No, you don't.
You do have a point.

But look at it this way - a tithe is a sacrifice. We all have to sacrifice and put in our time and effort (or money, which is fungible time and effort) for God and the Church, right? So one way or another, it has to exist. And the church facilitates the gathering of our individual efforts to accomplish something that individually we cannot.

The system we have now is basically the church leaders are the ones who will decide how to spend the money, which they are well placed to do being in full time service, and the congregation reviews their efforts and votes with their money if the church is being a good steward. Right?

I agree it's not a perfect system. But what is? I can't think of anything else myself. Can you?

Why do you equate being rich with sinning?

How do you know they sinned to get rich?

How do you know they are still sinning?

How do you know the church is not addressing this?

You are so wrong on the second Adam part. It's so funny.
But I will not even bother explaining to you. You probably cannot understand spiritual things because of your blindness.
Do you even understand what is the meaning of being born again? Yeah that's the clue on the second Adam. But you probably still will not get it.
The way you read the Bible is probably how the atheist read it anyway.
1 Corinthians 15
20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

See. But then even after you have been proven wrong. You probably still will not repent. Because that's your nature.

Wonder why Satan still continue in his ways even though he knows his time is short? I have given  you the clue here.

Lost people always never get it.

You even get rest wrong. But then reprobates like you do not fear God. Maybe another clue. What is the meaning of resting in God?
Hebrews 4
1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.

2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.

5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.

6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:

7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.

10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.

11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

See. Your whole post is rubbish.

It's just mr penguin if you havent already realised that

Eh, just wanna ask...which church is biggest in Malaysia?

Ekklesia. But a larger ekklesia might need a larger building to fit.

so god=human??

wtf

Given your serious allegations & respectfully coming from you, i trust that they are all first person accounts & not merely hearsay, eh jul? 

SIBKL has 4k members, so i'm sure in every congregation, there will be bad eggs, no? Wheat & tares?

They seem to be very transparent with where their funds are going. Have been church planting very well in your home state. They gave a break down of the funds at the 1st service of the year.

Particularly active arnd the Ranau area (missions) if i'm not mistaken, where witchcraft is extremely strong.

Also, the pastors are highly accountable to each other. They slug it out, or so i've heard.

You know, Ps Chew admitted that he fell morally some 30 odd years ago, at one of the services a few months back. You could literally hear a pin drop atm across the sanctuary     

Unfortunately you do not practice that in this thread.

And what do you mean by scripture is the sole source of authority?

Which scripture?

The NIV? ESV, KJB

Which differs from each other?

How can they be equally authoritative if they differ from each other?

As you can see, we are all human.

Well then it proves you do not believe in God's words then

So you do not believe that the following verse then

Matthew 24:35

Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

But then by your previous post, you just admitted that God never preserve his words.

Actually KJV is not in old English.

Compare shakespearean English with KJV. There's a huge difference.

Then show everybody here how is the Christ in NASB, ESV different from the Christ of the KJV.

Show us how the words and verses can lead to false Christ and ultimately no salvation?

You can't because no doctrines were formed from a single word or verse.

The other important principle from the Reformation is this: scriptura es sui interpres, which means the scripture explains scripture in latin. (scripture is its own interpreter)

Even if someone tries to alter a part of scripture, other parts will contradict and correct it.

Even if scribes try to change the whole new testament, the old testament can be a witness against that. The old testament is the new concealed, and the new is the old revealed. There's no way scribes can muck up the new testament without any external witness.

I believe this is how God preserved His word.

You believe that in order for God to preserve His word, He has to divinely and mechanically control all the scribes again and again to that no one makes any mistake in copying scriptures, which I find that will be very hard to prove because ultimately, the original autograph is gone.

But whatever, you can believe what you want.

Speaking of this, the issue of baptism comes to mind.

People always question why are the Presbyterians so stubborn to not do immersion baptism.

If you do a greek lexicon study of the word baptism and how it was used by people in those days, you will come to a conclusion that baptism is by immersion.

But if you study the original Hebrew rendering of baptism from the OT, you will find the baptism can mean wash, submerge, dip, sprinkle.

Amd then you find 1st century Christian art where they drew people in the river with, with water pouring over their heads, you will understand why Presbyterians insist on sprinkling.

15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:
16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the Lord.

Bible believers often are confronted with the charge that the Bible is filled with mistakes. These alleged mistakes can be placed into two major categories: (1) apparent internal inconsistencies among revealed data; and (2) scribal mistakes in the underlying manuscripts themselves. The former category involves those situations in which there are apparent discrepancies between biblical texts regarding a specific event, person, place, etc. [For a treatment of such difficulties see Archer, 1982; Geisler and Brooks, 1989, pp. 163-178]. The latter category involves a much more fundamental concern—the integrity of the underlying documents of our English translations. Some charge that the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts, having been copied and recopied by hand over many years, contain a plethora of scribal errors that have altered significantly the information presented in the original documents. As such, we cannot be confident that our English translations reflect the information initially penned by biblical writers. However, the materials discovered at Qumran, commonly called the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided impressive evidence for both the integrity of the Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts of the Old Testament and the authenticity of the books themselves.

Scholars were anxious to confirm that these Dead Sea Scrolls were the most ancient of all Old Testament manuscripts in the Hebrew language. Three types of dating tools were used: tools from archaeology, from the study of ancient languages, called paleography and orthography, and the carbon-14 dating method. Each can derive accurate results. When all the methods arrive at the same conclusion, there is an increased reliability in the dating.

Archaeologists studied the pottery, coins, graves, and garments at Khirbet Qumran, where the Essenes lived. They arrived at a date ranging from the second century B.C. to the first century A.D. Paleographers studied the style of writing and arrived at dates raging from the third century B.C. to the first century A.D. Scientists, using the radiocarbon dating method, dated the scrolls to range from the fourth century B.C. to the first century A.D. Since all the methods came to a similar conclusion, scholars are very confident in their assigned date for the texts. The scrolls date as early as the third century B.C. to the first century A.D.{1}

Eleven caves were discovered containing nearly 1,100 ancient documents which included several scrolls and more than 100,000 fragments.{2} Fragments from every Old Testament book except for the book of Esther were discovered. Other works included apocryphal books, commentaries, manuals of discipline for the Qumran community, and theological texts. The majority of the texts were written in the Hebrew language, but there were also manuscripts written in Aramaic and Greek.{3}

Among the eleven caves, Cave 1, which was excavated in 1949, and Cave 4, excavated in 1952, proved to be the most productive caves. One of the most significant discoveries was a well-preserved scroll of the entire book of Isaiah.

The famous Copper Scrolls were discovered in Cave 3 in 1952. Unlike most of the scrolls that were written on leather or parchment, these were written on copper and provided directions to sixty-four sites around Jerusalem that were said to contain hidden treasure. So far, no treasure has been found at the sites that have been investigated.

The oldest known piece of biblical Hebrew is a fragment from the book of Samuel discovered in Cave 4, and is dated from the third century B.C.{4} The War Scroll found in Caves 1 and 4 is an eschatological text describing a forty-year war between the Sons of Light and the evil Sons of Darkness. The Temple Scroll discovered in Cave 11 is the largest and describes a future Temple in Jerusalem that will be built at the end of the age.

Indeed, these were the most ancient Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament ever found, and their contents would yield valuable insights to our understanding of Judaism and early Christianity.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text
The Dead Sea Scrolls play a crucial role in assessing the accurate preservation of the Old Testament. With its hundreds of manuscripts from every book except Esther, detailed comparisons can be made with more recent texts.

The Old Testament that we use today is translated from what is called the Masoretic Text. The Masoretes were Jewish scholars who between A.D. 500 and 950 gave the Old Testament the form that we use today. Until the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947, the oldest Hebrew text of the Old Testament was the Masoretic Aleppo Codex which dates to A.D. 935.{5}

With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, we now had manuscripts that predated the Masoretic Text by about one thousand years. Scholars were anxious to see how the Dead Sea documents would match up with the Masoretic Text. If a significant amount of differences were found, we could conclude that our Old Testament Text had not been well preserved. Critics, along with religious groups such as Muslims and Mormons, often make the claim that the present day Old Testament has been corrupted and is not well preserved. According to these religious groups, this would explain the contradictions between the Old Testament and their religious teachings.

After years of careful study, it has been concluded that the Dead Sea Scrolls give substantial confirmation that our Old Testament has been accurately preserved. The scrolls were found to be almost identical with the Masoretic text. Hebrew Scholar Millar Burrows writes, “It is a matter of wonder that through something like one thousand years the text underwent so little alteration. As I said in my first article on the scroll, ‘Herein lies its chief importance, supporting the fidelity of the Masoretic tradition.'”{6}

A significant comparison study was conducted with the Isaiah Scroll written around 100 B.C. that was found among the Dead Sea documents and the book of Isaiah found in the Masoretic text. After much research, scholars found that the two texts were practically identical. Most variants were minor spelling differences, and none affected the meaning of the text.

One of the most respected Old Testament scholars, the late Gleason Archer, examined the two Isaiah scrolls found in Cave 1 and wrote, “Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The five percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling.”{7}

Despite the thousand year gap, scholars found the Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls to be nearly identical. The Dead Sea Scrolls provide valuable evidence that the Old Testament had been accurately and carefully preserved.

Because different people have different interpretations of the Bible. Thanks to their Sola Scriptura.

Extra Scriptura is acceptable because Tradition came long before the New Testament was written down, as St John mentioned in chapter 21 verse 25 of the gospel according to his name. What early orthodox Christians believed are definitely different from what Joseph Smith (came only in 19th century) and Mohammad (7th century) taught. If you are using celibacy to counter Catholic teaching, might as well say Jesus and Paul should't be celibate. Very lame.