, or an example of someone referring to a herd of money, or a flock of money. The half shekel offering was referred to as money and silver, because it was silver money. Have you ever heard of a silver dollar? A silver dollar is money and silver, and the silver half shekel was a half shekel, and it was silver.

[1ofthechosen]

I believe at Malachi 3:6 this whole context is widened from just the Levites. "For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed."

And then 3:9 says "Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, this whole nation. He's not talking to the nation of Levi bro, that makes no sense. And then 10 where He says "Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it." The storehouse was created during the surplus in the book of Chronicles. The only people that benefited from it being full were 1. The Levites, 2. The feasts, and 3. The poor. Which is another reason why I believe this is speaking to "the whole nation." Everyone. Otherwise it wouldn't have brought the punishment that it did upon them. But I do believe the priests were a problem. But not the whole complete problem. Do to the consequence it brought that He didn't speak to them for 400 years; this included everyone not just the priests. It doesn't make sense in light of all that.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Brother, If you want to convert me, quote one verse where the Bible said money and meant animals, or an example of someone referring to a herd of money, or a flock of money. The half shekel offering was referred to as money and silver, because it was silver money. Have you ever heard of a silver dollar? A silver dollar is money and silver, and the silver half shekel was a half shekel, and it was silver.

I'm not trying to convert you but to say that cattle and produce wasn't worth anything is crazy. You can't believe that. What were the priests doing? Selling the cattle for money. It would come in the front door and go back out the back door sold to someone else. That's what they were doing in Jesus day in the Tabernacle. That means cattle was as good as money. I didn't say it was money, but it had trade value. If your denying that, it has to be just to make a point.

[1ofthechosen]

I do wanna say I'm not part of the ministry, so I have no bias one way or the other. All I can say is I always give God His first, and He supplies all my needs. I believe its a good practice it's tried and true in my walk, whether y'all agree or not. But I can see a lot of evidence that you should do it. Way more than, that I shouldn't. That's my stance.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

I do wanna say I'm not part of the ministry, so I have no bias one way or the other. All I can say is I always give God His first, and He supplies all my needs. I believe its a good practice it's tried and true in my walk, whether y'all agree or not. But I can see a lot of evidence that you should do it. Way more than, that I shouldn't. That's my stance.

Everyone agrees with you.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

I'm not trying to convert you

I'm trying to convert him.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

I believe at Malachi 3:6 this whole context is widened from just the Levites. "For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed."

And then 3:9 says "Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, this whole nation. He's not talking to the nation of Levi bro, that makes no sense. And then 10 where He says "Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it." The storehouse was created during the surplus in the book of Chronicles. The only people that benefited from it being full were 1. The Levites, 2. The feasts, and 3. The poor. Which is another reason why I believe this is speaking to "the whole nation." Everyone. Otherwise it wouldn't have brought the punishment that it did upon them. But I do believe the priests were a problem. But not the whole complete problem. Do to the consequence it brought that He didn't speak to them for 400 years; this included everyone not just the priests. It doesn't make sense in light of all that.

Bro, please forgive me, but you aren't following the context. The prophet reminds them (Levites) that they weren't taking care of the widows, the orphans, robbing the hireling of his wages, the proselyte. the whole nation comes under the curse because of shoddy leadership. If the blind lead those who are also blind they all fall together into a pit.

[n david]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Malachi 3:8-9 is saying it's robbing God or it wouldn't say "ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. And 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, [10] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." So if it's robbery it always was, and always will be robbery. And the scripture doesn't say "thieves shall not inherit the kingdom of God." That's what he's saying and scripture says the samething in that context.

"even this whole nation" is referring to the curse, not the robbing.

Gill: "even this whole nation; the sin was become general, and therefore a general judgment was inflicted on them: Grotius thinks, that the people seeing the priests withhold the tithes from the Levites, they refused to pay them to them, and so the sin became universal. Kimchi observes, that in other sins charged upon the nation, the people were not all alike guilty, but in this which respected the tithes and offerings they were. "

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Bro, please forgive me, but you aren't following the context. The prophet reminds them (Levites) that they weren't taking care of the widows, the orphans, robbing the hireling of his wages, the proselyte. the whole nation comes under the curse because of shoddy leadership. If the blind lead those who are also blind they all fall together into a pit.

In verse 5 He says "Saith the Lord of Hosts." End statement to the Levites. Verse 6 He shows who He is talking to "therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." Otherwise why does it not say "ye sons of Levi"? The context has widened. And it shows in verse 9 "Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, this whole nation."

Look at 3:18 it shows it well "Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not." Letting you know he's talking to all the people. That they could discern between God's true ministers and the Levites.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by n david

"even this whole nation" is referring to the curse, not the robbing.

Gill: "even this whole nation; the sin was become general, and therefore a general judgment was inflicted on them: Grotius thinks, that the people seeing the priests withhold the tithes from the Levites, they refused to pay them to them, and so the sin became universal. Kimchi observes, that in other sins charged upon the nation, the people were not all alike guilty, but in this which respected the tithes and offerings they were. "

I would go with that, in fact that's all I'm saying. All I'm saying if at any point it could be called robbing God. It always is, that's part of the moral law.