CV: 1.Are you saying that Melchizedek’s was an unholy tithe?
RK: The truth and facts are these: Source: Sodom. Offered by: Uncircumcised Babylonian. Receiver: Canaanite king-priest. There is nothing inherently holy about any of those three.
CV: 2. You cautioned me about adding to scripture ...but you are willing to accept your guess as the truth.
RK: O.K. So BOTH of us do the same thing. Point those fingers back at yourself also.
CV: 3. You go as far as calling a tithe a tax.
RK: Have you ever read First Chronicles, chapter 23 to 26? They demonstrate that Levites were also political officers and rulers for the king –and—they were paid with tax money.
CV: 4. Melchizedek is compared to Jesus in Heb. ch.7 ...and your suspicion aligns Him with some Canaanite king.
RK: Melchizedek is not compared to Jesus. His “order” and the “interpretation of his name” are compared to Jesus –not his persons. Read your Bible. And, no, I do not “align” to a Canaanite king; I align him to the OFFICE of a Canaanite king.
CV: 5. Correction ...the order of Mechizedek in Heb. ch.7 compares an order that was introduced in the through Christ in the teachings he taught the disciples. Calvary never introduced grace ...neither did it introduce an order ...Calvary transferred grace through the Blood of Jesus.
RK: What are you talking about? You are tangled up with your own slick words.
CV: 6. You are using evidence outside the context of scripture to justify your belief. It's difficult to change scripture because there are too many copies of the original text ...but it's easy to manufacture evidence outside the bounds of scripture to create a deception. When you don't have an answer you refer to notes outside scripture.
RK: You present no evidence whatsoever and will not stick to what God’s holy Word literally says.
CV: 7. Was Melchizedek king and priest according to scripture?
RK: He was a king and a priest of Salem, a Canaanite city. He was like scores of equal king-priests living all around him in Canaan and Babylon. Your false unbiblical interpretation makes him into something else.
CV: 8. Are you too afraid to accept that an order is an instruction or instructions that make up an ordinance?
RK: Are you too afraid to accept that you one-of-many definitions of “order” does not apply? You are getting your information from a non-biblical source. Why is that wrong for me and correct for you? You definition goes far beyond the very basic definition of RANK.
CV: 9. Don't act ignorant ...we not talking about law outside the context of scripture ...you shouldn't refer to Arab law.
RK: Don’t you act ignorant. You know very well that Canaanite priest-kings absolutely must have had their own laws. You are ignoring an entire Christian planet full of archaeology, history and commentary books which disagree with you.
CV: Don't add “Abraham's observation of Arab law was a preferred guess of biblical scholars” ...but not the truth
RK: Again you are “adding” when you say that Abraham gave “not by ordinance but by conviction.”
CV: 10. If God accepted everyones' preferred guess ...imagine the chaos.
RK: It’s my “preferred guess” as to why Abram tithed spoils of war VERSES your “wild guess” of “no ordinance but by conviction.”
CV: It's your preferred guess that creates error.
RK: And your “wild guess” is O.K. What a hypocrite!
CV: 11. I'm not a used car salesman and would prefer if never compared me to one.
RK: I was comparing you debate tactics to one. You did not give an option for an alternative answer. You were trying to force an incorrect answer. That is a salesman trick as old as the hills.
CV: 12. I don't act like there were no laws ...but I do believe that Abraham was led by God and not the Arab laws ...as your preferred guess.
RK: So you opinion is pure faith with no Biblical texts.
CV: 13. If you had a television broadcast based on the topic at hand ...it won't change the fact that you are grasping at straws to keep what you believe is true alive.
RK: Jesus and Malachi used the Law’s definition to teach tithing and you do not. There are 16 texts to prove that it was always only FOOD from inside God’s holy land of Israel. You do not want to go there.
CV: I suppose it's because of the pride you've invested in you 288 page book you wrote. I also wrote books ...I am familiar with the intense research and the views of biblical scholar, historians and archeologist on a vast range of subject matters.
RK: Do you give away Internet copies of all your written, taped and video material as I do? The ones with pride and greed are the ones who charge for most of their produce.
CV: Taking into consideration that most of these don't have a relationship with God ...I never allow what they say to stand as truth ...especially if they don't have the courage to say what they believe God is saying in scripture. They create patterns and introduce different schools of thought based on their expertise gained in the secular world ...not gained in God.
RK: Their expertise is almost always gained from 8-12 years of intense Bible study and knowledge of biblical languages. You cannot win the argument so you attack the persons. Real neat debate tactic; we disagree with you so we must be wrong and lost. That is what the Roman Catholic Church told Martin Luther and that is what the Jews told Jesus! I am not impressed.
CV: 14. Why do you want to put this dialog on your site? Is it to gain the favor of man ...robbing God of His own glory?
RK: I want to put it on my site to show what arguments each side has. Honesty gives God glory. You probably will not dare put it on your site because you do not want your followers to know why some disagree with you. Opposite reasons.
CV: One of the sad realities is ...if we know we have flaws in what we believe ...and choose to allow pride to hold us back from repenting ...not only do we deceive ourselves ...we become deceivers of those who follow us.
RK: All that goggle-dee-gook to say “No, I will not put it on my site.”
CV: Sir ...when you sell a book that has inconsistencies ...because of the amount of work you put into it and the pride you invested in it ...it's natural to attempt to defend it.
RK: Is it natural to defend a book what does not have “inconsistencies” in it? Your argument is self-defeating.
CV: 14. A man who seeks public opinion is weak. You need to consider that the ones responsible for building the tower of Babel, murdering those who spoke truth, murdering Jesus Christ and many other evil accounts in history were the majority.
RK: Is a man who seeks “to go public” also weak? Guess what – YOU are in the majority here teaching tithing! Are you admitting that YOU are wrong?
CV: I never accept truth based on public opinion.
RK: Again you mis-use the word “truth” wrong. Truth never changes.
CV: 15. Not once have heard you say God said or your were inspired by the Holy Ghost who leads into all truth.
RK: I listen very carefully as God speaks to me through His inspired Word. Like a Berean, I also listen very carefully to what other Christians say and verify with God’s Word. Do you want me to discard the written Word and only rely on extra-biblical revelation? It that your final authority? Does the Bible not have the entire gospel?
CV: 16. If you are not led by the Holy Ghost you receive a lot of facts without truth. 17. How many devils have you cast out or was there ever a manifestation of the Glory of God in your meetings? Or is the relationship you have with God based on the knowledge you've attained?
RK: First, devils cannot inhabit the body of a Spirit-indwelt child of God. Second, no devil has dared to manifest itself in churches I attend. It they did, God would quickly dispose of them. Third, why would devils want to surrounded by Spirit-indwelt believers? Fourth, devils only dare to enter where they feel welcome.