BeforeThereWas
Seasoned Warrior
- Mar 14, 2005
- 2,450
- 59
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Constitution
probinson said:So let's back up and see what Paul was talking about here:
2 Corinthians 8:16-24
So we can see here that Paul is telling these people that he is sending Titus to them. We might call this a guest minister today, since Titus is coming to share something with them. So Titus, a guest speaker, is coming. That's important to the "context" of 2 Corinthians 9:7:
I somehow get the impression from those verses that Titus was being sent for reasons that FAR surpass his merely being a "guest speaker," but that's ok if you want to look at it like that.
2 Corinthians 9:1-7
Sowing Generously
6Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. 7Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
Paul tells them someone is coming. Get ready. Be prepared to give to this guest speaker. Then he says in verse 7, Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give.
That certainly doesn't speak of tithing. Such a concept can only be injected where it is nowhere addressed. What was the "gift"? Was it money? Was it something else of value? What? Again, we can only speculate. If it was gold and silver, then it had assumed value, which varied between economies. I also don't get the impression that those men were being sent only to be paid, but to colect the "gift" and take it back to where they came from.
Anyway, none of this speaks to the concept of institutionalized religious organizations such as we have today. You are applying FAR too much assumption in support of institutions and their alleged portrayal within these texts.
Looking at the context, Paul is telling them that they should be ready to give to these guests as they purpose in their heart. This verse, in its proper context, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with our regular giving at church, but everything to do with our giving to guest speakers.
Your edifice complex shows through your words. Do you really have this idea that the people at that time had anything similar to what we see around us today? Where do you get this stuff? Do you routinely inject into the text of scriptures today's mentality and practices, as if they fit?
Count me in. I'm one of the "young folk" that believe all believers SHOULD tithe. You believe that none have to tithe. What makes your belief any better or more valid than mine?
Mostly your lack of any biblical backing. What I have been saying just so happens to be on the side of scripture because of my lack of injecting into the texts what simply isn't there.
Why is your interpretation of scripture any more or less valid than mine?
Since when does proper interpretation involve the injection of a concept that clearly is not anywhere supported within the texts? That's not "interpretation. That's nothing more than a form of TRANSLITERATION, but from texts that simply don't exist. There's a big difference between the two.
The fruit I've seen from tithing in my own life points to God's goodness.
Ok. You feel that tithing has been a great benefit for you. However, the Lord does not lead us all down the same paths of giving and functioning within the body. To say otherwise is to utter that which finds no support within scripture. The Lord has set me about doing another task that does not involve institutionalized religious organizations, and supporting them. He has directed me to do other things.
My testimonies from tithing have drawn my friends closer to God. God uses my obedience to tithe as a testimony to His greatness.
Obedience to YOUR desire to tithe, but that doesn't mean that because you FEEL compelled that you want to tithe that everyone else should follow suit. You go where the Lord leads you. We all are organs with different functions within the same body.
Believe it or not, tithers can think for themselves. This picture that you portray of tithers just following some pastor or teacher blindly is misleading at best.
This has merit ONLY when you ignore the entirety of what I have said on this subject. You are a deceitful individual. I clearly stated, several times as a matter of fact, that BLINDLY GIVING to institutions that abuse the primary portion of believer's giving is wrong, and is nothing mroe than the blind leading the blind. Please represent my beliefs with the entirely what I have actually said on a given subject.
Clearly, Jesus is putting much more emphasis on following Him, having a close personal relationship with the Father, than head knowledge of the scriptures.
Absolutely! I also stated that if you feel a leading, or hear a voice, that directs you to do that which is contrary to the scriptures, that you can then know that leading or that voice to have originated from a source OTHER than the Lord. The Lord will NEVER contradict His written word.
Everyone I know that tithes has testimony after testimony of how God protected them in their finances and provided for them. This is good fruit. It's not "nonsense".
I also have heard testimony from faithful tithters who suffered greatly in this fallen world. Tithing is no guarantee of escaping suffering. There are good testimonies, and there are bad ones. So what? It's too easy to ignore the harsh realities of our living in a fallen world. Sometimes the Lord allows us to suffer because of the end result, not because we tithed or didn't tithe. Tithing is no magical formula to being blessed. The Lord causes it to rain on the righteous and the unrighteous alike, so your testimony in relation to tithing may or may not have merit where absolute truth is concerned.
BTW
Upvote
0

Must you attack my character? Is that the only way to get your point across?
Before you go and complain to the admins about my pointing out the obvious, please be honest enough by admitting to them that you brought all this upon yourself by way of your lack of representing the actual meaning behind my statements that I have clearly stated in other posts as clarification that you conveniently overlooked, or ignored completely, for whatever gain you may be after in misrepresentations, partial truths, or just outright fabrications that have no comparison to what I have said before.