Your tithes were already paid.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

Please see below



1Corinthians 9:13,4
Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

1Corinthians 10:18
Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar.


Clearly, the apostle is comparing New Testament giving equal of the Old Testament provision for the ministry.

How dare he use the old testament to prove his point!

Who does he think he is?

Doesn't he know we are under a new covenant?

I will address all of this but only if you FIRST address my points about the Lord's teaching from Luke, which I posted.

One thing at a time, brother!

[J.A. Perez]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Just thought of something. The tithing issue is somewhat obscure, in that it requires exegesis and study of both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Yet we tell folks who become Christians that they must do this, it is part of God's Way.

But the following statements are crystal clear and need no exegesis to understand the simple import of the words:

Mat_19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Mar_10:21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

And lest we think it's just a one time unique incident, we have this:

Luk_12:33 Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth.

Why do we not tell people these things? We do not tell people 'You want to be saved, want to be a Christian, want to follow the Lord? Sell all your stuff and give it away to the poor.'

We certainly do not tell them 'One thing you lack: sell ALL YOUR POSSESSIONS and give the money to the poor, and follow Jesus.'

BTW, I noticed he told them to give the money to the poor, not to his ministry...

Just thinking out loud, not making any conclusions (this is a safe discussion, lol).

I understand that the incident with the rich young ruler is a particular lesson in its self.

It goes on to say that 'he walked away sorrowful, for he had many possessions.'

I believe this was this mans individual stumbling block.

And the Lord hit the nail on the head.

However, I do believe if we are going to be anything in the kingdom we must sellout all.

All our focus must be for the furtherance of the kingdom.

It must be how I can use this to reach another soul.

That's why I have no problem with giving of 10% and a healthy offering to the church and ministry.

I also give most of my day to day life trying to build a church, by reaching souls, evangelism, bible studies, and such-like, besides having a full time job and a family to care for.

I pray that we can find the true treasure of selling out completely, it is my quest in life to wholly give myself to him.

I was talking to a friend today on my way to Men's conf. about this very thing.

If just 3000 of us gave up 1 soda, or 1 coffee, or 1 cup of tea, every day.

And took the money and saved it for 1 year.

Depending on the price average may be at least .75 cents. or .50 cents if your old as Cracker B. lol

We 3000 people collectively could give at .75cents per day for 1 year=

$821,250. to Missions...

That is no sacrifice, to give up .75 cents a day.but some would say that 10% really hurts and burdens and breaks the back of the poor and sends them to skid row and they have to live in the church van and end up backsliding. or Ill just feed my preacher or give him CANE's offering vegetables and crops and store up all my money for myself and buy bigger Barnes. COME ON!


May God help us, to find out what giving really is.

[J.A. Perez]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I will address all of this but only if you FIRST address my points about the Lord's teaching from Luke, which I posted.

One thing at a time, brother!

Originally Posted by Esaias

Thank you for bringing forth the scriptures that bear directly to the subject. I notice Paul did not appeal to any tithe law whatsoever, and never mentioned it, but instead appealed to the laws regarding wages.

So then it seems that Paul was commenting on what Jesus had established, when he said this:

Luk 10:1 After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.
Luk 10:2 Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest.
Luk 10:3 Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves.
Luk 10:4 Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by the way.
Luk 10:5 And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house.
Luk 10:6 And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again.
Luk 10:7 And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.
Luk 10:8 And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you:
Luk 10:9 And heal the sick that are therein, and say unto them, The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you.

Here Jesus refers to the support the apostles would receive as 'hire' (ie wages). He in fact is referencing the same idea Paul did! Therefore, it seems the apostolic preaching ministry is to be supported by freewill offerings from those who are taught, given to those who teach, based on how valuable the teaching is to the ones being taught.


No 'tithing' involved, either as specified under the Law or as developed in the modern ecclesiastical world.

This is a setting for a particular time, and there are good lessons to be learned by these verses.

However, The admonishment from our Lord is nothing that you (or I) practice or have in every literal sense.

Do you go house to house and stay at peoples house like in this instance, without bringing food or provision?

No, you guys have house church, which may be fine, but this is an example of what we as Apostolics have done for years.

Door knocking is a common practice around our place, as well as parking-lots, parks, and various other venues.

Good night my brother,

Praying for tons of worldliness in church tomorrow!

[J.A. Perez]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Who is being addressed in Malachi 3:8-10? Is it the people as the tithing teachers say, or is it the priests?

We need to study the entire Book of Malachi rather than take a few verses out of context. By the time we get to verse 6 in chapter 1, we see it is the priests that are being addressed at that point.

Malachi 1:6 (KJV) 6 A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?

In both chapters 1 and 2 of Malachi there is a conversation going on between God and the priests. Every time the word "you" is used, it is referring to the priests. Chapter 3 continues with this conversation. In verse 5 God says "And I will come near to you to judgment….."

In the Old Testament, during this period of time and generally speaking, only the priests could get near to God. It is only in the New Testament that born again believers, you and I, can get close to God. So up to chapter 3 verse 5, God is speaking to the priests. The word "you" is still referring to the priests. There is nothing in the scripture to indicate this changes when you get to verse 8. But that's not all.

Malachi chapter 1 verse 14 (NIV) reads: 14 "Cursed is the cheat who has an acceptable male in his flock and vows to give it, but then sacrifices a blemished animal to the Lord.

Remember we learned that in Numbers chapter 18, God said one tenth of the tithe was to be given to the priests for an offering to The Lord. Malachi 1:14 shows that the priests gave the worst of the tithe to God instead of the best. Thus we have the robbing God of offerings mentioned in Malachi chapter 3 verse 8.

Now let's look at Nehemiah chapter 13 verse 10 (NIV): 10 I also learned that the portions assigned to the Levites had not been given to them, and that all the Levites and singers responsible for the service had gone back to their own fields.

This verse is telling us that the priests stole the Levites portion of the tithe; therefore, they had no food to eat at the temple, and they went back to their own fields. We must interpret this verse in this way because nowhere does it say that the priests had also left the temple. The priests had the food. Read chapter 13 of Nehemiah to get the complete picture.

So Malachi 1:14 shows the priests robbed God of the offerings, and Nehemiah 13:10 shows the priests robbed God of the tithes.

Next, in Malachi 3:10 God says to bring all the tithes to the storehouse. The people took the tithes to the Levites who lived in the Levitical cities, not to the temple. The Levites took the required food from the tithes to the temple when it was their turn to serve. Only those tithes ever made it to the temple. The priests then took those tithes to the storehouse. It only makes sense if God is speaking to the priests in this verse.

Therefore, we believe that the evidence shows that Malachi 3:8-10 is being addressed to the priests, not the people.

http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePag....php?ID=280353

Lots of good information.

Malachi was rebuking everyone for the Pulpit to the door.

Israel always had this problem.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

What I think you're missing, respectfully is that Paul was establishing that Jesus was appointed Priest after the order of Melchisedek.

That's because Jesus continues to live so do men that receive Tithe.

I appreciate the tone and respect you are giving everyone in this post. May God bless your Christian example!

I see Christ being a priest after the order of Melchizedek very much. And this fact is key to understanding Who Jesus is, and what it means for the Law and the priesthood.

Look at Hebrews 7:11-12,

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 Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
12. For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Note the emboldened phrase above in verse 12. Since a new, different, and better priesthood was necessary, and that since the Aaronic priesthood of Levi had to be removed in order for the priesthood of Melchizedek to come to the fore, it is obvious the author intends his audience (Jews who were considering abandoning Jesus as the Messiah) to understand that all that came with the Law and the Levitical system is kyboshed.

The Law or Torah has been changed!!!

There is no longer an Aaronic high priest, or even an Aaronic priesthood at all, from God's point of view (even though it continued through the flesh of unbelieving Jews while the temple still stood).

Levi is no more, as far as God is concerned. There is only the high priesthood of Messiah after the order of Melchizedek, and the royal priesthood of Messianic believers in Jesus, which is also after the order of Melchizedek.

So what this means, is that, all that came with the Old Covenant through Moses, that was necessitated by the Levitical system (animal sacrifices, wave/heave/peace offerings, temple duties, the 24 courses of the priesthood, and yes, EVEN TITHING, is no more.

There is only now, from God's point of view, the priesthood of His Son, and the salvation His priesthood offers to the world. Nothing of the Old Covenant priesthood has any bearing on us as priests in the kingdom of God.

This salvation is by grace through faith in the atonement offered and procured by Jesus at the cross, and through His resurrection. Nothing can be added to or taken away from it.

We can't make the cross more effective. We add nothing to the blood of Christ's propitiation. All who live under the Law are under the curse:

Galatians 3:10,

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

If Paul is the author of Hebrews, know and understand that the first thing the Holy Spirit ever inspired Paul to write was 1 Thessalonians and then Galatians. Paul's theology and understanding of the Law was without parallel. His revelation of the mystery of the kingdom of God was unique, even among the other apostles (2 Peter 3:15).

And what he wrote to the Galatians stands true for us today. If any man of God takes up a tithe according to the instruction of the Old Covenant, he is bound by the Law to keep every point of it, or suffer the curse:

James 2:10,

10. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

If anyone else takes a tithe and believes he is justified because of Old Covenant commandments to do so, he is living under the beggarly elements of the Torah, and is cursed to obey every part of the whole Law in order to be righteous in God's eyes.

But we know, of course, that it is impossible to do so. The Law was given to make sin exceedingly sinful, and NOT to justify sinners:

Romans 7:13,

13. Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Galatians 2:16,

16. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHTEOUSNESS, from God's point of view, of keeping the works of the Law, like tithing. To keep the Law is a yoke not even faithful Jews can bear:

Acts 15:10,

10. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

We are Gentiles, grafted into the vine of Messiah by faith in Him. We are not required by the Holy Spirit to do a single thing regarding the keeping of the Law, apart from abstaining "from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood" (Acts 15:20).

No other binding commitment to the Torah/Law is upon us.

You are free from the LAW of sin and death. The Torah worked death. It's administration was to destroy so that God could save through Christ all that would believe in the promise of the Messiah:

2 Corinthians 3:3-16,

3. Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
4. And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
5. Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
6. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
7. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
8. How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
9. For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
10. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
11. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
12. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
13. And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
14. But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
15. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
16. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.

Take note of all the emboldened sections above:

- the letter killeth
- the ministration of death
- which glory was to be done away
- the ministration of condemnation
- no glory in this respect
- done away
- not as Moses
- to the end of that which is abolished
- the same vail untaken away
- the old testament
- which vail is done away in Christ
- the vail shall be taken away

Synthesize all of the bullet points above. Paul is writing about the Law, even the tables of stone otherwise called the Ten Commandments.

These work death. The Laws of the Old Testament kill. They administer death upon the recipient. But even still, there was a glory to it, as Moses' face shone every time he met with God and received new commands for the Law for the people.

But look what Moses did! He put a veil on his face so the people couldn't tell that his face had stopped shining with the glory of God. Any why? Because Moses knew that the laws and commandments he was giving the people were going to come to an end in the Messiah. God had given Moses the opportunity to see the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:6).

All that Moses gave to the people, including tithes, would have an end once Messiah came. The veil that kept people from receiving the revelation that the Law would come to an end, would only be taken away once Messiah came and abolished the Old Covenant in order to institute the New, which was given to the world through His blood (Matthew 26:28).

Tithes are over and done with, as much as any other aspect of the Old Covenant. We are free. Christ is the end of the Law to them that believe. Do you believe? Then you are free.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

You tell me, based on the Scriptures related to giving to the ministry

then,
What were the wages that Paul received?

If Old Testament tithe or offering had been disposed of, why did Paul use the Law to validate his argument to support the New Testament ministry?

Leviticus 19:13
Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.

Deuteronomy 25:4
Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.

Jeremiah 22:13
Woe unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness,
and his chambers by wrong;
that useth his neighbour's service without wages,
and giveth him not for his work;

1 Corinthians 9:1-14
Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.
Mine answer to them that do examine me is this, Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working? Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of thefruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?

For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.

Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

Clearly, the apostle is comparing New Testament giving equal of the Old Testament provision for the ministry.

2nd Corinthians 11:8
I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.

1 Timothy 5:17,18
Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

These are clearly all connected by the apostle.

These are clearly connected to giving financially to the kingdom of God in support of those servants called by God.

But remember the context! Paul was an itinerant slave of Jesus Christ. He owned nothing but what he wore and some parchments. He had no home, no wife, no children, no financial responsibilities but to travel and make Christ and His resurrection known to the Gentile world.

He was content with food and clothing. He didn't need any salary or support. It was only when he faced a Roman dungeon that he wrote to the Philippians about their lack of financial aid, something they had given in the past, but stopped once Paul was sent to Rome.

It was needful for Paul to take up an offering and be supported financially because he could no longer work with his own hands. There was a chain about his neck, and he was under house arrest. Look closely at the entire context of Philippians. Read it in one sitting. It is a reproof.

Epaphroditus worked himself nearly to death to keep Paul out of a dungeon, so he could rent his own house. And so, Paul sent Epaphroditus to them with a message, which was delivered, such that it caused the bishops and deacons of the church in Philippi to repent and begin supporting Paul financially once more.

But it wasn't a tithe. If Paul had instituted a tithe in all the churches he founded, there wouldn't have been any need for any other form of offering or financial assistance.

Think about how the 1st century church operated:

- No church building mortgage
- No parsonages to pay for
- No big conferences to raise money for
- No special attire
- No utilities
- No retirement presents for the pastor emeritus
- No cars for missionaries
- No programs or extra-Biblical ministries to support
- No organizational dues
- And etc.

So tell me, with all that in mind, what financial needs did the 1st century church or ministry have?

Here's a list:

- Traveling expenses for itinerant servants of the Gospel
- Food for communal meals (i.e. communion)
- Alms for the poor and needy (i.e. widows and orphans)
- ???

If we would get back to the model given to us in Acts, we wouldn't need to feel like we had to institute an Old Covenant idea to get people to put money into the pot. We'd all live with things in common. Our local assemblies wouldn't need a lot of money. Certainly not a tithe on every members' income.

So note how when we stray from the Acts model of how to be the church, suddenly the need for massive amounts of money come to the fore.

Let us come out of Babylon and not partake of her plagues anymore. We don't need to follow in the footsteps of the Catholic Church.

I am a part of a local assembly that meets in homes. We have elders. No one has a salary. We don't own a building, and have no other outstanding debts. Our church can take up an offering on the spot to pay for a man's very expensive car troubles (as an example that really happened a few months ago).

Next week our church is sending a mother and deaconess in the church to Kenya on a missions trip. Completely paid for by the church (By the way, she goes every year, and every year, the church finances it). Why? How? Because we tithe? NOPE!!!

Rather, because we do things the Bible, book of Acts way. Our local assembly can give to itinerant servants of the Gospel, just as Paul instructed, without demanding 10% of everyone's income. We feed each other out of pocket, and frequently have communal meals.

At our last meeting, as we prayed and interceding for our sister's trip to Kenya, the Lord said to me:

"The Master is in His House."

I didn't understand it at first. But now I do. Jesus is head over our assembly, AS HE SHOULD BE. He is welcome and is at home in us. We are doing things His way, and He is pleased to dwell in us in His fullness as Master over us, because of it.

The Bishop and Shepherd of our souls doesn't require us to tithe in order to stay in His good graces. His commandment is to love one another. Love is an action, and can be expressed financially. I have given and received. I've been blessed both ways.

It's not about a letter that kills, it's about the Spirit and the love of God shed forth in our hearts, even to give as needed. We need to stop locking ourselves into binding arrangements that the Lord doesn't want us to do.

His yoke is easy and His burden is light. He does not put us to the test above that which we are able to bear. Rather, He provides a way of escape, i.e. a solution to pass the trial of our faith.

Jesus isn't into crippling the saints with a legal yoke from the Law that He knows no one can bear. Jesus hates "corban". Monies dedicated to the temple don't mean anything to Him, when there are needs all around us, even in our own families.

I know a brother who's father died last year. His mother is a widow, and this brother is doing his part to care for her, as commanded by Holy Scripture. His financial responsibilities are to her, not to the temple, according to Christ (so he doesn't curse father or mother with his "corban"). And he is doing the right thing by taking care of her however he can.

This is how we are to live. Not tied into a law of 10%. Rather the law of love in Christ, to give 100%, every day, all day, for the rest of our lives, for the sake of the Kingdom, and the glory of God. One time, the Lord impressed upon me to take 1/3 of my recently received wedding money, and give it as an offering. My brand new wife was shocked, but I told her it was from God, and she consented. I gave it cheerfully, knowing it was my God telling me to do so.

I found out a week later that the area of the church I gave the offering to caused that function of the church to go from $0.00 to the amount I gave.

God is into giving, even sacrificially, when we'd rather use the money He allows us to have in some other way. But it's not about a tithe. That kind of thinking needs to change, just as the Laws governing the Jewish people were changed at the advent of Messiah.

Let go of this yoke, my brothers. It has been abolished.

[Originalist]

Keeping this thread in perspective, let us remember its real purpose. It is a thread that examines the validity of a doctrine that declares God commands Christians to give 10% of their gross income to a church or pastor.

One of the most common arguments by pro-tithe teachers is the "pre-Law" argument. This argument states that since tithing is mentioned a couple of times before the Law, that it is still in effect today. But is that a proper way to interpret scripture? Which of the Apostles ever taught that any practice we see being carried out before the Law is something we are to follow today? Why do we not teach mandatory circumcision, animal sacrifice, or Sabbath keeping since they all were mentioned before the Law?

Here are a some more questions I have of tithe teachers...

1) Why do you emphasize Abraham doing something God never commanded him to do (paying a one time tithe to a king) but you ignore a direct command given by God to Abraham (circumcision)? Why don't you teach mandatory circumcision?

2) God directly commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son. Why then do you not follow that same example of Abraham as a demonstration of your loyalty to God instead of claiming to follow his example in the Melchizedek incident?

3) Abraham paid a one time tithe on stolen items he recovered and was returning to their owners. This was not his personal property. Please explain how this is an example for us in our giving to a church regularly on something that does belong to us and was not stolen property of others.

4) Jacob paid a one time tithe on existing assets. Please explain .......

a) How can a one time tithe on assets )that was not commanded by God) be used to teach people thousands of years into the future that God commands them to give 10% of their income to a church. Income and assets are two different things all together. Since Jacob tithed on existing assets, wouldn't it be more accurate to use his example to instruct believers to pay a one time tithe on all their existing assets versus present and future income?

b) How did Jacob actually physically send this tithe to God? If the animals were sacrificed, then does that not complicate things even more since sacrifices are for sin, and Christ's sacrifice eliminated the need for all others?



5) Please explain what hermeneutical model you use to come to your conclusions.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by J.A. Perez

I agree for the most part of what you said.

And if you Read my last paragraph it should clear things up.

However I think it also must be taken into account that not everyone agrees with your understanding, for instance..


"Marvin D. Treece - Hebrews - The Literal Word-

Hebrews 7:8

Translation - and here dying man receive tithes; but there he (takes tithes), while it continues being witnessed that he lives.

And here dying man received tithes. We have the men and de construction which is best represented by men (on one hand) and de (on the other, or but). The preposition 'hode'(here) represents the Levitical priest hood.

This is the present circumstance which the Hebrew writer knew that his readers would except. While 'ekei'(there) represents Melchisedek the present participle 'apothneskoutes' (dying men) is without the article, and should be taken as objectival.

The description is apt for all the tribe of Levi, and anyone outside the perimeter of deity.

The present participle 'marturoumenos'(witness) represents a continuing action. The witness is surely meant to be that of Scripture, but for those who hold two Melchisedek being equivalent to theophany, it means that everyone has the witness by the continued living of the personage.

The verb 'ze' must find its counterpart in the participle 'apothneskoutes'(dying men), and must maintain the same force. It's dying man is and excepted condition, then 'ze'(he lives) must also be excepted. This writer, without earnestly seeking to establish a position, admits the effect of this comparison.

By that, it is implied that Melchisedek still lives.this again, would emphasize the personage as "God" in an appearance. It is no different then the appearance of God, or some divine entity being represented, as seen by Abraham (Genesis 18:2).

The tendency of the Hebrew writer by these two excepted conditions of dying man and he lives causes us to try to gauge the depth of his intended view. It is difficult to look at these two phrases without concluding that the one who lives must be viewed as a continued process.

It is quite amazing to consider the phrases dying man and he lives. If the often he is not in view, then exegesis certainly becomes more difficult."

Because Melchisedek continues so do men that receive tithe.

Okay, we are on the subject of Melchisedek now.

Melchisedek was a "type of Christ", right?

Melchisedek received tithes from Abraham, right?

Melchisedek received tithes "in the stead" of Christ, you teach, right?

If a man receives tithes today(as a replacement recipient of tithes to Melchisedek), as Melchisedek did, then they are receiving them in the stead of Christ, right?("give to God when giving you tithes to the church")

You do realize, that by using this passage in Hebrews 7 to make your case, that you are saying that the ministry stand as EQUALS to Melchisedek as the recipient of tithes, and as a replacement to the type of Christ illustrated in the passage.

Brother, this is exactly why we hear..."when you give your tithe, you are giving to God".

They are teaching us that the PASTOR, in a sense, replaces JESUS as your representative to God.

[Sean]

Then, the "replacement" for Jesus, behind the pulpit, threatens the church with an Old Testament curse for not paying their tithes to them.

[Sean]

Does this sound absurd?

It is happening in 95% of all Christian churches in America, as we speak.