The Plot by Bob Enyart

[Clete]

Brothers, I just read the Tree of Life chapter. It was amazing, and I loved it. One question though... how do you feel about tithing? In the chapter, Bob said it is a part of the law, and we are not under the law. I tithe 10% of gross (the 1st 10%). I am happy to do so and feel particularly blessed by it. (A worker is worth his wages... and I love my church leaders and want to support them.) What is your perspective?

Edit: I just found this post, and I agree with it. I still want to hear your input though.

Tithing Under Grace – Awesome Church

www.awesomechurch.com

Do yourself a favor and give ANYTHING but a "tithe". You are almost certainly doing it because there is a rule that says you should (i.e. because of the law), especially given your own terminology (e.g. "10% of gross (the 1st 10%)). However, even if you aren't, there isn't 1% of the Christian population that understands grace sufficiently well to prevent it from appearing as though you are doing it because there's a rule that says you should.

My advice is to forget about percentages except to the degree that they might cause someone else to stubble, which means give something other than ten percent. Just sit down with your wife (if you're married) and try to figure out what you can afford and then pray about it and give what you desire to give without giving a thought to a formula.

Also, keep reading!

Clete

 

[Unsettler]

Do yourself a favor and give ANYTHING but a "tithe". You are almost certainly doing it because there is a rule that says you should (i.e. because of the law), especially given your own terminology (e.g. "10% of gross (the 1st 10%)). However, even if you aren't, there isn't 1% of the Christian population that understands grace sufficiently well to prevent it from appearing as though you are doing it because there's a rule that says you should.

My advice is to forget about percentages except to the degree that they might cause someone else to stubble, which means give something other than ten percent. Just sit down with your wife (if you're married) and try to figure out what you can afford and then pray about it and give what you desire to give without giving a thought to a formula.

Also, keep reading!

Clete

Will do!! And thanks!!

 

[Clete]

If there are 10 slices of pizza in a single pizza pie, and I give you "the first 10%" of the pie, then you will get 1 slice. If, instead, I give you 10% of what remains (after the IRS takes 3 slices from the original 10), then the "10%" I give you at that point will really only be 70% of one slice of pizza.

Sounds like law to me!

Your pay is based on what you are willing to take in exchange for your time and talent (i.e. your labor), and on what your employer is willing to spend for that labor.

Guess what factor is built into those decisions on both sides.

TAXES!

If you didn't have to pay taxes, you'd be willing to work for a smaller gross and if your employer didn't have to pay taxes he could afford to either hire more people or pay those he does hire more money if the labor market demanded it. Regardless, your pay is a function of the labor market and the primary driver, as far as you are concerned, is the amount you get to spend on your own life. If that amount is too low, you ask for a raise or go find a different employer. It isn't the gross amount that makes you leave, its the fact that you can't pay your mortgage with your net.

Further, when the law was in effect, the tithe was paid on your increase, (Leviticus 27:30-33). That is, on your profit. Not only that but the tithe itself was a form of tax. It was a religious tax but a tax, nonetheless.

In short, forget the stupid taxes. It was never money you actually made in the first place.

 

[Clete]

The "first 10%" makes no sense.

The "first 10%" of what? You cannot calculate 10% until you know that 100% is.

That isn't true. If I get 100 of something but I knew going in that it was going to cost me 30 to get it then 70 is the increase and its really easy to calculate 10% of 70 and it isn't 10, it's 7.

 

[Clete]

Brothers, I just read the Tree of Life chapter. It was amazing, and I loved it. One question though... how do you feel about tithing? In the chapter, Bob said it is a part of the law, and we are not under the law. I tithe 10% of gross (the 1st 10%). I am happy to do so and feel particularly blessed by it. (A worker is worth his wages... and I love my church leaders and want to support them.) What is your perspective?

Edit: I just found this post, and I agree with it. I still want to hear your input though.

Tithing Under Grace – Awesome Church

www.awesomechurch.com

In response to that article you linked too, my response is simple.

"Tithing under grace" is an oxymoron.

 

[Right Divider]

That isn't true. If I get 100 of something but I knew going in that it was going to cost me 30 to get it then 70 is the increase and its really easy to calculate 10% of 70 and it isn't 10, it's 7.

As I've stated, 10% of the whole is 10%.

 

[Clete]

As I've stated, 10% of the whole is 10%.

And free gifts cost nothing. Basically, meaningless tautology. You're making a distinction without a difference.

 

[Right Divider]

And free gifts cost nothing. Basically, meaningless tautology. You're making a distinction without a difference.

My point was that there is no such thing as the "1st 10%".
Until you know what the WHOLE is, there is no way to calculate what one tenth of it would be.

 

[Unsettler]

Sounds like law to me!

Your pay is based on what you are willing to take in exchange for your time and talent (i.e. your labor), and on what your employer is willing to spend for that labor.

Guess what factor is built into those decisions on both sides.

TAXES!

If you didn't have to pay taxes, you'd be willing to work for a smaller gross and if your employer didn't have to pay taxes he could afford to either hire more people or pay those he does hire more money if the labor market demanded it. Regardless, your pay is a function of the labor market and the primary driver, as far as you are concerned, is the amount you get to spend on your own life. If that amount is too low, you ask for a raise or go find a different employer. It isn't the gross amount that makes you leave, its the fact that you can't pay your mortgage with your net.

Further, when the law was in effect, the tithe was paid on your increase, (Leviticus 27:30-33). That is, on your profit. Not only that but the tithe itself was a form of tax. It was a religious tax but a tax, nonetheless.

In short, forget the stupid taxes. It was never money you actually made in the first place.

That is a great point!!

 

[Clete]

That is a great point!!

Yeah, the people who have a big fetish about tithing on the gross are the people who get the money. Imagine that!

Also, when God told Israel to tithe, He also told them to use their tithe to pay for their travel expenses, their meals and have a big celebration on their way to give to the temple. And, every third year, (i.e. 1/3 of their total tithe) they were instructed to give their tithe directly to someone in need, rather than giving it to the temple at all.

You don't hear that from behind the pulpit!

 

[JudgeRightly]

And, every third year, (i.e. 1/3 of their total tithe)

Threes are everywhere!

 

[Unsettler]

Just finished "Next Stop" Chapter 9 on eschatology. What an amazing chapter. I am so at ease with it, and once I understood the correct perspective, I felt like I could have written the rest of it myself. It all makes perfect sense. So the Tribulation started, but then it was paused. The Body of Christ can look forward to a joyous Rapture with no Tribulation. The Tribulation is only intended for the those under the law. Looking at the parallelism and the 1,000 year periods, I wonder if ~2035 might be extraordinary.

 

[Clete]

Just finished "Next Stop" Chapter 9 on eschatology.

You're so far ahead of me! I envy your beginner's mind. I can so clearly remember what it was like learning all this for the first time. I litterally read the entire Plot in less than 48 hours. Now it takes me forever to read it. I'm one of those that gets sleepy when I read. I don't understand what causes that but I don't like it.

What an amazing chapter. I am so at ease with it, and once I understood the correct perspective, I felt like I could have written the rest of it myself. It all makes perfect sense. So the Tribulation started, but then it was paused. The Body of Christ can look forward to a joyous Rapture with no Tribulation. The Tribulation is only intended for the those under the law. Looking at the parallelism and the 1,000 year periods, I wonder if ~2035 might be extraordinary.

I remember some people, including myself, wondering the same thing about the turn of the century. I remember Bob shooting the idea down by pointing out that basically every Christian alive, since the Apostle Paul himself, has believed they might well be living in the end times. Not the best track record when you look at it that way.

As for me, I wish the rapture had happened yesterday and would be great with either today or tomorrow. The sooner the better, if you ask me, but God's timing is always better than mine.

 

[Unsettler]

The sooner the better, if you ask me, but God's timing is always better than mine.

Do you ever wonder if God may have decided at some point over the past nearly 2,000 years that He is not going to proceed with the Kingdom plan? We all believe that God can do whatever He wants, but, originally, God planned to have the Circumcision believers serve as the government and priests of a literal Kingdom with Jesus presiding for 1,000 years. But, once the temple was destroyed for the second time (70AD?), the Circumcision believers would have to have built a new portable tabernacle in order to comply with ALL of the laws of Moses as the Lord Jesus commanded. More likely, though, the 2nd destruction of the temple would represent the end of the raison d'etre for the majority of Circumcision believers. At that point, they would not be able to be fully compliant, and, if they were smart, they probably would have sought to join the Body of Christ. Therefore, from that point on, there wouldn't really be a Kingdom of Circumcision believers to be purified by a future Tribulation with a remnant to implement the plan that the Lord Jesus spoke of prior to Acts 9, namely His second coming and millennium reign. Thoughts?

 

[Clete]

Do you ever wonder if God may have decided at some point over the past nearly 2,000 years that He is not going to proceed with the Kingdom plan? We all believe that God can do whatever He wants, but, originally, God planned to have the Circumcision believers serve as the government and priests of a literal Kingdom with Jesus presiding for 1,000 years. But, once the temple was destroyed for the second time (70AD?), the Circumcision believers would have to have built a new portable tabernacle in order to comply with ALL of the laws of Moses as the Lord Jesus commanded. More likely, though, the 2nd destruction of the temple would represent the end of the raison d'etre for the majority of Circumcision believers. At that point, they would not be able to be fully compliant, and, if they were smart, they probably would have sought to join the Body of Christ. Therefore, from that point on, there wouldn't really be a Kingdom of Circumcision believers to be purified by a future Tribulation with a remnant to implement the plan that the Lord Jesus spoke of prior to Acts 9, namely His second coming and millennium reign. Thoughts?

I may not be understanding your question.

The only Kingdom believers that existed where those who believed prior to, and right up until, the cutting off of Israel. Once Israel was cut off then becoming a newly converted Kingdom believer wasn't an option. It was the Body of Christ or nothing at all. Those who were already Kingdom believers remained Kingdom believers throughout their natural lives and would not have had the option to join the Body of Christ, and, given that the average person who made it to adulthood lived to about their mid 50s, I would suspect that the majority of them were dead by 70 A.D., which may have something to do with why God allowed it to be destroyed at that time (total speculation, of course).

So, there was never any intent to maintain a group of Kingdom believers indefinitely and there was insufficient time for God to finish with the Body of Christ before the Kingdom believers were all dead and so it seems that God had in mind to start over from scratch with Israel whenever the time came to do so.

As for whether God would decide to permanently end any plans for Israel, I think that's definitely not possible. He'd have to break his promises to Abraham, for one thing, but, more importantly, there isn't any reason to think He would do so. Israel hasn't ever been any more or less evil than they've ever been nor any more or less evil than any other nation. It hasn't ever really been about Israel as a nation anyway. Not that the nation of Israel didn't (or doesn't) have an important role to play but at the end of the day, they are simply a chosen vessel that God has used, and intends to use again, to demonstrate certain truths. Moral and spiritual truths that God has been using the whole history of mankind to teach us. Indeed, as it says in Isaiah....

Isaiah 42:21 The Lord is well pleased for His righteousness’ sake; He will exalt the law and make it honorable.

Notice, "for His righteousness' sake". It makes little difference what Israel does or doesn't do. It makes no difference at all whether there is a temple any longer on Earth. One way or the other, God is going to glorify Himself concerning the righteousness of the Law and the story of mortal mankind on this planet Earth will not be over until that story is fully told.

Clete

 

[Unsettler]

So, there was never any intent to maintain a group of Kingdom believers indefinitely and there was insufficient time for God to finish with the Body of Christ before the Kingdom believers were all dead and so it seems that God had in mind to start over from scratch with Israel whenever the time came to do so.

This is exactly what I was wondering. If God is planning on continuing the plan and completing Daniel's last prophetic week (eventually), then God would have to "start over from scratch with Israel" building a new Temple/Tabernacle and having them following all of the laws of Moses (Revelation 18:2). However, doesn't this seem unlikely? (So much of the laws are agricultural and relevant to an agricultural civilization, which will most likely never become Israel's primary industry again). Regarding the promises to Abraham, weren't they mostly all fulfilled at one point or another? I agree, of course, that God is going to glorify himself in the consummation one way or another, but the completion of the Tribulation and establishment of the Kingdom (as originally detailed in Scripture) after a 2,000 year pause, seem likely to not be on the table anymore.

 

[Clete]

This is exactly what I was wondering. If God is planning on continuing the plan and completing Daniel's last prophetic week (eventually), then God would have to "start over from scratch with Israel" building a new Temple/Tabernacle and having them following all of the laws of Moses (Revelation 18:2). However, doesn't this seem unlikely?

No. It seems quite inevitable.

(So much of the laws are agricultural and relevant to an agricultural civilization, which will most likely never become Israel's primary industry again).

"most likely"?

Regardless, laws that cannot be applied will not be applied.

Further, when God turns back to Israel, believers will not be Jews in the Old Testament sense of the word but rather in the New Testament sense. You could even call them Christians because they will be Christians in the same sense that Peter, James and John were Christians. Thus, there's a whole swath of the Mosaic Law wouldn't apply anyway because Christ's death at Calvary has replaced the symbol with the substance. Believers will still be followers of Christ but instead of Paul's writings being primary, as they are now for the Body of Christ, it will be the books from Hebrews through Revelation that will become primary for those who are of the Kingdom of Israel. They will likely act similar to modern day Messianic Jews only without all the liberalism and Calvinism that is rampant in that modern day movement.

Regarding the promises to Abraham, weren't they mostly all fulfilled at one point or another?

There's something about a Kingdom with Abraham's Seed sitting on the throne that has yet to be fulfilled.

I agree, of course, that God is going to glorify himself in the consummation one way or another, but the completion of the Tribulation and establishment of the Kingdom (as originally detailed in Scripture) after a 2,000 year pause, seem likely to not be on the table anymore.

Definitely incorrect. God absolutely will turn again to Israel and He will establish a world-wide Kingdom that is ruled by Christ from Jerusalem, and the Earth will get to see what a righteous and just government looks like and will find out how perfect the Mosaic Law has always been.

Clete

 

[Unsettler]

Regardless, laws that cannot be applied will not be applied... Thus, there's a whole swath of the Mosaic Law wouldn't apply anyway because Christ's death at Calvary has replaced the symbol with the substance... Earth will get to see what a righteous and just government looks like and will find out how perfect the Mosaic Law has always been.

Okay, I can dig it. Perhaps I was taking the Lord's command to teach them to do all of the commandments too absolutely. That was the source of my confusion, because the future Circumcision believers would not likely have all the same Mosaic rituals that Peter and James' would have commanded to be kept to the last jot and tittle.

There's something about a Kingdom with Abraham's Seed sitting on the throne that has yet to be fulfilled.

Oops, my bad. I had King Solomon's expansive reign in mind as checking that box.

...and the Earth will get to see what a righteous and just government looks like...

I am very much looking forward to this.

 

[Unsettler]

Definitely incorrect. God absolutely will turn again to Israel and He will establish a world-wide Kingdom that is ruled by Christ from Jerusalem...

How many more centuries do you think Jerusalem will last? If the powers that be get their way, in the next 100-200 years, we will all be incarcerated in 15-minute cities, eating the bugs. In the video below, notice (starting at 1:52) that the previous cities are entirely demolished and environmentally restored. Instead of Jerusalem, there may only be Line City 37D of Sector 12, located 10 miles away from where Jerusalem used to be.

 

[Clete]

How many more centuries do you think Jerusalem will last? If the powers that be get their way, in the next 100-200 years, we will all be incarcerated in 15-minute cities, eating the bugs. In the video below, notice (starting at 1:52) that the previous cities are entirely demolished and environmentally restored. Instead of Jerusalem, there may only be Line City 37D of Sector 12, located 10 miles away from where Jerusalem used to be.

Complete, leftist, fantasy land, nonsense.

Personally, I'd be very surprised if the Lord tarries another two centuries. We're already so close, it seems to me, to be living in a world such as Noah lived in(Gen. 6:5).

Could it be a lot worse than it is?

Sure!

Will it take 200 years to get there?

I don't see how it could.

Regardless, there isn't any chance whatsoever that the cities that currently exist will be demolished and replaced with "Line" cities. In fact, I'd be willing to predict that there will never be a Line city that works and lasts longer than a very few years, if one ever exists at all.
The left always seems to just ignore how an economy actually works, never mind how human being act and why they act that way. Sure, they use buzz words like "sustainability" and "economy" but their brains process those ideas in a manner that ignores the reality of those concepts. Central planning simply does not work. It never has and it never will because it cannot work. It doesn't matter if you're talking about planning a housing community, a city or trying to engineer a whole national economy. The systems and processes involved are too organic and too complex. You might as well try telling the weather where and when it's allowed to rain.

In short, there's no way to have a free society where everyone is going to want to live in such a city, because why should they, and in a society that isn't free and people are forced to live in these cities, an insufficient number of people carry their own weight because why should they?

There! In one sentence, the entire idea of the Line City is smashed to dust. The investors of that company are either con-artists or fools.