you'll hate this thread, I guarantee it. (2)

[holo]

I know you don't. All you do is say that you don't.

You've not argued why you think the verses I cited have nothing to do with tithing. You've had ample opportnity to, but you simply prefer to say "No it's not".

Based on your say so. The church took money from the community as it does today to support enterprises.

Most New Testament discussion serves to promote giving over tithing. 2 Corinthians 9:7 talks about giving cheerfully; 2 Corinthians 8:3 encourages giving what you can afford; 1 Corinthians 16:2 discusses giving weekly; 1 Timothy 5:18 exhorts supporting the financial needs of Christian workers; Act 11:29 promotes feeding the hungry wherever they may be; and James 1:27 states that pure religion is to help widows and orphans.

But none of that is tithing. There were actually several tithes, and they were part of the covenant God made with Israel. It has nothing to do with the new covenant that is by faith, and which is between God and all who believe (jews and gentiles alike). We can't just pick and choose commandments from the old covenant and apply them as we see fit.

BTW, Abraham didn't tithe, at least not in the way that is preached in many churches. There was one instance where he gave 10% of some spoils (not his own income or riches) to the priest Melchisedek.

And anyway, if I should try to copy the original way of tithing, it would be to use 10% of my income at restaurants and pubs, and giving some to the priests in town who have no income of their own;

Deuteronomy 14:26-27
Use the silver to buy whatever you like: cattle, sheep, wine or other fermented drink, or anything you wish. Then you and your household shall eat there in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice. And do not neglect the Levites living in your towns, for they have no allotment or inheritance of their own.

Another of your trade-mark truisms

Don't you agree though? Everybody from Hitler to universalists are using the bible for "proof".

Refuted? Based on what? You claimed that Paul supported slavery, now you argue against this.

No, I don't argue that Paul doesn't support slavery. In fact it looks like he does support it! Or at least it seems like he accepts that it exists. Perhaps not what we usually think of as slavery (like in early America), but still.

Anyway, slave holders and racists would use bible verses to support their atrocities. For example, "what fellowship does light have with darkness" and so forth. That single verse could be used, of course, but if you hold it up against the bible as a whole, it doesn't really work. That's why slave holders would only allow the slaves to read the old testament, by the way. Restricting what scripture people are allowed to read is just one way to abuse the bible. Another is to get people to believe that they don't have the right or ability to understand it on their own - instead they must rely on some sort of church or clergy to interpret it for them - which obviously allows for (but doesn't necessarily lead to) a lot of abuse.

Then read the threads.
a) the Church put the Bible together.
b) the bible doesn't say it contains all of what Jesus said or did.
These are points I've made quite a bit

Yes, but they don't make me much wiser, because the Catholics, who disagree with you, are saying the exact same thing. It's kind of like saying "it's in the bible!" Well, yes, it is, but just because something is in the bible (like wars or slavery or circumcision) doesn't mean we should naturally do those things today.

But I agree with you that the church put the bible together and that the bible doesn't record everything Jesus said or did. But that doesn't mean the church recorded everything He said or did, either. And there's the question of which canon we should use. That's one area where I really can't offer any argument for or against any canon, as I haven't really studied that. Which canon do you use? Do you have a particular reason for using that?

Yes, you say it is flawed.

I say the bible does have errors, like the one I posted about the crucifixion (I haven't seen you reply to that, btw). That doesn't mean I reject it. I'm sure you've read christian literature, or heard priests, that you don't agree with 100%. That doesn't mean you reject them.

I don't reject any part of the bible. I interpret it differently than you do.

Anyway, I think it's perfectly natural to assume that the bible, written by people over thousands of years, by many different people, in many genres, in ages before people even knew that the Earth circles the sun and not vice versa, that it's not flawless. And indeed that it doesn't need to be, at least not about the less weighty matters. I think that if you claim that the bible is inerrant, the burden of proof is on you. Not that I need proof, I'm just curious about why you believe the bible is inerrant.

 

[holo]

Everything is permitted? Really now... It's relativism

Actually, it's Paul preaching the gospel.

Everything is lawful unto us in the same matter that everything was lawful unto Adam and Eve. They didn't have the law. Not that they needed it anyway, in fact they were commanded NOT to learn about good and evil.

Everything is lawful to me, but not everything is beneficial. When I decide not to slap a guy in the face, it's not because the law forbids it, but because it's not beneficial. Because I want to do good even to my enemies, because there are better options. I thankfully have better reasons to behave, than some law. I don't know about you? What is the reason you drive sensibly, for example? Because you're afraid of being fined or jailed? Or because you care about yourself and others?

The law is for the wicked and ungodly, it's there to condemn them. It's not for the righteous. It's not for Jesus. Jesus IS our righteousness.

So speaking for myself, nothing of what I do, or don't do, is motivated by the law. When I decide to abstain from alcohol, it's out of care for some who are "weaker in faith". When I do good to someone, it's because I love them. And so forth.

 

[benedictaoo]

Actually, it's Paul preaching the gospel.

Everything is lawful unto us in the same matter that everything was lawful unto Adam and Eve. They didn't have the law. Not that they needed it anyway, in fact they were commanded NOT to learn about good and evil.

Everything is lawful to me, but not everything is beneficial. When I decide not to slap a guy in the face, it's not because the law forbids it, but because it's not beneficial. Because I want to do good even to my enemies, because there are better options. I thankfully have better reasons to behave, than some law. I don't know about you? What is the reason you drive sensibly, for example? Because you're afraid of being fined or jailed? Or because you care about yourself and others?

The law is for the wicked and ungodly, it's there to condemn them. It's not for the righteous. It's not for Jesus. Jesus IS our righteousness.

So speaking for myself, nothing of what I do, or don't do, is motivated by the law. When I decide to abstain from alcohol, it's out of care for some who are "weaker in faith". When I do good to someone, it's because I love them. And so forth.

Incorrect interpretation.

 

[benedictaoo]

prayer style is completely subjective.

or lest you forget, some of those prayers that you think have been around for 2000 years, haven't. Whenever someone writes a prayer that you think is great, you use it. It's taking someone elses prayer, and making it your own.

again, I do not say that is a sin. But it would be for me. Much like it would be sin for the one convicted not to eat meat, to do so.

and no, I am not struggling. thanks very much. I've already said as much.

I have not misused the context of the passage.

what is sinful about reciting Jesus words UpHill? What is sinful about reciting a theologically correct words of another?

What is the sin in that? What is the false worship.

Again i ask, what is the goal and purpose of prayer?

Answer: to enter into God's holy presence to learn His will and to have His grace transform you.

There are many ways we can pray and as long as we are not blaspheming God or trying to channel other spirits or praying in non Christian ways, any prayer said that is good words, like Christ's words, will benefit us and there is no sin or false worship.

Doing centering prayer like a tibetan mock is sinful and false worship but reciting Christ's words?? Hardly.

 

[holo]

There's a special unity though here amongst Protestants as all those who cherish the Bible have ignored Holo saying the Bible is flawed.

Actually, I'm not saying the bible is flawed. If the bible itself had claimed to be 100% flawlessly inerrant about absolutely everything it contains, then it would be flawed. But the bible doesn't say that. In fact, the bible doesn't mention the bible at all. It mentions the OT and certain letters, and if I'm not mistaken it also cites a book that is NOT in the canon.

The bible isn't "flawed" any more than a poem or a novel is "flawed". You just have to have the right idea about what the bible is.

 

[holo]

Incorrect interpretation.

And the correct interpretation would be...?

 

[benedictaoo]

And the correct interpretation would be...?

Not yours.

 

[LogosRhema]

Prayer is a personal thing... no one can understand each other in our convictions to the Lord in our prayers. I do not see good fruit coming from a conversation like this at all, lest it be between VERY good friends. What does it matter to one who prayers a list of prayer written by themselves or others? Prayer is communication between a person and God. Keep in mind also that a relationship is developed through prayer, so how one prays is personal. Think of it this way. When I communicate with my girl friend, her and I exchange cute sayings that are between her and I and only we understand. Prayer is the same way. What ever way you work out your prayers is between you and God... I honestly am seeing a pointless argument and if we are to stay true to God's word we are to avoid them. Lets carry on then, shall we?

 

[holo]

Not yours.

And the correct interpretation would be?

 

[Uphill Battle]

and if the heart is far from, it is YOUR choice for it to be. It is YOU and not the prayer.

I don't know how any rational argument can be made against meditating on the words Christ taught us.

UpHill, what is prayer to you?

You can take a theologically correct prayer that speaks of God's divine truth and meditate on it and recite it as many times as your heart desires. There is NO act of false worship in that... you have GOT to see this?!

Yes, we have been seeing the point, we are trying to show it t you.

Relativism... personal truth and nothing is objective.

There is NO SIN is anyone reciting a holy prayer even if they did just rattle it off. At the very least the person is just praying non effectively but false worship and sin??!!

Where do you get this nonsense from???????????

You are so wrong on this one, I can not bare it.

what is sinful about reciting Jesus words UpHill? What is sinful about reciting a theologically correct words of another?

What is the sin in that? What is the false worship.

Again i ask, what is the goal and purpose of prayer?

Answer: to enter into God's holy presence to learn His will and to have His grace transform you.

There are many ways we can pray and as long as we are not blaspheming God or trying to channel other spirits or praying in non Christian ways, any prayer said that is good words, like Christ's words, will benefit us and there is no sin or false worship.

Doing centering prayer like a tibetan mock is sinful and false worship but reciting Christ's words?? Hardly.

since all three of your posts are saying the same thing, I'll answer once.

What does God want from us? Authentic worship. What does he think of ritual without heart in it? Sin.

For me, parroting the words of someone else, would be no authentic prayer. It would be worship devoid of thought and heart, and would be worthless.

unless of course, you think there is some special power in the words as opposed to the praying itself.

Prayer is conversing with God. I see no reason to use someone elses words, in fact, I find it rather rude. Think if you were to speak that way to anyone here. If they wanted to speak with you, have a relationship with you, and you read off what someone else has said, everytime you get together for a converstation.

that is why it would be wrong for me to do. It is no different than the man who eats meat, although firmly convinced it would be sin to do so.

I'm not answering this question again, I've been VERY clear.

 

[Montalban]

And the correct interpretation would be...?

Show me from Scripture your interpretation is correct... either in general, or regarding tithing

 

[Montalban]

This is according to who?? where do you get authority to say whose worship is "fake" and whose is not?

You are putting a judgment on someone else that you can be judged also ...so what is your point?

Like Holo they both want to argue their opinion is valid, but others invalid based as it is on their opinion, and that the Bible can be interpreted to make a number of different opinions!

Why should we worship in a "creative" way (that is not in the Bible....BTW) and not the way it was handed down to us by the Apostles? and in the Tradition of the early Church? You still have not present any proof why the way you want (individually) to worship is valid....

All Uphill Battle has done is suggest that he's stated this somewhere else, and that no one can understand him, or doesn't want to understand him.

 

[holo]

Show me from Scripture your interpretation is correct... either in general, or regarding tithing

I don't know how these threads are appearing to everybody else, but my posts are ending up all over the place, like way back, even before the post I was responding to!

Hopefully, this link will point you to the post you're looking for: http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=45172618&postcount=124

Let me know if you can see it.

 

[Montalban]

since all three of your posts are saying the same thing, I'll answer once.

What does God want from us? Authentic worship. What does he think of ritual without heart in it? Sin.

That doesn't mean that he doesn't want RITUAL! But for you no ritual matters, but it does, depending on what time of day I ask you.

For me, parroting the words of someone else, would be no authentic prayer.

So when Jesus tells us to say "Our Father..." for you it's 'parroting'?

It would be worship devoid of thought and heart, and would be worthless.

You said it doesn't matter, so long as we have faith in Jesus!

unless of course, you think there is some special power in the words as opposed to the praying itself.

Jesus just told us to pray, for what reason? Just to waste time?

Prayer is conversing with God. I see no reason to use someone elses words,

So Jesus telling us how to pray is without reason?

in fact, I find it rather rude. Think if you were to speak that way to anyone here. If they wanted to speak with you, have a relationship with you, and you read off what someone else has said, everytime you get together for a converstation.

So if you're married, you can only say "I love you" once in your marriage because after that time it's simply parroting what other people say and you have to find new and unique ways of expressing this one thought every time, because to do otherwise has no meaning?

 

[Uphill Battle]

That doesn't mean that he doesn't want RITUAL! But for you no ritual matters, but it does, depending on what time of day I ask you.

bull. I never said anything about ritual mattering. You're continuing down the misrepresentation road. It's been explained, if you continue, you're just lying to make your point.

So when Jesus tells us to say "Our Father..." for you it's 'parroting'?

If I merely following the bouncing ball, yes. I do not believe that Christ intended us to pray those exact words only, as if that were some magic prayer. It was demonstrative of form, not a command to pray those exact words.

You said it doesn't matter, so long as we have faith in Jesus!

what doesn't matter? Did you just remove context of what someone said to poison the well? I think you did? One trick pony.

Jesus just told us to pray, for what reason? Just to waste time?

no. And I didn't suggest as much. You are being VERY dishonest.

So Jesus telling us how to pray is without reason?

nope. Try again. I'm not saying this either.

So if you're married, you can only say "I love you" once in your marriage because after that time it's simply parroting what other people say and you have to find new and unique ways of expressing this one thought every time, because to do otherwise has no meaning?

comparing apples and t-bone steaks.

if I were to say to my wife the same thing every day, I think she'd get the point that I wasn't putting much effort into it. We aren't talking about a simple "I love you." Were talking about a conversation. Actually communicating.

If I took a poem, and I read it to her every day, it would very soon lose it's meaning.


now try and be a good boy, and don't be dishonest about what people have actually said, compared with what you pretend they did.

 

[Mick116]

For me, parroting the words of someone else, would be no authentic prayer. It would be worship devoid of thought and heart, and would be worthless.

I am not sure your worship tradition, but virtually all use borrowed words during worship. The words of Charles Wesley, Isaac Watts or John Newton are often repeated - prayerfully - in genuine, heartfelt worship, as are the words of Paul in the consecration of the emblems, the words of Mary in reciting magnificat, or the words of Christ when praying "Our Father".

Do you consider singing hymns or spiritual songs "parroting the words of someone else"? Can not genuine worship exist when you are singing such words?

Peace and blessings

 

[Montalban]

bull. I never said anything about ritual mattering. You're continuing down the misrepresentation road. It's been explained, if you continue, you're just lying to make your point.

I know you're frustrated because you don't know which argument you wish to have, but there's no point blaming me. You said yourself that all that mattered was to state a faith in Jesus! That's all!

If I merely following the bouncing ball, yes. I do not believe that Christ intended us to pray those exact words only,

I never said that we're to only pray that; in fact we use other prayers too. Why you believe one is valid, and others mere 'parroting' is only based on you repeating that it is so

as if that were some magic prayer. It was demonstrative of form, not a command to pray those exact words.

I agree. You've just refuted yourself then!

what doesn't matter? Did you just remove context of what someone said to poison the well? I think you did? One trick pony.
no. And I didn't suggest as much. You are being VERY dishonest.

That's what YOU said. If it's taken out of a context, then give it a context! I'm going by what you said.

nope. Try again. I'm not saying this either.

Who knows then what your point is at any given moment

comparing apples and t-bone steaks.

Again, because you say so. You're the one who made the grand sweeping statement that all repetition is meaningless.

if I were to say to my wife the same thing every day, I think she'd get the point that I wasn't putting much effort into it.

So do you, or don't keep changing it all the time?

We aren't talking about a simple "I love you." Were talking about a conversation.

I agree. So I take it any time you come home from work and she asks "How was your day?" she's being insincere

If I took a poem, and I read it to her every day, it would very soon lose it's meaning.

Why's it meaningless if I use one person's prayer one day, and someone else's another day?

now try and be a good boy, and don't be dishonest about what people have actually said, compared with what you pretend they did.

Well, when you get around to making up your mind what it is you object to, let me know.

Your posts look more like objecting for the sake of objecting.

Try putting your thoughts into some kind of context then

 

[Montalban]

I am not sure your worship tradition, but virtually all use borrowed words during worship. The words of Wesley or Newton are often repeated - prayerfully - in genuine, heartfelt worship, as are the words of Paul in the consecration of the emblems, the words of Mary in reciting magnificat, or the words of Christ when praying "Our Father".

Do you consider singing hymns or spiritual songs "parroting the words of someone else"? Can not genuine worship exist when you are singing such words?

Peace and blessings

Apparently if you use anyone else's words, it's just parroting!

 

[zeke37]

You've just continued like others here to give an opinion that seems to suggest you're your own pope; declaring for yourself what to keep, what to discard.

of course!!

else tradition may steeeeep in.

What basis you make these decisions on is unstated.

I just got here...and my basis is stated above...if we can find tradition written int he Word of God, then by all means, have at it...

if not, then what are you doing?

Do you believe in sola scriptura?

which definition?

what I do believe in is what is written in the Word about tradition...

not all tradition is bad, but some are for sure...and we are warned many times of false teachings/teachers...

Now the church is full of different theories, some based on traditions...new, and some old. Many are not good traditions...so we are to use the Word of God as correction.

I was force fed tradition for 30 years...and found many of the traditions i followed out of loyalty to be completely opposite to what is written. Who should I believe? man or God?

in His service
c

 

[Montalban]

Still waiting for Uphill Battle to explain what he relies on to show that he should only rely on Scripture.