Friday, January 05, 2018

Tithing: Russell Kelly and Apostle Oladele Johnson

Tithing: Russell Kelly Replies to Apostle Oladele Johnson, January 5, 2018

Johnson: I see the issue of Tithe, as a war against the body of Christ, an attack against the finance of the Church.

Kelly: There is no contextual Bible text connecting tithing with the support of gospel workers.

Johnson: Summarily, I just see it as a reckless and very unfair hard judgment on the church.

Kelly: Why do you not defend it in an open public forum?

Johnson: When we look into the Bible, Tithe has been there from the beginning.

Kelly: All pagans of the biblical world tithed to pagan gods. The "holy" tithe (as Moses, Nehemiah, Malachi and Jesus used the word) did not appear until the Law in Leviticus 27:30-34.

Johnson: Abraham was before Moses, and when you are talking about Old Testament, you are referring to Mosaic Law, there was Abraham giving to Melchizedek.

Kelly: The Bible does not say that Abram's tithe of pagan spoils of war was commanded or freewill. Hebrews 7 uses the "order" of Melchizedek, not his "person" to prove the superior priesthood of Jesus.

Johnson: … but if you are a child of God and you want to walk in the blessing of God, you must do it, so that you would not be a selective believer, but a whole believer, who believes in the books from Genesis to Revelation.

Kelly:  The Law was only commanded to Old Covenant Israel. Israel was forbidden to share its covenant with Gentiles (and the Church) (Ex 23:32; Deut 7:2).

Johnson: there is no place in the Bible that says stop Tithing.

Kelly: (1) Hebrews 7:5, 12, 18 do. (2) The New Covenant replaced the Old and tithing was not repeated to the Church after Calvary in terms of the New Covenant (Heb 8:8-13). (3) As a non-food producer Jesus did not qualify to tithe. (4) There are no N.T. Levites and Aaronic priests to receive tithes. (5) Christians are dead to the Law (Rom 7:4).

Johnson: … when Jesus talked about it in the Book of Luke, he said you have done all these things …

Kelly: Jesus said inn Matthew 23:23 "things" --- "of the Law."  If Jesus had not taught tithing before Calvary to Jews, He would have sinned (Gal 4:4-5).

Johnson: Those who are saying Tithing is of Old Testament are only trying to attack the prosperity of the church.

Kelly: They are trying to complete the Reformation and remove the Hebrew Law. You nullify Galatians 3:10 with Malachi 3:10.

Johnson: He only moves in the hands of people, who pay more than10%.

Kelly: No texts; merely opinion. Johnson does not even use the biblical definition of a "holy" tithe as "food from inside the holy land of Israel."

Johnson: It’s not Tithe that they use to buy Jets.

Kelly: I cannot picture in my mind My Savior with wealth and private jets for any reason. He gleaned in the fields because he qualified as a poor person.

Johnson: Abraham … by Volition ...  decided to sow/give his Tithe.

Kelly: The Bible does not state that Abram tithed spoils of war of his own freewill. He just as easily could have done so to obey the law of the land (Heb 7:4).

Johnson: So, if you are a child of God and you are born again, you will give your Tithe …

Kelly: Texts please. The tithe supported an Old Covenant priesthood which ended at Calvary Numb 18:20-28). All believers are now priests (1 Pet 2:9-10).

Johnson: … if you discover that blessing is not coming …

Kelly: God does not bless New Covenant Christians on the basis of Old Covenant promises to Israel (Gal 3:10-13).

Johnson: … He said you have robbed me …

Kelly: The "you" is Old Covenant Israel (Malachi 1:1) and its thieving priests (1:6; 2:1). It is not the Church. Gospel giving principles are: sacrificial, freewill, generous and not by commandment (2 Cor 9:7).

Johnson: So, my take is that if anybody wants to run the church down, it’s a lie from the pit of hell.

Kelly: Why not use sound biblical principles of interpretation given by the Holy Spirit after Calvary (John 14:26; 16:8-9, 13-14)?

Johnson: The prosperity in the Church, we have not seen anything, it’s still coming. Is it one Jet you saw, you will still see plenty Jets.

Kelly: What ever happened to the Gospel of salvation from the pit of hell through faith in Jesus Christ?

Johnson:  Baba Adeboye has to preach in four places in different continents of the world. How do you expect him to be effective in his job, if he doesn’t have a Jet?

Kelly: Does he have to be there personally? Has he failed to train others locally to do that?

Russell Earl Kelly, PHD

Tuesday, January 02, 2018


By Russell Earl Kelly, PHD, January 2, 2018

DADDY FREEZE, Lagos, Nigeria, appears to be God's man for our modern time to bring reform to all Christianity.

Daddy Freeze is an extremely popular media host who lives in Lagos, Nigeria.  It appears that he was asked to speak at a local church and used that sermon to disagree with the abuses of tithing in Nigeria. The result of that sermon has sparked a much needed debate in Nigeria over tithing.

The reason for Daddy Freeze's biblical objections is the fact that Nigeria has spawned mostly Pentecostal church pastors who have fleeced their extremely poor flocks and have purchased often numerous private jets and opulent lifestyles while the vast majority of their "tithing" parishioners remain poor. In a country rich and oil and threatened with Muslim terrorism, real Christianity has been replaced by a false "Christian prosperity" gospel which makes the job of converting abused converts to Islam easier.

I have been commenting on blogs from Nigeria for several years hoping to influence its honest leaders with the biblical arguments against tithing (and for sacrificial freewill giving).

I have just competed watching a You Tube video found by Googling "tithing Daddy Freeze." It was a 54 minute video by Linda Ikeji who admits to being a tither and asked hard questions. I was very impressed with the sincerity and Bible knowledge of Daddy Freeze. Although we disagree on several points, I am convinced that he is far more correct than he is wrong and recommend him to all.

Daddy Freeze appears to have been influenced by my book, website and videos either firsthand or (unknowingly) second hand. He refers to Nehemiah 10:38 and Malachi 2:1 and many other of my favorite text exactly as I do. Who cares? I am not in this for the money. I just want to see one major denomination accept the truth before I pass.

Daddy Freeze: Please correspond with me.

Monday, January 01, 2018


From Doctor Russell Earl Kelly Rebutted, Parts 1 and 2, By Anonymous on You Tube; By: Russell Earl Kelly, PHD

Anonymous has placed over 2 hours of video on You Tube rebutting my book on tithing. As always I encourage open public dialog with anybody concerning God's Word. I think this kind of personal attack is cowardly and wrong since it does not allow a proper discussion. Nevertheless I will hit the high points of his disagreement with me. Part 1 has been previously rebutted.

Chapter 29: He begins stating that chapters 28-31 are irrelevant. However chapter 29 is the Secular History of Tithing which demonstrates that the early church did not teach tithing as a church law until AD 777. Also, he uses chapter 28 later without reference.
Chapter 15 i. e. Luke 18:12; Anon criticizes by implying that I should cast out fasting along with tithing. First fasting is taught in the Post-Calvary church while tithing is not. Second, the Pharisee was going beyond the law which did not command fasting twice a week or tithing of everything.
Chapter 16; Acts 15: He admits that the Church is currently under "none" of the Law. This forces him to invent a post-Law biblical definition of the tithe (which he never does). He says James' list was only of things "we should not do" I say "Read Acts 15:19-20." It is a list of only those things that Gentile converts should do. Common sense must prevail. James was not entangling Gentile Christians in hundreds of laws which pertained only to Hebrews such as food tithing from inside Israel.
Chapter 17, New Covenant: Anon ignores the many top theologians I quoted who agree with me, including Martin Luther.  One of his two worst errors is failure to have a working hermeneutic (principle of interpretation) when transferring material from the Old to the New Covenant other than his own opinion. Only that which has been repeated from the OT after Calvary in terms of the New Covenant applies.
Chapter 18, the Law of Christ: Again Anon ignores the many top theologians who agree with me and attacks as if I stand alone. I would support a Christian who gives any percentage as a sacrificial faith response. Anon is the one who expects the poorest in the land to tithe a full ten percent and go without necessities. He uses "minimum sacrificial" giving as if the two words make sense being used together; "sacrificial" for one person is not necessarily "sacrificial" for another. Did Joseph and Jesus give 100% of their carpentry income before caring for their own household contrary to First Timothy 5:8?
Chapter 20; Law Ended: Yes, some things in the Law have been "carried over" --- BUT they have really been REPEATED after Calvary in terms of the New Covenant under grace. That is a consistent principle of interpretation. Anon has no consistent hermeneutic  other than his own opinion.
Chapter 21: Priesthood of Believers: After saying "I believe that the NT is clear that tithing is a means of support for gospel workers," Anon gives no detailed textual explanation. That is merely his opinion.
Chapter 24; 1 Tim 5; Double Honor: I urge readers to read the entire chapter very slowly.(1) Since "discipline" means "training people to obey rules" or "a code of behavior," I used the correct word for 5:1-20. (2) Anon completely ignores 5:19-20 in his rebuttal. (3) "Timee" is never translated "salary" in any un-paraphrased Bible. (4) While initially stating that my chapter 28 on Acts 20 is unimportant, he twists it here without encouraging its reading. (5) Paul would not follow his boasting about being self-supported with a command that gospel workers be paid double salary. (6) Anon's conclusion that Paul's full time support of his co-workers is a "deeply doctrinal policy" which proves that gospel workers should all be full time is ridiculous.
Chapter 25, Miscellaneous: Anon incorrectly connects Romans 12:1 to tithing. With the possible exception of Hebrews 7, Paul's writings do not contain the word "tithe."
Chapter 23, 1 Cor 16: Since this contains no reference to tithing, Anon defeats his own argument by saying that the principles here for helping the poor should be the same principles used for the support of gospel workers.  I agree.
Chapter 26: Anon does not point out that this is a verbatim chapter written by L. S. Chafer and John Walvoord of Dallas Theological Seminary.
Chapter 27: Although Anon quite often refers to Matthew 22:19-22 as his strongest argument for the tithe, he never explains what Jesus meant by "the things that are God's." Never does Anon define the word "tithe" using the 16 biblical verses of the HOLY tithe as always only food from inside HOLY Israel. Yet Jesus specifically said that money with the "image and superscription" of secular authority does not qualify as holy to God. Anon does not explain what is left.
Chapter 14, Matt 23:23: After admitting that the church was under "none" of the Law (his comments on chapter 16, Acts 15), Anon's primary argument for New Covenant tithing is because JESUS TAUGHT IT!. My reply is that, Jesus taught total obedience to the Law before Calvary--- otherwise He would have sinned. Yet He never taught that tithes should be given to Himself or to His discip0les. Mt 23:23 is about tithing under the Law.
Chapter 22, 1 Cor 9: Anon says that I seem to discourage full time ministry. I say, "Read the chapter." I attend a church with a full-time minister and support it. I merely point out that the Bible neither teaches such nor confirms such. Perhaps in our modern age, it is the best way to avoid uneducated neophytes.
I am angered by Anon twisting my words and repeating his false conclusion three times: Read the book; it is free online! On page 186 of chapter 9 about First Corinthians 9:13-14 I state in BOLD print what the MINORITY POSITION is. Anon's "Dr. Kelly meet Dr. Kelly" is a joke which proves he only skimmed my book. Anon's 2nd argument for tithing is "The Lord has ordained it." This is his own personal interpretation of 1st Corinthians 9:14-15 which really says "Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. But I have used none of these things." The gospel principles of grace and faith do not include Law principles of stewardship.
Chapter 19 & 2, Hebrews 7 and Genesis 14: Anon misses the point that it was Melchizedek's "order" and not his "person" which set the foundation of Christ's high-priestly order. Anon does not even have the courtesy to learn how to pronounce"Mel-chi-se-dec" from either the Old or New Testament. While admitting that 7:18 ended Levitical tithing, he never explains how the Scripture teaches a completely different kind of tithing. He erroneously states that there were no king-priests in the Old Testament. He says that my description of Melchizedek as a pagan Canaanite king priests is "total nonsense" -- yet I got the idea from the Baptist Wycliffe Bible Commentary. He says that there is no basis for the pagan tithe from spoils of war yet the five commentaries I quote on pages 24-25 disagree. Also Hebrews 7:4 must not be in his Bible. Finally, Heb 7:8 is used by many to justify post-Calvary tithing. Yet 7:8 was written while the Temple still stood and while the Levites and priests were still receiving tithe; it must mean they did so as Jesus' representatives. Nevertheless 7:8 does not annul the close connection between 7:5, 12 and 18..
If "anonymous" wants to come out of his dark closet and enter public open dialog with me, I await him in the name of Jesus Christ.

Russell Earl Kelly, PHD