The truth about tithing

We often times heard ministers teaching that the tithing law was done away. I posted some questions to ask as to where exactly in the bible that the tithing was abrogated?

This is the most important part of the lesson to take up before we accept matters and issues that concern our salvation. In the end, there was no written record of Paul or Jesus who seemed to have stated that the tithing law was abolished even after his resurrection. 

All were ended in speculations presuming that if the old covenant is done away then it goes likewise with the tithing laws. 

Laws and covenant are two different things and, therefore, not to be confused with. 

Was the tithing law ended after the old covenant was abolished?

Make no mistake about it. The first covenant was broken long before Jesus was born YET we found the Jews observing or keeping the sabbath laws and giving tithes in the days of the Roman occupations. 

Now if the Jews have mistakenly kept the law of God then sure Jesus will rebuke them and teach them that the laws were done away. but what we expect from his action posed a terrible striking point against these modern preachers of doom that had been deceived from their unfounded faith. 

Let's read Mathew 23:23 about the tithing law:

"You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the most important matters of the law—justice, mercy, and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former"

What exactly Jesus said is the tithe, in order to fulfill it they should first observe its requirements in a spiritual way rather than in physical obedience equipped with the fruit of the spirit which is written in Gal 5:22-23

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,  gentleness, and self-control. Against such things, there is no law" - Gal 5:22-23

There's seem not a slight word from Jesus lectures that the tithing law was done away.  and as a new testament teacher, he should have taught them of new laws concerning the right way to be saved.

an example of God's law to stay:
Luke 10:25-28

25....“Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

²⁶ “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

²⁷ He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’^]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’^]”

²⁸ “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

  
But which book of the laws did he refer to the Jew as the source of salvation? 

of course, it's the first book we called the old testament, the only book available in his time.  
why would Jesus present it as a solution to salvation if this won't mean to last in the later times?  

Paul's message in Heb 7:8 has made it clear to all of us that the tithing law transferred its authority from the Levitical Priest to the Melchizedek Priest. 

"In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die [Mortal Levite priest]; but in the other case, by him [immortal Melchizedek] who is declared to be living"

this reference will surely send these ministers back to their study room for a  recheck of Paul's statement, it's a crash to their heart when they learn that this law is to last even to this day as our Melchizedek has been assumed by Jesus Christ himself who was authorized to collect our tithes. 

no doubt that these ministers of doom are nowhere to run and will find themselves locked up in a situation with no excuses to stand before the Lord.  

One thing I found from Jesus statement when he confronted the Jews for having raised the Caesar's tax.
“Then give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

 Despite the fact that the question raised is all about the tax collections, he chose to bring up God in this issue and from his statement he left a clue that sent me to contemplate deeper of what it meant to imply. 

God’s creation is in dual form.  he first created the world in heaven before earth and universe were created.  
all the living things were set up first in heaven including angels and they were governed by God's law for a long long time. Angels like humans built cities too and we could say he replicated the heavenly things and later set them up on earth. The stars therefore in heaven is a memorial dedicated to God's angels.

An illustration of angels dominion under God's kingdom

Now if Caesar received a tenth from the people, this also brings to a conclusion that God received his tithe from his angels too. 

For easy understanding of God's purpose here are some examples that I found in the bible.

.

1. God replicated himself to Man [Gen 1:26]

2. Heaven - Physical heaven [earth and Universe]

3. Angels - Animals?

4. God's throne - Jerusalem or earth

5. God's kingdom - Man's kingdom

6. Tithe - Tax

Now if taxation is entitle to the human govenment then rest assure that the tithing law is to God's kingdom.

If we remove the tithe then what’s the sense of paying our taxes to the government? the logic is there and I want people not to be ignorant of this analogy of giving.
it’s important to know that the Kingdom of God will be set up on this earth and will restore his tithing law in full pledge as one of the requirements of support for his kingdom which is about to be united with the kingdom that was set up in heaven.
it's a probable cause of its origin and non-escapable for those who teach that the tithing was done away. 

in fact, the heavy penalty which is written in Mal 4:1 is still standing waiting for them all when the time for judgment arrives.

 

Mal 4:1

“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them.

Does God Exist?—Many Absolute Proofs! (Part 1)

Lamsa or Lumpsum

he said:

[ TANONG KO LANG PO YUNG GAWA 20:28 LAMSA TRANSLATION kasi po isa yan sa basehan natin na tayo ang tunay na iglesia ni cristo,di naman po sa nagdududa ako sa pagiging Iglesia Ni Cristo pero yung ibang relihiyon ay ang panlaban nila ay lamsa Translation lang daw ang Iglesia Ni Cristo na kalagay pero sa iba "IGLESIA NG DIOS" ang nakalagay. pahingi naman po ng explanation for that. plsss tungkol sa lamsa translation.”]

sa akin ok lng yun Iglesya ni Krsito ang ilagay niya dahl siya din kasi ay Diyos ng old testament.
kya lang kukunin lng natin yun tamang interpretasyon niya sa Act 20:28 kung iglseya ni Kristo ang lumalabas sa talata.

Tanong lang ako, nagbabasa ba tlga ng biblia si Lamsa? 
kasi sa tingin ko hindi niya nakuha yun punto po ng Act 20:28 tungkol sa Iglesya ng Diyos na tinubos ng knyng dugo at sabi paano daw matutubos ito kung ang Diyos ang pangalan ng church dahl wala naman dugo yn?

parang yun Iglesya makasilip lang ng susuporta sa pagkatao ni Cristo ay knlng gagawing basehan kht hindi dumaan sa matinding tanong. 

eto ang tanong ko kay lamsa kung sya ay nabubuhay pa. 
kanino ba nagkasala ang mga tao?

sa Diyos? o kay Cristo?

1 John 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law, for sin is the transgression of the law.

Romans 2:13
(For it is not the hearers of the law who are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Kapag tinubos ang utang kanino mapupunta ang tinubos? sa may ari o sa nagtubos? 

sino ang may ari? ang Diyos? o si Cristo? 

medyo delikado ang sagot na ginawa ni Lamsa dahl na etepwera na pala ang tunay na me ari ng sankatauhan. dapat nya malaman na ang Diyos ang me ari ng sankatauhan. 

Kung tama ang sagot niya sa Acts 20:28 pwd ba natin ikumpara ito sa Rev 

Acts 20:28
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God which He hath purchased with His own blood.

Revelation 5:9
New International Version (NIV)

9 And they sang a new song, saying:“You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals,because you were slain,
and with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation.

pansinin :

- because you were slain,and with your blood you purchased for God

- to feed the church of [God or christ] which He hath purchased with His own blood

eto ba parehas? para sa God o kay Cristo?

tagilid si Lamsa at ang Iglesya sa bagay n yan.

Another proof of ignorance shared by Aerial of torch.

[Sa Deuteronomio 6:4, ay sinabi ni Mosies sa mga Israelita na:
“Dinggin mo, O Israel: Ang PANGINOON nating Dios ay iisang PANGINOON!” (NPV).]

However, Moses never taught the people about God being a one individual God. 
it won't conform to other passages he wrote to support Manalo's theory. 

Let's read this Genesis 1.26:

Genesis 1:26 New International Version (NIV)
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,..

The Hebrew translation of god is Elohim, a collective noun for Eloah.
therefore Eloah is singular. 

it's easy to understand that not all singular verbs are for singular nouns usage.

in the case of Elohim, it is a collective noun which also act like a singular noun.
now if Eloah denotes singularity that supported a one individual God then it raised a question alone, Why didn't Moses use it in Gen 1:26 for Manalo's sake?

the answer is it will not conform to the remaining elements embedded such as the use of "us" & "our" to describe the number of person speaking. 

Elohim can be broken down as Eloah, Eloah,......and so on. 

Our proof from my previous post that the God in Genesis was composed of a Father and a Mother can be a help in solving Gen 1:26.

Let's rewrite again Gen 1:26 with regards to Gen 2:24:

Genesis 1:26 New International Version
Then the Father said to the Mother, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,..

it's clear that the passage has finally spoken by itself that God is not a kind of individual God as Manalo wanted to believe, but a married God who stood as our first parents. 

Again if God is only a one individual God then how did he accept this fact when he shared his holiness to Moses as he was about to confront Pharaoh? 

Exodus 7:1
Then the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet.

Is God trying to make idols out of Moses? 

>>>>>>>>>Oneness of God?<<<<<<<<<<<<<

i'd been reading the bible and there's no proof that God is just only a one individual person. 
however, oneness in terms of biblical sense doesn't necessarily mean only one cited this fact in Gen 2:24 and John 10:30. 

Genesis 2:24 New International Version (NIV)
24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

Covenant made the two in one flesh. in the case of God since Adam has a Father and a Mother it would be nice to say that his parents bound as one. 
therefore the God in Genesis account is one married God. 

we can't discount or reject the acceptance that the man mentioned was not Adam. 
this is a pure ignorance on the critics part. 

Adam became a model for all humanities. if the passage which served as a lesson intended for the rest of his sons after him then it would be an unfair treatment for Adam since all humanities committed the same sins that started from the first man. 

Another passage debunking the one individual God can be found in John 10:30 as we read: 

John 10:30 New International Version (NIV)
I and the Father are one.

the context stands alone that the two personage was in reference to the Genesis 2:24 account. Jesus was just merely speaking of his previous status as one in the Genesis times

It fits me to write and re post again my opposition over their arguments 
about Jesus' I AM. 

he said:
[Defenders of Christ-is-God theology cite John 8:58 as one of their biblical bases in proving their belief that Jesus Christ is God. Although there is no explicit statement from Christ in this verse that He is God, His statement is being understood by those who believe in His alleged deity as an indication and affirmation of His divinity. Why did they come up with this line of reasoning – that Jesus is God – simply because Christ uttered, “I AM”?]

Jesus version of "I am" was in reference to this phrase "before Abraham was, I am"

how can we deny his remark which is in reference to his previous existence 
way back to the time of Abraham? 

he made a numerous false assertions about this phrase. 

There was only one voice being heard in the time of Abraham and that voice came from God. 

however, the word God in Hebrew is Elohim, a collective noun for Eloah which is in singular form. 

Moses chose to write Elohim to allay proof that God is not a one individual God as he is trying to assert here. 

John, the disciple had it to describe the very exact position that Jesus had assume. 

-In the beginning was the Word, 
and the Word was with God, 
and the Word was God.

the title Word can be translated as Speaker or a Spokesman of the family of God. 
the role of this speaker can liken to the congress where a group of lawmakers must vote a one speaker who can speak on behalf of their group. 

so we can exactly know what was the title "word" mean to us according to the bible.

Jesus was made a speaker by God the father to deliver his purpose to mankind. 

"And the Father who sent me has himself testified 
concerning me. You have never heard his voice 
nor seen his form " 

"YOU HAVE NEVER HEARD HIS VOICE!"

if the father has not been heard ever since then who was this a lone voice in the time of Abraham? 

the answer is:
“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I AM ! ”

The False conception of the Sabbath by the Iglesya of Manalo

Another false conception of laws by the Iglesya is the Sabbath day.
Let's read their argument:

"Kumbaga ito ang tinatawag na “REST DAY” o isang araw na pahinga mula sa ating isang Linggong paggawa o paghahanapbuhay, na noon ngang panahon ni Moises at ng Bayang Israel ay tinatawag na SABBATH sapagkat ginaganap ito sa tuwing ika-pitong araw ng isang linggo – araw ng SABADO."

Was the Sabbath originated from Moses?

*For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy- Exodus 20:11

God's creation of 7th day became the basis of Sabbath keeping and not from Moses ruling.

Jesus obeyed the Sabbath and as a model of the new testament teacher he taught his follower to do the same obedience just like what Paul was doing. 

let's compare the two situations. 

On Jesus obedience - Luke 4:16
He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read

On Paul's obedience - Acts 17:2
As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,

Why Paul? here is the reason,

1 Corinthians 11:1
Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.


The first became their excuse not to obey today.
but the second won't excuse them from obedience. 


how can they reason out that Paul sets an example of obeying the sabbath law?

*There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 
for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works,
 just as God did from his

what:
1-There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God
2- anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works
3- just as God did from his

Did from his? Of course, from the seventh day!
it's clear that the Sabbath is still enforce for all mankind up to The End of times 
as it is written in Mathew 5:18 


..and this is his warning for those who wish to disobey like the Iglesyas.

*Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience. please read Heb 4 !

I post this Aerial's Torch of salvation about the Laws of God and he noted that God's law is no longer binding to Christianity. such that careless teachings might inflict harmful effects to the people. i hope i can save them from his disastrous doctrines. 

He said:
"Luke 16:16 "THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE WRITINGS OF THE PROPHETS WERE IN EFFECT UP TO THE TIME OF JOHN THE BAPTIST; since then the Good News about the Kingdom of God is being told, and everyone forces their way in. [Good News Bible]"

I'ts clear that the paragraph does not contain that the law of God was abrogated. 
The passage just wanted to explain that the law of God was being preached up to the time of John and in the person of John himself. To say that the law was abrogated, the answer is No! 

Because the one who is worthy to carry the preaching job has arrived and therefore John's role as a preacher must diminish.

please look at the statement of John. 

Matthew 3:11
“..... But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Didn't John state about the abrogation of the laws after the Lord has arrived? 
The answer is still No! 

read carefully of what the statement of Mathew before u judge. 

* For truly I tell you, until HEAVEN and EARTH disappear, NOT the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means DISAPPEAR from the Law until everything is accomplished*

Is there any abrogation mentioned? 
even the word abrogation was not there! 

The paragraph made plain that the law will only be abrogated at The End of times! NOT UNTIL JOHN! 

Paul made it plain to us in Romans, 

*God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.And so he condemned sin in the flesh, 
in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit* 

see Paul's wording that says, "in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us" 

i see no abrogation either in Paul's word. 

* For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses 
that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, 
you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.*

Surpasses or exceed their righteousness does not mean to imply removing the laws. 
i think it's clear that the law will remain with us until then end of times. 

Let's take an example about murder in the time of Moses.

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 
‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will 
be subject to judgment"

does the example imply to have done away in the time of Jesus? 
No! please read!

" But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister 
will be subject to judgment.

Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca, is answerable 
to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the 
fire of hell" 

No sight of abrogation can be found on Jesus' words. 
The law is still the same Murder which is included in the Ten Commandments. 
in fact he glorified it with his own spiritual way than in physical way of obedience. 

* It pleased the LORD for the sake of his righteousness to make his law great and glorious*