Frances
Kelly: Have you really read all of the book? Many of my comments are found in the book.
Your Question:
17. Is there any evidence that the seven-day weekly cycle was universally known through general revelation before Exodus 16?
Answer. Origin of the week:
Gen. 1 and 2, Also Gen. 7:4, 8:10,12. 29:27, 28, In the kinds of question that you have, it looks like you are not a Christian guided by the holy spirit Bro. Russel.
- Universally known means to all the people who exist during that time Mr Russell? Is that what you mean? So do you expect that the Pagan worshiper during that time will follow this cycle without knowing the God of the bible and the Creation? “Definitely not”, but to the people of God in the Bible, Yes. It is universally Known as what the above verses of the Bible is telling us.
Kelly Reply: Your very first comment is pompous, arrogant, derogatory and ridicules those who disagree with you. If I am not a Christian guided by the Spirit, then why do you call me 'Brother'?
Kelly: The God of creation has placed within every soul a knowledge of his moral law. Although very clouded, most non-Hebrew and non-Christian cultures know by creation, nature and conscience that is wrong to violate the moral parts of the Law which reflect God's character. All creation knows that time should be set aside to worship God. However, however, however, creation and nature do not teach that the specific 7th day of the week is a moral imperative. Why? The cultic 7th day Sabbath day was only given to national Israel who was commanded NOT to share it with other nations.
Your Question:
18. Did the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians have a seven-day (7) week because they worshipped 7 heavenly bodies such as the Sun, Moon, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Uranus and Saturn?
Answer: Yes if you have notice the name of the Days that we have today from Monday to Saturn day!! That’s were this names came from.
This is a logic question and maybe needs a logic answer also, which is not all the time is applicable in the words of God in the scripture; “It is very simple logic that this People you have mention, the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians who worship other “gods” like what have you’ve mention above are none believers of the God of the Bible,. That’s also the reason why they are not the believer of Seventh day cycle in some other ways and of the creation that have mention by the God of the Bible.. Maybe your one of them Mr. Russel Earl Kelly?
Take note. That Israel is the only chosen people who believes in the God of the Bible during there time. So don’t compare them to this unGodly people that you have mentions above.
Kelly: Again you chose to insult me. Do you get some kind of sadistic pleasure in insulting others? If it makes you feel superior, then go right ahead.
Kelly: Again you miss the point that the 7th day Saturday Sabbath is unique to national Israel and is not part of God's eternal moral law. Do you think that God had a holy Sabbath day every 7th day in heaven in eternity past?
Your Question:
19. Did the frequency of market days determine the length of the week in many nations?
Answer: every body can explain the rotation of our planet to the Sun: 1 year = 12 months = 48 weeks = 360/365days = 8640/8760hrs etc., but you cannot explain the weekly cycle that only God has appointed to have that cycle on us as His People. There are many scientific evidence that science cannot explain about the Seventh day Mr. Kelly. Like the slowing of the heart bit of the Ox, cow, etc. during the seventh day. Nature it self recognize the seven day cycle. Except you Mr. Russel.and why you are not be able to know that even you are a former SDA.
Kelly: Please explain Exodus 31:13-17. God did not give the Sabbath to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. God only gave the Sabbath to national Israel as part of its unique Old Covenant which vanished at Calvary per Heb 8:12. You are not Old Covenant national Israel. You have appropriated something which does not belong to you and that is called stealing. You have stolen the Sabbath which solely belonged to the Hebrews under the Old Covenant.
Kelly: There are tens of thousands of FORMER SDAs who have left that false denomination. Many of them are long-time former members and many of them are long-time former teachers who have had access to the deepest guarded SDA secrets. Tell me how many theologians have gone the other direction from other denominations.
Your Question:
22. Ex. 16:26 Six days you shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none.
Is it evident than even Israel had not been observing any Sabbath day and that the day had been lost in history?
Answer: Because of 438years of captivity in Egypt as a slave it doesn’t mean that they have not remember the weekly cycle Mr. Russell
From Eden to Abraham:
Adam to Methusselah – Lives overlap 243years
Methusselah to shem – 100yrs
Shem to Abraham - 150yrs
No chance to forget the facts of creation and institution of Sabbath in Gen. 1&2.
Ex16:4, 5, 21-30, 35 – People knew People knew when the Sabbath came before the law was given to Sinai.
Kelly: If it were so very critically important, one would expect it to be mentioned at least once between Genesis 2 and Exodus 16. Without any Biblical evidence I have every reason to conclude that it must not have been important. It Israel had not forgotten it, then why did God need to re-introduce it in Exodus 16 as merely a day of rest and not a day of worship?
Your Question:
23. Ex. 16:28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long do you refuse to keep my commandments and my laws?
Ex. 16:29 See, for that the LORD has given you the Sabbath, therefore he gives you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
Ex. 16:30 So the people rested on the seventh day.
Is it not evident that the Sabbath was a law designed for only the Hebrews to observe? Does not the "you" only refer to the Hebrews?
Answer: Isaiah 66:22:23 – 22 For as the new heaven and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me. Saith the Lord, so your seed and you name remain.
23 for it shall come to pass, from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall “all FLESH” come to worship before me, saith the Lord.
- Take note that in other Bible translation written as “ALL MEN” or “all MANKIND”. Maybe you are not a flesh Mr. Russell? That’s why you have say that in your writings.
- Not After the Council of the Jew approved the stoning of Stephen in the time of the apostol in 33AD in Acts 7:59. this is the time when God open the Gospel to the Gentiles and none Israelites people. Because the Jew harden there Hearts and reject the salvation of the Cross through Jesus Christ. That’s Why we are here also as a Bible believers, but not a Literal Israel, but Spiritual Israel who believes the God of the Bible. If you believe in the God of the Bible and the scripture, that should be including the Sabbath rest for the people of God.in Hebrew 4:9
You know Mr. Russel, even all of you that are against the Sabbath of the Lord will unite, and wiping out all of us who keep the Sabbath, the Sabbath will still remain and never be wiped out, even all we who keep the Sabbath are Gone,.. But it will never happen as history shows that the Sabbath keeping survive until this time, after so many attempt to change it. And forget it in the face of the earth. This is the only issue that will remain in the Christian world until the second coming of Christ.. So thanks for the challenge of this Questions. Hope that you can Answer this also before God, if you have make people doubt because of the Books that you have written. It is not between us (as a Sabbath keeper)and you. Its always between God and you in the end.
KELLY: How much of Isa 66 do you apply to now and how do you apply it to either the millennial kingdom on earth or eternity? You ignore its context completely.
66:l says that heaven is God's throne and earth is his footstool. SDAs say that God lives in a HP and MHP smaller than most houses.
66:10-12 says Rejoice ye with Jerusalem. SDAs say that God has rejected Israel and ignored the hundreds of unconditional promises made to Israel. SDAs do not rejoice with Jerusalem and bring the curse of Gen 12:3 upon themselves.
66:13-14 says ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem. Yet SDAs have rejected God's unconditional promises to Israel and have usurped them upon themselves. SDAs will not be comforted in Jerusalem.
66:15-18 says that God will come with fire and destroy those who oppose Jerusalem. SDAs will be included if they do not correctly apply biblical prophecy to national Israel instead of themselves.
66:19-20 says that God will restore his children "to my holy mountain Jerusalem." SDAs deny this and say it will not be fulfilled by national Israel in the last days.
66:21 says "And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD." This is the fulfillment of Exodus 19:5-6 to national Israel and not to the church.
66:22-23 is a prophecy of the millennial kingdom on earth when God will fulfill his many unconditional promises made to national Israel. It is not the same as the new heavens and new earth in Revelation 21-22 because it still contains the dead rotting corpses of those (like SDAs) who oppose Israel in the last days in verse 24.
Kelly: Why do you ignore the context of the entire chapter and throw 66:21-22 out of context? Why? You only use the two texts which refer to the Sabbath out of context. Why don't you explain the entire chapter in its context, especially 66:24????
Revelation 12:17 – And the Dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandment of God…
Take not that the Woman is represented by the Church..
Kelly: Says who? My Bible says that Christ was born of the seed of David and of the virgin Mary, a Hebrew woman. Israel, not the Church, brought forth the Christ child.
Kelly: Even if it were the Church, that was over 1800 years before the Seventh-day Adventist Church. That "church" is the same "church" which you tag as Babylon or the daughters of Babylon. Make up your mind. Did the FALSE church bring forth the Christ child?
Frances: Are your church is a Commandments keeping church like the Seventh Day Adventist Mr. Russell?
Kelly: Yes, my church keeps the commandments given to it in the New Covenant after Calvary. On the other hand your church, the SDA Church, breaks the Sabbath a hundred ways every 7th day and its children do not live long in the land of Israel (eretz).
Kelly: The Sabbath commandment is broken when:
(1) You do not own slaves.
(2) You cause others to work on the Sabbath:
A. Policemen on your very busy roads.
B. Electric power company to provide electricity.
C. Water company to provide water.
D. Telephone company to provide service.
E. Sewage workers when you flush.
F. Auto mechanics to help Sabbath breakdowns.
Kelly: By attempting to follow the vanished Old Covenant law, you have brought the curses of the whole law down upon yourselves in ignorance per Gal 3:10. On the other hand, by attempting to live a New Covenant life, I rest in the Edenic Sabbath rest in Christ's imputed righteousness 7 days a week 24 hours per day.
Frances: God bless you Brother Russell.
Bro. Frances .
Kelly: How can you justify saying that after you have called me a non-Christian without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Kelly: Believe it or nor, I believe that you are a saved born-again Christian if you have at some point accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior. On the other hand, you will not grant me the same status. Before you do anything else, I ask you to explain Exodus 31:13-17.
Russell Earl Kelly, PHD
www.tithing-russkelly.com/sda
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Reading My Tithing Book
This was pointed out recently. Pastor Dave Goodgame of MIlls Road Baptist Church, Houston, Texas is preaching a series using my book. He is reading almost every word of the book. Thus far he has preached 7 sermons beginning on 8-16-09. This will save me the trouble of reading the book online but I am still considering it for a huge project.http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=82009141225
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Franklin Graham's Salary
Graham: Take away BGEA pay
'Calling was never based on compensation,' says evangelist, who draws salaries from 2 ministries.
By Tim Funk and Ames Alexandertfunk@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009
In 2008, Franklin Graham's compensation from the two ministries totaled $1.2 million, including $669,000 from BGEA.
Graham's 2 CEO posts boost pay, draw critics
2 days ago
Graham's CEO pay draws experts' criticism
Evangelist Franklin Graham told his staff on Friday he wants to give up his pay as head of the Charlotte-based Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, saying his calling to the ministry "was never based on compensation."
Comment: Why did he take so long to make this decision? Why did it take negative publicity to force this decision?
Graham's decision to ask the BGEA board of directors to stop paying him came a day after an Observer report raised questions about the size of his compensation from the BGEA and Samaritan's Purse, the Boone-based international relief agency that Graham has led since 1979.
In 2008, his two salaries, two retirement packages and other payments from the ministries totaled $1.2 million. That included $669,000 from BGEA, where, in February, 55 employees were laid off - more than 10 percent of the staff. Revenue at BGEA dropped 18 percent last year; at Samaritan's Purse, it climbed 11 percent.
Graham, 57, will continue to draw his salary and benefits from Samaritan's Purse, which totaled $535,000 in 2008.
Comment: This Samaritan could buy a luxury hotel to house the man in the Bible.
After the Observer began asking questions about his compensation, he asked the boards of the two ministries on Tuesday to suspend contributions to his retirement plans until the economy bounced back.
Comment: No remorse. The decision is only temporary.
In a memo to BGEA employees Friday, sent just before the end of the workday, he announced that he had asked the BGEA board of directors "to consider that I work for no compensation. I feel that God has called me to this ministry and that calling was never based on compensation."
The memo, which covered several other subjects, made no mention of the concerns raised in the Observer. The newspaper reported criticisms from charity watchdogs, who said they doubted anyone could do two full-time jobs leading organizations that, together, employ almost 1,000 people with budgets of more than $200 million.
Comment: Does he work 80 hours per week?
Graham spokesman Mark DeMoss said the evangelist called him Friday, before he sent the memo and a letter to BGEA board members. "He said, 'It's not worth it. I'll just do without.
Comment: It's not worth answering to the public. He will keep the $535,000 and drop the $669,000.
The board can do what it wants,'" DeMoss reported.
BGEA board member Denton Lotz said it's up to Graham - and not the board - to make such decisions. "I think that's great if he feels he can do it," said Lotz, the pastor of an inner-city church in Boston. Lotz's brother is married to Graham's sister, Anne Graham Lotz. She's an evangelist based in Raleigh and one of five Graham family members on the 20-member BGEA board.
Comment: Many family members have their hands in the pie.
Graham, who leaves today for a Samaritan's Purse trip to Asia, was not available for an interview Friday.
'Here's what I'm going to do'
Non-profit watchdog Pablo Eisenberg, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Public Policy Institute, said he was delighted by Graham's decision. "He's still getting more than most non-profit executives get," Eisenberg said. "He should be satisfied."
As head of Samaritan's Purse, Graham earned more last year than any other leader of an international relief agency based in the United States. That includes eight with larger budgets, according to data compiled by Guidestar, a group that monitors nonprofits.
Comment:
1 Cor 9:18What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.
Acts 20:33-35
33 I have coveted no one's silver or gold or apparel. 34 Yes, you yourselves know that these hands have provided for my necessities, and for those who were with me. 35 I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'"
Samaritan's Purse, which sends planeloads of aid to victims in disaster areas and shoeboxes filled with Christmas gifts to poor children around the world, "is where (Graham) started his ministry life," said DeMoss. "It's where he spends most of his time. And it's the bigger of the two (ministries)."
Comment: But he gets $134,000 more a year from BGEA.
Graham lives in Boone and travels to Charlotte, site of the BGEA headquarters, five or six times a month, DeMoss said.
Comment: How can this be considered a full-time job?
DeMoss didn't know when the BGEA board will meet to take up Graham's request to work for free. The full board meets twice a year, DeMoss said, and its executive committee meets separately three times annually. "The executive committee can meet at any time," DeMoss said. "And the full board can meet by phone." DeMoss said some BGEA board members tried to talk Graham out of requesting a suspension of his retirement and an end to his pay.
Comment: Afraid of a trickle-down affect on their own salaries.
"They said to him that the CEO ought to be compensated," DeMoss said. "But he's at the point where 'Here's what I'm going to do. I make a comfortable salary at Samaritan's Purse.'"
Moving ahead
Comment: CEOs possibly. But there should be some moral constraints on gospel workers.
Whether he's paid or not, Graham plans to go ahead with a full schedule of BGEA crusades - Graham calls them festivals - in 2010, DeMoss said.
Today, he flies to North Korea, where he'll present $190,000 in equipment and supplies for a dental center being built in Pyongyang. Samaritan's Purse has been working there since 1997, providing more than $10 million in medical and dental aid.
Graham will also visit China, where last year Samaritan's Purse sent a Boeing 747 filled with supplies for those devastated by a 7.9-magnitude earthquake.
Staff researcher Maria David contributed.
Comments by: Russell Earl Kelly
'Calling was never based on compensation,' says evangelist, who draws salaries from 2 ministries.
By Tim Funk and Ames Alexandertfunk@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009
In 2008, Franklin Graham's compensation from the two ministries totaled $1.2 million, including $669,000 from BGEA.
Graham's 2 CEO posts boost pay, draw critics
2 days ago
Graham's CEO pay draws experts' criticism
Evangelist Franklin Graham told his staff on Friday he wants to give up his pay as head of the Charlotte-based Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, saying his calling to the ministry "was never based on compensation."
Comment: Why did he take so long to make this decision? Why did it take negative publicity to force this decision?
Graham's decision to ask the BGEA board of directors to stop paying him came a day after an Observer report raised questions about the size of his compensation from the BGEA and Samaritan's Purse, the Boone-based international relief agency that Graham has led since 1979.
In 2008, his two salaries, two retirement packages and other payments from the ministries totaled $1.2 million. That included $669,000 from BGEA, where, in February, 55 employees were laid off - more than 10 percent of the staff. Revenue at BGEA dropped 18 percent last year; at Samaritan's Purse, it climbed 11 percent.
Graham, 57, will continue to draw his salary and benefits from Samaritan's Purse, which totaled $535,000 in 2008.
Comment: This Samaritan could buy a luxury hotel to house the man in the Bible.
After the Observer began asking questions about his compensation, he asked the boards of the two ministries on Tuesday to suspend contributions to his retirement plans until the economy bounced back.
Comment: No remorse. The decision is only temporary.
In a memo to BGEA employees Friday, sent just before the end of the workday, he announced that he had asked the BGEA board of directors "to consider that I work for no compensation. I feel that God has called me to this ministry and that calling was never based on compensation."
The memo, which covered several other subjects, made no mention of the concerns raised in the Observer. The newspaper reported criticisms from charity watchdogs, who said they doubted anyone could do two full-time jobs leading organizations that, together, employ almost 1,000 people with budgets of more than $200 million.
Comment: Does he work 80 hours per week?
Graham spokesman Mark DeMoss said the evangelist called him Friday, before he sent the memo and a letter to BGEA board members. "He said, 'It's not worth it. I'll just do without.
Comment: It's not worth answering to the public. He will keep the $535,000 and drop the $669,000.
The board can do what it wants,'" DeMoss reported.
BGEA board member Denton Lotz said it's up to Graham - and not the board - to make such decisions. "I think that's great if he feels he can do it," said Lotz, the pastor of an inner-city church in Boston. Lotz's brother is married to Graham's sister, Anne Graham Lotz. She's an evangelist based in Raleigh and one of five Graham family members on the 20-member BGEA board.
Comment: Many family members have their hands in the pie.
Graham, who leaves today for a Samaritan's Purse trip to Asia, was not available for an interview Friday.
'Here's what I'm going to do'
Non-profit watchdog Pablo Eisenberg, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Public Policy Institute, said he was delighted by Graham's decision. "He's still getting more than most non-profit executives get," Eisenberg said. "He should be satisfied."
As head of Samaritan's Purse, Graham earned more last year than any other leader of an international relief agency based in the United States. That includes eight with larger budgets, according to data compiled by Guidestar, a group that monitors nonprofits.
Comment:
1 Cor 9:18What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.
Acts 20:33-35
33 I have coveted no one's silver or gold or apparel. 34 Yes, you yourselves know that these hands have provided for my necessities, and for those who were with me. 35 I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'"
Samaritan's Purse, which sends planeloads of aid to victims in disaster areas and shoeboxes filled with Christmas gifts to poor children around the world, "is where (Graham) started his ministry life," said DeMoss. "It's where he spends most of his time. And it's the bigger of the two (ministries)."
Comment: But he gets $134,000 more a year from BGEA.
Graham lives in Boone and travels to Charlotte, site of the BGEA headquarters, five or six times a month, DeMoss said.
Comment: How can this be considered a full-time job?
DeMoss didn't know when the BGEA board will meet to take up Graham's request to work for free. The full board meets twice a year, DeMoss said, and its executive committee meets separately three times annually. "The executive committee can meet at any time," DeMoss said. "And the full board can meet by phone." DeMoss said some BGEA board members tried to talk Graham out of requesting a suspension of his retirement and an end to his pay.
Comment: Afraid of a trickle-down affect on their own salaries.
"They said to him that the CEO ought to be compensated," DeMoss said. "But he's at the point where 'Here's what I'm going to do. I make a comfortable salary at Samaritan's Purse.'"
Moving ahead
Comment: CEOs possibly. But there should be some moral constraints on gospel workers.
Whether he's paid or not, Graham plans to go ahead with a full schedule of BGEA crusades - Graham calls them festivals - in 2010, DeMoss said.
Today, he flies to North Korea, where he'll present $190,000 in equipment and supplies for a dental center being built in Pyongyang. Samaritan's Purse has been working there since 1997, providing more than $10 million in medical and dental aid.
Graham will also visit China, where last year Samaritan's Purse sent a Boeing 747 filled with supplies for those devastated by a 7.9-magnitude earthquake.
Staff researcher Maria David contributed.
Comments by: Russell Earl Kelly
Friday, October 09, 2009
Thanks to Pastor Dave Goodgame
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=82009141225
He is almost reading my entire book beginning on 8-16-09
He is almost reading my entire book beginning on 8-16-09
Reply to Pastor Bill Johnson, Bethel Church, Redding, CA on Tithing
Reply to Bill Johnson, Bethel Church, Redding, Ca. on Tithing by Russell Earl Kelly
Christianblog.com
http://www.christianblog.com/blog/abelajohnb/kingdom-finances-the-tithe/
From the book "The Treasury", by Anne Kalvestrand. The question's were asked of, and answered by, Pastor Bill Johnson, Senior Pastor, Bethel Church, Redding, California. USA.
Johnson: Question: Is the tithe a principle only for those who live under the Law of Moses? Answer: No.
Abraham practices the tithe 400 years before the Law was given - "Melchizedek, king of Salem ... to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all..." Hebrews 7:1-4
Kelly: Nothing Abraham did concerning tithes is followed by any church today. (1) only pagan spoils of war from defiled pagan dust, (2) not holy tithes from God's holy land which had been miraculously increased by God's hand, (3) other than spoils, nothing of his own personal property, (4) only once recorded, (5) he kept nothing and (6) gave the 90% to the king of Sodom. Just because something is very old and very common, that does not mean it is eternal and moral.
Johnson: Jacob also tithed. "... of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You." Genesis 28:22
The Law ratified the wisdom of tithing. "And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord's; so it is holy to the Lord." Leviticus 27:30
Kelly: Jacob set the conditions and told God what to do. His tithe was a freewill vow and was not given to support a Levitical priesthood. Neither Abraham nor Jacob's tithe are used in the Law as examples for Israel.
Leviticus 27:30 and 15 other texts all describe the tithe as only food from inside Israel. Although money was common even in Genesis and essential for sanctuary worship, money was never included in the definition of biblical tithes. Jesus, Peter and Paul did not qualify as tithe-payers and neither did the poor nor anybody who lived outside Israel.
Johnson: Jesus confirmed the principle of the tithe. "... you pay tithe of the mint and anise and cummin ... these you ought to have done..." Matthew 23:23
Kelly: The actual quote from Mt 23:23 includes "matters of the law." Jesus was rebuking hypocritical scribes and Pharisees for abusing the law. Jesus did not command the Gentiles whom he healed to obey the law and could not have commanded them to tithe.
Johnson: Question: Did the early church fathers practice tithing? Answer: YesJusitin Martyr, Renaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Irenaius, Ambrose, Augustine, and many more."Our ancestors used to abound in wealth of ever kind for this reason that they used to give tithes and pay the tax to Caesar... we have been unwilling to share the tithe with God, now the whole is taken away." - Augustine
Kelly: It is not true that any early church father of the first 200 years after Calvary taught tithing. Johnson is wrong to include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Tertullian. Cyprian's middle of the third century concept included equally sharing the tithe with all in the church and even it was rejected.
Then came the state-supported Roman Catholic Church. Augustine's concept was not adopted by the Church. Attempts in 567 and 585 failed to spread beyond local churches. Tithing did not become church law until AD 777. Study this.
Johnson: Question: Can I choose where the tithe is to go? Answer: No.The tithe is a payment, already designated by God to go into the storehouse for the ministry of the local church. "Bring all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be food in My house." - Malachi 3:10
Kelly: The OT Temple and priesthood have been replaced with the priesthood of every believer who do not tithe to themselves. The covenant, Levitical cities, Levites, priests and temple all ended. There is no such thing as the storehouse of the church. Early church buildings did not exist for over 200 years after Calvary.
Johnson: "But the firstborn among animals, which should be the Lord's firstborn, no man shall dedicate... it is the Lord's". - Leviticus 26:27
Kelly: The firstborn and firstfruits were never the same as tithes in the Bible. Firstfruits were very small token offerings per Deut 26:1-4 and Neh 10:35-38. It is wrong to teach that the first tenth of income must go to the local church. According to 1st Timothy 5:8, the first should go to buy medicine and essential food and shelter.
Johnson: Question: What is the purpose of the tithe? Answer: To provide for the priests. They are the ones in ministry that work to equip the saints for service."For the tithe of the children of Israel, which they offer as a heave offering to the Lord, I have given to the Levites as an inheritance..." - Numbers 18:24
Kelly: Numbers 18 is the tithing statute-ordinance of the Law. Nothing in it is followed by any church today. (1) tithes are only food from inside Israel, (2) only ministers can enter the sanctuary, (3) the first Levitical tithe goes to the servants of the ministers, (4) the ministers only get one per cent of the total tithe, (5) ministers are to kill anybody who dares to worship God directly and (6) Levites and ministers who receive the tithe cannot own or inherit property.
Johnson: Question: Can we borrow the tithe? Answer: Yes, at 20 percent interest."If a man wants at all to redeem any of his tithes, he shall add one-fifth to it." - Leviticus 27:31Kelly: According to Leviticus 27:30-34 the tithe is (1) only food from inside Israel, (2) is only agricultural crops or clean animals, (3) the tenth and not the first, (4) the tenth and not the best and (5) part of the Law given only to national Israel at Mt Sinai.
Johnson: Question: What happens if I keep my title? Answer: You can withhold tithe, but you never get to keep it. It belongs to the devourer."He gave them all into his hand ... to fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths... to fulfill seventy years." - 2 Chronicles 36:17-221
Kelly: According to Galatians 3:10-13 the curse of the law (including tithing) ended at Calvary. And verse 10 says that the only way to be blessed by law-keeping is to keep all 600+ commands of the law. The Law (and tithing) was never given to Gentiles and/or the Church after Calvary in the New Covenant.
Johnson: Withholding the tithe is idolatry."... all Israel... broke the sacred pillars, cut down the wooden images, and threw down the high places and the alters... As soon as the commandment was circulated, the children of Israel brought the abundance the first fruits of all the produce of the field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of all." - 2 Chronicles 31:1-5Kelly: According to 1st Chronicles, chapters 23 to 26 the tithe was used by the king to pay Levites who also worked for him in secular areas. Why is this ignored? It was a tax. It is also stealing to accept the tithe and own property.
Johnson: Question: Will tithing remove all financial difficulties? Answer: No. But it is the beginning place of those wanting God's blessing. Some problems are related to other areas needing obedience.
Kelly: The ghettos are full of honest believers who have been faithfully "tithing" for generations and remain in poverty while many of their pastors are much better off.
Johnson: Question: Do I tithe on the net or the gross? Answer: Our taxes are our payment for living in America from our income. The tithe should be based on the gross income.
Kelly: Neither. Tithes are only food from inside Israel. The definition never changed for over 1500 years from Leviticus to Luke. And it is absurd to expect modern farmers and self-employed businessmen to tithe gross when they must first spend exorbitant sums to produce any profit.Johnson: Another way to look at it would be, which measure would you like for God to use to bless you with? A tithe of the gross, or a tithe of the net?
Kelly: This is a con job.
Johnson: Question: What should a wife do if her unbelieving husband does not want to tithe? Answer: …. Testing God in this way is a practical way for people to see God's faithfulness.
Kelly: The whole law was a test --not merely tithing. Obey all to be blessed; break one to be cursed. God never gave the law to Gentiles or the Church. Deu 28-30.
Johnson: Question: What is the difference between a tithe and an offering? Answer: The tithe is a payment, while the offering is a gift. Both are required that we do not rob God."... but you say, ‘In what way have we robbed you?' In tithes and offerings." - Malachi 3:8
Kelly: Tithes were always only food from inside Israel. Offerings were either above the tithe for food producers inside Israel --or-- from non-food items which could be cleansed in the fire from outside Israel. See Numbers 31. There are no post-Calvary NT tithes.
Johnson: Question: Where should we give our offerings? Answer: That is your choice.Give according to your burden. Just remember to put the work of the Kingdom of God first.
Kelly: Earlier in this article you wrote " The tithe is a payment, already designated by God to go into the storehouse for the ministry of the local church."
om
Christianblog.com
http://www.christianblog.com/blog/abelajohnb/kingdom-finances-the-tithe/
From the book "The Treasury", by Anne Kalvestrand. The question's were asked of, and answered by, Pastor Bill Johnson, Senior Pastor, Bethel Church, Redding, California. USA.
Johnson: Question: Is the tithe a principle only for those who live under the Law of Moses? Answer: No.
Abraham practices the tithe 400 years before the Law was given - "Melchizedek, king of Salem ... to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all..." Hebrews 7:1-4
Kelly: Nothing Abraham did concerning tithes is followed by any church today. (1) only pagan spoils of war from defiled pagan dust, (2) not holy tithes from God's holy land which had been miraculously increased by God's hand, (3) other than spoils, nothing of his own personal property, (4) only once recorded, (5) he kept nothing and (6) gave the 90% to the king of Sodom. Just because something is very old and very common, that does not mean it is eternal and moral.
Johnson: Jacob also tithed. "... of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You." Genesis 28:22
The Law ratified the wisdom of tithing. "And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord's; so it is holy to the Lord." Leviticus 27:30
Kelly: Jacob set the conditions and told God what to do. His tithe was a freewill vow and was not given to support a Levitical priesthood. Neither Abraham nor Jacob's tithe are used in the Law as examples for Israel.
Leviticus 27:30 and 15 other texts all describe the tithe as only food from inside Israel. Although money was common even in Genesis and essential for sanctuary worship, money was never included in the definition of biblical tithes. Jesus, Peter and Paul did not qualify as tithe-payers and neither did the poor nor anybody who lived outside Israel.
Johnson: Jesus confirmed the principle of the tithe. "... you pay tithe of the mint and anise and cummin ... these you ought to have done..." Matthew 23:23
Kelly: The actual quote from Mt 23:23 includes "matters of the law." Jesus was rebuking hypocritical scribes and Pharisees for abusing the law. Jesus did not command the Gentiles whom he healed to obey the law and could not have commanded them to tithe.
Johnson: Question: Did the early church fathers practice tithing? Answer: YesJusitin Martyr, Renaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Irenaius, Ambrose, Augustine, and many more."Our ancestors used to abound in wealth of ever kind for this reason that they used to give tithes and pay the tax to Caesar... we have been unwilling to share the tithe with God, now the whole is taken away." - Augustine
Kelly: It is not true that any early church father of the first 200 years after Calvary taught tithing. Johnson is wrong to include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Tertullian. Cyprian's middle of the third century concept included equally sharing the tithe with all in the church and even it was rejected.
Then came the state-supported Roman Catholic Church. Augustine's concept was not adopted by the Church. Attempts in 567 and 585 failed to spread beyond local churches. Tithing did not become church law until AD 777. Study this.
Johnson: Question: Can I choose where the tithe is to go? Answer: No.The tithe is a payment, already designated by God to go into the storehouse for the ministry of the local church. "Bring all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be food in My house." - Malachi 3:10
Kelly: The OT Temple and priesthood have been replaced with the priesthood of every believer who do not tithe to themselves. The covenant, Levitical cities, Levites, priests and temple all ended. There is no such thing as the storehouse of the church. Early church buildings did not exist for over 200 years after Calvary.
Johnson: "But the firstborn among animals, which should be the Lord's firstborn, no man shall dedicate... it is the Lord's". - Leviticus 26:27
Kelly: The firstborn and firstfruits were never the same as tithes in the Bible. Firstfruits were very small token offerings per Deut 26:1-4 and Neh 10:35-38. It is wrong to teach that the first tenth of income must go to the local church. According to 1st Timothy 5:8, the first should go to buy medicine and essential food and shelter.
Johnson: Question: What is the purpose of the tithe? Answer: To provide for the priests. They are the ones in ministry that work to equip the saints for service."For the tithe of the children of Israel, which they offer as a heave offering to the Lord, I have given to the Levites as an inheritance..." - Numbers 18:24
Kelly: Numbers 18 is the tithing statute-ordinance of the Law. Nothing in it is followed by any church today. (1) tithes are only food from inside Israel, (2) only ministers can enter the sanctuary, (3) the first Levitical tithe goes to the servants of the ministers, (4) the ministers only get one per cent of the total tithe, (5) ministers are to kill anybody who dares to worship God directly and (6) Levites and ministers who receive the tithe cannot own or inherit property.
Johnson: Question: Can we borrow the tithe? Answer: Yes, at 20 percent interest."If a man wants at all to redeem any of his tithes, he shall add one-fifth to it." - Leviticus 27:31Kelly: According to Leviticus 27:30-34 the tithe is (1) only food from inside Israel, (2) is only agricultural crops or clean animals, (3) the tenth and not the first, (4) the tenth and not the best and (5) part of the Law given only to national Israel at Mt Sinai.
Johnson: Question: What happens if I keep my title? Answer: You can withhold tithe, but you never get to keep it. It belongs to the devourer."He gave them all into his hand ... to fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths... to fulfill seventy years." - 2 Chronicles 36:17-221
Kelly: According to Galatians 3:10-13 the curse of the law (including tithing) ended at Calvary. And verse 10 says that the only way to be blessed by law-keeping is to keep all 600+ commands of the law. The Law (and tithing) was never given to Gentiles and/or the Church after Calvary in the New Covenant.
Johnson: Withholding the tithe is idolatry."... all Israel... broke the sacred pillars, cut down the wooden images, and threw down the high places and the alters... As soon as the commandment was circulated, the children of Israel brought the abundance the first fruits of all the produce of the field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of all." - 2 Chronicles 31:1-5Kelly: According to 1st Chronicles, chapters 23 to 26 the tithe was used by the king to pay Levites who also worked for him in secular areas. Why is this ignored? It was a tax. It is also stealing to accept the tithe and own property.
Johnson: Question: Will tithing remove all financial difficulties? Answer: No. But it is the beginning place of those wanting God's blessing. Some problems are related to other areas needing obedience.
Kelly: The ghettos are full of honest believers who have been faithfully "tithing" for generations and remain in poverty while many of their pastors are much better off.
Johnson: Question: Do I tithe on the net or the gross? Answer: Our taxes are our payment for living in America from our income. The tithe should be based on the gross income.
Kelly: Neither. Tithes are only food from inside Israel. The definition never changed for over 1500 years from Leviticus to Luke. And it is absurd to expect modern farmers and self-employed businessmen to tithe gross when they must first spend exorbitant sums to produce any profit.Johnson: Another way to look at it would be, which measure would you like for God to use to bless you with? A tithe of the gross, or a tithe of the net?
Kelly: This is a con job.
Johnson: Question: What should a wife do if her unbelieving husband does not want to tithe? Answer: …. Testing God in this way is a practical way for people to see God's faithfulness.
Kelly: The whole law was a test --not merely tithing. Obey all to be blessed; break one to be cursed. God never gave the law to Gentiles or the Church. Deu 28-30.
Johnson: Question: What is the difference between a tithe and an offering? Answer: The tithe is a payment, while the offering is a gift. Both are required that we do not rob God."... but you say, ‘In what way have we robbed you?' In tithes and offerings." - Malachi 3:8
Kelly: Tithes were always only food from inside Israel. Offerings were either above the tithe for food producers inside Israel --or-- from non-food items which could be cleansed in the fire from outside Israel. See Numbers 31. There are no post-Calvary NT tithes.
Johnson: Question: Where should we give our offerings? Answer: That is your choice.Give according to your burden. Just remember to put the work of the Kingdom of God first.
Kelly: Earlier in this article you wrote " The tithe is a payment, already designated by God to go into the storehouse for the ministry of the local church."
om
Friday, October 02, 2009
Reply to Randy Alcorn on Tithing -3
Question and Answer of the Week: the Old Testament Model of Tithing and Christians Today
http://soulecho.net/question-and-answer-of-the-week-the-old-testament-model-of-tithing-and-christians-today EDITED
Alcorn: I have mixed feelings on tithing. I detest legalism. I certainly don’t want to pour new wine into old wineskins, imposing superseded first covenant restrictions on Christians.
Russ: You are legalistic when you pour the old wine of tithing into the new covenant wineskin after Calvary. You false impose even more than the tithe on believers regardless of their ability to buy the essentials of life.
Alcorn: However, the fact is that every New Testament example of giving goes beyond the tithe. This means that none falls short of it.
Kelly: This is not a fact. According to Acts 21:20 the Jewish Christians in Judea never did stop paying tithes to the Temple system. According to 2nd Corinthians 8 and 9 (especially 8:12-15) many should give more while others give less. Those who give less may be giving sacrificially even though they are giving less than 10%.
Alcorn: The strongest arguments made against tithing today are “law versus grace.” But does being under grace mean we should stop doing all that was done under the law?
Kelly: Your error is teaching that everybody in the OT began their level of giving at ten per cent. Yet that is only true of food producers who lived inside Israel. Jesus, Peter and Paul did not qualify as tithe-payers and neither did the poor nor anybody who lived outside Israel.
Alcorn: I’m a strong believer in the new covenant’s superiority over the old (Romans 7; 2 Corinthians 3; Hebrews 8). On the other hand, I believe there’s ongoing value to certain aspects of the old covenant. The model of paying back to God the firstfruits (tithing) and giving freewill offerings beyond that is among those.
Kelly: You are wrong to define tithes as firstfruits. See Deut 26:1-4; Neh 10:35-38 and all other "firstfruit" texts. Firstfruits were only very small token offerings which could be carried in a small basket. Tithes were tenth-fruits after the crop had been fully harvested from inside God's special holy land of Israel.
Alcorn: Because we are never told that tithing has been superseded …
Kelly: See http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/id171.html for details. Everything about tithing has very clearly been superseded after Calvary:
1. WHO #1: The Levitical servants to the priests who received the first whole tithe have been abolished. See Numbers 18:21-24.
2. WHO #2: OT priests who received a tenth of the tithe (only 1 per cent) have been abolished. See Num 18:25-28 and Neh 10:38.
3. WHAT: The definition of tithes as only food miraculously increased by God from inside His holy land of Israel has been abolished and replaced with the false unbiblical definition of income.
4. WHERE: The destination of the OT tithes first to the Levitical cities some to the Temple has been abolished. See Neh 10:37b and Mal 3:10.
5. WHEN: The time to tithe has been abolished. The Levitical tithe was paid yearly in the Levitical cities.
6. WHY #1: The covenant which prescribed them was abolished per Heb 8:8-13; Gal 4:21-26' 2 Cor 3:6-10.
7. WHY #2: The "commandment" for Levites and priests to collect tithes was "annulled" per Hebrews 7:5, 12, 18.
8. WHY #3: The law which condemned believers has been rendered of no effect when the believer died in Christ per Romans 7:4. No law can tell a dead person what to do.
9. HOW #1: Jesus abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances per Eph 2:13. Tithing was an ordinance per Num 18.
10. HOW $2: Jesus blotted out the handwriting of ordinances, per Col 2:14. Tithing was an ordinance per Num 18.
11. HOW #3: The Temple which tithes supported was abolished in AD 70. God's temple is now within each believer per 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19-20.
12. HOW #4: The priesthood which was supported by tithes was abolished in AD 70. God's priesthood is now within every believer per 1st Peter 2:9-10.
13. HOW #5: The blessings and curses of tithing as part of the whole law have been abolished per Galatians 3:10-13.
Would you continue to send money to a church after
1. The building is destroyed?
2. The preacher has been defrocked?
3. The workers have found other jobs?
4. The members have all left?
5. The land has been inhabited by non religious people?
6. The purpose for the church no longer exists?
7. You have died?
Alcorn: … because Jesus directly affirmed it (Matthew 23:23)
Kelly: The hermeneutic of Mt 23:23 demands that it be interpreted as "matters of the law." Jesus could not have told his Gentile disciples to tithe. Jesus did not command Gentiles whom he healed to obey the law of Moses.
Alcorn: and prominent church fathers taught it as a requirement for Christian living,
Kelly: Prominent church fathers of the first two centuries opposed tithing. Only after the church became endorsed by the Roman emperor did tithing attempt to begin but it did not become legal until AD 777.
Alcorn: it seems to me the burden of proof falls on those who say tithing is no longer a minimum standard for God’s people.
Kelly: I can give you 16 texts which define tithes as only food from inside Israel for over 1500 years from Leviticus to Luke. The burden of proof is on you to show from the Bible where it changed. You cannot even prove that it was a minimum for everybody who lived inside Israel --much less anybody else.
Alcorn: Christ fulfilled the entire Old Testament, but he didn’t render it irrelevant. Old Testament legislation demonstrated how to love my neighbor. Although the specific regulations don’t all apply, the principles certainly do, and many of the guidelines are still as helpful as ever. Consider the command to build a roof with a parapet to protect people from falling off (Deuteronomy 22:8). When it comes to the Old Testament, we must be careful not to throw out the baby (ongoing principles intended for everyone) with the bathwater (detailed regulations intended only for ancient Israel).
Kelly: The English law (good and bad) was rendered irrelevant the moment the Declaration of Independence was signed. In the same way, after Calvary God took that which was good from the old covenant law and repeated in terms of grace and faith after Calvary in the New Covenant. Why is that so hard to grasp?
Alcorn: We don’t offer sacrifices anymore, so why should we tithe? Because sacrifices are specifically rescinded in the New Testament. As the book of Hebrews demonstrates, Christ has rendered inoperative the whole sacrificial system. But where in the New Testament does it indicate that tithing is no longer valid? There is no such passage. With a single statement, God could have easily singled out tithing like he did sacrifices and the Sabbath. But he didn’t.
Kelly: You are very wrong. In fact NOTHING about tithing is actually obeyed by any church today. Again see my article at http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/id171.html.
Alcorn: The disciples gave all that they had because “much grace was upon them all” (Acts 4:33). It was obvious from the beginning that being under grace didn’t mean that New Testament Christians would give less than their Old Testament brethren.
Kelly: If you follow Acts 2:46-48; 15; and 21:20 you will discover that the Jewish Christians from Acts never stopped fully supporting the Temple system with its tithes. Almost every denomination's church historians tell us that the church in Jerusalem eventually apostatized and became extremely legalistic for many centuries.
Alcorn: On the contrary, it meant they would give more.
Kelly: Your assumption is false and cannot be documented. According to 1st Timothy 5:8 the Christian should spend the first of income on medicine and essential food and shelter. You would have them do without medicine and give the first to the church. That is cruel.
Alcorn: Being under grace does not mean living by lower standards than the law.
Kelly: You keep repeating your false assumption that the law required everybody to begin their giving level at ten per cent. Your basic premise is wrong.
Alcorn: Christ systematically addressed such issues as murder, adultery, and the taking of oaths and made it clear that his standards were much higher than those of the Pharisees (Matthew 5:17-48). He never lowered the bar. He always raised it. But he also empowers us by his grace to jump higher than the law
Kelly: Mt 5:19-48 includes the whole indivisible law. Either teach that Christians must keep all of the law of Moses or none of it. The book of Matthew makes it very clear that Jesus completely fulfilled the righteous requirements of the law. Christians are under the New Covenant "law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" per Romans 8:2.
Please reply. I would appreciate dialog with you.
Russell Earl Kelly, PHD
www.tithing-russkelly.com
http://soulecho.net/question-and-answer-of-the-week-the-old-testament-model-of-tithing-and-christians-today EDITED
Alcorn: I have mixed feelings on tithing. I detest legalism. I certainly don’t want to pour new wine into old wineskins, imposing superseded first covenant restrictions on Christians.
Russ: You are legalistic when you pour the old wine of tithing into the new covenant wineskin after Calvary. You false impose even more than the tithe on believers regardless of their ability to buy the essentials of life.
Alcorn: However, the fact is that every New Testament example of giving goes beyond the tithe. This means that none falls short of it.
Kelly: This is not a fact. According to Acts 21:20 the Jewish Christians in Judea never did stop paying tithes to the Temple system. According to 2nd Corinthians 8 and 9 (especially 8:12-15) many should give more while others give less. Those who give less may be giving sacrificially even though they are giving less than 10%.
Alcorn: The strongest arguments made against tithing today are “law versus grace.” But does being under grace mean we should stop doing all that was done under the law?
Kelly: Your error is teaching that everybody in the OT began their level of giving at ten per cent. Yet that is only true of food producers who lived inside Israel. Jesus, Peter and Paul did not qualify as tithe-payers and neither did the poor nor anybody who lived outside Israel.
Alcorn: I’m a strong believer in the new covenant’s superiority over the old (Romans 7; 2 Corinthians 3; Hebrews 8). On the other hand, I believe there’s ongoing value to certain aspects of the old covenant. The model of paying back to God the firstfruits (tithing) and giving freewill offerings beyond that is among those.
Kelly: You are wrong to define tithes as firstfruits. See Deut 26:1-4; Neh 10:35-38 and all other "firstfruit" texts. Firstfruits were only very small token offerings which could be carried in a small basket. Tithes were tenth-fruits after the crop had been fully harvested from inside God's special holy land of Israel.
Alcorn: Because we are never told that tithing has been superseded …
Kelly: See http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/id171.html for details. Everything about tithing has very clearly been superseded after Calvary:
1. WHO #1: The Levitical servants to the priests who received the first whole tithe have been abolished. See Numbers 18:21-24.
2. WHO #2: OT priests who received a tenth of the tithe (only 1 per cent) have been abolished. See Num 18:25-28 and Neh 10:38.
3. WHAT: The definition of tithes as only food miraculously increased by God from inside His holy land of Israel has been abolished and replaced with the false unbiblical definition of income.
4. WHERE: The destination of the OT tithes first to the Levitical cities some to the Temple has been abolished. See Neh 10:37b and Mal 3:10.
5. WHEN: The time to tithe has been abolished. The Levitical tithe was paid yearly in the Levitical cities.
6. WHY #1: The covenant which prescribed them was abolished per Heb 8:8-13; Gal 4:21-26' 2 Cor 3:6-10.
7. WHY #2: The "commandment" for Levites and priests to collect tithes was "annulled" per Hebrews 7:5, 12, 18.
8. WHY #3: The law which condemned believers has been rendered of no effect when the believer died in Christ per Romans 7:4. No law can tell a dead person what to do.
9. HOW #1: Jesus abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances per Eph 2:13. Tithing was an ordinance per Num 18.
10. HOW $2: Jesus blotted out the handwriting of ordinances, per Col 2:14. Tithing was an ordinance per Num 18.
11. HOW #3: The Temple which tithes supported was abolished in AD 70. God's temple is now within each believer per 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19-20.
12. HOW #4: The priesthood which was supported by tithes was abolished in AD 70. God's priesthood is now within every believer per 1st Peter 2:9-10.
13. HOW #5: The blessings and curses of tithing as part of the whole law have been abolished per Galatians 3:10-13.
Would you continue to send money to a church after
1. The building is destroyed?
2. The preacher has been defrocked?
3. The workers have found other jobs?
4. The members have all left?
5. The land has been inhabited by non religious people?
6. The purpose for the church no longer exists?
7. You have died?
Alcorn: … because Jesus directly affirmed it (Matthew 23:23)
Kelly: The hermeneutic of Mt 23:23 demands that it be interpreted as "matters of the law." Jesus could not have told his Gentile disciples to tithe. Jesus did not command Gentiles whom he healed to obey the law of Moses.
Alcorn: and prominent church fathers taught it as a requirement for Christian living,
Kelly: Prominent church fathers of the first two centuries opposed tithing. Only after the church became endorsed by the Roman emperor did tithing attempt to begin but it did not become legal until AD 777.
Alcorn: it seems to me the burden of proof falls on those who say tithing is no longer a minimum standard for God’s people.
Kelly: I can give you 16 texts which define tithes as only food from inside Israel for over 1500 years from Leviticus to Luke. The burden of proof is on you to show from the Bible where it changed. You cannot even prove that it was a minimum for everybody who lived inside Israel --much less anybody else.
Alcorn: Christ fulfilled the entire Old Testament, but he didn’t render it irrelevant. Old Testament legislation demonstrated how to love my neighbor. Although the specific regulations don’t all apply, the principles certainly do, and many of the guidelines are still as helpful as ever. Consider the command to build a roof with a parapet to protect people from falling off (Deuteronomy 22:8). When it comes to the Old Testament, we must be careful not to throw out the baby (ongoing principles intended for everyone) with the bathwater (detailed regulations intended only for ancient Israel).
Kelly: The English law (good and bad) was rendered irrelevant the moment the Declaration of Independence was signed. In the same way, after Calvary God took that which was good from the old covenant law and repeated in terms of grace and faith after Calvary in the New Covenant. Why is that so hard to grasp?
Alcorn: We don’t offer sacrifices anymore, so why should we tithe? Because sacrifices are specifically rescinded in the New Testament. As the book of Hebrews demonstrates, Christ has rendered inoperative the whole sacrificial system. But where in the New Testament does it indicate that tithing is no longer valid? There is no such passage. With a single statement, God could have easily singled out tithing like he did sacrifices and the Sabbath. But he didn’t.
Kelly: You are very wrong. In fact NOTHING about tithing is actually obeyed by any church today. Again see my article at http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/id171.html.
Alcorn: The disciples gave all that they had because “much grace was upon them all” (Acts 4:33). It was obvious from the beginning that being under grace didn’t mean that New Testament Christians would give less than their Old Testament brethren.
Kelly: If you follow Acts 2:46-48; 15; and 21:20 you will discover that the Jewish Christians from Acts never stopped fully supporting the Temple system with its tithes. Almost every denomination's church historians tell us that the church in Jerusalem eventually apostatized and became extremely legalistic for many centuries.
Alcorn: On the contrary, it meant they would give more.
Kelly: Your assumption is false and cannot be documented. According to 1st Timothy 5:8 the Christian should spend the first of income on medicine and essential food and shelter. You would have them do without medicine and give the first to the church. That is cruel.
Alcorn: Being under grace does not mean living by lower standards than the law.
Kelly: You keep repeating your false assumption that the law required everybody to begin their giving level at ten per cent. Your basic premise is wrong.
Alcorn: Christ systematically addressed such issues as murder, adultery, and the taking of oaths and made it clear that his standards were much higher than those of the Pharisees (Matthew 5:17-48). He never lowered the bar. He always raised it. But he also empowers us by his grace to jump higher than the law
Kelly: Mt 5:19-48 includes the whole indivisible law. Either teach that Christians must keep all of the law of Moses or none of it. The book of Matthew makes it very clear that Jesus completely fulfilled the righteous requirements of the law. Christians are under the New Covenant "law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" per Romans 8:2.
Please reply. I would appreciate dialog with you.
Russell Earl Kelly, PHD
www.tithing-russkelly.com
Reply to Puritan Lad of Covenant Theology 3
Reply to Lad at Covenant Theology -3
Lad: You continue to try to tie the tithe to the Mosaic Covenant, and have still failed to do so
Russ: I have succeeded to prove my point by proving texts from God's Word which describe tithes as part of the ceremonial worship cultic laws of statutes and ordinance. On the other hand you have provided no valid argument to explain away my texts.
Lad: I have established in Hebrews 7. Verses 12, 18, and 19 do not "disprove" anything, as they deal only with the ceremonial aspects of the law,
Russ: Hebrews 7:5 is the first use of "commandment," "law" and "tithes" in Hebrews. Therefore common sense demands that the "change of the law" in 7:12 absolutely must at the very least include tithing from 7:5. How can you deny that? What was the "change"? The "commandment going before" of tithing from 7:5 was "disannulled" in 7:18.
Lad: and the tithe was not ceremonial but moral (robbery), and thus lasts until heaven and earth pass away.
Russ: Define "law" so I will know where you are coming from. Violation of any of the commandments, statutes and judgments was SIN and was punishable. According to your logic, we should still be observing all 600 of them.
Lad: The fact that the tithe only applied to Israel in the Old Covenant is irrelevant (unless I were arguing for tithe outside of the authority of the church, for Israel is the church (in both Old and New Covenants).
Russ: So you think! True biblical tithes could not be accepted from defiled pagan dust outside of Israel. True or not? If true, then your argument that all of God's law also applied to the Gentiles is false.
Lad: It was Israel only who received God's revealed will. In the Old Covenant, Israel typified the church, and anyone in the Old Covenant who was redeemed had to become a Jew (Exodus 12:48), but there was one law for both the stranger and the native of the land (Exodus 12:49).
Russ: Have you ever red Exodus 12:49? "One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you." The text does not include all Gentiles. It ly says that those Gentiles who chose to live in and among the Hebrew community must abide by its laws.
Lad: As Israel was the church in the Old Covenant, why do we assume that they lose authority to take up tithe in the New Covenant?
Russ: Israel was God's assembly in the Old Covenant but it was far from being the mysterious body of Christ in which the Holy Spirit permanently lived. If you are going to press the tithing law into the church, then you should press all of the tithing law into the New Covenant. You should (1) give tithes to the servants of the ministers, (2) only give one per cent to the ministers, (3) only allow ministers into the sanctuary, (4) define tithes as only food from inside Israel and (5) kill anybody who dares to worship God directly as demanded in Numbers 18. Why don't you comment on these tithe requirements?
Lad: What God considered to be sinful in Israel was not tolerated just over the state line, nor did God's Holy law begin with it's revelation to Moses.
Russ: Tithing could not come from just over the state line and Sabbath keeping was not commanded to Gentiles who lived over the state line. God did not reveal himself as Yahweh to the Gentiles as their special covenant God.
Lad: Christ also paid tithe, for he was born under the law, and fulfilled the law.
Russ: Where do you find this in the Bible? Christ and Joseph earned their livelihood as carpenters and the products of carpentry were not tithe-able.
Lad: He also commanded the Pharisees to tithe (see above), and then told his disciples to observe and do whatever the Pharisees told them, but to avoid their hypocrisy (Matthew 23:2-3).
Russ: He could not have told his Gentile disciples to tithe because it was illegal. He also did not command Gentiles whom he healed to show themselves to the priests and to offer the offering Moses commanded.
Lad: In the New Covenant, that which Jesus commanded His disciples is to be observed by "all nations" (Matthew 28:19-20).Russ: Matthew 28:19-20 is after Calvary. It is part of the New Covenant. It is a new commission.
Lad: Regarding the fact that Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek (a theophany of Christ) was superior, the Scripture itself tells us that, particularly verses 5-7. What else needs to be said there?
Russ: You invent theology when you say that Abraham's tithe was superior to the tithe of the law. It was not. The tithe of the law was holy and could only come from inside God's holy land. Repeating your view 1000 times does not change that fact. Tithe teachers never get past Hebrews 7:10 and ignore the conclusion reached in 7:12 and 7:18, 19.
Lad: I never suggested that this was a commandment for the church to take tithe, for that is commanded in other places. This was an answer to your question about who has the right beside a Levite to take a tithe. The answer is Christ, who is superior to the human priesthood, for His priesthood is forever.
Russ: Hebrews 7:12 clearly states that there is "of necessity a change of the law" (of tithing from 7:5) and that change was to "disannul" the "commandment going before" of tithing from 7:5. How clear can it be?
Lad: Finally, I never said that 1 Corinthians teaches that "the church is to be supported IN THE SAME WAY IN EVERY ASPECT as was the Old Covenant Temple". The statement addresses how those who minister the gospel should live, and the answer is "in the same way" as "those who are employed in the temple service" (the tithe).
Russ: You only see "tithing" in 7:13 when it includes far more. Read your statement again several times. If "in the same way" only refers to 7:13, then it must include ALL methods of support included in 7:13 and that goes far beyond tithes. Your argument is self-defeating.
Lad: The New Testament commands tithing, and continuously puts it's stamp of approval on the practice.
Russ: Where are your texts that the New Testament commands tithing as part of the New Covenant after Calvary?
Lad: Malachi writes, "Will a man rob God?" That is the question that I will ask you and Gary. If God owns it, we are obligated to render it to Him. It is really that smple
Russ: The whole law was a test --not merely tithing. Do you think that God owes you a blessing for tithing when you are at the same time violating the other 600 laws? Obey ALL to be blessed; break ONE to be cursed. Clearly Galatians 3:10-13 replaces Malachi 3:10-12 for those who were under the law.
Lad: The tithe belongs to the Lord,
Russ: Everything in the book of Leviticus belonged to the Lord because it was either holy or most holy. Why don't you teach that?
Lad: the burden of proof is on you to show that the Lord and His Church have relinquished ownership of the tithe in the New Covenant.
Russ: You are hypocritical if you do not obey all of the tithing law from Numbers 18. The burden of proof is on you to prove (1) that the tithe is not limited to food from inside Israel and (2) that modern ministers can have their cake and eat it too -- they can receive the "tithe" and also be property owners.
Lad: You continue to try to tie the tithe to the Mosaic Covenant, and have still failed to do so
Russ: I have succeeded to prove my point by proving texts from God's Word which describe tithes as part of the ceremonial worship cultic laws of statutes and ordinance. On the other hand you have provided no valid argument to explain away my texts.
Lad: I have established in Hebrews 7. Verses 12, 18, and 19 do not "disprove" anything, as they deal only with the ceremonial aspects of the law,
Russ: Hebrews 7:5 is the first use of "commandment," "law" and "tithes" in Hebrews. Therefore common sense demands that the "change of the law" in 7:12 absolutely must at the very least include tithing from 7:5. How can you deny that? What was the "change"? The "commandment going before" of tithing from 7:5 was "disannulled" in 7:18.
Lad: and the tithe was not ceremonial but moral (robbery), and thus lasts until heaven and earth pass away.
Russ: Define "law" so I will know where you are coming from. Violation of any of the commandments, statutes and judgments was SIN and was punishable. According to your logic, we should still be observing all 600 of them.
Lad: The fact that the tithe only applied to Israel in the Old Covenant is irrelevant (unless I were arguing for tithe outside of the authority of the church, for Israel is the church (in both Old and New Covenants).
Russ: So you think! True biblical tithes could not be accepted from defiled pagan dust outside of Israel. True or not? If true, then your argument that all of God's law also applied to the Gentiles is false.
Lad: It was Israel only who received God's revealed will. In the Old Covenant, Israel typified the church, and anyone in the Old Covenant who was redeemed had to become a Jew (Exodus 12:48), but there was one law for both the stranger and the native of the land (Exodus 12:49).
Russ: Have you ever red Exodus 12:49? "One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you." The text does not include all Gentiles. It ly says that those Gentiles who chose to live in and among the Hebrew community must abide by its laws.
Lad: As Israel was the church in the Old Covenant, why do we assume that they lose authority to take up tithe in the New Covenant?
Russ: Israel was God's assembly in the Old Covenant but it was far from being the mysterious body of Christ in which the Holy Spirit permanently lived. If you are going to press the tithing law into the church, then you should press all of the tithing law into the New Covenant. You should (1) give tithes to the servants of the ministers, (2) only give one per cent to the ministers, (3) only allow ministers into the sanctuary, (4) define tithes as only food from inside Israel and (5) kill anybody who dares to worship God directly as demanded in Numbers 18. Why don't you comment on these tithe requirements?
Lad: What God considered to be sinful in Israel was not tolerated just over the state line, nor did God's Holy law begin with it's revelation to Moses.
Russ: Tithing could not come from just over the state line and Sabbath keeping was not commanded to Gentiles who lived over the state line. God did not reveal himself as Yahweh to the Gentiles as their special covenant God.
Lad: Christ also paid tithe, for he was born under the law, and fulfilled the law.
Russ: Where do you find this in the Bible? Christ and Joseph earned their livelihood as carpenters and the products of carpentry were not tithe-able.
Lad: He also commanded the Pharisees to tithe (see above), and then told his disciples to observe and do whatever the Pharisees told them, but to avoid their hypocrisy (Matthew 23:2-3).
Russ: He could not have told his Gentile disciples to tithe because it was illegal. He also did not command Gentiles whom he healed to show themselves to the priests and to offer the offering Moses commanded.
Lad: In the New Covenant, that which Jesus commanded His disciples is to be observed by "all nations" (Matthew 28:19-20).Russ: Matthew 28:19-20 is after Calvary. It is part of the New Covenant. It is a new commission.
Lad: Regarding the fact that Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek (a theophany of Christ) was superior, the Scripture itself tells us that, particularly verses 5-7. What else needs to be said there?
Russ: You invent theology when you say that Abraham's tithe was superior to the tithe of the law. It was not. The tithe of the law was holy and could only come from inside God's holy land. Repeating your view 1000 times does not change that fact. Tithe teachers never get past Hebrews 7:10 and ignore the conclusion reached in 7:12 and 7:18, 19.
Lad: I never suggested that this was a commandment for the church to take tithe, for that is commanded in other places. This was an answer to your question about who has the right beside a Levite to take a tithe. The answer is Christ, who is superior to the human priesthood, for His priesthood is forever.
Russ: Hebrews 7:12 clearly states that there is "of necessity a change of the law" (of tithing from 7:5) and that change was to "disannul" the "commandment going before" of tithing from 7:5. How clear can it be?
Lad: Finally, I never said that 1 Corinthians teaches that "the church is to be supported IN THE SAME WAY IN EVERY ASPECT as was the Old Covenant Temple". The statement addresses how those who minister the gospel should live, and the answer is "in the same way" as "those who are employed in the temple service" (the tithe).
Russ: You only see "tithing" in 7:13 when it includes far more. Read your statement again several times. If "in the same way" only refers to 7:13, then it must include ALL methods of support included in 7:13 and that goes far beyond tithes. Your argument is self-defeating.
Lad: The New Testament commands tithing, and continuously puts it's stamp of approval on the practice.
Russ: Where are your texts that the New Testament commands tithing as part of the New Covenant after Calvary?
Lad: Malachi writes, "Will a man rob God?" That is the question that I will ask you and Gary. If God owns it, we are obligated to render it to Him. It is really that smple
Russ: The whole law was a test --not merely tithing. Do you think that God owes you a blessing for tithing when you are at the same time violating the other 600 laws? Obey ALL to be blessed; break ONE to be cursed. Clearly Galatians 3:10-13 replaces Malachi 3:10-12 for those who were under the law.
Lad: The tithe belongs to the Lord,
Russ: Everything in the book of Leviticus belonged to the Lord because it was either holy or most holy. Why don't you teach that?
Lad: the burden of proof is on you to show that the Lord and His Church have relinquished ownership of the tithe in the New Covenant.
Russ: You are hypocritical if you do not obey all of the tithing law from Numbers 18. The burden of proof is on you to prove (1) that the tithe is not limited to food from inside Israel and (2) that modern ministers can have their cake and eat it too -- they can receive the "tithe" and also be property owners.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
2nd Reply to Covenant Theology Puritan Lad
Reply to Covenant Theology, Oct 1, 2009
1.) We don't pay tithes to Levites and Priests, but those who minister the gospel are to live off of the gospel "in the same way". So all of your arguments against the Levitical Priesthood are irrelevant.
Russ: See my blog. Your argument is self-defeating because it opens the door for every single type of sustenance included in 9:13. www. russkellyphd.blogspot.com
2.) We don't pay the same kind of tithe that was paid to Levites, but we pay a "superior" tithe to the High Priest Christ, just as Abraham did (1/10).
Russ: In over 10 years of reading tithing arguments you are THE ONLY ONE to argue that Abraham's tithe was SUPERIOR to the Levitical tithe. The point of Hebrews 7 is that Christ's priesthood is SUPERIOR. Are you actually arguing that tithes from pagan spoils of war are superior to tithes from inside God's holy land of Israel?
3.) Jesus commanded tithing.
Russ: Jesus was living under the jurisdiction of the law. He would have sinned if he had not commanded tithing. The hermeneutics of the text itself (Mt 23:23) demands that you explain it in the context of "matters of the law." Jesus could not have commanded his Gentile converts to tithe. Jesus also commanded full obedience to the ritual of the law. Why do you ignore that and include tithing?
4.) Your arguments against Old Covenant ceremonial laws are irrelevant, since tithing is not a ceremonial law, nor was it tied only to the Mosaic Covenant. (See Abraham above).
Russ: Tithing very assuredly is part of the ceremonial law as seen in Leviticus 27, Numbers 18 and Deuteronomy 12, 14 and 26. Have you cut these chapters out of your Bible?
5.) If you mean that Christ has abolished the moral law as well, you are wrong. It lasts "forever" (Deuteronomy 29:29, Psalm 119:160), until heaven and earth has passed away (Matthew 5:18). One who continuously, purposely disobeys God's law is not born again (Ezekiel 36:26-27, 1 John 2:3-5). So I am in no bind as far as which commandments to obey. All of the moral laws (including tithing) are to be kept. The ceremonial laws (circumcision, animal sacrifices, etc.) have been fulfilled. We actually still keep these laws, but in their substance rather than their shadows.God's law is only legalistic if we use it as a means of our justification.Russ: I know of no church which teaches that Jesus abolished the moral law. According to Romans 2:14-16, the moral law was even revealed to the Gentiles through nature and conscience. You cannot correctly define what you mean when you use the words "law" and "moral law." Do you believe that the U.S. abrogated all of the English law when the Declaration of Independence was signed? I do --even the good and moral parts no longer applied as English law. God repeated that part of the eternal moral law which applies to the Church in the New Covenant.
6.) The tithe is the Lord's, not the priest's. Therefore the priesthood is irrelevant, and we are to render to God that which is God's.
Russ: Why do you only read the last five verses of Leviticus and ignore all of the other 27 chapters where almost everything is called either "holy" or "most holy" to the Lord? You seem to pick and choose only that which serves your goals.
Numbers 18 says that God has given the tithe to the Levites and priests for their service in the sanctuary. It was the Lord's and the Lord gave it to them. Next he forbade them from owing property. How many preachers do that?
1.) We don't pay tithes to Levites and Priests, but those who minister the gospel are to live off of the gospel "in the same way". So all of your arguments against the Levitical Priesthood are irrelevant.
Russ: See my blog. Your argument is self-defeating because it opens the door for every single type of sustenance included in 9:13. www. russkellyphd.blogspot.com
2.) We don't pay the same kind of tithe that was paid to Levites, but we pay a "superior" tithe to the High Priest Christ, just as Abraham did (1/10).
Russ: In over 10 years of reading tithing arguments you are THE ONLY ONE to argue that Abraham's tithe was SUPERIOR to the Levitical tithe. The point of Hebrews 7 is that Christ's priesthood is SUPERIOR. Are you actually arguing that tithes from pagan spoils of war are superior to tithes from inside God's holy land of Israel?
3.) Jesus commanded tithing.
Russ: Jesus was living under the jurisdiction of the law. He would have sinned if he had not commanded tithing. The hermeneutics of the text itself (Mt 23:23) demands that you explain it in the context of "matters of the law." Jesus could not have commanded his Gentile converts to tithe. Jesus also commanded full obedience to the ritual of the law. Why do you ignore that and include tithing?
4.) Your arguments against Old Covenant ceremonial laws are irrelevant, since tithing is not a ceremonial law, nor was it tied only to the Mosaic Covenant. (See Abraham above).
Russ: Tithing very assuredly is part of the ceremonial law as seen in Leviticus 27, Numbers 18 and Deuteronomy 12, 14 and 26. Have you cut these chapters out of your Bible?
5.) If you mean that Christ has abolished the moral law as well, you are wrong. It lasts "forever" (Deuteronomy 29:29, Psalm 119:160), until heaven and earth has passed away (Matthew 5:18). One who continuously, purposely disobeys God's law is not born again (Ezekiel 36:26-27, 1 John 2:3-5). So I am in no bind as far as which commandments to obey. All of the moral laws (including tithing) are to be kept. The ceremonial laws (circumcision, animal sacrifices, etc.) have been fulfilled. We actually still keep these laws, but in their substance rather than their shadows.God's law is only legalistic if we use it as a means of our justification.Russ: I know of no church which teaches that Jesus abolished the moral law. According to Romans 2:14-16, the moral law was even revealed to the Gentiles through nature and conscience. You cannot correctly define what you mean when you use the words "law" and "moral law." Do you believe that the U.S. abrogated all of the English law when the Declaration of Independence was signed? I do --even the good and moral parts no longer applied as English law. God repeated that part of the eternal moral law which applies to the Church in the New Covenant.
6.) The tithe is the Lord's, not the priest's. Therefore the priesthood is irrelevant, and we are to render to God that which is God's.
Russ: Why do you only read the last five verses of Leviticus and ignore all of the other 27 chapters where almost everything is called either "holy" or "most holy" to the Lord? You seem to pick and choose only that which serves your goals.
Numbers 18 says that God has given the tithe to the Levites and priests for their service in the sanctuary. It was the Lord's and the Lord gave it to them. Next he forbade them from owing property. How many preachers do that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
