THE "SEVEN DISPENSATIONS" VIEWED IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Leviticus 25 is not meaning the Levites owned those suburbs, as in they bought the land. The land was provided to them and was not to be sold is all that means.
Please provide me the Scripture that states that cattle and crops were bartered. I find no evidence that such bartering was ever done in the Word of God.


When Jesus comes, if He requires a tithe of me, I will be sure to give it to Him. At current time, He obviously does not require a tithe or the Apostles would certainly have mentioned it in their epistles.

When He does come, He more than likely will have some harsh words for those pastors who oppressed their flocks by teaching them doctrines of men for the commandments of God.

1 Peter 5:1-4 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Standing Firm In Christ

[Standing Firm In Christ]

From tithing-russkelly.com/id12 :

The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, “The name of this mysterious person means either ‘king of righteousness,’ or ‘my king is righteousness,’ or ‘my king is Zedek.’ Zedek is the Hebrew word for ‘righteousness’ and also the name of a Canaanite deity. Melchizedek was the priest-king of Salem, which is the shortened form of ‘Urusalem,’ ‘city of peace,’ identified with Jerusalem. ‘Shalom’ is the Hebrew word for ‘peace’ and ‘Shalem’ probably was the Canaanite god of peace. This kindly priest-king, recognizing Abram’s nobility and worth, supplied refreshment and sustenance for the weary warrior and his men. These gifts were tokens of friendship and ­ hospitality.”[3]

The preceding quotation opened my eyes to do extensive research on the ignored Phoenician and Canaanite pantheon. Oddly, this statement comes from a commentary re-published for Southwestern Company (Southern Baptist) by Moody Press in 1968. The chapter on Genesis is written by Kyle M. Yates, Sr., Th. D., Ph. D., Professor of Old Testament, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, which is Southern Baptist. If, as Yates claims, Melchizedek worshiped the Canaanite gods, Zedek and Salem, then, logically, El Elyon must have also been a Canaanite god!

[2Tim215]

There is nothing wrong with using the 10% tithe example for NT giving as a guideline for how much to give. Me, knowing MY bills, would rather give 10% than what the NT teaches we should - EVERYTHING. My trust is not quite there yet. But the bottom line is that all pastors are not required to be responsible for what the brethren give or don't give. A pastors responsibility is to teach the Word in truth so that the believer may grow in Christ and when the believer grows in Christ, founded on the Word that believer will give all out of love. Yet, again, the pastor is not responsible for the believers walk with Christ, the believer is and he will stand before Christ one day and give an account for everything.

Using the OT example of tithing is the same as using the OT Laws for how we should live and I agree totally with Steve's posts regarding this, 10% is not "required" in the NT, but it sure is a good starting point. There are many things in the OT that are not required of the believer in the NT, yet there is nothing wrong with teaching these things as examples to live by, lessons to be learned from, so why should the tithe be any different. No where did Steve say that the 10% tithe was compulsory that I could read, so why make a big deal about him teaching it as an OT example to live by? Just being argumentative maybe? Seeing a lot of that here these days.

[Steve Schwenke]

1. Have you ever considered that those commentaries are wrong? THe definitive commentary on Genesis 14 is Psalm 110 and Hebrews 7, which both confirm that Melchizedek was not some Baalite priest. Ditch the commentaries, and believe the Bible. Many Bible believers contend that Melchizedek was Shem, who certainly was a believer blessed by God. (Melchizedek is a title, not a name.)
2. You seem to want to have a gunfight over the specifics of the OT Tithe. That is not what this is all about. I have repeatedly stated that all we are looking at is THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE of the thing. God laid out his expectations in regards to giving in the OT for our learning and admonition. We should be able to "take a hint." Furthermore, the Levites were scattered throughout Israel to be teachers of the Law. So the tithe was tied into the OT form of worship, no matter how you want to slice and dice the Law.
3. You continue to ignore my other points about the APPLICATION of the OT Law in the NT church. I gave you several references - Rom. 13:7-9, Eph. 4:17ff, etc. So apparently, while we are not under the curse of the Law, and while the ceremonial aspects of the Law are done away, and the blood sacrifices are done away, the moral aspects of the Law are still in effect - stealing, murder, lying, idolatry, loving your neighbor, loving God, etc. This being the case, I see no reason why we cannot borrow the OT PRINICPLE of tithing as a general rule. Instead you want to debate the specifics of the OT tithe instead of accepting the general principle of it.
4. If everyone gave what was left over from the income at the end of the month, we would not have a church, because everyone could easily justify a use for every penny. That is why we give off the top.
5. I have written lenghthy posts here to demonstrate that I don't fit into that hyper-IFB mold of DEMANDING a tithe. I understand the differences between OT and NT, Law and Grace. It really is between the individual and the Lord - but there is a principle of giving that existed before the Law; the Law specifies what the tithe was for (again IN PRINCIPLE). And again, you have not addressed teh FACT that Paul appealed to the OT in reference to the support of the preacher.

It is NOT about greed. It IS about teaching the "whole counsel of God." Failure to teach this is harmful to the church and to the preacher.

Keep shooting away - I am moving on!

In Christ,

[irishman]

This thread certainly reveals much about the posters! (Readiing between the lines)

One must wonder what the Lord thinks of it!

[Steve Schwenke]

Well, there is no emotion on my part....just making my case. As I stated, I certainly sympathize with Standing Firm about his condition. So anything I post is not personal - just teaching it as I understand it.

In Christ,

[John81]

:ot: Since the "will a man rob God" thread has been revived, can we keep this thread for the original purpose?

Also, could anyone possibly answer my question in the Rapture thread with regards to Dr.Jeremiah and his teaching on pre-trib/pre-mil?

Thank you!!!

[Covenanter]

Surely Melchizedek is a preincarnation appearance of Jesus. See Hebrews,

[Standing Firm In Christ]

There is nothing wrong with using the 10% tithe example for NT giving as a guideline for how much to give. Me, knowing MY bills, would rather give 10% than what the NT teaches we should - EVERYTHING. My trust is not quite there yet. But the bottom line is that all pastors are not required to be responsible for what the brethren give or don't give. A pastors responsibility is to teach the Word in truth so that the believer may grow in Christ and when the believer grows in Christ, founded on the Word that believer will give all out of love. Yet, again, the pastor is not responsible for the believers walk with Christ, the believer is and he will stand before Christ one day and give an account for everything.

Using the OT example of tithing is the same as using the OT Laws for how we should live and I agree totally with Steve's posts regarding this, 10% is not "required" in the NT, but it sure is a good starting point. There are many things in the OT that are not required of the believer in the NT, yet there is nothing wrong with teaching these things as examples to live by, lessons to be learned from, so why should the tithe be any different. No where did Steve say that the 10% tithe was compulsory that I could read, so why make a big deal about him teaching it as an OT example to live by? Just being argumentative maybe? Seeing a lot of that here these days.

Sorry, 2Tim, but the New Testament does not tell us to give everything. It tells us to give what we purpose in our hearts to give.

As far as the "10% is a good place to start" theory, that's all it is is a theory. Not all Israelites were required to tithe, only farmers and herders. So, perhaps you can tell me, which Christians are required to tithe, and which are not? And again, where is the tithe ever changed to a monetary tithe in the Word of God?

The fact is, there is no such doctrine as a monetary tithe for the Christian found in the Word of God, none whatsoever.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Surely Melchizedek is a preincarnation appearance of Jesus. See Hebrews,

Surely, he isn't.

Melchizedek was an earthly king. You are suggesting that Christ ruled on the earth prior to the virgin birth, which is utterly ridiculous.

[Invicta]

1. I stand corrected on the "spoils of war." Thank you.
2. You stated this earlier:
To tell the New Testament Beleiver that he or she is required to tithe is to put them under a yoke of bondage that not even the Holy Spirit wants on them.

Acts 15:28-29 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

You are implying here that the Holy Spirit does not want us under ANY of the OT Law, period. I have demonstrated that this is false. We are set free from the ceremonial aspects of the Law. However, murder is still murder, stealing is still stealing, lying is still lying, covetousness is still covetousness. I gave you the verses earlier that state quite clearly that while we no longer suffer the penalties of the Law, that ALL of the MORAL aspects of the Law are in place. We no more have the "right" to be a sodomite because we are "not under the Law" than we do to stop tithing because it was "under the Law."
I also demonstrated that in the midst of Paul's dissertation on the support of the preacher, he used an example from the OT Law. Dave gave a very thorough response above about the APPLICATION of the OT Law.
So in my view, it is inconceivable that we would just toss all of the OT Teaching on tithing and giving because "it is under the law." Should we toss Leviticus 18 out too? Should we toss the 10 commandments out too? Can we start building idols now?
The obvious answer is NO, we should not. We simply recognize that these things define sin for us, and lay out God's expectations for us.
The principle is there.
You can dismiss Abraham all you want to, but Paul does not dismiss is so lightly in Hebrews 7. You are overlooking a very important principle when you do so.
What we do know from the NT:
1. It was the carnal Corinthians who choked over the giving issue - the ones who lived in freedom, wealth, and luxury. They didn't support Paul, but they DID support those who taught false doctrine
2. The poor saints at Macedonia gave freely out of their poverty to help Paul
3. Paul admonished the Corinthians to give SYSTEMATICALLY and METHODICALLY - I Cor. 16:2 - so that there would not be any last minute "love offerings" that amount to nothing. (Again, the RICH WEALTHY people get very stingy when it comes to giving to the Lord's work!)
4. Paul used OT EXAMPLES from the OT LAW to prove his case (I Cor. 9:9-10). So why people want to dismiss the OT teaching on tithing in light of this is beyond me.
5. Since tithing was practised prior to the Law and under the Law, and even mentioned by Jesus Christ, I fail to see why so many people want to choke on this matter. It is the regular Scriptural practice.
6. Just as Abraham is our example of faith (Romans 4) so Abraham is our example in giving (Hebrews 7).

Well, Bro Steve.

We had a pastor who preached on those lines, and I asked him afterwards, if that meant we should have salad on the Lord's Day, as he had quoted: Ex 35:3 Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day. "It wouldn't suit me!" he said.

Do you have your heating on on the sabbath? or your oven, or barbecue, or air conditioning? If you do, then I don't believe that you live according to your above post.

[Steve Schwenke]

Well, Bro Steve.

We had a pastor who preached on those lines, and I asked him afterwards, if that meant we should have salad on the Lord's Day, as he had quoted: Ex 35:3 Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day. "It wouldn't suit me!" he said.

Do you have your heating on on the sabbath? or your oven, or barbecue, or air conditioning? If you do, then I don't believe that you live according to your above post.

The Sabbath was a sign to the Jews:
Eze 20:19 I am the LORD your God; walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments, and do them;
Eze 20:20 And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the LORD your God.

It was not instituted until Exodus 16 (when God gave them Manna for bread), and it is included in Leviticus 23 with all of the other Feasts, Holy Days, and special Sabbaths.

1 Corinthians 1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

Therefore, it is part of the Ceremonial Law, not the moral law, and is done away with at the Cross.
Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

And Again, I really don't think you are following my line of reasoning. I am not saying that anyone is bound by the Law, and MUST give 10%. I do not advocate any preacher using the Pulpit to twist people's arms, and all kinds of absurd emotional manipulation tactics to wring as much $$$ as possible out of the congregation (i.e. "fleecing the flock.")
All I am saying is that there is a general principle established in giving - Abraham gave 10% of his spoils the the Priest of the Most High God; Israel gave 10% of their crops and herds to the Levites for their support, and every 3 years an additional 10% to the Temple. It went to support God's system in the OT, as Nehemiah 13 demonstrates (and which most people have a tendency to overlook!). It is a general principle. It is a good starting point. It is not a Law. No church should ever demand it, and should never have any "tithe police." It is Scriptural; it is for the support of the ministry; it is a good place to start. Personally, I believe that a Christian who loves the Lord should be able to do more than the OT Law required.

In Christ,

[Standing Firm In Christ]

So, if we are to use Abraham's tithe as a principle, then we are to

1. Tithe of the booty we obtain any time we go to war
2. Tithe to a king of a pagan land who has a Sodomite as his ambassador.
3. Give the remaining 90% of the booty to that Sodomite.

I'll put that on my to-do list.

[Covenanter]

Surely, he isn't.

Melchizedek was an earthly king. You are suggesting that Christ ruled on the earth prior to the virgin birth, which is utterly ridiculous.

Standing Firm in Christ:
So, if we are to use Abraham's tithe as a principle, then we are to

1. Tithe of the booty we obtain any time we go to war
2. Tithe to a king of a pagan land who has a Sodomite as his ambassador.
3. Give the remaining 90% of the booty to that Sodomite.

I'll put that on my to-do list.

Hebrews says:

7:

1

For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

2

To whom also Abraham gave a te

nt

h part of all; first being by i

nt

erpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

3

Without father, without m

ot

her, without desce

nt

, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like u

nt

o the Son of God; abideth a priest co

nt

inually.

.....

7

And without all co

nt

radiction the less is blessed of the better.

8

And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

.....

15

And it is yet far more evide

nt

: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth an

ot

her priest,

16

Who is made, n

ot

after the law of a carnal commandme

nt

, but after the power of an endless life.

17

For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Yes, Christ is the King of kings & Lord of lords from the beginning. No earthly monarch could bless Abraham - he had won the victory over the most powerful nations on earth at that time. He rendered 10% of the spoils to the one who had given him victory:

Gen. 14:

18

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

19

And he blessed him, and said,

Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

20

And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies i

nt

o thy hand.

And he gave him tithes of all.

21

And the king of Sodom said u

nt

o Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.

22

And Abram said to the king of Sodom,

I have lift up mine hand u

nt

o the LORD, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

23

That I will n

ot

take from a thread even to a shoelatchet, and that I will n

ot

take any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich:

It is blasphemy against our Lord Jesus Christ to assert that the one who blessed Abraham was: "king of a pagan land who has a Sodomite as his ambassador." What did Jesus say?

John 8:

56

Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

57

Then said the Jews u

nt

o him, Thou art n

ot

yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

58

Jesus said u

nt

o them, Verily, verily, I say u

nt

o you, Before Abraham was, I am.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Hebrews says:

7:

1

For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

2

To whom also Abraham gave a te

nt

h part of all; first being by i

nt

erpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

3

Without father, without m

ot

her, without desce

nt

, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like u

nt

o the Son of God; abideth a priest co

nt

inually.

.....

7

And without all co

nt

radiction the less is blessed of the better.

8

And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.

.....

15

And it is yet far more evide

nt

: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth an

ot

her priest,

16

Who is made, n

ot

after the law of a carnal commandme

nt

, but after the power of an endless life.

17

For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Yes, Christ is the King of kings & Lord of lords from the beginning. No earthly monarch could bless Abraham - he had won the victory over the most powerful nations on earth at that time. He rendered 10% of the spoils to the one who had given him victory:

Gen. 14:

18

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

19

And he blessed him, and said,

Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

20

And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies i

nt

o thy hand.

And he gave him tithes of all.

21

And the king of Sodom said u

nt

o Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.

22

And Abram said to the king of Sodom,

I have lift up mine hand u

nt

o the LORD, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,

23

That I will n

ot

take from a thread even to a shoelatchet, and that I will n

ot

take any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich:

It is blasphemy against our Lord Jesus Christ to assert that the one who blessed Abraham was: "king of a pagan land who has a Sodomite as his ambassador." What did Jesus say?

John 8:

56

Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

57

Then said the Jews u

nt

o him, Thou art n

ot

yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

58

Jesus said u

nt

o them, Verily, verily, I say u

nt

o you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Not blaspheming Christ at all. Melchizedek was not Christ. Christ.did not rule on this earth as a king prior to His birth in Bethlehem.

Melchizedek was indeed a king over a pagan land that Abraham was traveling through on his way home from rescuing Lot from his captors.

And the king of Sodom went before him... he was Melchizedek's ambassador.

It is inconceivable that Melchizedek could be the Son of God reigning on the earth prior to His virgin birth.

It is also inconceivable that God would allow His priest (Abram) to give to the pagan king of Sodom 90% and only take 10% for Himself.

No, melchizedek was not Christ, he was an established king over a pagan land. Edited March 7, 2012 by Standing Firm In Christ