Tuesday, October 15, 2019

How the Rich Prove 2nd Tithe is Wrong



How the Rich Prove 2nd Tithe is Wrong

There are so many good reasons why COG7D acknowledged annual holy days and permitted people to observe them BUT refused to make them official doctrine of the church. HWA chose to make them one of his pet doctrines and used them to carve out his own cult following. Making them a New Testament requirement brought with them a laundry list of questions on how this was to be done. And no answers can be found in Scripture. So what is a man to do? One way is to declare yourself an Apostle and Elijah and presto, your answers are now un-admittedly on par with Scripture.


I have a whole series of posts coming on the topic of tithing but since many are just days away from traveling to feast sites around the world, I thought I would make one simple observation about 2nd tithing that when thought through, proves it is not a New Testament concept.

The highlight of the year is "keeping" the Feast of Tabernacles for many brethren in the churches of God. While the sermons usually suck and it is annoying to be expected at services every morning, it is a vacation better than a vacation because not only are you with family but you get to be with like-minded friends on your vacation. It is always exciting to see what old friends show up at the same feast site.

The dark side of 2nd tithe is the fact that it is compulsory. Church of God tithing is an egregious doctrine to the poor. It is inherently unfair and actually drives the poor out of the church. If you don't believe this, just look at the cars in Church of God parking lots today. The truth is the poor can't afford to be in the churches of God. This is the exact opposite from Christ who told John the baptist's disciples that one of the proofs that He was the Promised One is the fact that He preached to the poor. Why bother preaching to the poor? They cannot support your ministry through compulsory tithing. The poor are unable to sustain an organization dependent on cash to preach the gospel so the end will come. (I will talk more on the poor and tithing in another post)


I spent many years on meager wages saving 2nd tithe to the harm of my family. 
While the feast was always an oasis of joy for 8 days, the stress it put on me and 
my wife the other 357 days of the year was almost unbearable some years. And 
to fail to obey God in this would bring great mental anguish and shame... so year 
after year, I sucked it up, obeyed and suffered and watched my family suffer.

It is funny how ministers will say to test God on tithing and say you can't afford to 
not tithe. They will say (and sometimes without saying it) that tithing is 
proportionately related to your faith and obedience. Well, I can say I did test God 
on tithing for over 20 years. I was very faithful in "doing it" for a long time. I am 
now in a time of my life financially where tithing is no longer burdensome. So these 
ministers need to know that some people actually stop tithing or never start 
because it truly is unBiblical and unGodly.

I could not see the real problem with 2nd tithe until a wealthy friend pointed this 
fact out to me. The church takes an Old Testament concept and has to force it into 
a New Testament construct that is functional to a people in today's society. 
This gets back to simply accepting a man's explanation as to how this should be 
done. HWA decided that brethren should put aside 10% of their incomes to pay for
annual holy day observances. The bulk of this would be needed to observe the feast 
of tabernacles. The reading of this feast tells people to enjoy the feast, spending 
their tithe on food and drink. This has been interpreted by HWA to mean that one 
must blow 10% of your annual income in an 8-day spending spree on food and 
alcohol. If you fail to spend it all, you must give the excess to the church.

What a wealthy person can observe about this is something I never could afford to see but it is very true. Let us say you are a person who does have an above-average annual income. Maybe you are a successful entrepreneur, doctor, lawyer or IT guy. Maybe $300,000 a year. Maybe $500,000 a year. Does it sound like a Godly principle to take $30,000-$50,000 and blow it on whatever your heart desires in an 8-day spending spree? And do this year after year? You can quickly see as a rich person with Godly principles, that this would fly in the face of what God would have us do and not do concerning money.

Keeping 2nd tithe in its Old Testament context and thinking this one through actually appears to be a very sensible socio-economic principle for the financial well-being of a country. Largely an agrarian society, wealth and value was measured in nondurable goods. Enduring wealth-building would involve making annual purchases in items that would grow your agrarian family business into the next year. My wealthy friend proposed that the Feast of Tabernacles was used as an annual market place at the end of ingathering when one would take 10% of his annual increase and use it to trade and purchase what would be needed to continue growing into the next year.

This is just one really good example of how myopic HWA was in trying to take a specific socio-economic construct designed for an ancient nation and force it into an American religious cult. COG7D leaders who were smarter than HWA thought this through and probably told him as much in so many ways but as they said, "Herbert was not one to listen to anyone."

I still save money and attend the feast. It is a family vacation that we get to spend 
with friends that love God. I even suffer through the morning sermons. BUT I 
enjoy the feasts now more than ever because the other 357 days are not spent 
agonizing over a soul-stealing doctrine of the church.

I have much more to say about tithing coming soon.

Stoned Stephen Society


41 comments:

Anonymous said...

Was it really 3 tithes or just 1 tithe divided into 3 possible uses? Although they no longer observe it, some Jews believe it's just 1 tithe.

For the sake of discussion, let's say Manasseh and Ephraim are just 1 tribe. Also, assume each tribe has only 1 member with the 11 tribes earning $100 each.

First tithe - each of the 11 gives Levy $10. Each of the 11 tribes now has $90 while Levy has $110.

Second tithe - each of the 11 saves $10 and decides to give Levy $1 from their 2T. Each of the 11 tribes now has $80 plus $9 second tithe while Levy has $110 plus $11 second tithe.

Third tithe year - each of the 11 gives Levy $10. Each of the 11 tribes now has $70 while Levy has $220.

Anonymous said...

How does someone write as "article" on how wrong tithing is, and NOT mention that it was an OLD COVENANT requirement and not in force under the NEW COVENANT? Maybe because the author does not understand what he is talking about.

Don't bother writing "many more articles" on tithing, I won't be reading them.

nck said...

When did 2nd tithe start in radiocg?
Did it start in Oregon days when about 200 people would get together in the woodcabin and were still undecided if they would stay for 3 days, the weekend or 8 days even?

Then it was decided that it would be fun to stay together for 8 days which would require more than taking potluck.

10 percent including travel for 1937-1954 wages would on average cover costs for all the Holy Days and which is far less I spend on leisure today after taxes.

Then from the 1960's when USA reached empire people wages would go up and people with real wages would enter the church, only then ( 1967) the calculation offered in the article became reality.

Thus reasonable people would lower the ratio to 5 percent.

This is where the cultic aspect came in and the church required excess to be donated to the church. People would oblige gladly since the end was near. Anyway to donate the excess would be cultic HOWEVER one could use it for the 7 "obligatory freewill offerings.

The 10 percent 2nd tithe and the holidays spent bound people to" away of life". Money was not an excuse anymore to not attend holidays and enjoy goodies in life people of the same income class would never enjoy because they were trapped in a circle of poverty.

The question is not whether 2nd tithe is a bad thing. The question is if someone wishes to be bound to an all consuming system. 150.000 people wished so. 3.5 billion did not.

Nck

Stoned Stephen Society said...

"How does someone write as "article" on how wrong tithing is, and NOT mention that it was an OLD COVENANT requirement and not in force under the NEW COVENANT?"

"I have a whole series of posts coming on the topic of tithing but since many are just days away from traveling to feast sites around the world, I thought I would make one simple observation about 2nd tithing that when thought through, proves it is not a New Testament concept."

"...I would make ONE simple observation about 2nd tithing..."
"...ONE simple observation about 2nd tithing..."
"...ONE simple observation..."
"...ONE..."
"ONE"

Try and keep up. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

SSS said: "I spent many years on meager wages saving 2nd tithe to the harm of my family. While the feast was always an oasis of joy for 8 days, the stress it put on me and my wife the other 357 days of the year was almost unbearable some years. And to fail to obey God in this would bring great mental anguish and shame... so year after year, I sucked it up, obeyed and suffered and watched my family suffer."

Mandatory tithing and FOT observance are just 2 reasons I quit the UCG after learning the Bible doesn't support these HWA teachings.

To start with Biblical tithing was never on money. It was on animals and plants, the tithes of which were given to the landless Levites who then gave a "tithe of the tithe" to the Aaronic priesthood. The NT advocates voluntary donations to the poor and needy not mandatory tithing of up to 30% or more of your money to ministers. This Armstrongist doctrine is akin to prosperity theology preachers that manipulate people into giving money to "God's Work" in hope of being healed or healthier or wealthier in return (see 1 Timothy 6:5; 2 Peter 2:3). Also, where specifically in the Bible does God or Jesus, His apostles or the early Church teach a collection plate to be passed around for money on weekly/annual Sabbaths as ACOGs traditionally do?

Also, every year as the FOT approached and knowing people in the church or community suffering financial hardship from unemployment, homelessness, medical bills, etc. I came to understand how it was an unnecessary economic burden imposed on members and nothing more than an example of self-indulgence. Nowhere in the NT did Christ oblige His followers the world over to keep the FOT as Armstrongists do today and go on a mandatory 8-day annual holiday in the fall to some city across the country or the other side of the world that a church administration has authorized as the place “God has put His name.” In the OT God instructed the Israelites to observe 3 pilgrimage feasts in Jerusalem where His Temple was. In the NT early Christians, like the Diaspora, observed the holy days locally. I don’t understand why COG members put up with this man-made Armstrongist tradition when IMHO it’d be more liberating for everyone if the COGs kept the FOT like the other holy days (inc the 2 other pilgrimage feasts UB/Pentecost BTW). This way its members and families have the freedom to choose 1) if they want (or can afford) to go on holiday (in the first place); 2) when they want; 3) where they want; 4) and even attend services of whichever local church group they’re at meets—just like Jews and non-Armstrongist Christians do with all their holidays the world over.

TBH what both of these man-made HWA doctrines/traditions prove to me is that HWA was a master at deceiving and controlling his followers so much so that even 30 years after his death they're still in his grip!

But, then I guess like HWA always said about other Christians false beliefs/practices applies to his own followers: "They might be sincere, but they are sincerely wrong!"

Feastgoer said...

Related to this post is the matter of people "rich" in 2T helping those who are "poor" in 2T, yet faithfully attend the Feast anyway - and many have faithfully attended that way over the years.

Several COG's from Worldwide on have set up a "Festival assistance fund" for members who need help. That's what many ministers have encouraged "rich" members to do with their excess 2T after a Feast - donate it to that fund. (Some have tried to make that mandatory, but there doesn't seem to be Biblical support for that.)

Yet COG's also have warned members about people who come to them personally during the Feast and ask for help. Clear it with a minister first, we've often been told.

nck said...

10:22

Yes I believe you are right. My posting was intended to say that "habits" or corporate customs tend to become "religious dogma" over time.

It is with women being veiled in Arab countries. A superior habit in the time and historical and societal context.......UNTIL it became religious dogma.

nck

Anonymous said...

WCG taught (as do the splinters) that you could use second tithe for Holy Day expenses, not just the Feast of Tabernacles but ANY of the pilgrimage feasts (as when the Radio Church of God met for a week of Passover services). This was eventually extended in principle to all of the Holy Days (which with long commute distances were indeed pilgrimage festivals for many).

With this extension came a problem. With Passover and the seven DULB days, and the FOT, plus the LGD and Pentecost, Trumpets, and Atonement, you have 19 days a year for the use of your second tithe, and even longer than that for the brethren who must truly take a long trip to the Feast, often including the days between Trumpets and Atonement, and Atonement and the Feast. Suddenly your second tithe doesn't stretch nearly as far as it used to, yet WCG couldn't offer a valid scriptural excuse to deny this extension of the principle.

Anonymous said...

"OLD COVENANT requirement and not in force under the NEW COVENANT"

Incorrect. The armstrongites disavow the Christ and replace him with HWA as the messiah. He is the 'new' OT authority figure. The acog's have found a replacement for Moses in HWA therefor they re-adapt the OT stories with this 20th century replacement figure. Armstrong is like the 'white' Christ of America that has all the answers needed for prosperity and salvation.

Now if the acog's were Christian in a biblical sense they would teach that the OT was nothing but symbolic for what was to come, the Christ. No, the armstrongites are nothing but a cheap imitation of the messianic Jew.

nck said...

7:34

No symbolism Mr painful truth.

WCG theology states that EVERYTHING that expired in the OT was to prove the point that NOTHING could be achieved without jesus.

The Christians took this to exterminate the Jews whereas the armstrongite crypto Jews distributed 15 million booklets to prove they were cousins. (which the racist neo tries to disprove as wiedergutmachung for his forebears who shipped 80 percent of the American white ancestors to the USA)

Nothing symbolic about that.

Nck

Anonymous said...

nck,

What they spoke was a far cry from what they believed. Look at the what the people DID and SPOKE about. Jesus was replace by 'Herbert.' This was and continues to be what they believe in. IN HERB WE TRUST!
______________

I am of the opinion that you are here to spread disinformation and that you are most likely in some position within one of the organizations. This is one reason you are banned from replying to articles on the Painful Truth blog.

nck said...

Well PT you are wrong on all counts regarding me and probably about wcg too, although not much at pt blog can be taken serious so I don't spend too much time there just to keep up for possible improvements.

Nck

nck said...

BTW PT I actually do agree with the first 5 sentences of your reply.

Lots of nutter nimkompoops in wcg.

Nck

Anonymous said...

"The church takes an Old Testament concept and has to force it into
a New Testament construct that is functional to a people in today's society."

"...I would make ONE simple observation about 2nd tithing..."
"...ONE simple observation about 2nd tithing..."
"...ONE simple observation..."
"...ONE..."
"ONE"


The problem with your ridiculous comeback is that you made MULTIPLE comments and observations about "2nd tithing".....and overlooked the fundamental fact that tithing was an OLD COVENANT requirement.

Like I said, you don't seem to understand what you are talking about.


now, try to keep up with your OWN words.

Anonymous said...

PT said:

"OLD COVENANT requirement and not in force under the NEW COVENANT"

Incorrect. The armstrongites disavow the Christ and replace him with HWA as the messiah. He is the 'new' OT authority figure. The acog's have found a replacement for Moses in HWA therefor they re-adapt the OT stories with this 20th century replacement figure. Armstrong is like the 'white' Christ of America that has all the answers needed for prosperity and salvation.


You state my observation is "incorrect" and then provide no proof of it being incorrect.

Just another ex-WCG brain dead zombie, still licking his wounds.

Anonymous said...

October 16, 2019 at 5:28 PM

You cannot see sarcasm in that statement???

Stoned Stephen Society said...

"The church takes an Old Testament concept and has to force it into
a New Testament construct that is functional to a people in today's society."

I think most folks would recognize this comment as not "overlooking the fundamental fact that tithing was an OLD COVENANT requirement." I think most folks were capable, based on the one observation made about 2nd tithe, that it is understood and assumed tithing is fundamentally understood to be an Old Covenant requirement. But thanks for making your troll comments to clarify to everyone where you are coming from. Maybe you did bring light and clarification to the slow among us. Maybe.

Anonymous said...

Don't worry about it stoned, any moron reading this "The church takes an Old Testament concept and has to force it into a New Testament..." and not recognize that you're saying tithing is totally old covenant, doesn't need their hand held and given an explanation. They just want to argue. Your post was just fine.

km

Anonymous said...

Kevin: Why do you have to be so condescending to people? You want civil conversations and yet calling people morons, jerks, idiots and other derogatory things because they don't agree with YOUR interpretation of things is insulting. It's no wonder most don't bother to comment on your posts. It doesn't matter if you are 20 years old, 45 years olf or in your 70's, respecting people is ageless.

Anonymous said...

Stoned Stephen Society, is this your ANON complaint towards me?

"You state my observation is "incorrect" and then provide no proof of it being incorrect.

Just another ex-WCG brain dead zombie, still licking his wounds."

October 16, 2019 at 5:28 PM

Anonymous said...

Stoner Stephen said:

"The church takes an Old Testament concept and has to force it into
a New Testament construct that is functional to a people in today's society."

I think most folks would recognize this comment as not "overlooking the fundamental fact that tithing was an OLD COVENANT requirement." I think most folks were capable, based on the one observation made about 2nd tithe, that it is understood and assumed tithing is fundamentally understood to be an Old Covenant requirement. But thanks for making your troll comments to clarify to everyone where you are coming from. Maybe you did bring light and clarification to the slow among us. Maybe.

Looks like my reply sailed right over your head. You replied here that you were making ONE point, remember? So my comment shows you clearly making MORE than just the ONE point you were claiming. I could have given other examples.

Also, I used that quote to emphasize that you stated an "Old Testament concept".

Tithing was not a "concept" in the OT. It was the law. So are you stating that you followed the 2nd tithe OT law while you were in the WCG, even though you consider it to only be an "OT concept"? If it is only a concept, why did you follow it? You sound conflicted, and like I have said I doubt you know what you are talking about.

The Old Covenant ended the moment the Messiah died and the veil was torn open.

Hopefully this will shed some light into your mind. Maybe.

Anonymous said...

"Tithing was not a "concept" in the OT. It was the law."

Wrong %$&+@#! The Old Testament consists of the books from Genesis to Malachi. The Old Covenant was the covenant that God made with Israel at Mt. Sinai. Tithing was not an OT law it was an Old Covenant law. Many people in the OT did not tithe (gentiles).

There is nothing wrong with saying that tithing was an OT concept. If my above explanation is too nit-picky for you then maybe you should re-read all of your comments to SSS!

We'll see if Gary allows this one to go through.

km

Stoned Stephen Society said...

You,re right. I'm wrong. You're smart. I'm stupid. You're handsome. I'm ugly. Move along.

Anonymous said...

Tithing verses in the bible:

1. Gen 14:20 Abram and Melchizedek. This was not a command. Tithe is just 10% of anything (Eze 45:11, 14).
2. Gen 28:22 Jacob's vow to tithe. The text does not mention how but this was not a command.
3. Lev 27:30-32 tithe of the LAND and tenth of flock HOLY to the Lord. Verse 34 "THESE ARE THE COMMANDMENTS which the LORD commanded Moses for the children of Israel on Mount Sinai'
4. Num 18:21, 24, 26, 28 Levites given all the tithes in ISRAEL as inheritance IN RETURN for the work of the tabernacle. My take - no temple, no tithing.
5. Deu 12:5-6, 11, 17 2nd tithe. Verse 10 'But when you cross over the Jordan and dwell in the land which the LORD your God is giving you to inherit, ..., then there will be the place where the LORD your God chooses to make HIS NAME ABIDE'. My take - ONLY IN JERUSALEM, NOT ELSEWHERE. Also, no temple, no 2nd tithe.
6. Deu 14:22, 23 tithe increase of your GRAIN, new wine, oil, firstborn of flocks. Notice the difference between first tithe (tenth of flock) and 2nd tithe (firstborn of flock).
7. Deu 14:28; Deu 26:12 3rd tithe of your PRODUCE. My take - applicable only in the land of Israel.

Anonymous said...

Wrong %$&+@#! The Old Testament consists of the books from Genesis to Malachi. The Old Covenant was the covenant that God made with Israel at Mt. Sinai. Tithing was not an OT law it was an Old Covenant law. Many people in the OT did not tithe (gentiles). KM

This is the most bizarre comment I've ever seen here on Banned. Does the OP not realize that the entirety of the Old Covenant is contained within the Old Testament, and that the Old Testament was written about Abraham and his descendants? It was not written about gentiles, who could also join the children of Israel. There is not ONE book dedicated to any gentiles. Therefore it is a non-nonsensical comment, and used as a tactic of distraction from the topic.

Sounds like KM is suffering from Jerusalem Syndrome.

Anonymous said...

Stoned Stephen Society said...

You,re right. I'm wrong. You're smart. I'm stupid. You're handsome. I'm ugly. Move along. SSS



It is a sign of virtue to capitulate when you have been corrected, even publicly. I accept your surrender, Stoner.

(PS: a comma is not an apostrophe)

Now, if we could get KM to remove his foot from his mouth that would be great.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tithing verses in the bible:

1. Gen 14:20 Abram and Melchizedek. This was not a command. Tithe is just 10% of anything (Eze 45:11, 14).

So, do you eat pork then?

nck said...

6:15
Wrong!

Non of the OT consists of books.

It consists of scrolls.

BTW.
The gentiles/"strangers" that exodust with Israel. They did not tithe? Oh wait, they were considered Israel so they were not gentiles......Confusing. Melchizedek/Seth/Noah, descendants of Abraham?

If a gentile is a non jew. Is a Rubenite than a gentile too?

Tithing is it a concept or a law. Oh Hammurabi, help me out here.

Nck

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:35pm

Gen 14:18-20
"Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High.

And he (Melchizedek) blessed him (Abram) and said: “Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; And blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand.”

And he (Abram??) gave him (Melchizedek??) a tithe of all.

Notice the next verse (v21), the king of Sodom offering Abram all the goods. Sounds like a pissing contest. In verses 22-24, Abram refused and said he promised God he would take nothing, "...I will take nothing, ..., and that I will not take anything that is yours, ..." (v23). If Abram tithed, what was he tithed from? He didn't take any spoils of war. Did he bring his tithe from his flock to battle?

Why would Melchizedek give him 'tithe of all'? Because Abram returned what was stolen from Melchizedek. Melchizedek was just giving him a 10% reward. Yes, Abram didn't take anything for himself.

If you would like to pursue this further, you can post your email address so I can respond to you directly. Let us limit our discussion in the Old Testament. Thanks in advance for your understanding.

nck said...

I was just watching a lecture with some of the best medical research available about fasting.
It seems that in combination with chemotherapy, fasting has a significant effect on the reduction of and the spread of cancer.

To extrapolate this research it can be argued (not proven yet) that fasting reduces the chance of obtaining some types of cancer for otherwise considered healthy persons.

The effect of fasting on inflammation reduction (arthritis) is also significant.

Just to show you some of my perspectives when I start having fun on this blog or others on OT or NT customs or Laws or whatever. I really don't care about opinions since I am solely ocupied with the best of science. I'm just living a life of surprise and wonder anytime that science finds reason to promote OT heresies.

Now, could there be some other hidden principles behind and beyond a broader principle as tithing, even far beyond "stealing from god to support your local minister?"

nck

Anonymous said...

"Why would Melchizedek give him 'tithe of all'? Because Abram returned what was stolen from Melchizedek. Melchizedek was just giving him a 10% reward. Yes, Abram didn't take anything for himself."


It looks to me like someone really needs to learn how to read the bible!


Heb 7:4 - Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

Abraham gave tithe to Melchizedek, not vice versa.

km

Anonymous said...

Nck, my bible doesn't consist of scrolls. 😇

km

NO2HWA said...

Give it a rest Kevin. I am going to continue to delete your posts until you can act decently towards others. You can call me anything you want, I don't care. I have better things to do in daily life than to sit here and act like a Jr. High hall monitor. It is your choice whether to act decent to others or not.

Anonymous said...

"It looks to me like someone really needs to learn how to read the bible!" (KM)

the sanctimony is strong with this one, Obi-Wan

Stoned Stephen Society said...

TPT. Sorry, I missed this comment/question to me. I made no anonymous comments to anything you said. I always appreciate your perspective. To anyone else: Disagreeing is always welcome. Trolling is never appreciated.

Anonymous said...

Nck, if you really want to get technical it doesn't consist of scrolls it consists of fragments.

km

nck said...

Km..... Nah I saw scrolls in Israel.
No verses though.

Nck

Anonymous said...

Km..... Nah I saw scrolls in Israel.
No verses though.

Nck

October 20, 2019 at 11:57 AM




Luke 4:17-21 King James Version (KJV)

17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

I'm sure next you tell me that the "book" was just a scroll.

nck said...

6:55

For fun sake.

Just finish the "verse".
Tell your local librarian that you adhere to the practice of "unrolling" books.

You might get "dismembered" for the rape of books and language.

Nck

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:55pm

The Jewish bible, also called TANAKH, were written on scrolls. You can find a picture of the Great Isaiah Scroll, found in Qumran, by going to http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah. You can even 'scroll' that image to view the entire scroll.

Since you cited Luke 4:17-21, I have to point out that this passage is problematic. Verses 18 to 19 were supposedly quoting Isaiah 61:1-2. But it is a misquote! Aside from not being an exact quote, Luke added "And recovery of sight to the blind" which is not found in Isaiah 61. This portion might have been taken from Isaiah 42:7. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I couldn't find Isaiah 61:1-2 quoted in Matthew nor Mark.

The only english translations I can find whose version of Isaiah 61:1-2 conform to Luke 4:18-19 are the New Heart English Bible ('opening of the eyes to the blind') and Brenton Septuagint Translation ('recovery of sight to the blind'). Yes, the Septuagint has that. Only the first five books of Moses were translated by the 70/72 'rabbis' and that original was long lost (Library of Alexandria?).

We have to be honest and examine the credibility of Luke's account. Was he an eyewitness? Was he a Jew? Was he mentioned in any of the gospels? Are we going to believe Jesus was reading from a Septuagint? Or that Jesus inserted words in Isaiah 61:1-2?

Luke 4:18-19
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”

Isaiah 61:1-2
“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me,
Because the Lord has anointed Me
To preach good tidings to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives,
And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,
And the day of vengeance of our God;
To comfort all who mourn,

Isaiah 42:7
To open blind eyes,
To bring out prisoners from the prison,
Those who sit in darkness from the prison house.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:27 pm
Following Ockham’s razor I’d think Luke was quoting the Septuagint.