LindaR

Luke 20:45 (KJV) 45 Then in the audience of all the people he said unto his disciples,
In the audience of all the people, i.e.; in the hearing of all the people, Jesus spoke.  All who were there could hear His words, both the rich who cast in their gifts, and the widow who cast her entire living into the treasury receptacle were within range of His voice.
Luke 20:46 (KJV) 46 Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
Luke 20:47 (KJV) 47 Which devour widows' houses, and for a shew make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation.
The people in attendance heard the warning Jesus had just delivered to the disciples.  They were made aware that the scribes were thieves, preying on widows.  They were made aware that the scribes were a condemned lot.
Luke 21:1 (KJV) 1 And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury.
There is no great time frame indicated between the delivery of His warning and His looking up and seeing the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury.  He spoke, He sat down, (Mark 12:41) He looked up.
Luke 21:2 (KJV) 2 And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites.
Here was a widow who had just heard Jesus' warning that scribes were robbing widows house.  And yet, she chose to ignore Jesus' warning.  She rejected the words of the One who would soon put an end to all sacrifice for sin.  She instead gave her last two coins into the very treasury of the men that Jesus was warning of just moments earlier.
Sounds cultic, to some degree.  Cult followers will ignore any warnings from outsiders who are trying to rescue them from danger. This widow chose to continue to give to the corrupt system despite the fact that she heard that widows were being robbed by that system.
Luke 21:3 (KJV) 3 And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all:
Luke 21:4 (KJV) 4 For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had.
According to Mark 12:43, Jesus spoke this to His disciples.  Did the rest of those in the Temple hear these words as they had the warning?  We are not told.  The text in Mark states that Jesus called the disciples unto Himself, so it is possible that these words were spoken privately, i.e.; only the disciples hearing.
There is no commendation of the widow in the text at all.  It cannot be possible that Jesus Christ would first expose the corrupt religious system and its thieving staff, and then turn around and praise a widow who chose to reject Him and instead foolishly put all her living into the coffers of that corrupt system.
Seeing the seeming cultic behavior of the widow, (ignoring the warnings from outsiders)  I am once again reminded of a woe levied upon the scribes and Pharisees,...
Matthew 23:15 (KJV) 15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
The widow had been made a proselyte of the religious leaders.  She chose to ignore Jesus' warning.  The corrupt religious system had her fully brainwashed into believing she was giving into the offerings of God, when in reality, they were robbing her of all her living.

Out of curiosity, "Invicta",  I wonder what do you presume 2 Thessalonians 2:4 to mean? A "spiritual" temple?
2 Thes 2:4 "Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."
It clearly isn't referencing Antiochus IV (175-164 BC) as his lifespan was well before 2 Thessalonians was written.
 

I suppose if I ignored the surrounding verses and ripped the one verse out of context, added a motive and commendation to the text, I could arrive at thr same false teaching that you do.
 
However, I cannot.  I read the verse in the context of the whole account, thereby allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture.  I take into account the fact that God is against the abuse of the poor.  I take into account that the needs of the poor of Israel were to be met.  
 
So many today could care less that a poor widow was made destitute.  So long as their religious organization has the amenities they want, they could care less that another hasn't funds to survive.  Judas Iscariat's bag had to have money in it,... their's do also.

So, as you contend... the judgments of wrath listed throughout Revelation 6-18 aren't really wrath until Rev. 14? And then we are raptured (supposedly) in Rev. 14 go up to be with the Lord and yo-yo right back down to come back with the Lord? 
It's no wonder post-tribbers are "stocking up" on supplies... if they believe they are going to be going through the tribulation, they will have to contend with all of the following (from the book of Revelation):
1. Inflation so high it will take an entire days' wages just to eat (6:6)
2. 1/4 of the entire world population killed (6:8)
3. huge earthquake (6:12)
4. stars falling to earth (6:13)
THIS is just the beginning! There is plenty more wrath to come, we've only got to the 6th seal being opened at this point and already mankind is hiding in dens and rocks of the mountains, begging the rocks and mountains to fall on them and hide them from the the face of God and to hide them from the wrath of the Lamb.(6:16)
Rev. 6:17 "For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"
(WHEW... I (personally) am thankful that Jesus has already delivered me from the wrath to come (1 Thes. 1:10)
Now onward we go into more wrath:
5. wind is kept from blowing on earth (7:1)
6. silence up in heaven for about 1/2 hour (8:1)... this one is very creepy to me, whatever is coming must be downright horrible if all of heaven is silent!
    Here come the trumpet judgments:
7. thunderings, lightnings, and another earthquake (8:5)
    note: I doubt the earthquakes referenced in Revelation will be anything like the ones we've seen in our days on earth. I think they are going to be mega-quakes that effect the entire world. We are told the tribulation will be a time far worse than anything we've ever seen before.
8. hail mingled with blood! (8:7)
9. 1/3 of all the trees are burned up (8:7)
10. 1/3 of all the green grass burned up (8:7)
11. something resembling a mountain burning with fire is cast into the sea (8:8)
12. 1/3 of the sea becomes blood (8:8)
13. 1/3 of all sea creatures die and 1/3 of ship destroyed (8:9)
14. a great burning star falls from heaven (8:10)
15. 1/3 of the rivers and 1/3 of fresh water made poisonous (8:10)
16. Many people die because of the poisonous water (8:11)
17. 1/3 part of the sun smitten (8:12)
18. 1/3 part of moon smitten also (8:12)
19. 1/3 part of stars darkened (8:12)
    Note: I kind of doubt mankind's "climate change" laws are going to help out in this situation.
    Can you even imagine... ask a meteorologist what kind of effects this would bring to the world...
    They've got one thing right... climate change is coming! But they won't be able to stop the wrath of God upon this earth!
20. WOE, WOE, WOE is pronounced by an angel upon the inhabiters of the earth because there are 3 more trumpets yet to sound! (8:12)
21. The bottomless pit is opened (9:2)
22. Locust beings with scorpion stinging qualities torment mankind for 5 months (9:3-5)
23. Mankind will be in such horrible agony that they will "desire to die, and death shall flee from them" (9:6)(WOE #1)
24. 1/3 more of mankind is slain by the 4 angels and by fire/smoke/brimstone (9:14-20)
25. Something so awful happens that John isn't even allowed to write down what the 7 thinders uttered. (10:1-4)
26. The 2 witnesses will be killed, lie in the street 3.5 days, the whole world will see this and actually rejoice over their dead bodies and sent gifts to each other. (11:3-10)
27. The 2 witnesses are resurrected, and RAPTURED up into heaven (11:11-12)
28. Lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail" (11:19)
29. The devil himself is cast to earth, along with his demonic angels (12:7-9)
30. The antichrist, the false prophet,and the image of the beast are in full swing. Chopping off heads, making mankind take the mark of the beast. (rev 13)
I'm sure I left out a several things... but anyways... none of this is WRATH???????
Alrighty then, looks like a whole lot of wrath to me. 
This ALL happens before the Lord comes to stand on Zion and it all happens PRIOR to the sickle harvest. 
The whole period prior to that is filled with judgment and wrath. 
Rapture
"The big one" is in 1 cor 15, as well as Thes 4:
However, I do not see the "big one" in Rev 14:14... I do not see a rapture there at all... that would be adding to scripture. It does not state that the Lord gives them glorified bodies there at all in Rev 14:14
Zech 14:4 we read that Jesus comes to earth physically:
4 "And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south."
We read that those who have fought against Jerusalem will suffer a terrible fate:
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
It states "ALL" of the people who have fought against Jerusalem will suffer that fate.
when we get down to verse 16 we see that it is those who did NOT fight against Jerusalem (which would be those saved during the tribulation---- NOT those who came against Jerusalem during the tribulation, as they are the unsaved ones who have already been consumed in verse 12)
So who would that include? ALL of those saved during that period, (the 70th week of Daniel), those people alive and in human bodies would because ALL of the sinners/those who had not accepted Christ were already consumed in verse 12.
16 "And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. 
Those are the ones left alive at the end of the tribulation in human bodies (not glorified bodies as we/saved/previously raptured will already have). The ones who came against Jerusalem in the tribulation will already have been consumed (as Zech 14:12 shows), and they will not be entering into the millennial kingdom. 
So back to "wrath" ... even though it's not obvious to you that the wrath is clearly presented throughout Revelation in the 30 examples I gave above (and I'm sure there are MORE than 30, but if 30 isn't enough wrath to prove wrath... what would be?) there is no doubt in my mind that those events ARE wrath. Which makes me even the more thankful that I am not appointed to wrath.
Thank you for describing your position.  I'll attempt to leave it there. You hold your position and I hold my position. As clearly, they are 2 opposing positions. 

Context reveals it.
 
Jesus had finished his scathing rebuke of rhe scribes and Pharisees.  He had ended with a warning to beware of the scribes.
 
why?  Because the were not the pious people they pretended to be.  Instead, they were thieves.
 
now, Jesus ended all that, nd then sat down to watch the treasury.  Why?  This was not His normal practice.  Normally, after ripping the religious leaders for their dishonesty, He would leave the Temple.
 
but this time it was different.  He knew the widow would be coming in.  It was a perfect demonstration of the thievery He had just spoken of.  The widow's living was forcibly appropriated by the thieves.

It is easily seen IMO that the widow was being manipulated into giving and this manipulation came from thieves posing as God's men. The overall context does indicate it because it is consistent throughout the Gospels that our Lord was in full rebuke of all formalized religious practices fueled by man's greed. The "priests" of that day had the same iron handed rule over the hearts of the deceived just as the present day roman pagan "priests" do now.
The same goes for any teaching of tithing for Christians. Tithing is wrongful manipulation of people and goes against everything our Lord told us He wants from us as born again believers.
Now please don't go confusing this exposure of wrongful manipulation into meaning we should not give all to Jesus. But Jesus told us clearly who to give to and nowhere did He intimate to give blindly to church "finance committees". We are to give to each other in the church (certainly including the elders who labor in the Word and doctrine-who are to live of the Gospel) and to the lost poor as we witness. Never to give grudgingly and of necessity through manipulation.
I know everyone here has been exposed to this type of "finance committee" or "deacon board" or "treasurer" (you know whomever handles the money). People are manipulated into tithing and then not making bills or living without basic necessities only to find out later that this "tithe-tax": went to pay for a vacation for the church staff. "Because they have been so faithful". Well, guess what: they have their reward.
Is that what it is all about in full time ministry, I am talking IFBs? Really folks, I don't think so.
 

People put into the offerings of God all the time every Sunday.  Yet, it has been proven time and again that many do so out of manipulation and coercion.  Given the fact that this account is in the context of widows being robbed, I have no doubt that this widow was manipulated into giving into the offerings of God.  
 
Again, the account makes no sense in the place the author placed it if she wasn't being robbed.
 
Makes no sense that Jesus would be commending the widow for bringing an offering into the place He had just said was now a "den of thieves".

Did you not read what I prefaced my post with?  I do NOT listen to John MacArthur.  This was the very first time I ever listened to him.
no, I don't denounce all real Baptist's on this forum.  There are real Baptist's on this forum who also see that the widow was being robbed.  They also don't bow to the monetary tithe requirement lie. I haven't denounced them. 
The monetary tithe requirement doctrine may be popular, but then again, most false doctrines are popular.
Again, reference the word "Independent".  Just because I reject your doctrine that Jesus was commending that widow does not mean I am not IFB.
No, I am not in error.  It is you who is in error.
 
 

You believe in a post-trib rapture and you represent (as a moderator) the Independent Fundamental Baptist group? And you use 2 Tim 4 as your signature? I'd say I am surprised at the irony... but since I also feel confident these are the last days and apostasy is in full swing... I am not really surprised at all.  FUNDAMENTAL? (Catholics believe in the post-trib theory... I guess they are "fundamental Catholics"?  
If you (personally)believe you can make it through to the end of the time of Jacob's trouble...and don't believe that Jesus has delivered us from the wrath to come... that's your prerogative.  Personally, I believe I will wait for Jesus who has already promised He has delivered me from the wrath to come. 1 Thes 1:10 "And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come". 
I also feel very confident in the words of a blessed hope meaning just that... blessed and hopeful! You state your post-trib position is  what you " believe the Bible best shows this to be the case" and you asked me to extrapolate... so I will. 
Titus 2:13 "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" 
There is nothing blessed or hopeful about the day of the Lord. 
Things that are different are not the same (as the old kindergarten song goes):
Amos 5:18 "18 Woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord! to what end is it for you? the day of the Lord is darkness, and not light"
What is hopeful or blessed about that?
Contrast #1: The rapture is something to look forward to a blessing, a comforting thought.
    v/s The 2nd coming is a day of WOE, a day of darkness.
1 Thes 4:16 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:"
 17 "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
 18 "Wherefore comfort one another with these words."
v/s 
Isaiah 13:9 "Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger..."
Contrast #2: Once again, the Lord promises words of comfort concerning the rapture.
    v/s The 2nd coming: The day of the Lord is cruel, with wrath and with fierce anger.
Revelation 19:14 "And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean."
Contrast #3: In the rapture, we see the church (saved during age of grace) going UP with Jesus (clearly depicted in 1 Thes 4:16-18, above)
    At the 2nd coming the church (saved during age of grace) will be returning with Jesus as depicted in Rev. 19:14
1 Thes 5:9 "For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,"
 10 "Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him."
 11 "Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do."
v/s the previous verse:
1 Thes 5:3 "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape."
Contrast #4: the difference between the YE/US and the THEY/THEM.  
WE are not appointed to wrath...we are given the instruction (yet again) of comfort (the saved during church age)
 v/s THEY will suffer sudden destruction. (those in the tribulation)
1 Thes 4:17 "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." 
v/s
Zech 14:4 "And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south."
Contrast #5: Those who mock the pre-trib rapture like to call it our "secret rapture", as if somehow a derogatory term.
What did Paul have to say about it? He called it a MYSTERY. In the rapture, we will meet the Lord in the air. 
v/s During the 2nd coming Jesus feet will stand upon the mount of Olives (splitting it in half) on the earth. 
1 Cor. 15:51 "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,"
 52 "In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."
 53 "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."
v/s 
Isaiah 65:20 "There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed."
 21 "And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them."
Contrast #6: Rapture: In the same split-second of time (the twinkling of an eye) believer's will be given glorified bodies.
v/s 2nd coming: At the end of the tribulation, at the 2nd coming of Christ, those who accepted Christ (during the tribulation) and lived to the end will remain in human bodies to enter into the millennial kingdom. They will repopulate the earth.
John 14:3 "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also."
v/s
1 Thes 3:13 "To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints."
Contrast #7, in the rapture: Christ comes for His own
V/s in the 2nd coming: Christ comes with His own

2 Thes 2:1 "Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him"
v/s
Jude 1:14 "14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints"
Contrast #8 Rapture- we are gathered unto Christ
v/s 2nd coming: - we come back with Christ
1 Thes 4:17 "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
v/s
Rev 19:7 "Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready."
 8 "And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints."
-14 "And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean."
Contrast #9 Rapture- Christ claims His bride
v/s 2nd coming- Christ brings His bride with Him
contrast #10 Throughout scripture, during the age of grace, the church is told that the rapture could happen at any minute.. to be waiting for the Lord. It is imminent.
v/s The tribulation period is to last a total of 7 years. Knowing the time frame given throughout both Daniel and Revelation, the rapture could not be imminent if it were to come at the end of the tribulation.
 
Those are some of the biblical reason why I (personally) believe the Bible best shows the pre-trib rapture to be the case.  I also wonder why the church isn't mentioned even one time throughout all of the passages dealing with the tribulational-wrath period? In chapters 6-18 of Revelation, dealing with the judgments upon earth... why isn't there even one mention of the church being there on earth also?
I find it very  unusual in light of the prominence of the Church in the chapters dealing with events prior to and after the Tribulation....
It's odd (to me) that those who poke fun at the mystery of the rapture (when Paul himself called it a mystery), can't explain this mysterious circumstance in Revelation. Maybe you can extrapolate on that mystery for me?

Kent Hovind believes in a post-trib rapture, and learned his new "theory" in jail (admittedly). What a fine "godly" example??? He also now claims (now --- meaning after his "spiritual enlightenment" in jail) that the Jewish people in Israel aren't really even "Jews".  Very interesting turn about this "godly" man has made. I'm not surprised with apostasy running rampant... ALL over the place...

Not since 1988.  LoL
 
However, there are thousands upon thousands who do get 'ripped off' by their pastors each year.  
 
The sad thing is, so many because of not knowing what God's Word says about His holy tithe, gladly accept the request for the counterfeit tithe that is preached to them.

I listened to a sermon this morning from James Scudder called "Giving isn't what you think it is". I thought, "Hmmm...maybe this will be worth listening to." It was actually a video of their church service from Nov. 15...and it started off bad...with them reminding and encouraging people to fill out their "Firstfruits Cards". The singing and music was wonderful. Then the sermon was about tithing. Not sure how the title fit in with the sermon...
 

Pastors have no right to put guilt trips on snyone for not tithing.
It is not a matter of semantics at all.  It is a matter of adhering to what the Word of God says concerning God's holy tithe.
Just as calling a bicycle a Harley Davidson doesn't make it a Harley Davidson, so also, telling people that God's holy tithe is monetary doesn't make it so.
God defined in His Word what His holy tithe was to consist of, who was required to tithe, where the tithe was to be observed, when the tithe was to be observed, and to whom the tithe was to be given.  The last place it is mentioned in the Bible, it is still to be given to the sons of Levi, and is still to be agricultural.  .  Preachers have no right to teach others that it is something other than what God said it was to be, who was required to tithe, where they were to tithe, when they were to tithe, and to whom they were to tithe to.
The monetary tithe requirement doctrine is totally foreign to the Word of God.
Then Peter and the other Apostles answered and said, "We ought to obey God rather than men." Acts 5:29
 
 
 

Because: 
"Thou shalt not steal"
"Thou shalt not commit adultery"
"Thou shalt not kill"
"Thou shalt not covet" 
"Honor thy father and thy mother"...(read respect your elders in pagan cultures here)
etc....
Imply a Universally understood moral requirement above and not subject to the whims and preferences of man.....
It says in no uncertain terms that there is a non-subjective and non-negotiable set of standards to which men must adhere, and men's laws are designed to reflect that non-negotiable standard.  It implies transcendent moral axioms which are non-negotiable.
 Also, it's the founding socio-religious moral exemplar which informed all of Western thought and shaped Western Civilization for the last 1,000 years.  It creates precedent.
That's why.

I guess the big conundrum is how on earth do men allegedly called of God to Pastor, who claim to be worthy of their hire because they labor in the Word and Doctrine, who claim to be worthy of double honor, don't understand this rudimentary difference. It is so obvious in Scripture that a babe could see it.
Makes me wonder sometimes just who are these pastors, really? Are they what they claim to be? Do they really want you mediating in God's Word day and night? I don't think so......I wonder if they prefer the tares over the real thing? The tares will never question unScriptural claims or practices (IMO a tare is a religious lost person who looks, acts and talks like a born again believer but worries over their pastor's and other members opinion of them more than God's) What God thinks rarely if ever enters their mind and our IFBs are full of them. You know the types, they surround you in services. They will do no work, nor speak of God nor pray unless someone down here is looking. It is about what people see them do or say but their hearts are empty sepulchers and when no one is looking all that enters their minds are the trappings and entertainments of the world.
No, I am not referring to babes in Christ. They should and will seek the guidance, correction and approval of those discipling them. BUT there always comes a reasonable time (if they are real) when they are eating the meat of the Word and they no longer care what you think of them; they are all about what God thinks from that point on and they will correct others if they display Scriptural retardation.
Any pastor who reads this thread and gets mad instead of getting convicted is suspect IMO.
I think fraud like this is only the tip of the iceberg still in some IFB circles. I used to think satan destroyed those huge IFB churches in the recent past but I wonder sometimes if it was God who destroyed them because they were LOADED down with tares worshipping the creature rather than the Creator who is God Blessed Forever.

I don't know your situation completely, nor am I asking you to elaborate on it further. What I do know is that I can somewhat understand. You see, I've been through some pretty hard times myself...begging God to heal, take away, or if nothing else...to please take my children's health problems and give them to me instead. He never gave me what I asked and begged for. Though I never turned from God, I did go through some deep valleys.
We all do.
Remember how Elijah had that tremendous victory over the prophets of Baal? The next thing he did was run and hide because he was afraid of Jezebel...wishing he were dead. He went from an incredible victory to being incredibly defeated...but he kept going.
What got me through was this simple (but deep) truth...God loves me. Despite my circumstances, he loves me so much that he sacrificed his only begotten Son for me. Nothing...NOTHING can begin to compare to that. I may not understand why he allows things to happen, but he does...and he knows what is best.
When I survey the wondrous cross,
On which the Prince of glory died.
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.
 
 
 
 

 
The Relationship of the Christian to the Law and Grace
Before the Mosaic Law was instituted at Mt. Sinai, there were people who lived righteous lives in conformity to God's moral absolutes.
Abel - Hebrews 11:4
Enoch -  Genesis 5:22, 24; Hebrews 11:5
Noah - Genesis 6:9; Ezekiel 14:14, 20
Job - Job 1:8; 2:3; Ezekiel 14:14, 20
The fact that some people lived righteous lives in conformity to God's moral absolutes before the Mosaic Law was instituted indicates two things:
People can be related to the eternal, unchangeable, moral absolutes of God without being under the moral aspect of the Mosaic Law; and it is possible to be free from the moral aspect of the Mosaic Law without being lawless.
Prior to Mount Sinai, God administered His moral absolutes over all mankind in ways other than through the Mosaic Law.  From Mount Sinai to the cross of Jesus Christ, He administered His moral absolutes over Israel through the Mosaic Law.  Since the time of the cross, God has been administering His eternal absolutes over all of mankind in a way which is different from and superior to the Mosaic Law.  The moral absolutes have not changed, but the way of God's  administering those absolutes has changed.  For example, idolatry and adultery have been just as wrong in God's sight since the time of the cross as they were when the Mosaic Law was in effect, but since the cross, God has not required the death penalty for those sins (1 Corinthians 6:9-11) as He did when the Mosaic Law was in effect (Exodus 22:20; Leviticus 20:10).  The new, superior way of God's administering His moral absolutes is called grace.
Freedom from the moral aspect of the Mosaic Law does not involve freedom from the eternal, unchangeable moral absolutes of God.  It only involves freedom from one way of God's administering His absolutes--namely through the Mosaic Law.  If one is under God's grace, in administering His eternal, unchangeable, moral absolutes, one will not be lawless.
Although the Mosaic Law had three aspects (civil, ceremonial, and moral), it functioned as an indivisible unit.  Thus, to place oneself under one aspect of the Mosaic Law is to obligate oneself to be under the entire Law.  James declared "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10).  James was asserting that the breaking of only one part of the Mosaic Law made a person guilty of breaking the entire Law.  The only way this could be true was if the Mosaic Law were an indivisible unit.
The fact that the Mosaic Law was indivisible by nature has a strong implication concerning the relationship of the Christian to the Mosaic Law.  The implication is that since the Mosaic Law as indivisible by nature, the Christian who places himself under its moral aspect obligates himself to keep every aspect of the Law (the civil, ceremonial and moral). (Galatians 3:10) 
Source: There Really Is A Difference: A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology by Renald E. Showers (excerpts from chapter 16, The Relationship of the Christian to Law and Grace, pg. 187-190)

One of the most erudite descriptions explanations and examples of salient posting I've seen on the topic in my life. Everyone should read this.
You pointed out where the conversation, I think, usually goes off-track:
I think the big problem comes when pastors refer to the giving AS 'tithing',
I couldn't agreemore.  We have to divorce ourselves from the notion that "giving" and "tithing" are remotely related.  They really aren't.  We can't use those terms synonymously.  I've never "Given" anything to the IRS......A Jew never "gave" to God's work when he tithed.
Alan (for instance) means quite well, but the issue I see is that he's focusing on the Spirit and generosity and indeed Godly intent of New Testament giving and he's conflating it with passages about tithing.  Saying such phrases as that Abraham "tithed from grace"   etc....
While no disrespect is intended.........that's not what real tithing has ever been.
Tithing is, and always was, compulsory, and God could have cared less whether it was done in the right Spirit or the wrong one.  The Tithe was the tribe of Levi's due inheritance.  One is to "render" the tithe (whether from a right Spirit or not) but the New Testament Christian "GIVES"; lovingly, freely, with joy, and not under compulsion.
Simply put, if a Christian gives it must or at least should be from the right Spirit.......when a Jew tithed.....it was a tax and one's personal feelings were irrelevant.  Giving and tithing are entirely different.  Only by conflating the terms does the confusion set in. Once one ceases using those terms interchangeably......... the issue is MUCH MUCH clearer.  
Confucius had a point when he said:   “The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.”
 
 
 

I'd have to say it is YOUR interpretation that is both ludicrous and private.
 
The Biblical text reveals Abram promised God that he would not claim any of the spoils as his own.  Yet, your interpretation leaves the Biblical text and makes him to be a liar, keeping spoils as his own property.  The Biblical text reveals that it was spoils that Abram gave to Melchizedek.  Yet, your interpretation leaves the Biblical text and espouses the theory that Abram tithed items other than war spoils as well. 
 
No, I never said, nor did I infer, that Abram was a thief or a hypocrite.  You are trying to manipulate my words just as you are manipulating the Biblical text.  
 
It isn't mentioned that Abram tithed his own property, yet you are putting your opinion above the veracity of Scripture.  Historical facts of the customs do not take away from the Biblical account, nor do they add to the account.  They explain what was happening in history at that time.  Pastors use history quite often to show background surrounding a Biblical event.  Nothing wrong with it at all.
 
 

We all have choices to make while we are yet on this earth... choose the light of salvation that is in the Lord Jesus, or choose darkness which leads to eternal damnation.  
John 12:46 "I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness."
Acts 26:18 "To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me."
1 John 1:5 "This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all."
 
The Lord draws us to Him to bring us into the light of His salvation.  The world would pull us back into darkness if we succumb to it's pull.  There is only one reason we would willfully choose to go back to the darkness after having been shown the light of the gospel of salvation in Jesus.... that reason would be sin.  Too many expect to come to Jesus only in the thought that He can be "used" to give them worldly desires... Jesus cannot be used as a "fairy godmother".  No, He will show you the light of the truth... that we are all sinners.  What we then do is either accept His gift of salvation from our sins (as there is NO other way but by Jesus), or we deny Him and make a CHOICE to continue sinning, without salvation.  Choose Jesus, and choose eternal life.  Deny Jesus and choose eternal damnation. 
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
17 "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."
18 "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."  John 3:19 "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."  
 
The choice is yours.  I will be praying for you, that the Lord will open your eyes to the right choice...

Not misunderstanding you at all.  You said, 
I posted the correct Biblical definition of the word "tithe."
You further said
 
to which I explained that tithing should not be in the Church.  
Monetary tithing was not taught by the Apostles.  Nor was it taught by the Christian churches until late-nineteenth century.  In 1932, monetary tithing was still not taught in the Middle Tennessee Baptist denomination.  That year, John Harvey Grime, a MTB minister, said of monetary tithing, "Should a Baptist Church ever start teaching it, they will cease being Baptist."
Abram did tithe before the Law.  But that does not mean we should tithe today.  Abraham also married his sister.  Should we marry our sister too?  Abram also had a child by another woman while married to his sister.  Abram also gave his wife to another man,  do we imitate all these too?  After all, they all took place before the Law, did they not?
 
There are bills associated with the meeting place of any religious organization, no doubt.  However, that does not mean people have to tithe in order to meet those needs.  The first church had needs.  Yet, not once is it recorded in God's Word that the  Body of Believers had to tithe to meet those needs.  Instead, people gave what they purposed to give.  And the needs were met.
There is nothing wrong with a person giving 10% of their money if they choose to do that without being manipulated by deceitful sermons that guilt them, belittle them, or scare them into giving that ten percent.  However, it has been my experience over the last half century, that guilt, intimidation,  and fear play a major role in why people do give 10% of their money to the church.  Guilt, intimidation and fear instilled through preachers abusing Malachi 3:8-10 and other passages in our precious Bible.
 
One example of manipulation is when Robert Morris told his congregation that if they don't tithe, they open the door for demons to enter their life.  Who wants to open doors for demons, right?  Better get out that checkbook.  Another example is When Perry stone used intimidation by telling members of his congregation that if they didn't tithe they were stupid and thieves.
Earlier, I put up a meme of a bulletin board with the names of many leaders who use guilt and fear to coerce people into giving ten percent of their money to the Church they pastor.  I could name many more that use the same types of manipulation.
 
Abram's tithe was not from his own personal property.  Nor was it from his own household income.  

 
Sorry for the weird formatting... I'm on a phone.
Leviticus 27:30-34
30  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: it is holy unto the LORD.
 31  And if a man will at all redeem ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof.
 32  And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD.
 33  He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed.
 34  These are the commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai.

The Biblical definition is "a tenth; a tenth part".  
 
Tithing should not be in the Christian Church.  God did not think tithing was necessary, else he would have told us so in the Word.  And if God did not think it necessary to practice monetary tithing, who are we to say it should be practiced?

 
The Relationship of the Christian to the Law and Grace
Before the Mosaic Law was instituted at Mt. Sinai, there were people who lived righteous lives in conformity to God's moral absolutes.
Abel - Hebrews 11:4
Enoch -  Genesis 5:22, 24; Hebrews 11:5
Noah - Genesis 6:9; Ezekiel 14:14, 20
Job - Job 1:8; 2:3; Ezekiel 14:14, 20
The fact that some people lived righteous lives in conformity to God's moral absolutes before the Mosaic Law was instituted indicates two things:
People can be related to the eternal, unchangeable, moral absolutes of God without being under the moral aspect of the Mosaic Law; and it is possible to be free from the moral aspect of the Mosaic Law without being lawless.
Prior to Mount Sinai, God administered His moral absolutes over all mankind in ways other than through the Mosaic Law.  From Mount Sinai to the cross of Jesus Christ, He administered His moral absolutes over Israel through the Mosaic Law.  Since the time of the cross, God has been administering His eternal absolutes over all of mankind in a way which is different from and superior to the Mosaic Law.  The moral absolutes have not changed, but the way of God's  administering those absolutes has changed.  For example, idolatry and adultery have been just as wrong in God's sight since the time of the cross as they were when the Mosaic Law was in effect, but since the cross, God has not required the death penalty for those sins (1 Corinthians 6:9-11) as He did when the Mosaic Law was in effect (Exodus 22:20; Leviticus 20:10).  The new, superior way of God's administering His moral absolutes is called grace.
Freedom from the moral aspect of the Mosaic Law does not involve freedom from the eternal, unchangeable moral absolutes of God.  It only involves freedom from one way of God's administering His absolutes--namely through the Mosaic Law.  If one is under God's grace, in administering His eternal, unchangeable, moral absolutes, one will not be lawless.
Although the Mosaic Law had three aspects (civil, ceremonial, and moral), it functioned as an indivisible unit.  Thus, to place oneself under one aspect of the Mosaic Law is to obligate oneself to be under the entire Law.  James declared "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10).  James was asserting that the breaking of only one part of the Mosaic Law made a person guilty of breaking the entire Law.  The only way this could be true was if the Mosaic Law were an indivisible unit.
The fact that the Mosaic Law was indivisible by nature has a strong implication concerning the relationship of the Christian to the Mosaic Law.  The implication is that since the Mosaic Law as indivisible by nature, the Christian who places himself under its moral aspect obligates himself to keep every aspect of the Law (the civil, ceremonial and moral). (Galatians 3:10) 
Source: There Really Is A Difference: A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology by Renald E. Showers (excerpts from chapter 16, The Relationship of the Christian to Law and Grace, pg. 187-190)

The animal tithe was not 10%, it was every 10th animal which passed under the rod:
Leviticus 27:32 And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD.
Leviticus 27:33 He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed.
Animals could not be redeemed.