Okay ladies and gentlemen, here’s how it’s going to go. This posting is dedicated to the question of Tithing. Any one who wants to comment, even repeat comments they made earlier on a different posting, can comment here.
But here are the rules for the comments:
1. You must read the essay I wrote and have posted under the essays link. Click here to download the essay.
2. In your comment you must either tell us why something in the essay is wrong, misinterpreted, or biased or present something not previously discussed in the essay. Quoting Jesus and saying that this proves that the New Testament says we have to tithes is not doing so. I discuss the New Testament in the essay. Instead, try to tell me why my position on Jesus’ words and the assertion that they were under the Old Testament and the Law is wrong - from Scripture.
3. Provide Scripture in you response. Do not use such phrases as “anyone can see…”, “it’s obvious that…” or other comments and statements that assume there is support from Scripture. Provide the support. And make sure I haven’t already addressed it in the essay.
Read the entire essay. Don’t read part of it and then like John Jenkins stop and respond “I see where you are going with this.”
Again, the intent here is to address the issues, not continuously go around in circles.
The questions: Is a Christian REQUIRED TO TITHE? Is he stealing from God when he doesn’t?
Don’t bother to tell me that giving is good. We know that. Don’t tell me that tithing gets you in the habit of giving. That is not the question.
If any of you still want to comment, have at it. And limit your tithing comments to this post please. That way if folks don’t want to participate, they don’t have to.
This will be interesting indeed. Hopefully this will be a fruitfull discussion. BTW, i’m hoping we can get into some Deutoronomy, Leviticus, and Numbers where the law was established, instead of the same ol’ Malichi chapter 3.
(MN: You should be happy. The essay covers stuff from Genesis to Malachi. It’s an attempt to pull in the whole counsel of God. )
(MN: Using the same word to mean the same thing is important in any discussion. I’ve been married almost thirty-two years and have discovered that this is one of life’s non-negotiable truths. In this discussion, I suspect we will have to establish a couple of defintions - again in order to prevent any dizzying circular discussions. For this discussion I want to differentiate between Tithing and giving. For this discussion Tithing is defined by the rules of the Old Testament (in the Pentateuch). It is not synonymous with giving. Giving, as the term is used in the essay and in the New Testament, is exactly that - giving. For this discussion, if you are not talking about the system used to support the Temple system, please refer to the action as “giving”. If you are talking about the system used to support the Temple system, refer to it as Tithing. This should help us to stay synchronized in the discussion. As you read the following comment [which I thought was pretty good, if wordy] you can see how mixing the terms clouds the discussion.
Again:
Tithe = The method used to support the Temple system.
Giving = That action we take based on a desire which God lays on our hearts to support the pastor, each other, or activities that God wants supported and uses us (the Body of Christ) to support.
Remember, tithing is NOT simply the act of giving 10% of some item, be it time, talent, or treasure. )
I read MJ’s essay, and I agree: There is no New Testament admonition to pay tithes.
The reason is because, as the essay made clear, we are not under law; that is, we don’t “have to” pay tithes.
However, where I’m coming from is that Jesus taught us to love God and to love our neighbor. Love is sacrificial, and disciplines itself so that others can benefit even if it comes at our expense. If we do this then tithing, it would seem, would be a natural response in the freedom that we have been Christ rather than a requirement of Law.
Why? Because the tithe that we give to the church CAN BE USED for furthering the gospel, the presentation of Christian literature, support of missionaries, and, of course, pastors (NOTE: I never said that it can be used for a church building…..so no one please try argue that tithing is wrong because people use it just for that………as if it was ever just for that). Regular giving can accomplish this as well, but there’s no reason to say that tithing doesn’t. Regarding the latter, look at what it says in 1 Corinthians 9:1-14:
The Rights of an Apostle
1Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? 2Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
3This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. 4Don’t we have the right to food and drink? 5Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas[a]? 6Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?
7Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? 8Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? 9For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.”[b] Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. 11If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?
But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. 13Don’t you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? 14In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.
Jesus said that workers deserve their wages (Luke 10:17), and Paul echoes this thought and urges the church to be sure to pay their Christian workers. Paul is teaching us here that those who work at something have the right to make a living from it. This is a basic and simple principle that is found in the scriptures. In 1 Tim. 5:18, Paul says, “For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.” Even though he willingly gave up his personal rights to win people for Christ (I Corinthians 9:4).The fact remains that he deserved to be paid for his work.
Clearly those who work in the ministry are allowed to make a living from the ministry. How can they do this if they are not supported by tithes from the very congregation that the feed?
This becomes more obvious when we realize that ministers often work more than 40 hours a week (often unexpected) and are usually on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week……and this even when having a job outside of ministry.
To say that regular giving alone is enough doesn’t cut it, especially when realizing that most people in congregations give very little when not challenged to and that regular giving cannot be measured continually in concrete amounts. Having an uncertain amount to live off on wouldn’t be very practical and unfair to the Pastor, not to mention hypocritical on the parts of the members (ex: “I’d be so upset if my employer kept changing my wages constantly, but thankfully I have a job I support my family off of and get a certain amount constantly to work with, but I think you should do the same amount of work, if not more, that I do and deserve what the people at our fellowship feel like giving, but don’t worry…..your family should do just fine. We’re all glorifying God”)
Just as a regular Congregation member has a job where a certain amount of pay is given so they can plan around it/budget around it for their families, why should Pastoral ministry be any different? It’s as much of a job as anything else and having a set amount given seems to be common sense……something that tithing would seem to solve.
This becomes more obvious when we realize that ministers often work more than 40 hours a week (often unexpected) and are usually on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week……and this even when having a job outside of ministry.
Therefore, it’d seem fair to say that tithing is, more or less, expected in the New Testament but we would not say that any Christian is under OBLIGATION to tithe. It should be done out of the kindness and generosity of the heart as an act of worship before God……not as if one simply having to pay a bill (though I must say that those who view tithing simply as that don’t do it justice because it can be so much more)
Those who disagree, there’s really no need to trip. Unless those who tithe are forcing you to do so, relax. They’re doing it unto God, as those who don’t claim to be doing the same.
To clarify, this one was by me…..
Pray that my last statement clarifies all of my other previous ones (i.e. other anonymous ones where my moniker wasn’t present too) from earlier when I said that the PRINCIPLES/SPIRIT BEHIND TITHING WERE STILL RELEVANT (i.e. Worship for the Lord, giving whatever is of our best to Him rather than what’s left over, supporting ministry, sharing FAIR/EQUAL responsibility meeting the needs of members of the local church or Christian community which is God’s NEW Temple/Church Body, I Corinthians 3:16-17, etc) ……
I was never for promoting the EXACT methodology used to support the temple system…. (that was part of my frustration from earlier, for it felt that words were being placed in my mouth and I was being told I’d supported that when obviously that’d be foolishness……the mechanics, as Mr. Melvin said obviously aren’t there, and a whole lot of dangerous improvising would have to take place…..something that we all know God doesn’t like!)
Regardless of your stance (though personally, I’m for both regular giving and tithing, or least giving a set amount since the definition of “Tithing” in this discussion means different), what matters is whether one’s seeking to study, back actions by the Word and question whether those actions are based on giving God “Our utmost for His Highest” (I Corinthians 10:31, Colossians 3:17)
(MN: There is no tithing aside from that defined in the OT. How am I to give and tithe? Again, for this discussion, use “give” if you are not talking about supporting the temple. Use “tithe” if you are talking about supporting the Temple.
So are you saying the believer should give at least 10% of their income to the church organization? If so, why? How does this differ from the Government demanding a percentage of my income to spend as it sees fit? Do I have to give at least 10% of my income? If I don’t give that 10% am I being disobedient to God?
Again, are you saying that the Christian should give 10%? If so, how come you don’t say we should give 20 percent? Or 50%? If there is an ideal percentage that I am to give, how is that percentage determined?
Address the issues covered in the paper. Don’t simply tell me why you think we should tithe (or give 10% as you are actually saying). And if you are promoting the EXACT system, how did you figure out how much of the temple system to keep and use? And why do you still call it tithing? Afterall, God defines tithing and what you’re doing doesn’t fit that definition. Or am I missing something in the essay? )
Mel,
I never said that you should default at 10%……If you want to give 30%, 50%, or more, by all means do so. As I’ve said before, The issue isn’t the amount so much the amount as it is the reasoning behind why one gave it. For some, 10% percent may be too much of a burden to handle, which I believe the other members should help out. To embarrass them or to simply “pressure” them to give without any assistance is something I personally hate.
If witholding an amount is for any other reason like spending it on self (i.e. entertaiment, worrying about feeding yourself before giving to feed another, buying clothes rather than investing to clothe the homeless….and generally being concerned with everything God said not to worry about if we’re for His Kingdom….Matthew 6:25-34)…..that’s an issue.
If you differ, why do you think that disciplining oneself to give a small amount of income is a waste? Or still feel that to give an amount is like having to give to the government?
We’re not talking about an beaurcratic organization that often doesn’t care for your welfare or have no control over what it’s doing while using the money you give to support causes not in line with Scripture (much like taxes do)…..We’re talking about giving to support thE CHURCH, where you know that your investment is not in vain if it’s a godly fellowship and that needs funding if it’s to do the things we’re commissioned to do.
Again, logically, why would you NOT WANT to give a certain amount WHEN YOU KNOW HOW IT’LL BENEFIT SOMEONE (And please don’t say I said “Tithing”….I’m talking about simple sacrifical giving)? (MN: I may not want to give a particular amount because I may have something else to do with it. Or I may disagree with the church organization involving itself in a particular activity, as beneficial as it may seem. As an example, the church I attend advertises on WAVA. I don’t help them do that. I’m not at all certain they should be in anyway identified with this station. Plus, I don’t believe sacrifical giving is the norm, nor really spoken of in the Bible. Where, exactly does the sacrifice stop? Or how much does it have to hurt to count as a sacrifice? Should I give rather than attend to my son’s medical needs? Should I give rather than buy some decent clothes for my wife? What magnitude of “sacrifice” should take place in order to count as sacrificial? If the church wants to do something and I have to kill my cable subscription to support it, is that sacrificial? If I need money so I can repair my car, so I can get to work, should I give “sacrificially” and not get the car fixed? The term sounds nice, but it’s not one that can be quantified. Or course it can be used to guilt people into giving. The New Testament talks about our relationships with each other and about supporting the workers in the church. It doesn’t talk about amounts, sacrificial vs not sacrificial, or anything else. It talks about giving as God has moved on my heart.
Sometimes it might be expensive and sometimes it won’t. As an example, a couple of months ago, I struck up a conversation with a fellow I met downtown. It turns out he had just gotten out of prison and was going for an interview at a restaurant that afternoon. He needed some toiletries to get ready. I took him to the nearby CVS and he spent about $60.00 for supplies. I do bleieve God had me do this for him. Did “The Church” get that $60? No. Did I give? I believe so. Was it as God moved on my heart? I certianly believe so. Along the same line, I had a “friend” on one of the corners. When I could, on the way to work, he and I would have breakfast together. Not a lot of money, but in keeping with God’s move on my heart. I suspect these acts come closer than. )
I thought I made it explicitly clear why I believe it would be beneficial to give at least 10% to ministry (again, go back and read my point….it was regarding a wise way to support ministers and things of the ministry……thought you read it yourself and even said it was good) (MN: This is the first time you didn’t use the word “tithe” in your comment. And even with the first I pointed out that the use of the word “tithe” tended to muddy up the contents. And you didn’t make it clear why 10% is the magic number or why it has to be given to the church organization. )
And again, IF YOU READ MY STATEMENT FULLY, I said that I was never for promoting the EXACT SYSTEM!!!!! You’re overlooking my point……I’m talking about the Spirit of the Law, not the EXACT PRACTICE! Don’t know how much clearer I could get in saying that (MN: Exactly as you have, by not using the word “tithe” as though it is interchangeable with “give”. )….so please don’t bring it up again as if it wasn’t addressed. (MN: As long as you don’t use the two words as thought they are interchangeable. )
Grace opens to what you are able to give, as Paul instructs to give generously with what you have, not what one does not have……so I can graciously give 10%, 25%, 35%. No set standard.
There is no pentaly if I do not have it to give.
What about the tithe? The tithe places a restriction on what you cannot account for yourself, no matter what you have need of.
There is a penalty associated (according to many preachers) with not producing the tithe of “your increase”.
Malachi 3:9
Ye [are] cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, [even] this whole nation.
What nation have I robbed? Wasn’t the wrath of God for matters such as this POURED out on Jesus? He is my atonement.
Romans 5:9-11
9) Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10)For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
11) And not only [so], but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.
Which one is it? Do I graciously give? Or do I tithe? We cannot call it a tithe if we say we believe in giving by grace.
Grace places no bounds or restrictions…..tithe (the tenth) does, it in fact places a grudge as one cannot freely GIVE while being bound to a written requirement.
I can give 10% as I have decided in my heart beforehand. That is the “principle” of the tithe, not the regulation.
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.
Notice the scripture states….”…..as he purposeth in his heart…….” Paul is clearly admonishing a decision on the behalf of the giver beforehand. Yet, in the next verse (2 Cor 9:8) he goes further to encourage “generous” giving. Tithing does not…..these two ideologies do not coincide.
The instant I start quoting Malachi 3:10, I fall back into the legalistic requirements of my righteousness being fulfilled.
Jesus fulfilled this for me, thats why I give graciously to him….the same way Abram gave to Melchizedek. Out of thanks (graciously), not because of written laws that instruct me to do so.
Excellent answers. Your response pretty much nailed it for me. Scripture is the final authority.
Melvin said, “Again, are you saying that the Christian should give 10%? If so, how come you don’t say we should give 20 percent? Or 50%? If there is an ideal percentage that I am to give, how is that percentage determined?”
The word “tithe” means tenth or 10%.
(MN: Yeah. And? )
Who cares if G. Craig is pro-tithe…
G2 what did you just say? You quoted the Apostles stance of being free 1 Cor 9:14. Why?
It has nothing to do with the tithe. Why talk about giving? It has nothing to do with the issue, either.
We all agree with that, that as Christ is centered in our lives giving is the creed of one who belongs to the Lord.
Wish people would stop talking about that to give cred to their stance, we are not talking about greed, or selfishness.
We are talking about men being BOUND to the letter of the law (as written in Malachi & Leviticus) to tithe.
Tithe pre-law….the tithe was given by Abram to Melchizedek, ONCE. (Gen 14:18-20) As an act of reverence for the victory in war.
This was pre-law, and a free will gift to the King. So it cannot be used (this FREE-WILL gift from Abram) to validate the law of Moses which was established afterward.
If you want to quote the writer of Hebrews, he emphasizes this same freedom (as Abram gave the spoils of war FREELY to Melchizedek) and the fact that the line of Chist as being a type of Melchizedek.
This line is clearly stated as being greater than the line of Aaron (Levites).
Hebrews 7:5-7
5) And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:
6) But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.
7) And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.
“The less is blessed of the better.”
The Levites were the priests to whom the tithes were paid to. Right? This law was established to support the Levites (the priests whom ruled the people).
Aaron was the first anointed priest. His descendants, “the house of Aaron,” constituted the priesthood in general.
In the time of David they were very numerous (1 Ch 12:27). The other branches of the tribe of Levi held subordinate positions in connection with the sacred office.
Aaron was a type of Christ in his official character as the high priest. His priesthood was a “shadow of heavenly things,” (Hebrews 8:5) and was intended to lead the people of Israel to look forward to the time when “another priest” would arise “after the order of Melchizedek” ( Hbr 6:20).
So the priesthood was not after the order of Aaron, it was after the order of a more superior priest.
Superiority of his priesthood to that of Aaron in these several respects,
-Even Abraham paid him tithes;
-He blessed Abraham;
-He is the type of a Priest who lives for ever
-Levi, yet unborn, paid him tithes in the person of Abraham;
-The permanence of his priesthood in Christ implied the abrogation (elimination) of the Levitical system;
-He was made priest not without an oath;
-His priesthood can neither be transmitted nor interrupted by death: “this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.”
So which do we follow? The priesthood that was eliminated? Or the priesthood that abides forever?
Galatians 5:1
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
What is Paul talking about? If you read Galatians, you will see that false teachers crept in stating that one had to follow Jewish laws of circumcision in order to be saved.
Observance of WRITTEN (external, not internal)laws. These things were not true any longer, Paul was teaching against this creeping in among them & to not receive it.
In addition, if you are going to tithe….livestock was what was tithed. Mint and cummin, as well…not to mention there was a currency system in which money existed. When did the tithe become currency?
One more thing….Malachi…..the people were not robbing God. the PRIESTS were. I believe it is very similar to what Eli was allowing his sons to do to the people with their offerings. God was not pleased with the Priests that he appointed and how they were governing the people.
Actually, it was both brah…….the priests were robbing God in the way they were offering sacrifices, for they were not driven to bring anything of value to God (much like we can do when we give Him our leftover time, money, and energy)…..
They sacrificed to God wrongly through 1.) expedience–being as cheap as possible, 2.) neglect–not caring for how they offered the sacrifice, and 3.) outright disobediance—sacrificing their own way and not as God commanded them to, revealing that they didn’t truly care about Worship for the Lord and That the worship of God was no longer from heartfelt adoration as intended, but had becomes simply a burdensome job for the priest
The people, which is what Malachi III is focused on after God admonishes the priest in Malachi 1:6-14 and Malcahi 2:1-9, were robbing God because they held back their tithes, to stop keeping from God what He deserved, which consequently led to the Levites not earning a living for their costly work, causing them to go to work and earn a living, neglecting their God-Given responsibilities.
No One was innocent……
(MN: So how do you tie the sacrifice in with the Tithe? God specifically said they were robbing in the Tithes and Offerings. They weren’t bring things of little worth - they weren’t bringing anything. Where is the rest of what you say “…which consequently led to the Levites not earning a living for their costly work…”? Where, exactly, do you get this? )
When did the Levites NOT rule? Where is this in scripture?
(MN: So how do you tie the sacrifice in with the Tithe? God specifically said they were robbing in the Tithes and Offerings. They weren’t bring things of little worth - they weren’t bringing anything”)
To clarify, the priest were guilty because ALLOWING the people to offer blind, crippled and diseased animals to God, God accused them of dishonoring Him.
By taking the sacrifices of the people and offering them up, they greatly displeased God and essentiall showed contempt for His name (Malachi 1:6-8).
They were intermediaries between the people and God and responsible for reflecting God’s attitudes and character.
Accepting imperfect sacrifices led to the people believing that the Lord accepts anything, and they esentially “robbed” God by not rendering unto him the greatness His name deserved to be displayed before men(Malachi 1:10-14, Malachi 2:1-9)
(MN: “Where is the rest of what you say “…which consequently led to the Levites not earning a living for their costly work…”? Where, exactly, do you get this?”)
As you probably know, the tithing system began during the time of Moses (Leviticus 27:30-34, Deuteronnomy 14:22), and the Levites were able to benefit off of it.
Seeing that they were FULL-TIME ministers and consequently not be allowed room to provide for themselves, they were to never have to go outside to get a job or be placed in a position where they would become distracted and eventually despondent concerning their jobs (as if often the case when one doesn’t have a secure source of income/stability), which is one reason why they were supported by the tithes of the people who gave them homes, flocks and pasturelands.(Numbers 18:20-21, Numbers 35:2-3).
The tithe was essentially part of their income, and a way to ensure that they wouln
The connection seems to be pretty apparent, especially considering that it’s happned before.
In Judges 17:7-13, where “everyone did as he saw fit” and replaced God’s standards/True worship with a homemade version, the Israelites no longer supported the priests and the Levites with their tithes because so many people no longer worshiped God.
The young Levite in the story left his home because the money he recieved from the people there was no longer enough to live on.
As a result of Israel’s moral decay, even the priests and Levites were affected, for he eventually accepted money (Judges 17:10) OUTSIDE OF GOD’S DESIGNATED SOURCE OF TITHES, idolatry (Judges 18:20), and position (Judges 17:12)……doing ministry anyway he saw fit in God’s name (Judges 18:4-6) and eventually using the Lord for selfish gain (Judges 18:11-26)
All of this is almost redundant. If this is true for us today…..
Why did not Paul collect TITHES?
Peter?
Matthew?
Andrew?
James?
John?
Thomas?
Bartholomew?
Philip?
Maybe Judas? (He didn’t and he was the treasurer)
For all the reasons listed in the OT are good….but none of the Apostles nor Jesus Christ himself did any of these things. They all consistently point to him as the fulfillment of these matters.
When they gave, it was freely…to the poor…..and out of the circumcision of the heart.
Rom 2:29
“…….and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.”
Grid, it is redundant. And the point that you just raised should at least spark some interest to investigate further.
LUKE 18 (notice this is a parable meaning it is designed to illustrate or teach a principle) so please do not answer my question below, by telling saying, “This does not apply to us today because we do not have cattle or we are not in the same time period.”) Thanks.
10Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
What was wrong with the Pharisee, the fact that he paid tithes (sounds like he paid tithes from his increase, what we would consider income as I do believe he had a job and if he was giving from ALL he possessed as possession came in returned tithe=10 percent), or was it because he was prideful and religiously giving? Why didn’t Jesus rebuke him for being prideful and paying tithes?
Since Jesus’ mission was to fulfill the law (carry out the law, not subtracting or adding to it), I would think that whatever was a ungodly practice like making the temple a den of theives, Jesus would have publicly spoke against it.
(MN: This is borderline “Jesus said…” but I, as the benevolent dictator, will post it anyway. This one depends on Jesus approving of the Tithe and not recognizing that Jesus was speaking under the old covenant. Additionally, no one denies that attitude is critical. But this doesn’t address whether or not Tithing is REQUIRED of the Christian. It only establishes that God is interested in our hearts. )
Jesus did not affirm the tithe here. NT scripture anyone?? C’mon…let’s not READ into the parable.
He did not have to speak on it, as an obedient Jew he would not dare break the law HE (as God) established….the tithe was binding until calvary……sin offerings were binding…until calvary….sabbath days were bhinding…until calvary…..his desire was to reveal the heart of the law to the people, not the letter of the law.
……Jesus dealt with the hearts of men.
You notice that he spoke in parables to the people….and plainly to the disciples…..in Matth 23:23, the tithe is used to REBUKE…..not to affirm….why would he affirm men he called “blind guides”?
He didn’t and never did affirm them, that’s where context gets taken out of line. He affirmed those whose hearts were contrite.
He never affirmed those whom wanted him killed. He knew their hearts. So he used his own law (the heart of it) to rebuke them (their written interpretation of it).
The parable used here in Luke 18:10-14 demonstrates the motive of the heart….using the tithe to rebuke…again.
He never affirms it, nor them. As an obedient Jew….why would he admonish the law to be broken? He would have reason to be arrested, and given up to the Roman govm’t.
Once his mission (to fulfill the law) was complete, we are free from the bounds of it. Isn’t this why he came? To free us (while we were yet sinners….Christ died)?
The Apostle Paul was so obedient to the law as a Pharissee, he was never accused of a fault once. He never admonished the tithe.
Why? Instead both He and Jesus (when speaking about tithes) used them to (rebuke hard hearted leaders, & admonish believers) illustrate a FAR more important point that cannot be interpreted by written law.
Thanks for answering my questions.
Thank you for that definition MJ….that hopefully will kill the synonymous reasoning.
Be interested to hear what G.Craig has to say on this one, seeing that he’s pro-tithing. Just curious….
G Craig is not correct in everything he says. While I agree with most of what he says, he has missed it on some things.
You’re right……and the same thing goes for here too. But I’d still be interested in hearing his thoughts.
(MN: You could always write him and ask. )
Actually, I listened to a podcast of his and him discussing how one being faithful in paying their tithes anyway despite what comes against them will lead them to be blessed eventually (I’m paraphrasing).
Check it out in the “G. Craige Lewis Keys Sermon” on the “Resources” section of the site…….( http://www.exministries.com/downloads.html )
I believe that about G. Craige as well. One being that Lobias Murray renders himself as an “Apostle”. I do not know him, not do I live in TX, but I do not see how that can be negotiated…..that office is closed.
(MN: Do you want to try again? It looks as if you hit the “post” button a little too soon. )
Shalom,
I know you guys have exhausted this topic so I’ll try to deal with subjects that weren’t discussed(or atleast I couldn’t locate it).
How about the FREQUENCY of the tithe giving? Where did the rule come from that the church gets 10% every week!!??
The tithe was collected once from the first of the Holy Foods(Dt.14:22) not everytime a crop sprung out the same field and NOT from objects that bore the image of men (Mt.22:20-21). The things of GOD aren’t defiled by the images of men. (MN: Even Benjamins?!?!?! )
The tithes (clean animals/crops) could only be converted into money if the quanity became a burden to carry when traveling from a distant land. However, the tither had to purchase the biblical TITHE when he arrived at Temple(Dt. 14:24-26).
Those entitled to the tithe were not just the Levites:
*The Husbandless (Dt.14:29; 26:12)
*The Fatherless (Dt.14:29; 26:12)
*The Levite(Dt.14:29;26:12)
Notice these folks had no inheritance in the Promised Land. The Husbandless had no head of household to claim her portion. The Fatherless had no Father to pass on the inheritance so he had no claim. And of course The Head of the Levite’s Household was ADONAI, their Father.
Again in Malachi chapter 3 specifically ver
Agreed. but…the Levites were within the line of Jacob, which God specifically appointed the priesthood to, for his own service.
The tithes for those w/o inheritance (Husbandless, and Fatherless) do not measure the same standard with which God had appointed the Levites.
They were set apart and the Lord was their inheritance. This differs with regard to family lineage as God appropriated them for himself only:
Deut 18:1-2
The priests the Levites, [and] all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel: they shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and his inheritance.
Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren: the LORD [is] their inheritance, as he hath said unto them.
I agree wholheartedly with everything else, the entire standard needs to be measured.
Shalom,
I know you guys have exhausted this topic so I’ll try to deal with subjects that weren’t discussed(or atleast I couldn’t locate it). (MN: Actually, this is covered in the essay. But because I like your treatment, I’ll go ahead an post it for the drive-bys. )
How about the FREQUENCY of the tithe giving? Where did the rule come from that the church gets 10% every week!!??
The tithe was collected once from the first of the Holy Foods(Dt.14:22) not everytime a crop sprung out the same field and NOT from objects that bore the image of men(Mt.22:20-21). The things of GOD aren’t defiled by the images of men.
The tithes(clean animals/crops) could only be converted into money if the quanity became a burden to carry when traveling from a distant land. However, the tither had to purchase the biblical TITHE when he arrived at Temple(Dt. 14:24-26).
Those entitled to the tithe were not just the Levites:
*The Husbandless (Dt.14:29; 26:12)
*The Fatherless (Dt.14:29; 26:12)
*The Levite(Dt.14:29;26:12)
Notice these folks had to inheritance in the Promised Land. The Husbandless had no head of household to claim her portion. The Fatherless had no Father to pass on the inheritance so he had no claim. And of course The Head of the Levite’s Household was ADONAI, their Father.
Again in Malachi chapter 3 specifically verse 5, ADONAI says about the offerings of Israel that HE will stand as a Witness in Judgement against those who are opressing the:
*Husbandless(MK:12:40-42(nobody to claim portion)
*Gentile(nobody to claim Israelite portion)
*Fatherless(nobody to pass on portion)
Also, the Levites were those who worked in the Temple which held the following positions(1chron.23:4-5):
*Singers/The Choir
*Door Keepers(security)
and when these choir members didn’t receive their portion they left(Neh.10:13). If modern preachers want the tithe, why aren’t they sharing with their Choir?
for another perspective check out:
http://www.shouldthechurchteachtithing.com/
http://www.powerofaith.com/tithe.htm
Shalom Alechem,
Avishalom
ATTN: Avishalom - I truly love the clarity of this post. Truthseekers will do well to study the Scriptures you have referenced. I’ve cut and pasted to my notebook for further study. Too bad the wolves in sheep’s clothing blatantly ignore Scriptural instruction and prefer to pur$ue the 30 piece$ of $ilver and then $ome.
LOL….Avishalom (aka Antoine Mason for those whom do not know, or remember - check the posting archives).
Good Post.
Shalom Grid,
Antoine Mason!? Nope, sorry. I have posted under my real name “Sid”/ “Sidney” though. This was about six months ago.
M-kay. Then I definitely retract that statement…..Sidney.
Shalom Grid,
no prob’. But the wife won’t let it go. You know “Antoine” is associated with the more feminine brothers, so I now I have new nickname.
Jenkins did a series on tithing last year. He claimed tithing was mandated and mentioned in New Testament. I searched the scriptures for myself, and I found that to be untrue.
An accurate scripture study will reveal tithing is not mandatory under the new covenant. Therefore, we should never be told “tithing is mandatory”.
(MN: When I was there, John did a series about every other year. Some of them [like the one he illustrated with fruit] are quite effective. Unfortunately, effective isn’t always the same as accurate or faithful to Scripture. )
Colossians 2:13-15 (NIV) (Freedom From Human Regualtions Through Life With Christ)
13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, GOD made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; He took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
This line of New Testament scripture alone is why I don’t feel obligated to tithe. Christianity is a spiritual walk…not a walk of materialism (which is what so-called “faithful tithers” support i.e. a walk of materialism).
“Christianity is a spiritual walk…not a walk of materialism (which is what so-called “faithful tithers” support i.e. a walk of materialism).
Materialism, brah, is the theory that MATTER and matter only, exists in the universe….an attitude that ignores spiritual values. Those who tit, err, want to give sacrifically (at least me) don’t ignore this fact.
Perhaps many for it have twisted it into something horrible, such as giving to get or living for the physical blessings, but that doesn’t equate with all persons who do so having the same mentality. To do so would be to give a broad stroke. Pray you understand.
Blessings…..
Actually materialism also means
Try this link: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/materialism
(MN: I posted this comment not because it addressed the issue (it kind of did) but because he presents a fairly interesting argument. Although, in the end he really only brushes up against any kind of Bible based answer, and even then says we have issues if we don’t tithe. Of course, the question is “Is the Christian required to tithe. He seemed to answer the question “Should the Christian be willing to tithe?” )
Yes, christianity is a spiritual walk, but in the physical world. God could esally snap his fingers and make money appear in every church so no one would have to choose to give or choose not to give. The scripture says he made us in his image Genesis 9:6. He also told us to subdue the Earth Genesis 1:28. God has given us the responsibility to be the rulers and overseers of this physical world. So to hold the stance that the physical is not important to God is unscriptural. God does not just want to restore only the souls of people but all creation buisnesses,government,the Earth…..for the son of man came to save “THAT” which was lost Luke19:10. Jesus “IS” pyhsical 1 Timothy 2:5 “THE MAN Christ Jesus.” If you find it hard to choose to give a tenth of what you make than I can promise you that it will reflect in your attitude towards other things in your life towards God. We are not under the law. And there is no where in the New Covenant that I have read that sets a standard rate to give. More than enything else God cares for YOU not for how much you give. The Scripturer states that the LOVE of money is the root of all evil. It releases the curse that the scripture warns us about when we give a portion of the money back to God throught His ministry. To sum it up we all have a personal relation ship with God if we have confesed his Son Jesus Christ and beleived on Him to be the Lord of our life. This Question of Tithing cannot merely be answered from one persons view or lifes expeirence. There are many different perspectives. One could be seeing it from his/her angle another from his/her angle. and they both could be partly right or partly wrong. So you need an arial view in which we cannot have since we are limited to our own limitations. Paul says “let evry man be persuaded in his own conscience toward God” (I can’t remeber the verse so if someone knows it and could post it) Ask God what to do (with a gracious heart) and then go and continue to give to the Church that is feeding you spiritually and your conscience will line up with God’s word.
Really enjoyed your statement by the way, I MAN PERSPECTIVE. Liked the angle you came at it concerning being a proper steward of your resources……
Also, nice seeing how your question seemed to address the question of “Should a Christian be willing to tithe”,
So often many become so focused on what’s legal/required or what they’re exempt from that they end up using it as an opportunity for selfishness and the flesh (ex. Saying that they’re not required to give a percentage and often using money wastefully for self, claiming “It’s My Money” rather than realizing it’s God’s and given with the purpose of using it wisely/lovingly for others)
And while others often claim to not tithe for noble purposes, like taking care of their families and the poor man they see or giving graciously as one purposes in their heart, like II Corinthians 8:12-13 and II Corinthians 9:7-9 advocates, in truth far too many do so for every reason besides that……..I use to be one of them.
And God’s Word makes explicitly clear that Christian freedom is not the removal of moral restraints/call for sacrificial service…..it is the freedom to serve one another.
Galatians 5:10-14
13You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature[a]; rather, serve one another in love. 14The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[b]
The Gospel exchanges the bondage of legalism for the Higher bondage of LOVE…….Something that we were never freed from (which is why practicing tithing can be a valid practice if you’re doing it out of love for another rather than to simply meet a quota…..Regular giving can do this as well, but tithing can also, especially seeing how it can practically help support ministers/ministry):
Again, appreciate your comments…….
This is getting good…
You make some valid points as far as supporting the ministry is concerned, which infact i agree with. But, the thing is you cannot twist the bible around to make or force people to give. The job of the minister is to preach the word, thats it. What Paul stated in his letters are valid and still apply. And again i do agree that a man is worthy of the work that he does.
But for the sake of the discussion. Please show me, under the New Covenant where we are commanded to TITHE, in accordance to the Old Covenant. Or show me where we are to pay a certain amount out of every check. Now, we are speaking about a law, not about what appears to be correct or how this principle will fit. But where is the law or commandment for New Testament saints tithing? I ask this because in most churches they run to the Old Covenant (Malichi), to enforce the law. Meanwhile, they teach that Christ came and nailed the law to the cross therefore we are under grace not the letters of the law. It just appears that is a certain level of contradiction.
That is what comes with the calling of ministers. This is NOT a glorious, or ordinary position.
I think the entire point is being missed by those whom do follow the letter of the law with regard to the tithe….because in some aspect the TRAIL leads off to giving and the focus shifts on supporting the ministry ……..
…..as if those who believe in the grace of giving (instead of the wriiten letter concerning tithe) are being selfish because of apparent disobedience to Malachi…
Ministry is supported. Where in the NT does it affirm that….the Letter of the law of the Tithe is binding?
Grace suprcedes the written law. So giving is freely.
Galatians 5:4
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the {written} law; ye are fallen from grace.
Galatians 2:21
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [come] by the {written} law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Romans 6:14
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the {written} law, but under grace.
The written law cannot justify graceful giving. You give out of grace (thankfulness) just as Abram did to Melchizedek, or your give as it is written in the law of Moses…because it is written in the law of Moses.
Jesus has already fulfilled the void of the law, so why would we refute grace {written in our hearts} and go back to the written set of external rules?
(Grid: “That is what comes with the calling of ministers. This is NOT a glorious, or ordinary position.”)
Forgive me if Perhaps I’m misreading the comment, but it seems that implication was that being paid for one’s work is synomous with being glorious, or that recieving wages is something that’s reserved for ordinary jobs/laymen rather than clergy……
(MN: Actually, neither of your comments were consistent with the dicsussion. We aren’t talking about whether or not a pastor should be paid. The question is: Is the Christian robbing God if he does not tithe? )
NO!
“Tithe”, as you define it correct?
No. Tithe as the Bible defines it, with all the rules and regulations that go with it.
Oh, in that case, of course no…….
They all (what was witheld) amounted to worship. They “robbed” God of his worship. These (tithes) were witheld, & (offerings) were sacrifices were offered up for sin which were not being performed by the priests.
Malachi 1:1
The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.
Malachi 1:6
A son honoureth [his] father, and a servant his master: if then I [be] a father, where [is] mine honour? and if I [be] a master, where [is] my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, {O PRIESTS}, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?
….”O PRIESTS”…” (v6)…makes it clear to whom the prophet of God is addressing.
G-Dub. You say it was BOTH (The people and Priests?) That CANNOT be. The PREIST was responsible for the actions of the people.
They represented the people to God and represented God to the people. Jesus is our fulfillment of this role.
So how can the people “rob” God when the priest is in power? The priest(s) are addressed for not giving God honor.
Please read in context, brah……That was ONE section of the Book, and in that Section through to Malachi 2:1-9, THAT WAS THE GENERAL AUDIENCE. God was SPECIFICALLY Adressing the SINFUL PRIESTS: No one else. No one’s denies this……
However, the moment you Hit verse 10 in Malachi 2, you’ll notice that the audience SWITCHES from the Priest to the Sinful People: “JUDAH (not a specific person, but a group, mind you) has broken faith. A detestable thing has been commited in Israel and in Jerusalem”,
And from there throughout the rest of the book, He describes the VAST sins of the people in general (i.e.rejection of God, hypocrisy/pretense, complaining why the Lord wouldn’t hear them when they shoud’ve been acknowlwedging sin, Divorce being practiced by the men, twisting the Truth, etc)
From there, God even makes it clear that He’s addressing a group of people when He changes the subject of “The Faithful People”, those who’d remain faithful to Him and who’d love, fear, honor, and respect Him.” (Malachi 3:16-18), and from there He even gives what’s essentially a shout-out/warrning to all concerning the “Day of The Lord” (an all-inclusive event),……where ALL who are wicked are given warning to fear/”GET READY” for destruction while ALL those for Him are encouraged to continue on in remembering “His law” because they’ll reciece His Mercy (Malachi 4:1-4)………
(MN: So - based on all of this, is Tithing required of a Christian or not? )
Add to that the fact that God goes even further and lets ALL the people know of the day that He’ll “turn the hearts of their fathers to their children and the hearts of their children to their fathers”, uniting the people as they needed to be for Him. (Malachi 4:6)
Mr.Mel,
(MN: So - based on all of this, is Tithing required of a Christian or not? )
Please don’t tell me I have to answer this AGAIN when I already made my stance that I think that its……not tithing, but giving graciously/sacrificially and, IMO, also with a set amount, is more or less, expected of Christians IN my first essay in this post (NOT OBLIGATED)
And the statement was SPECIFICALLY addressed to Mr.Grid’s statements that it was the Priests that God was speaking to when He brought the accusation of robbery up. Never said that we rob God when we don’t tithe according to the standards of the OT (though the principle of not giving God Honor can be clearly seen)
Why does it seem as if there’s confusion?
(MN: The confusion comes in at the point you refuse to say either “Yes, tithing is required of a Christian” or “No, tithing is not required of a Christian.” I’m having some trouble seeing why this would be so dificult for you. None of us want to try to interpret what you are saying when it’s really easy for you to answer the question directly.
Here’s an example interview:
John Jenkins: Melvin, do you believe Tithing is required of a Christian?
Melvin: No, I don’t believe Tithing is required of a Christian.
Do you see how easy that was and how few words that took? And and how no one has to interpret what is being said?
Try it and see if it hurts. I guarantee you it won’t, either way you go. )
Right Melvin: This is the reason why this debate gets redundant, because some tithe supporters insist that we are required to tithe, yet believe that we are no longer under the law because of Christ. Well since tithing is under the “Law”, then that (to me) is where the confusion and contradiction comes.
You know what G??? That Priests/who God was addressing is a SIDE issue…which detracts from the overall question…….lets drop it and answer the question. The TD “two step” is not valid here.
Is TITHING valid? The TITHE and NT GIVING are NOT the same. That has been made clear.
Calling a tithe just that is not a gift. It is a requirement. Please answer the question and stop dancing.
Yes TOG. If one says the law was “nailed” to the cross….then why call it a “tithe” (which was part of the law).
The NT doesn’t refer to that as such.
*MJ - The illustration (Yourself & John Jenkins) is a good one :). Thanks for keeping it loose.
(MN: Okay, it appears GDub did (kind of) give an aswer to the question. It was almost a whisper, but he did answer. I think. I think we missed it because it wasn’t 100 to 200 words long. )
The question is: Is the Christian robbing God if he does not tithe? )
Reply to this comment
Comment by Gridiron
2007-02-22 14:06:45
NO!
(Comments wont nest below this level)
Reply here
Comment by Double G (G²)
2007-02-22 14:15:16
“Tithe”, as you define it correct?
(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Melvin Jones
2007-02-22 14:17:08
No. Tithe as the Bible defines it, with all the rules and regulations that go with it.
Comment by Double G (G²)
2007-02-22 14:29:43
Oh, in that case, of course no…….
That should (and hopefully for the last time) clarify what my stance was on tithing and that I already answered it correctly. Any more responses on this as if I didn’t answer the question, and people just aren’t searching throughout the postings.
Blessings…….
(MN: “Jesus was speaking under the old covenant (regarding tithing).
(TOG: some tithe supporters insist that we are required to tithe, yet believe that we are no longer under the law because of Christ. Well since tithing is under the “Law”, then that (to me) is where the confusion and contradiction comes.)
Gotta love this dialouge, and I’ve learned quite a bit from it. GOTTA ASK THOUGH, I’ve noticed that one of the main answers given throughout this dialouge against tithing is that Jesus was speaking under the old covenat when He said we should practice it.
I’m curious as to what people may think about where to draw to line as in intepretting what Jesus was saying regardding the OC and and the NEW, or whether EVERYTHING He said prior to His death is OLd covenant and therefore should go out the window……because it’d seem that one would have to define clearly where the line is at before any more clarity can proceed further.
Also, regarding TOG’s comment, what aspect of the law do you think was crucifed on the cross? Was it every aspect (minus principle)? Every category of it (civil, ceremonial, moral (10 commandmens, and the obligation to have to pay the penalty of sin by our own efforts)?
Are there no longer any things from the OT that we’re obligated to do, and is the NT about what we’re inclined/LED to do solely?
A very good question. Thanks.
You know I’m good for it….Blessings…….
G….I belive you are still missing it because you call the Law of God “crucified”.
That is NOT true. The “nature” of the law is what is fulfilled and alive (Jesus Christ). The Letter was crucified.
Mark 2:21-22
21) No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.
22) And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.
Jesus is making a reference to not destroying that which was done before him. The “rent” being made worse, is reference to the division that currently exists from the written law and man’s exile from God, as the old (written) does not suffice, so new (Jesus) is needed. Jesus is making clear that this is not why he came….to cause division over the law, but to fulfill it. (Matthew 5:17)
The deep root of the word “cloth”, comes from;
Hebrew word -. “bad”; rendered “linen” Exodus 28:42; 39:28; Lev 6:10; 16:4, 23, 32; 1 Samuel 2:18; 2 Samuel 6:14, etc. It is uniformly used of the sacred vestments worn by the priests. The word is from a root signifying “separation.”
So in Mark 2:21, Jesus is establishing that he did not come to separate according to God’s law, notice the reference indicates a cloth from a priestly garment as well.
In Jewish feasts, “new wine” was partaken as better, and that it could not possibly be contained in old wineskins. New wines, by fermenting, would rend (divide/tear) old skins (cp. Jos 9:13; Job 32:19). Jesus is stating that the new, could not exist withing the constraints of the old.
Matthew sums the matter up in stating that the law is not abolished:
Matthew 9:17
Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.
BOTH are preserved. So the law is not done away. It is fulfilled and alive.
Search the NT. Anytime you see the word “written” it is refer