Response to Steve Gregg's article-Is Tithing For Christians?

[Guest]

The thread below is a response to an email in which I attached Steve Gregg's article "Is Tithing For Christians? that I sent a brother a few months ago, and he just responded to it yesterday.

It would be great if anyone can give me some points on responding.

Thank you.

SoldierInChrist



Dear Brother,

I respectfully disagree with the teaching found in your email. I will attempt to examine the arguments presented in the esssay from a biblical view.

You wrote the following:



“have examined and looked at the information you gave me, and thank
you brother for taking the time to gather the info. I have considered your
points, but I respectfully disagree.”



Answer: I appreciate your charity in reading the paper that I gave you and your candidness about your present position on the subject.



As I explained on the phone with you, that it is commonly taught in churches
that Christians should tithe (a word meaning the giving of "a tenth" of
their income) to their local church.



Answer: I remember our conservation vividly. I agree that the word “tithe” signifies a tenth of a person’s income.



Christians are sometimes told that
they owe the first ten percent of their income to the church where they
attend, and that any giving to other needy persons or ministries falls into
a separate category called "offerings" and should be given only after the
first tenth has been given to the church. Preachers sometimes speak as if
the Bible actually teaches such a thing, although the Bible nowhere mentions
what we today call a "local church," and the New Testament never applies any
duty of tithing to Christians.



Answer: The Bible speaks about freewill offerings and the tithe. The offerings are separate from the tithe. The offerings are not a set number but the tithe is. The Bible does teach such a thing. The Bible does teach about the church and the New Testament does teach the duty of tithing to Christians. The New Testament mentions many “local churches” such as in the towns and cities of: Antioch, Philadelphia, Laodicea, etc…


Tithing was commanded to the children of Israel for the support of the
Levites (Num.18:21).



Answer: I agree.



The Levites, who were consecrated to full-time
ministry and could not be profitably employed, would enjoy a standard of
living that approximated or was slightly higher than the national average.



Answer: Ministers in the Old Testament (Levites and Priests) and the New Testament (Pastors/Elders and Deacons) do not go into the ministry to gain a profit. These leaders in Christ’s church are ministers because it is a calling from Him who saved us from sin and damnation.


The Levites, in turn, contributed a tenth of their income to the priests for
their support (Num.18:26-28).


Answer: I agree.


The system was designed to free-up a
large number of men to minister in things of the tabernacle/temple and to
teach the law to the people. The fraction "a tenth" was not arbitrary, but
corresponded to the needs of the number of full-time ministers requiring
support.


Answer: God never commands nor does anything that is arbitrary. I do not agree that the tithe was commanded because it was proportionate to the amount of the Levites. In some ages, God raises more ministers than in other epochs. The tithe is determined by God’s sovereign disposition. If God commands 20%, 30%, 40%, 1% or any other amount it is His decision that should not be called arbitrary nor should we seek some kind of an explanation with our human wisdom. “Rationalizations need not apply.”


Ever since God abolished the temple and the Levitical priesthood, there
remains no obvious reason why the tithe should continue to define a
Christian's measure of giving to God.


Answer: The writer begs the question. The writer assumes that if the Levitical Priesthood and the temple is abolished then automatically the tithe vanishes. The writer does not tell the readers that the Bible nowhere abolishes the tithe! But I agree that the New Testament abolishes the temple and the Levitical Priesthood. The above is taught in Hebrews chapters 7 and 10. The obvious reason that the tithe remains is grounded on the fact that God has not abolished it.


The church generally does not release
one full-time minister for every ten families (though this ratio would not
be excessive), so there is no biblical or logical reason why the same
percentage of the Christian's income should be devoted to the church's
coffers as was required of the Israelites in their support of the temple
clergy.


Answer: The above is a strange argument and begs the question again. The writer tells us that there needs to be a ratio of 10 families for one minister. Where is this argument taught in the Bible? The writer shows a prejudice against the tithe by implying that Christians who hold to the Biblical teaching of the tithe are engaging in a illogical practice! This is clearly an ad hominem attack against those who do not agree with his position. Thus, his argument is fallacious.


This is, no doubt, why neither Jesus nor the apostles ever so much
as suggested this duty to the disciples. The tithe was for the support of
the ritual system of Israel. These ceremonial aspects of the Law were done
away with in the coming of a better covenant.


Answer: The writer continues to state numerous errors. Jesus (who is Jehovah) did teach his disciples about His command to keep the tithe in Matt. 23:23. In the gospels, we do not see Christ condemning homosexuality. Does this mean then (using the logic of the writer) that Christ condoned homosexuality? Christ is the same Yahweh that spoke in the Old Testament Scriptures that condemned homosexuality and commanded the tithe. The tithe was not simply for the “ritual system of Israel,” it was also used to care for the needy. The tithe was not part of the ceremonial law of Israel since it preceded and transcends the nation of Israel. Where in the New Testament does it say that the tithe has been done away? What I just wrote is not an argument from silence because the tithe is commanded in the Holy Scriptures. Consequently, we need a clear command in the New Testament to the effect that this holy law is repealed (2 Tim 3:16-17).

Sometimes it is argued that tithing did not "go out with the Law" for
the simple reason that it was practiced prior to the giving of the Law, and
has, therefore, a validity of its own independent of the Law. The total
evidence that tithing was practiced before the time of Moses consists of two
passages in Genesis.

Answer: The writer admits there is evidence that the tithe precedes Moses. One passage is sufficient to establish that the tithe was pleasing to God before Moses received Christ’s Law.


In Genesis 14:20, Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils
of his recent conquest against Chedolaomer to the priest Melchisedek. Also,
in Genesis 28:20-22, Jacob, awaking from his famous dream, vowed to give God
a tenth of whatever prosperity God might give him in the time of his absence
from Canaan. Do these passages teach or even hint that godly individuals
regularly devoted ten percent of their wealth to God?



Answer: Yes it does.



Two isolated cases
cannot establish such a pattern, since we never read of Abel, Enoch, Noah,
Isaac, Judah or Joseph observing any such practice.



Answer: The author argues from silence. Where in the Bible does it say that two “isolated” cases of a practice does not establish a pattern? We do not see Enoch giving the tithe, the author states, therefore he did not give the tithe! Let’s follow his logic. We do not see Enoch praying to God, therefore, Enoch did not pray! I can multiply the examples of this fallacy of arguing from silence, but the above example is sufficient. The Bible is not an exhaustive biography of the saints.



Nor do we have record
of Abraham or Jacob ever doing so on occasions other than these two recorded
cases. We have no reason to believe that Abraham tithed
regularly. Therefore, none can establish from Scripture that tithing was a
recognized or mandated practice prior to the time of Moses. Furthermore,
even if we did have a biblical basis for such a teaching, it does not follow
that tithing continues as a duty into the New Covenant.



Answer: The writer again argues from silence in his first two sentences above. This is fallacious reasoning as explained in my previous response. Wrong, Gen. 14:20, 28:20-22 establishes the tithe before Moses. If we read carefully the above verses we will discover that the LORD does not command Abraham and Jacob to give him the tithe at the same moment that they gave God the tithe. What is the reason for this? The reason Abraham and Jacob gave the tithe was because they already knew beforehand that it is God’s command. The author in his third sentence dogmatically begs the question. The Old Testament Scriptures are authoritative to the Christian (2 Tim 3:16-17).



Remember,
circumcision and animal sacrifices (both commanded in the Law of Moses) were
definitely regular practices prior to the giving of the Law, but this does
not provide an argument for their continuance after the time of Christ.



Answer: The author contradicts himself in the first clause. He argues that sacrifices were “regular practices” when we only have less than a handful of examples before the Law. Remember, the author previously stated that we had only two examples of the tithe, before the Law, but this does not establish that “Abel, Enoch, Noah, Isaac, Judah or Joseph” tithed to the LORD. The writer argues thusly: We do not see Enoch offering a sacrifice, but he did offer sacrifices. We do not read that Enoch offered the tithe, thus, he did not offer it! “What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” The author destroys his own argument with this contradiction! In addition, the author shows a bias against the tithe. In the second clause, he does not state the reason(s) why sacrifices are not observed today. The reason why Christians do not offer blood sacrifices to the Lord is: God repealed the practice in the New Testament (Hebrews Chapter 9). On the other hand, God does not repeal the tithe in the New Testament.

Tithing is mentioned in the New Testament in three connections.
Hebrews 7 simply recounts the story of Abraham and Melchisedek, without
reference to any duty in this matter accruing to others.



Answer: Hebrews chapter 7 does not simply recount “the story of Abraham and Melchizedek”. Once again, the author begs the question. The author does not engage in any meaningful exegesis of this chapter which deals with the subject at hand. He simply states his position and then argues from silence. The author drives the point that Christ is after the order of Melchizedek not after the Levitical order. The Melchizedek order, transcends and precedes the Levitical. Our father Abraham (Rom. 4:1,16-17; James 2:21) gave the tithe to Melchizedek. The Christian, who is mindful of the godly example of our father in the faith (Gal 3:6-9; 4:29), likewise gives the tithe to the same Jesus Christ that appeared to Abraham. When the Christian tithes he is acknowledging Jesus as the true High Priest of all his people. In addition, Melchizedek is described as being the king of Salem. Salem is the ancient name for the city Jerusalem. When the Christian obeys God in tithing, he is affirming that Christ is the King of kings. Like the apostle Paul in Romans 4, the author of Hebrews in chapter 7 gives us the example of Abraham so that we may imitate. It is important to notice that Hebrews 7 does not any shape or form abolish the tithe. In the book of Hebrews, God repeals such things as: sacrifices, the tabernacle, the Levitical priesthood but not the tithe. The reason is obvious. The tithe remains to be a command of God. This passage does not teach that God abrogated the tithe.



The Gospels record
the saying of Christ that the scribes and Pharisees meticulously paid their
tithes, while neglecting "weightier maters of the law" (Matt.23:23/Luke
11:42). Jesus states that they should have done both (i.e. paid tithes and
observed the weightier matters), but this only states what was required of
the Pharisees as men living under the Old Testament law, and tells us
nothing of any ongoing duty for Christian disciples.



Answer: This statement is fallacious. It is true that the Pharisees were living under the Old Testament Law, but so was Christ and His disciples. Christ kept the Law perfectly, so he did not teach his disciples not to keep the tithe! Christ could not be our Savior if He taught that his disciples should sin by breaking the commandment of the tithe (1Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5). Commending the Pharisees for keeping the tithe and rebuking their neglect for His other commandments does not entail that the disciples are not to keep the tithe and “the weightier matters of the law”. This statement is a leap of logic, which is erroneous.



Finally, we have the
self-congratulating "prayer" of a Pharisee in a parable (Luke 18:12), who
boasts of paying tithes of all that he possesses, but the parable does not
go on to make this man a model for Christians to emulate. It is not surprising that advocates of tithing do not make much use of these New Testament verses.



Answer: It is true that Christians are not to emulate the self righteous and unrepentant character of this Pharisee, but this does not signify that Christians should not tithe. Using the writer’s logic, Christians should not fast and should be extortioners, unjust, adulterers, and parasitic tax collectors. The teaching of this parable is that Christians should not have a self righteous and unrepentant heart. Fasting and tithing are good works because that is what God commands. Tithing is not abolished because an unrighteous Pharisee does it. Is prayer and fasting abolished because a wicked person does it? The author is not omniscient to state that people who believe and practice the tithe do not “make much use of these New Testament verses”. This is a slanderous statement that I heartily reject. By God’s grace, I believe, accept, love, preach, desire to be obedient, and teach Luke 18:12 and the rest of the whole counsel of God.



The preaching usually centers upon the classic
Old Testament rebuke of those who neglected to "bring all of the tithes into
the storehouse" (Mal.3:10). The argument goes something like this:

"The storehouse is where you go to get your food. Spiritually, you get your
feeding from your local church. Therefore, God commands you to give ten
percent of your income to the church of which you are a member. Anything
over that amount that you give is not your tithe, but an offering."
One can easily speculate as to the motivation churches might have for
teaching along this line.



Answer: The above quotation of the hypothetical argument is not unsound. The Church is the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:15) and ministers (like the levites and priests) are to provide by the power of the Holy Spirit spiritual food to the people of God. Christ commanded Peter “Feed my sheep” (John 21:17). Peter was an apostle and elder in Christ’s holy church. The difference between the tithe and the offering is clearly established in Malachi 3:10. Both are commanded. The application of viewing the term “food” in Mal. 3:10 as spiritual food is not unbiblical. This interpretation is using the historical-redemptive hermeneutic. This interpretation can be also applied to the other part of verse 10 in which our LORD states that he will “pour out for you such blessing that there will not be room enough to receive it.” Are we to only say that this means only material food but, not a spiritual blessing of sanctification for those who humble themselves to the Lord in obedience to his loving command? I believe that it signifies both. The Lord’s prayer is the same when Christ commands us to pray for our daily bread. This command means to ask for material as well as spiritual food. Not simply fruits, nuts, vegetables, New York steak, and drink but, also spiritual sustenance from Him who is our Creator, Redeemer, and Life. The author in his last statement attempts to plant a seed of prejudice in the reader. He mentions that “one can easily speculate” but he does not speculate as to “the motivation churches might have for teaching along this line.” I will not speculate because I want to be obedient to my Savior when He commands “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (John. 7:24).



The only thing wrong with the above argument is
that there is not one legitimate scriptural point contained in it. First,
the "storehouse" was not where the Jews went to get their food. The
storehouse refers to the storage rooms in the Jerusalem temple (Neh.10:38)
where food was stored for the priests. They ate it there, and any surplus
was given to the poor (Deut.26:12), but the idea was not that of a private
pantry from which the tithing worshipper provided for his own sustenance.



Answer: I have proven that it is legitimate. The author again contradicts himself. First he says that the storehouse is not where the Jews got their food. Then he states that the surplus was used to help the poor. Which is it? The tithe is not used to help the needy or is it used to help the needy (“poor”). “You can’t have it both ways”. I am not sure why the author writes “but the idea was not that of a private pantry from which the tithing worshipper provided for his own sustenance.” Is he reacting to the belief of Christians who tithe or is he simply making a point about the tithe? By the way, I agree with this statement.



Further, it is not a given that every Christian gets his primary spiritual
feeding from his local church. It is the very negligence of such feeding by
the churches that has led to the proliferation on non-ecclesiastical
ministries (sometimes called parachurch ) to make up for this deficiency.
Finally, nothing in the passage is addressed to New Testament believers. The
Christian's standards for giving are defined in entirely different terms.



Answer: I agree that there are Christians who are not fed by the church they attend. These Christians are to attend a church that feeds them so that they can give the tithe and offerings cheerfully. I agree to a great extent with the second sentence above. I prove in my previous remarks that Hebrews 7 speaks to Christians and the commandment of the tithe. The writer here simply states his argument but does not prove it (ie. Begs the question). We shall see if the last sentence above is correct.


Those terms are found in the teaching of Christ, that one who would
follow Christ must forsake "all that he has" (Luke 14:33/ cf.
Matt.13:44-46). The ceremonial law served as a foreshadowing of the
Christian revelation. The latter teaches that all of God's people, having
been "bought with a price," are not their own, but are owned lock, stock and
barrel by Jesus Christ (1 Cor.6:19-20). All of the believer's time and all
of his possessions belong to God-a fact foreshadowed in ceremonial law by
the requirement of giving Him a representative token of each (one day of his
week, and one tenth of his possessions).



Answer: The writer contradicts himself again. Earlier, the author stated that Matt. 23:36 is not applicable to the Christian because it was spoken under the Old Covenant, then he turns around and gives proof texts that were stated under the Old Covenant. God owns and has always owned all things. The author commits grave errors in his last statement that affect his system of theology. He assumes that the LORD has not owned everything in the Old Testament and now in the New Testament the LORD owns everything. He also places the tithe and the Sabbath under the category of ceremonial law (which the author does not define), however, both practices precede the “ceremonial law”. As a matter a fact, the Sabbath is a creational ordinance (command, institution) established in Eden (Gen. 2:2-3; Ex. 20:8-10).



In place of "tithing" the New Testament teaches "stewardship" (Luke
12:42; 16:1ff; 19:12-13/ Matt.25:14/ Titus 1:7). The Christian is a
"steward", or "manager," of somebody else's (God's) possessions. He is not
in a partnership with God in which God holds 10 shares and he holds 90. In
coming to Christ, the repentant sinner surrenders everything to God, and
claims ownership of nothing (Acts 4:32). From the moment of his conversion,
the believer becomes responsible to manage every asset (monetary or
otherwise) in the interests of his Master's profit. Those seeking to
reserve a share of their lives for themselves need not apply (Luke 9:23).



Answer: The author erroneously draws a false dichotomy between stewardship and the tithe. The two are not mutually exclusive. When a Christian obeys God’s command of the tithe and offerings he is being a good steward of what the LORD has given him. Being a good manager of the possessions that God has granted to us, is to be a good steward. To obey God’s commands in reference to our possessions is the very heart of being a good steward. When Christians are obedient, God is pleased, honored, and glorified. The Old Testament Scriptures do not teach that God’s people are “in a partnership with God in which God holds 10 shares and he holds 90.” The above statement demonstrates a marked prejudice against God’s tithe. Moreover, the Old Testament saints did not “reserve a share of their lives for themselves.” The writer demonstrates a great ignorance of the Scriptures with the above statement. If we follow the thinking of this author, all the O.T. saints and our Lord Jesus Christ are guilty of reserving “a share of their lives for themselves” since they gave the tithe to God. The conclusion of the author is full of calumny and blasphemy.



What, then, is the steward's responsibility? He must discharge his
trust in exactly the manner that his Master would do if He were in His
steward's shoes. What would God spend His money on? Well, the Scriptures
give us all the guidance we need on this matter. Throughout Scripture, God
expresses His concern for the plight of the helpless poor and the support of
those who minister the Word of God. A timely gift to the poor is a gift to
God Himself (Prov.19:17/Matt.25:37-40), and is the prescribed method of
depositing treasures in heaven (Mark 10:21/Luke 12:33). Giving to the needy
is merely an expression of the mandate to love our neighbor as we love
ourselves (Luke 10:27-37).



Answer: The author continues to quote from Scriptures under the Old Covenant to make his point. However, he neglects the passages that speak about the tithe. The above paragraph displays the arbitrariness of the writer’s position. Christ quotes from the Law when he says “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18).



The support of the Kingdom's ministers is similarly an expression of
our duty to love God, to seek first the Kingdom of God (Matt.6:33). These
ministers include those who teach the Word of God (as the Levites were to
do-Gal.6:6/1 Cor.9:11/1 Tim.5:17-18).



Answer: Notice that the writer makes the connection between the ministers of the congregation and the Levites of the assembly. However, the writer fails to make the correct conclusion that just as the tithe was given in the Old Testament to provide for the ministers of God’s word, likewise, the ministers of God’s word in the New Covenant deserve the same.



This would include the pastor of one's
church (if he teaches God's Word) as well as others from whom one receives
spiritual direction and nourishment. It also would include traveling
ministers and missionaries (Luke 8:2-3/Phil.4:16-18/3 John 5-8). There is
such a variety of ministry-some more- and some less-needy, and some more-,
some less-worthy of support-that a conscientious steward will do a bit of
prayerful research before committing the Master's funds to a given appeal
for assistance. In the end, the discharge of one's stewardship requires a
great deal of prayer and leading of the Holy Spirit. It is nothing like such
a simple matter as writing a check to the local assembly (which might be
looking to replace the carpeting for the third time this decade) for a tenth
of one's paycheck.



Answer: The author demonstrates a very poor concept of the tithe in his last sentence above. He gives the impression to the reader that people who tithe engage in a mindless exercise or ritual, but, those who believe like him are “conscientious” stewards who do “a bit of prayerful research before committing the Master’s funds to a given appeal for assistance.” The author again engages in straw man and ad-hominem attacks against those who disagree with him. Any attack against the tithe is an attack against God, since He is the one who created it in the first place.


We must also acknowledge that God would provide for the needs of His
servants and their families. Therefore, a certain amount of our income must
be devoted to the feeding, housing and clothing of our families (1 Tim.5:8).



Answer: I agree.



Nor is there any forbidding of a few things for enjoyment alone (1
Tim.6:17).How many such things? That is between the steward and his
Master, and is not for another to judge (Rom.14:4).



Answer: The godly preacher will exhort Christ’s flock to avoid sinful, vain materialism for the praise and glory of God. The scripture the author provides (Rom. 14:4) deals with some scruples some believers may have about food and fast days. This verse does not speak about stewardship.





However, we must be on
our guard against our own pervasive tendency to judge our own actions (and
expenditures) more favorably than the facts would suggest. In eternity,
our rejoicing will be proportionate to our self-denial in this life and our
generosity to the poor and to the work of God.



Answer: The first sentence is the author’s opinion that I do not wholly agree with. Self-denial is a grace that God gives us that is pivotal to salvation, sanctification, and stewardship. The tithe and self-denial are not in conflict. Thus, the author should embrace self-denial and the tithe rather than just self-denial.

In the century following the apostolic age, the Christians understood
that tithing had been replaced by full surrender to God. In Against
Heresies, Irenaeus wrote, "[The Old Testament saints] offered their tithes;
but those who have received liberty set apart everything they have for the
Lord's use, cheerfully and freely giving them, not as small things in hope
of greater, but like that poor widow, who put her whole livelihood into the
treasury of God." The Didache (early second century) certainly has
Scripture on its side when it counsels, "Do not hesitate to give, and do not
give with a bad grace; for you will discover who He is that repays you. .
Do not turn your back on the needy, but share everything with your brother
and call nothing your own."



Answer: In the writer’s last statements he appeals to extra biblical writings to complement or prove (?) his arguments. As a biblical Christian I do not accept whatsoever human writings or traditions to establish doctrine, theology, and practice. For all true Christians, the Scripture alone is the sole authority for our faith. God commands us to not go beyond what is written (1Cor. 4:6). If Ireneaus and the author of the Didache are teaching against Christ’s command of the tithe then they are wrong. But, if they are teaching that God’s people should be willing to forsake all, without neglecting the former command of the tithe, then they are correct.



God bless you brother, and I'm sure (God willing) that we will speak soon.


Nelson J. Damota
SoldierInChrist
"Your Word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path."
Psalm 119:105





My Conclusion: The tithe is clearly the teaching of the Bible. When God gives us a command, we must obey. If God does not repeal a specific command He has given us, Christians do not have the authority to repeal or ignore it (Mark 7:8-9; Matt. 15:3,6). The Roman Catholic Church-State cult and the Jewish religion falsely believe that they have authority to abolish commands that God has established. For the former, the third commandment against idol worship and for the latter, Talmudic traditions of the rabbinate that make void many commandments of God. On the other hand, the apostle Paul in Romans 15:4 teaches us that the Old Testament Scriptures are authoritative for the New Covenant Christian: “For whatever things were written before were written for our learning (literally instruction or teaching), that we through the perseverance and comfort of the Scriptures (Old Testament) might have hope” In the preceding verse the apostle quotes from Ps. 69:9 to be applicable to Christians. In 2 Timothy 3:15-16 we have again the apostolic doctrine of the authority of the Old Testament to Christians today: “And that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures (Old Testament), which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture (Old Testament) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” Hence, God’s Word teaches the tithe is normative for Christians today. I hope and pray that my response is glorifying to God and that it will be to your growth in Christ. Please ask me any questions or send me a response. There may be a statement(s) that I failed to respond, so please notify me. In addition, please mention any errors that I made. Please forgive me for taking so much time in sending you a response. Lord willing, next time I will respond to you promptly. May God’s grace be upon you and your family.


In Christ,


Oscar

[_Steve]

Hi Brother,

Thanks for posting these responses. I will leave it to the judgment of discerning readers to decide whether the arguments for tithing adequately overthrow the case I made in my article.

I would like to make a few points of clarification of the issue:

1. It is repeatedly said that when God gives a command in the Old Testament, it remains intact unless that specific command is repealed in the New Testament. This would apparently mean that the parents of a rebellious son should bring that child into the public square and commence stoning him. On the other hand, there is no command in either testament about tithing other than that tithes should be brought to the Levites. I will gladly give 10% of my income to the Levites, if you can point them out to me.

2. It is said repeatedly that my case arises from a prejudice against the tithe. Does this mean that I don't like tithing? I always paid my tithe until I discovered the scriptural teaching about stewardship. Since then, I have never been content to give 10%. For many years now, my base percentage of giving has been above 10%. I tend to increase the percentage, as the Lord continues to provide for me to do so. Of course, for me to live on a fraction of my income requires that I live a modest lifestyle compared to most people I know. However, I have always found it to be more gratifying to support the needs of the poor and other ministers than to spend the same money on myself (since I have always had all that I need). Whence is this imaginary prejudice against the tithe?

3. It is repeatedly said that, when I am quoting Jesus, I am citing "Old Testament" texts. I assume this means the responder is a dispensationalist of the variety that believes Jesus' teachings apply to the Jews of the Old Covenant era, and belong to a different dispensation than our own. If this is what he believes, then this is a much more serious difference between us than that of whether one ought or ought not to tithe. In fact, it seems tantamount to an entirely different religion. My teaching is intended to illuminate the standards of Christian discipleship. If one has a different religion than this, he is welcome to advocate any means he wishes for its financial support. That is a relatively small matter.

[Guest]

The requirement for discipleship is to renounce all that one has.
The first Christians shared all that they had with their fellows. (Acts 2 and Acts 4).

Modern tithers assume that when they have given 10% to "God" (euphemism for the local church), that they have done their duty as God has commanded it. They assume the rest is theirs to do with as they please. I don't think our Lord allows for 10% disciples.

Ananias and Sapphira kept back a portion of their land sale for themselves. How did that work out?

[Guest]

Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek.........
Melchizedek wasn't Jewish let alone a Levite.
It isn't excluded to Levitical priesthood only.
I pay my tithes and I pay my offering............I trust the Lord to take care of my 85% when I dedicate the first 15% to him.
Throughout - His people gave Him the first portion of what He blessed them with and He continued to take care of them and I have found that to be true as well.

I refuse to rob God by not giving in tithes and offerings. To deny the tithe to the Lord is not a good idea according to Malachi.

[_Steve]

Contrary to the original responder, there is no evidence that Abraham practiced tithing. He gave (so far as we know) a one-time gift to Melchisedek. Did he ever meet Melchisedek again? If not, to whom did he give his tithe at other times?

Did Jacob fulfill his vow to tithe more than once? I only know of one instance (that's probably what he did in Gen.15:1ff, though, if not, we have no record of his ever doing it).

In any case, there is no evidence that either Abraham or Jacob (nor anyone else before Sinai) were commanded by God to tithe. Both men did what they did spontaneously and voluntarily, without any command from God that they do so.

Of course, contrary to the claims of the responder, the practice of regularly offering sacrifices (unlike tithing) prior to the Mosaic law, is more than established by the biblical record. We read of Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Job offering sacrifices prior to the giving of the law. In the case of Abraham, we see it as a repeated practice (Gen.12:7, 8; 13:4; 15:9; 22:2), and in the case of Job it is recorded to be a regular practice as well (Job 1:5). By contrast, we don't read of anyone tithing as a practice before Sinai. Abraham's sacrifice in Genesis 22 was directly commanded by God, whereas his tithing to Melchisedek was not.

I repeat, the tithing law was given along with the tabernacle's institution to support the Levites. It isn't necessary for the New Testament to revoke the tithing command, since the tabernacle and the temple that replaced it have disappeared, along with the Levites. There remains no one and no place on earth to whom God has ever told anyone to give a tithe.

If tithing remains an obligation to Christians, then the New Testament should have included a command to that effect, along with instructions as to where and to whom it should be given. There is no biblical reason to automatically transfer the significance of the Jewish temple to a given local Christian church.

Until one can find a command given to Christians to give a tithe to somebody or other, we have no more reason to continue the practice than to continue animal sacrifices.

[Guest]

I would like to add that it seems that the "tithe" that is given to "God" seems far and wide to go to the building fund, softball team (and field of course), air conditioning, nice seats and pews, million dollar sound systems (I'm not exagerating), acoustic tuning of sanctuaries (again people find this important), fancy alters and pulpits, fancy busses, gymnasiums (yeesh)!!, etc..etc.. instead of to God. Unless of course we can find justification for these creature comforts in the scriptures.

I know that this isn't always the case. But it has been my experience, and it may be a coincidence, that every church I have visited that says you are "robbing God" appears to give an incredibly disproportionate amount of "Gods money" to God's work. Like the poor, missions, widows, orphans, outreaches, Christians that <b>don't have food to eat</b> etc...I am not saying that they don't have these things as well...Well <b>some</b> of them do. But it is almost always a bizarre unbalanced distribution of "God's money".

OK sorry. I know that this is not exactly what the thread is about. Soapbox time over.
God bless,
Derek

[Guest]

It seems that the point driven home is that anything in the OT that is not explicitly "repealed" in the NT is still in effect.

Having thought about this topic many times, these passages come to mind:

Acts 15:28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.

It seems to me that the only "requirements" beyond conversion itself is stated above. And Paul's statement:

"Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellow man has fulfilled the law. (Rom 13:8)"

And Paul further explains the 3 items that are "food" related:

Rom 14:13 Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.

So how did the tithe (or sabbath keeping for that matter) get added?

Additionally, a tithe imposed on the Christian is putting that person under compulsion to give, something expressly forbidden by Paul:

"Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." (2 Cor 9:7)

To say "You've gotta give 10%" is making people give under compulsion. It takes people who don't feel comfortable giving that amount of money to one specific group of Christians and makes them choose; "Do I give, or not?" The problem is, if you give and it's not of faith, then what is it? If you just go along with it because everyone else is doing it, even though your conscience is not clear about it then that's a problem.

In Matthew 17:26 Jesus said that the sons are exempt from the temple tax, even though the law required it. Jesus paid for Himself and Peter, so that He wouldn't offend them who asked, but Jesus worked a miracle to provide the money. Interesting that Jesus didn't take money from the money bag to pay the tax.

And what about the people who don't have any extra money at the end of the month? Are they "required" to tithe? Should they be hard pressed while others, who could give 30% or more (but only give 10%, because that's what they are told) can be at ease?


2 Cor 8:13 Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.

2 Cor 9:6 Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously.

Interesting that Paul doesn't mention a tithe, which would make a completely different point. Since a tithe would be the same percentage no matter how much or little you have. In other words, there would be no sowing generously or sparingly.

[Guest]

Steve, et al,

How would you answer the following:

In any case, there is no evidence that either Abraham or Jacob (nor anyone else before Sinai) were commanded by God to tithe. Both men did what they did spontaneously and voluntarily, without any command from God that they do so.

How is it that Abraham and Jacob both decided to give exactly 1/10 and later God commanded that same 1/10 to be given? Coincidence, or was there an unwritten "common denominator" (God)? When sacrifices were first offered to God, as far as I recall, there is no mention how they came up with the idea; isn't it assumed they were told to do so by God or did they just "make it up"? Could not the same explanation fit both cases?

[_Steve]

I don't know the answer to your question, Homer. I can only speculate, since the scriptures are silent on this.

Jacob's volunteering one tenth may have been influenced by Abraham's earlier example (just a guess). God's later institutionalizing the tithe might be unrelated or might take its cue from Abraham's example (since the writer of Hebrews says that Levi paid tithes in Abraham—suggesting a not-coincidental similarity between Abraham's action and that of Israel in supporting the Levites). But was it a regular practice with Abraham, as it later was with Israel?

As I mentioned earlier, there is no evidence that the tithe was regularly practiced by anyone prior to the establishment of the tabernacle. To whom would it be given prior to that? and for what purpose? We might speculate (without scriptural warrant) that Abraham regularly supported Melchisedek, though this would seem unlikely if, as I believe, Melchisedek was a theophany. It is notable that, when Abraham regularly offered sacrifices, he did not avail himself of the services of Melchisedek (as if recognizing the latter were his "parish priest").

Even if Abraham did regularly support Melchisedek (which I find unlikely), this would not tell us to whom other devout men, of other generations gave their tithes.

Both Abraham and Jacob, in devoting 10%, may have been influenced by local custom (otherwise unknown to us) practiced in religious nations that supported a priesthood—just as other things that were included in the law seem to reflect earlier local customs (e.g., the law of levirite marriage—Gen.38).

It is just possible that the standard taxation rate in religious nations (i.e., those supporting a national priesthood) was 20%—of which 10% was regarded as necessary for government's administrative expenses and salaries, and the other 10% for the priesthood's maintenance. Thus we see Joseph taxing the Egyptians 20% (Genesis 47:24). We know that, in addition to the tithe for the priesthood, King Saul taxed the people an additional 10% for his administrative needs (1 Sam.8:14-17), bringing the total tax liability of the Israelites to 20%. When God gave the law of the tithe, Israel had no king, and needed only to support a priesthood.

My argument, that the tithe was not exacted of the people of God after the abolition of the temple system, would also suggest that it was never exacted prior to that system's institution.

[Guest]

Mal 3:8
8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
(KJV)

You want to say that we won't be robbing God if we fail to pay tithes, that's fine, that's your opinion. But the Word of God says we are robbing God if we fail to give Him the first tenth of all that He blesses us with.
I plan to continue to do so.

When I decided to start paying my tithes about a year after my conversion, that very month I received 2 seperate raises from work.
That is an experience I had and I know it proved nothing to you who disagree and that's fine, but I truly believe God blesses our obedience to what He's stated in His Word.