mkrishna

I'm not trying to stir up anything Jim, and unless I misunderstand what you're saying...but that's not a true statement regarding SFIC. He does believe in giving to the work of the Lord...

Alan,  I can't believe you said this to "standing firm"... I have seen others post things which contradict the bible and are clearly not IFB teaching. We even have mods who believe in post-trib and other non-IFB stances here!!! I've seen Calvinist, replacement theology, and preterism on this site as commonplace discussion (sadly). 
BUT this topic of tithing is not one of those places where I believe it's "off-limits" to discuss.  "Standing firm" has given OT verses to support his stance.  It's obvious there are many of us here divided over this very subject of tithing. I believe many have brought forth their own study findings supported with verses and reasons which are contrary to yours, and I believe many have brought forth verses and reasons which agree with yours. I think both sides have made valid points (from their own interpretation and understanding of scripture).  And I don't think it was kind or Christian-like to tell "Standing Firm" that his teaching is "repugnant".  Others may feel the same about your stance, yet we all have come here to discuss bible topics such as these.  There ARE Independent Fundamental Baptist pastors who do actually preach against tithing. One of them is Dr. David Peacock from Jacksonville, Florida.  I've heard many of his sermons on sermonaudio.com and he also brings forth the same verses "Standing Firm" has.  He's not the only IFB pastor who has been teaching this. My uncle was also an IFB pastor all of his adult life (from age of mid-20's to late 70's when he went on to be with the Lord). He also taught against tithing, tithing was (he said and showed scripturally) a Levitical law, he (my uncle) also stated that we are not under Levitical law, nor are we under Mosaic law, but we are under grace... and his church never suffered because of it either... people gave willingly of a cheerful heart. They built new buildings (for a school), ran buses for children, sent money to missionaries, and paid for kids to go to bible camp in the summer (if they were needy and desired to go), they also had Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners which were taken to elderly and shut-ins.  ALL of this was done without requiring an unbiblical tithe.
There are MANY other topics being discussed/ have been discussed which also actually DO need to be called repugnant... but discussing tithing (either pro or against) should not be considered repugnant. I'm sorry we have parted ways in this one matter, however, I felt compelled to speak up in defense of "Standing Firm" because I (for one) do NOT find his stance repugnant. He has as much right as you and I (or anyone else) to defend his position, and he did so with scripture.

The disciples of Christ and Christian Church separated from each other years ago. The disciples of Christ are liberal, while the Christian church is conservative. The Christian church has doctrines similar to the church of Christ in regards to Baptism, salvation, etc. They believe water baptism is part of the salvation process. Both have their roots in the restoration movement.

If the pastor (or anyone else) asks how much anyone gives I would say it is none of their business.  I'd probably be quite a bit more polite than that,.Anyway we don't have "Staff." we work for the Lord, not for man.

R B Oullette asks his Staff for the names of the best givers.  He then calls on those givers to testify of the Lord's goodness whenever he wants to drun up finances.
 
Totally wrong.

No...sorry. If man doesn't have freewill, and God directs all of man's actions and thoughts...then there's a major conundrum with those verses, because in those verses, God is speaking to Israel concerning their sinful idolatrous acts. He's saying that...
He didn't command them to do it. He didn't tell them to do it. It didn't enter his mind that they should do it. If God didn't command them or tell them to do it, the actions were their own.
If it didn't even enter God's mind for them to do those acts, then the thoughts to do the acts came from their own minds.
So...either God lied, or there's no explanation other than they did it of their own freewill.
Not only has a non-freewiller ever explained those verses, but even when confronted with the verses...they ignore them and continue their non-freewill belief.

Do you mean, "What happens to unelect babies who die?" I have heard one (and only one) Calvinist say that they are tossed into the fires of hell and Christians should give God glory for it. I make this not up.

Still have never had anyone (who claims that man doesn't have freewill) explain these two simple verses...
Jeremiah 19:5 They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:   Jeremiah 32:35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

of course God has the 'right to choose". On occasion God even took all choice away from people: "And when it was told Saul, he sent other messengers, and they prophesied likewise. And Saul sent messengers again the third time, and they prophesied also. Then went he also to Ramah, and came to a great well that is in Sechu: and he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And one said, Behold, they be at Naioth in Ramah. And he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets? " (1Sam 19:21-24) In this case we see that God took all Saul's wil away for a short time and humbled him, making him strip naked and lay down and prophesy before His prophet, Samuel.
But, that God gave us the right to choose, as well, would make sense, as He created us in His image.  And of course, God not only chose the Hebrews as His people, (there would be no Israel, no Hebrews, except that He called them out of Ur of the Chaldees, in Abram), but apparently they had the right, at least as individuals, as well as a people, to reject Him.  Jesus reveals that in His own words: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"
If God is sovereign, why can he not allow us the right to choose, be it well or poorly?

Surprisingly, those who make these threats about God will get the tithe don't believe that giving to the needy or missionaries counts as giving to God, they believe the tithe is only for the general fund of the church. In addition to giving to the church, I also give to the needy and missionaries. For the most part, I have NOT practiced the tithe but rather grace giving from my heart, and I have never had any financial problems, and none of these threats have happened to me. I am proof that these threats the Pastors make are not true.

Surprisingly, those who make these threats about God will get the tithe don't believe that giving to the needy or missionaries counts as giving to God, they believe the tithe is only for the general fund of the church. In addition to giving to the church, I also give to the needy and missionaries. For the most part, I have NOT practiced the tithe but rather grace giving from my heart, and I have never had any financial problems, and none of these threats have happened to me. I am proof that these threats the Pastors make are not true.

Surprisingly, those who make these threats about God will get the tithe don't believe that giving to the needy or missionaries counts as giving to God, they believe the tithe is only for the general fund of the church. In addition to giving to the church, I also give to the needy and missionaries. For the most part, I have NOT practiced the tithe but rather grace giving from my heart, and I have never had any financial problems, and none of these threats have happened to me. I am proof that these threats the Pastors make are not true.

Amen. It is not talking about physical death. If we use the same false logic, we should not preach the gospel to the unsaved, since dead men cannot hear either. Dead men cannot sin either.

Amen. It is not talking about physical death. If we use the same false logic, we should not preach the gospel to the unsaved, since dead men cannot hear either. Dead men cannot sin either.

Interesting passages Invicta. Sadly though you pre-text them with this little quote that cannot be found in Scripture anywhere. This is the issue with all false teaching. It is based on a predisposed notion APART from Scripture and then Scripture is twisted around to conform to the predisposed false notion.
You have heard the term cart before the horse. Your adopted idea in this post places the horse in the cart, therefore the cart goes nowhere.
Sorry dude, you are false in this.

Amen! That is the biblical truth there!!
It's sad to hear Baptist preachers sound so much like the prosperity preachers they denounce, when they come before their congregation and tell them they must tithe even if that means they can't pay their bills or shop for groceries. Then they declare God will honor their faithfulness by sending them whatever amount of money they need to pay those bills and buy those groceries.
J. Vernon McGee told a good story of the depression days when a well-to-do man was speaking highly of himself for continuing to tithe during the hard times while speaking badly of those with virtually nothing (in some cases literally having no money at all) who were not tithing each Sunday. McGee pointed out Christians are not under the tithe laws and when God prospers some it could be He wants them to give more during those times others are unable to give.
As God provides, we cheerfully give, thankful to give what we can. It's such a blessing to spend time with the Lord in prayer seeking His will with regards to our giving.

Tithing was a Levitical law. We (saved/church/bride) are not under the law but under grace. I come under fire for this belief often, yet I believe that's exactly what the bible teaches. Now that is not to say we shouldn't give to the church. But we are not obligated to a 10% tithe.  We should give from a cheerful heart (not grudgingly). I heard one preacher tell his congregation: "If you have unpaid bills, you better not be putting money into the plate".  I agree... when bills are manageable then give (willingly) and if you have looming taxes or utility bills needing paid... pay those first. And it would also depends on each person's walk with the Lord... as they are led by the Holy Spirit. Some years I have given a lot more than other years, it depended on true expenses (not talking about wants, but needs) and other years there wasn't as much to give. God knows the hearts/minds and situations. He meets the needs. 
2 Corinthians 9:7 "Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver."
I notice the words "or of necessity" , that shows that churches should not demand a set percentage of income (once again, we are not under Levitical law). But it also doesn't mean "give nothing", I'm not saying that at all... because "God loveth a cheerful giver". 

Actually, I think an ad hominem attack would be like "Calvinism is wrong because Calvin is a jerk who eats worms." In other words, a personal attack that has nothing to do with the issues at hand. However, when dealing with Calvin's theological leanings and manner toward those who disagreed with him, I would say they are quite relevant.
Calvin may have left the RCC, but he acted like a pope, himself-he allowed no disagreement with him, and would imprison, torture, banish and kill those who disagreed with him, or even for lesser things, like being silly. Some kid stuck a bean in some Easter cake, (I don't remember the entire story off the top of my head), and Calvin had him put in prison for a few days. Calvin showed no sign of a Christian spirit of kindness and love-he ruled with an iron fist. So really, when dealing with associations and character, you CAN make some proper associations, and it should not be considered an ad hominem attack.

Sounds to me like you are hitting the nail on the head with this. I have the same doubts about these comparisons. Today seems very much as in the days of Noah and just before the BBQ of Sodom as described by God.
Oh, on a side note I believe there will be multitudes of "so called christians" going through the 7 year great tribulation. None will be born again however....All bastards will they be.
I overheard someone quote recently that 31% of America is "saved". Glad I wasn't taking a sip or coffee when I heard that. 0.31% is probably closer to the truth.

Neither a necessary question nor an addition to the conversation.

I Timothy 5:8 " But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel"
Yep, the context of this verse centers around taking care of widows. But since verses that have been quoted to support the idea that defending oneself with a gun is unbiblical aren't in context, this one will do for defending oneself...with a gun, a bat, or a sock full of coins, etc. Same/same. And, since it's God's Word, the one is quite enough. And "those of his own house" would indicate that is speaking to more than just a widow for whom he is responsible.
A man is to provide for his own - especially those of his own house. Providing doesn't just mean food, clothes, and a roof. Or even Bible teaching and training. There's a whole lot more that goes into taking care of one's family. PROTECTION being one.
And, don't worry, GP - I'm not one who says OT verses don't apply. So if you were intimating that I was being hypocritical, you're wrong. If not, okay.
________
Fine and dandy if folks want to believe that it's not loving for someone to use a gun against someone who has broken into one's home and is in the process of raping or killing a loved one. Doesn't seem to me to be too loving toward one's supposed loved ones, but, hey. It is what it is. The excuse for it would be that God protects. Okay.
Then make sure you don't ever lock your doors. House doors or car doors. Don't lock your windows, either. Because locking doors and windows isn't trusting God to keep bad folks out...
And if you seriously think that someone who is intent on raping or murdering is going to stop and listen to you witness, go for it. 
Accepting being persecuted for your faith is NOT in any way the same as not stopping someone from hurting you or your loved ones.
Neither is it stated anywhere that a pastor cannot carry a gun to protect his flock. After all, he is the undershepherd...and shepherds DO carry things to protect their flocks. David used a rock to protect his sheep...people, who are made in the image of God, are more important than sheep. 
 

What happened to OB since this morning? Everything has an odd appearance, the page is no longer centered, much hangs off the right side now, the button to read new comments is gone, the button that says "unread content" is unhelpful. And where did the emoticons go?
I'm lost...

. If you guys trust the Lord so thoroughly, there should be no need for doctors and hospitals anymore. And, if it isn't required in your state, might as well drop all your insurance policies too. 
 

And all the while let's ignore the verses that teach that men are responsible for their families. To be spiritual, according to what seems to be the idea of a few men on this thread, means to sit back and let someone who might be lost do whatever they want to anyone they want. So long as you witness to them, it's all okay, because we're going to heaven anyway.
The truth is, not everyone who gets attacked dies. At least not right away. Some live in agony, whether physical or mental, for many years after an attack. But, hey, the Lord protected them, right? Really? Then why did the bad thing happen to them? Simply put: we live in a sin-filled world. And because of that, bad things do happen. Being able to physically "equalize" a situation is in no way not trusting the Lord. Each one of us has to make a decision as to whether or not we will carry a gun, a stun gun, a baseball bat, or a sock filled with coins, etc. Or nothing at all.
That's the beauty of of God leading the individual - including pastors.  It's kinda silly to claim in one breath that having guns comes from the notions of our rights, and then say that our rights come from God. SMH.
The fact of the matter is, we do have the right - even under God - to defend ourselves. I guarantee you that if someone were to come and try to attack me, or my mother, or my nieces while they are under my care, etc., I'm not going to sit back and just pray. Why? Because God has provided a way for me to defend myself and my loved ones (if my hubby is not home...if he is, he'll take care of us, as the Bible instructs men to do). And I'll do that without apology and without sin.
It's a real  shame when folks try to make people who believe that it's okay or even correct to have defense of some sort out to be unspiritual. There is no biblical basis for it. You can use any verses you want to try to paint the person who has a gun as not trusting the Lord, but you don't know the heart of the person. 
If you don't want to attend a church where the pastor has a gun, don't. But don't try to come off as more spiritual because of it. The Pharisees thought they were more spiritual, too.
_______
By all means, apply scripture that you want for your personal reasons, but stop trying to make folks that disagree with your thoughts (in other words, folks that have guns or approve of having them) appear unspiritual.

I don't see how some random guy sneaking into your house at night and raping your wife, or children, like what happened to a girl down the road from me, is a case of martyrdom. 
And even so, if someone busts into your church and starts blowing people away are you saying it's ungodly to fire back if you have a gun? How 'bout if you have a baseball bat and you bash his brains in instead? Is that wrong? Is that really any different than if you blast him with a gun? If he begins to rape your children do you tell them to take it for Jesus? Seems like a man would do all he could to stop that guy. And too bad if he didn't have things right with God. He had his chance before he decided to bust into your home or church and begin to kill and/or rape people.
Still seems like a martyr complex is going on here.