• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christians and the Word of God.

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member
Okay. Sorry, I really thought that you were trying to focus on that one item. Past experience tells me that when you try to cover too much in one thread, it usually ends up getting kind of out of control pretty fast. But since it's your thread and you've said that it's all encompassing, I'll respond to uss_bigd's post.


No, I'm not going to say that baptism is not necessary. I believe it is. I'm not going to say that repentance isn't necessary, because I don't believe in the doctrine of "once saved, always saved."

I'm not going to collect anything. I'm going to give. :D Jesus said (in Luke 11:42 and Matthew 23:23) that it is important to that we obey the entire law. While the payment of tithes (which specifically means 10%) may be less important than showing love, mercy and faith, we are expected to keep all of His commandments, and not just some of them.

Well, I'm neither a Catholic nor a Baptist, but my Church collects money only from its members. When it comes to giving, though, we give to whomever is in need.

when i said collect.. i was referring to the church who does it.

i will not dare insult your intelligence by reiterataing what the verse meant...
collection of tights is not a christian doctrine. it was a commandment for the tribees of levy. read that verse in the book of hebrews.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
i will not dare insult your intelligence by reiterataing what the verse meant...collection of tights is not a christian doctrine. it was a commandment for the tribees of levy. read that verse in the book of hebrews.
And when was the law of tithing rescinded?

Personally, I can't imagine why anyone would begrudge God a mere 10% of what he has. If it weren't for God, I wouldn't have anything. To try to figure out a biblically-based excuse for not returning such a tiny fraction of what we have to God requires some real mental gymnastics.
 

Sola'lor

LDSUJC
actually, its not the interpretation ... its who follows everything thats written...

So you're saying it's impossible to interpret what is written?

what matters is who accepts whats written.

if Peter said in the book of acts " Repent and be baptized"
  • Are you going to interpret that and say baptism is not necessary????
  • Are you going to say that repentance isnt necessary coz once saved your always saved anyway???
I think the most common interpretation is the method of baptism. What is the process. Sprinkling? Standing in water? Immersion? I don't think it specifies in those those four words you quoted.

if Paul said to the Corinthians " give what your heart decides "

  • are you going to collect 10%??? are you following what Paul said?
I don't think I've seen any church that prohibits their members from contributing what their hearts decide.

if John said, "we preached without taking anything from anyone who is not a follower"

  • are you going to collect money from the catholics if you are a baptiste???
The interpretation could be in taking, or anything, or follower.

HOW DIFFICULT COULD IT BE??

I don't think it's difficult. It's just different.
 

John_672

Omnitheist
I think that all Scripture needs to be followed strictly, as awkward as that may seem. The problem with not is someone says, I think we should follow the Bible except for this part and other says, yeah, and I don't think we have to follow this part either and so on and so. Hence the debate, where do Christians draw the line. (2 Tim. 3:16-17)

REALLY?! When you say all the scripture, do you mean Old and New Testament, or just the New Testament? I would suggest that would have to be old and new, seeing as Jesus said that he didn't change the law, but fulfilled it. So in order to live a truly biblical life, you would have to live as A.J. Jacobs did before he wrote "A Year of Living Biblically." See following URL for the full story:
A J Jacobs: My year of playing it by the Book - Telegraph

However, let us suppose you can ignore the Old Testament and focus just on the New Testament, and still call yourself a Christian - a follower of Christ. Should all Christians take to snake handling (Luke 10:19) and drinking poison (Mark 16:18)? Should Christians speak in tongues? Should all Christians heal the sick by laying on hands? All these things are suggested in the New Testament, yet the vast majority of Christendom see these practices as metaphorical. Yet, following the New Testament as strictly as possible would necessitate such things.

It would seem to me, however, that much of the power within Jesus's message isn't in the literal interpretation of his words on a page, but his intent on living honestly and in harmony with each other. Judge not, lest ye be judged. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. Pray in secret - not as the hypocrites who pray on the street corners. *This,* along with the belief of Christ having died on the cross for your sins, is what makes you a Christian. Everything else is just window dressing.
 

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member
And when was the law of tithing rescinded?

Personally, I can't imagine why anyone would begrudge God a mere 10% of what he has. If it weren't for God, I wouldn't have anything. To try to figure out a biblically-based excuse for not returning such a tiny fraction of what we have to God requires some real mental gymnastics.


tsk tsk tsk!

it is sad that you are already accusing me of begrudging

anyway ... you asked... When was the law of tithing rescinded?

Let ask Paul ...

Heb 7:5

And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers,though these also are descended from Abraham.

take note .. Priestly commandment

see Heb 7:11-12

11(F) Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.

also ...

heB 8:13

"In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away"


when the priesthood was change, the law was changed and when the old was made obsolete, it is ready to vanish away....


now, what s the christian doctrine????

2 Corinthians 9

The Collection for Christians in Jerusalem

1Now(A) it is superfluous for me to write to you about(B) the ministry for the saints, 2for I know your readiness,(C) of which I boast about you to the people of Macedonia, saying that Achaia has been ready(D) since last year. And your zeal has stirred up most of them. 3But(E) I am sending[a] the brothers so that our boasting about you may not prove empty in this matter, so that you may be ready,(F) as I said you would be. 4Otherwise, if some Macedonians(G) come with me and find that you are not ready, we would be humiliated—to say nothing of you—for being so confident. 5So I thought it necessary to urge the brothers to go on ahead to you and arrange in advance for the(H) gift[b] you have promised, so that it may be ready(I) as a willing gift,(J) not as an exaction.[c]
The Cheerful Giver

6The point is this:(K) whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully[d] will also reap bountifully. 7Each one must give as he has decided in his heart,(L) not reluctantly or under compulsion, for(M) God loves a cheerful giver. 8And(N) God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency[e] in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work. 9As it is written,



i dare not insult you intelligence by explaing further!

Thanks be to God!!!
 

Jeremy Mason

Well-Known Member
REALLY?! When you say all the scripture, do you mean Old and New Testament, or just the New Testament? I would suggest that would have to be old and new, seeing as Jesus said that he didn't change the law, but fulfilled it. So in order to live a truly biblical life, you would have to live as A.J. Jacobs did before he wrote "A Year of Living Biblically." See following URL for the full story:
A J Jacobs: My year of playing it by the Book - Telegraph

However, let us suppose you can ignore the Old Testament and focus just on the New Testament, and still call yourself a Christian - a follower of Christ. Should all Christians take to snake handling (Luke 10:19) and drinking poison (Mark 16:18)? Should Christians speak in tongues? Should all Christians heal the sick by laying on hands? All these things are suggested in the New Testament, yet the vast majority of Christendom see these practices as metaphorical. Yet, following the New Testament as strictly as possible would necessitate such things.

It would seem to me, however, that much of the power within Jesus's message isn't in the literal interpretation of his words on a page, but his intent on living honestly and in harmony with each other. Judge not, lest ye be judged. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. Pray in secret - not as the hypocrites who pray on the street corners. *This,* along with the belief of Christ having died on the cross for your sins, is what makes you a Christian. Everything else is just window dressing.

I agree with you,
1. The Old Testament is relevant in part to Christians. There are things that Christians aren't required to do ie, dietary restrictions--the law as it applied to the Israelites and their covenant with God.
2. Luke 10:19 is symbolic. Snakes and scorpions are symbols of evil spirits. There are churches that do handle snake and sometimes they get bit. OUCH!!!
3. Mark 16:18 is symbolic as well. That we all agree on.

My point is there is different types of language in the Bible. Symbolic and non-symbolic. The epistles of the New Testament are not symbolic because they detail doctrine and that's not window dressing.
 

Sola'lor

LDSUJC
Since this topic is within the realm of the New Testament I think this can be considered on topic. One scripture 2 Corinthians 9:5-8 speaks about that attitue in which offerings should be given. Emphasis and commentary added.

5 Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousness.

According to this verse and the ones before these people were asked to prepare some sort of bounty. It doesn't really specify what this bounty is. But we can see in this verse that it should be prepared, "as a matter of bounty," this seems to mean out of a charitable heart since the next part of the sentence specifies ,"and not of covetnousness."

6 But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.

This verse talks specifically to those giving as part of the previously mentioned bounty. Those who give a little will recieve less blessings. Those who give more will recieve greater blessings. While this verse specifically applies to those people asked to prepare the bounty, the gospel principle mentioned can be equally applied today. But there is still no connection in this verse with tithing.

7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

This verse speaks of the desires of the hearts of the people giving the bounty. It can also be applied to ourselves. When we give it shouldn't be because we don't want to, or because we are forced to. Then its states that God loves a cheerful giver. What we learn from this verse is that When we give it should be with a cheerul heart and not grudgingly.

Specifically this scripture is refering to a specific group of people who where asked to prepare a bounty. But there are many important principles in this scripture that pertain to our attitude in giving. But after analysing this scripture we can see it has nothing to do with tithing specifically.

A little bit off topic this is what our church believes God has revealed to us about tithing. And as we can see the above verse and these scriptures in no way contradict each other.

D&C 119:4
4 And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord.

D&C 64:23
23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Are Christian's required to obey all of the New Testament?

In my opinion, it's impossible. No church follows the entire New Testament for a one very simple reason:

The NT is impossible to reconcile with itself. There are too many contradictions in practice and theology for a church to claim to follow it completely. Of course they can lie about it, as we see on this thread, and many of them do.

This impossiblity inevitably leads to churches choosing "pet verses" and ignoring or interpreting other verses through what they think is important. This can be done stupidly or quite cleverly, but the inconsistencies remain, and churches who claim to follow the Bible end up with some fairly dramatic interpretative gymnastics in order to sustain the strict application of a "pet verse" and a less literal interpretation of another verse which precisely contradicts their pet position.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
i dare not insult you intelligence by explaing further!

Thanks be to God!!!

Good. We'll be spared your clumsy interpretation.

Paul argues in 1 Cor 9 that ministers and apostles are to be paid - it is a right that that have, but they can refuse it. He simply refuses payment from the Corinthians - but accepts gifts from the Philippians.


1 Corinthians 9:6-19
6 Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living? 7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard without eating any of its fruit? Or who tends a flock without getting some of the milk? 8 Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain." Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. 11 If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more? Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in the sacrificial offerings? 14 In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel. 15 But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting. 16 For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward, but not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a stewardship. 18 What then is my reward? That in my preaching I may present the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. 19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them.
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
i dare not insult you intelligence by explaing further!
And yet you do, every time you open your mouth and start screaming. There are so many points in your post on which you and I agree that it would be pointless for me to even waste my time.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
And yet you do, every time you open your mouth and start screaming. There are so many points in your post on which you and I agree that it would be pointless for me to even waste my time.

I'm sure you didn't mean to say that.:p
 

Smoke

Done here.
tsk tsk tsk!

it is sad that you are already accusing me of begrudging

anyway ... you asked... When was the law of tithing rescinded?

Let ask Paul ...

Heb 7:5

And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers,though these also are descended from Abraham.

take note .. Priestly commandment

see Heb 7:11-12

11(F) Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.

also ...

heB 8:13

"In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away"


when the priesthood was change, the law was changed and when the old was made obsolete, it is ready to vanish away....


now, what s the christian doctrine????

2 Corinthians 9

The Collection for Christians in Jerusalem

1Now(A) it is superfluous for me to write to you about(B) the ministry for the saints, 2for I know your readiness,(C) of which I boast about you to the people of Macedonia, saying that Achaia has been ready(D) since last year. And your zeal has stirred up most of them. 3But(E) I am sending[a] the brothers so that our boasting about you may not prove empty in this matter, so that you may be ready,(F) as I said you would be. 4Otherwise, if some Macedonians(G) come with me and find that you are not ready, we would be humiliated—to say nothing of you—for being so confident. 5So I thought it necessary to urge the brothers to go on ahead to you and arrange in advance for the(H) gift[b] you have promised, so that it may be ready(I) as a willing gift,(J) not as an exaction.[c]
The Cheerful Giver

6The point is this:(K) whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully[d] will also reap bountifully. 7Each one must give as he has decided in his heart,(L) not reluctantly or under compulsion, for(M) God loves a cheerful giver. 8And(N) God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency[e] in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work. 9As it is written,



i dare not insult you intelligence by explaing further!

Thanks be to God!!!
A major new study that I just made up proves conclusively that 98.5% of the people never read anything written in three colors and three different font sizes with bolding and underlining and italics and references to footnotes that aren't there.
 

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member
Good. We'll be spared your clumsy interpretation.

Paul argues in 1 Cor 9 that ministers and apostles are to be paid - it is a right that that have, but they can refuse it. He simply refuses payment from the Corinthians - but accepts gifts from the Philippians.


what he meant was nobody should be offended if they get something from the contributions ... contributions given as their heart desired ....

which can be 5% 12% 15% 100% of ones income ... as their heart desired ... besides that was the point of my whole post.

thank you for reading ...
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
what he meant was nobody should be offended if they get something from the contributions ... contributions given as their heart desired ....

which can be 5% 12% 15% 100% of ones income ... as their heart desired ... besides that was the point of my whole post.

thank you for reading ...

So churches and pastors are not prohibited from giving or receiving gifts to their pastors, and therefore pastors indeed should be paid a salary, but can refuse it if they want to.
 

Jeremy Mason

Well-Known Member
In my opinion, it's impossible. No church follows the entire New Testament for a one very simple reason:

The NT is impossible to reconcile with itself. There are too many contradictions in practice and theology for a church to claim to follow it completely. Of course they can lie about it, as we see on this thread, and many of them do.

This impossiblity inevitably leads to churches choosing "pet verses" and ignoring or interpreting other verses through what they think is important. This can be done stupidly or quite cleverly, but the inconsistencies remain, and churches who claim to follow the Bible end up with some fairly dramatic interpretative gymnastics in order to sustain the strict application of a "pet verse" and a less literal interpretation of another verse which precisely contradicts their pet position.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I happen to appreciate the wisdom in the NT & OT and personally it inspires me a better person everyday.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
I'm sorry you feel that way. I happen to appreciate the wisdom in the NT & OT and personally it inspires me a better person everyday.


I didn't say that it can't make someone a better person, or that it cannot be a source of great inspiration.

What I am saying is that it's not a perfect systematic grouping of either theology or practice that can be followed consistently, because the texts are inconsistent with one another. That's all.

So constructing a biblical church in the evangelical sense is doomed to failure.
 

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member
I didn't say that it can't make someone a better person, or that it cannot be a source of great inspiration.

What I am saying is that it's not a perfect systematic grouping of either theology or practice that can be followed consistently, because the texts are inconsistent with one another. That's all.

So constructing a biblical church in the evangelical sense is doomed to failure.


how long have you studied tha bible to make such conclusions? have you OBJECTIVELY searched for the truth? their is a biblical church. seek and you shall find!

for the record ... the old testament is important as its prophecies pertain to the new testament and to the end times. so the old test must be considered.

remember, study it thoroughly before assuming the books are contradicting.
 

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member
So churches and pastors are not prohibited from giving or receiving gifts to their pastors, and therefore pastors indeed should be paid a salary, but can refuse it if they want to.

let us ask Paul

he said

1 Corinthians 9:18
What pay am I given? It is the chance to preach the good news free of charge and not to use the privileges that are mine because I am a preacher.

hope he answered your question
 
Top