Featured Baptist Preferences

Why do you find that odd? (Mine also holds to congregationalism and teaches tithing as it is viewed as biblical ... on both accounts).

 

How do you determine that the tithe was an OT tax to the government when Able offered at least a tithe in principle (portions, and apparently specific portions)?

Now, I actually agree with you that the Tithe was an OT concept as I believe it foreshadowed a time when we would be delivered from the slavery of sin and death and become heirs. But what it foreshadows is that now all we have and all we are belong to God. But you have misrepresented the history of the OT tithe here, brother. God did actually demand of his people a tithe under the Law. But even more, Abel is said to have tithed to God (not to some pagan deity). Abraham offered a tithe to Melchizedek as a priest of God (not some pagan deity). Perhaps it was his "free gift offering," but we have no evidence that it was not a "tithe."

So I agree with you that the tithe is not for today (and yes, this is different from what my church holds to be true), but you are failing to discern OT history here. There are many genuine principles of Scripture that find similarities within ANE religious thought (e.g., tithing, sacrifice, temple structure and symbolism, etc). But the OT tithe was biblical in principle centuries before the Law was ever given. If not, then we need to look at the reason God adopted paganism into the Law.

And this is not a hill upon which I'd choose to die.

My question, however, was why you thought it odd that a congregational church would also be a tithing church?

 

Ahhhh, I see. I misunderstood what you were putting together there, brother. I have always attended a baptist church (which is congregational government) but have not attended any that teach drinking is a sin. Most do, however, teach that it can be dangerous and perhaps is not the best option to glorify God. But all of them that I've attended teach tithing. Our experiences are different.

 

oops

 

Well, drinking isn't the "high road," and some (myself included) appreciate discipline and self denial for at least characters sake. And our "Christian liberty" doesn't work that way. You are, I believe, replacing "liberty" with "entitlement" or "right.". That said, it doesn't bother me if someone drinks or abstains.

But you and I both abstain. Why make an issue of drinking alcohol?

 

It's called congregational church government. The local church interprets Scripture as prohibiting drinking and to be faithful they act on their convictions. You wouldn't deny their Christian liberty to do that would you? They certainly are not denying anyone a drink, but they have the liberty to exercise church discipline within their own walls.

I don't know if you realize it or not, but your argument is the same one that people have used to permit SSM in churches. We need to be careful, brother, lest we redefine liberty as right.


Oh, and sorry for the assumption. I have been gone a few months. Last we spoke you had quit drinking for the benefit of your wife. I didn't know you started again. I have not been keeping up with things here.

 

Does your church have a rule that children cannot run in the sanctuary? If so - is that legalism? (unless you can give me chapter and verse)

 

Not to speak for JoJ, but when I read his comments what comes to my mind is the fact that the moment you find yourself fighting for your Christian liberty is the moment it ceases to be Christian liberty.