10Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
11And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts. (Malachi 3:10-11, KJV)
Not Just a Regulation …
There are some who say that tithing is a “work of the law” that was no longer necessary after Jesus’ sacrificial death. 
Indeed there are quite a view verses dedicated to tithes and other mandated offerings in the Pentateuch.
However, the first tithe mentioned in scripture was given before the law was given. While the law regulated the manner in which the tithe was given – and received –, the tithe pre-dated the law.
Furthermore, while that first tithe was given sacrificially by Abram (Abraham) to acknowledge God’s role in a military victory, the tithe’s purpose was to provide sustenance to the priesthood.
23“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. (Matthew 23:23, NIV)
Here in Jesus’ denunciation of the legalistic practices of the Pharisees, Jesus brings a moral imperative in connection to tithing (“You should have …”). He shows that while tithing is proper, it should not be at the expense of higher spiritual values.
In an earlier post, I referenced II Corinthians 9:7-8 which posits that giving should not be under compulsion but done in a cheerful manner. Tithing is NOT mandated under our New Testament dispensation. It is encouraged, however, and should be a joyful, natural result of our generous character instead of an unsatisfying completion of a legal checklist.
Investing In Your Church
9And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
10As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:9-10, KJV)
21For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Matthew 6:21, KJV)
As believers, we should be hooked up with a local church. We should be participants and not just occasional attendees. The benefits of church membership can not be overestimated: fellowship, edification, service to others, etc.
It is the Pastor’s job to oversee our souls and to guide us along in our spiritual development. We should see to our church’s temporal needs while they attend to our spiritual needs (1 Corinthians 9:11). While we may debate the requirement of tithing, we can’t debate that pastors still need to be fed and provide for their families. Pastors are scripturally entitled to a steady income (1 Corinthians 9:14)
Our giving to our local church should be ongoing. The tithing of our income ensures that it is. When the Lord blesses our substance over time, the church is rewarded proportionately. It is a fair and reliable arrangement.
While tithing is not a New Testament command, it is a New Testament principle.
Keeping Your Priorities
33“But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you. (Matthew 6:33; NASB)
However, don’t stop at 10%! Malachi 3:8 mentions tithes and offerings. Giving should be inculcated into our lifestyle. Giving to the poor, good ministries, righteous causes, etc. over and above your tithe should flow naturally from you as you seek His kingdom. Malachi 3:10God promises to take care of you as you take care of His Kingdom. He even promises systematic increase along the way (Luke 6:38). If give God financial preeminence, your needs will be taken care of, you’ve got His word on it.
Are you up to the challenge?
9 And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart. 10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:9-10; NKJ)
Tags: Giving, is tithing obsolete, Malachi 3:10-11, new testament tithing, tithe, Tithing, tithing for today
March 1st, 2009 at 12:08 pm
May I respond to your worldwide Internet post requesting comments.
Genesis 14:18-21: Nothing Abraham did is an example of faith for the Church. (1) only pagan spoils of war, (2) not his own property, (3) he gave it all away and (4) he gave the 90% to the king of Sodom.
Numbers 18:202-29: The tithing law required those who receive tithes to forfeit land ownership. It also demands tithes be paid to servants to the prissts and only one percent be given to the priests. Churches do not teach this.
Deuteronomy 28 and 29: The entire law was a TEST. Obey and be blessed; disobey and be cursed. The only way for Hebrews to be blessed by tithing was by observing all 600+ commands of the OT law which is impossible. See also Neh 10:29; Mal 4:4.
Malachi 3:10 has been replaced by Galatians 3:10; 1:8-9; 3:1-2 and 2 Cor 3:10.
Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
DEFINE TITHES: Although money was common in Genesis and essential for sanctuary worship, money is never included in 16 texts which describe the content of tithes.
DEFINE FIRSTFRUITS: Tithes were not firstfruits. Firstfruits were extremely small token offerings. Compare Deut 26:1-10; Neh 10:35-39; 12:44 and 2 Chron 31:5.
Matthew 23:23: Jesus only discussed tithing as “matters of the law.” Tithing is never commanded o the Church in terms of grace after Calvary.
Gentiles were never under Hebrew worship laws (Ex 19:5-6; Acts 15:10-11, 19; 21:20.
NT giving is: freewill, generous, sacrificial, joyful, not by commandment or percentage and motivated by love for God and lost souls. Especially 2 Cor 8:12-15.
http://www.tithing-russkelly.com
March 1st, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Russell:
Enough already! This is an EXACT duplicate of what you posted in my previous discussion about tithing. Apparently, you haven’t come up with anything new but are rehashing your old arguments. Unless you come up with something original or engage in a REAL discussion of this issue, you will be considered a spammer and will not be allowed to comment any further on this website.
It’s a shame. You sure had me fooled! I thought that you wanted to bring a new perspective to the table instead of showing us that you can copy and paste. Is your rationale so indefensible that you can’t even respond with anything new?
Your last paragraph is especially ironic (“freewill … not by commandment … motivated by love for God and lost souls.”). No it isn’t! You preach freewill while you are a slave to your own dogma. Your supposedly New Testament perspective is a little lacking in the “new” aspect.
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Stay Cool Guy
I am merely waiting for you to reply to any of my arguments before beginning any new ones. It seems that you are not willing to defend your statements. I am prepared to spend as much time is necessary to show you what God’s Word really says to the Church in its proper context.
The “you” of Malachi 3:10 must (in context) refer to the priests from 1:6; 2:1 and 2:17. Please stop and read Nehemiah 10:37b. The people were commanded to bring tithes to the Levitical cities. Please read Nehemiah 10:38-39 to discover who was told to bring the tithes to the Temple.
Malachi 3:11 is another wording of Deuteronomy 28 because the curses and blessing of tithing were a small part of the curses and blessings of the whole law. That is why I pointed to Galatians 3:10.
Not Just a Regulation
Tithing before the law was a pagan tradition throughout the known world of Abraham’s time. Levitical tithing during the law was a cold hard regulation for food producers living inside Israel. That is a regulation and that is a fact proven from 16 texts.
YOU: “However, the first tithe mentioned in scripture was given before the law was given. While the law regulated the manner in which the tithe was given – and received –, the tithe pre-dated the law.”
ME: Yes, and you made no effort to discuss what I said about this first tithe. Should I repost a third time or are the first two posts sufficient?
YOU: Furthermore, while that first tithe was given sacrificially by Abram (Abraham) to acknowledge God’s role in a military victory, the tithe’s purpose was to provide sustenance to the priesthood.
ME: Why does everybody add to God’s Word here and say that Abram gave sacrificially. Any serious study in a number of commentaries will reveal that verse 21 proves that he gave because the pagan Arab tradition required tithes from spoils of war be given to local priest-kings.
YOU: 23“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. (Matthew 23:23, NIV)
ME: Again you make no effort to discuss my two identical posts. You mindlessly put forth this lame argument. Jesus was discussing “matters of the law’ –not matters of grace for the church. He could not have told his Gentile disciples to tithe at that time. Am I right or not?
YOU: Here in Jesus’ denunciation of the legalistic practices of the Pharisees, Jesus brings a moral imperative in connection to tithing (“You should have …”). He shows that while tithing is proper, it should not be at the expense of higher spiritual values.
ME: Jesus did not denounce their legalistic practices because they were the legal interpreters of the law and sat in Moses’ seat per Mt 23:2-3. Read the context. In fact he told his disciples to obey them and to tithe garden spices. Does your church tithe garden spices? If not, you are disobeying your own argument.
YOU: In an earlier post, I referenced II Corinthians 9:7-8 which posits that giving should not be under compulsion but done in a cheerful manner. Tithing is NOT mandated under our New Testament dispensation. It is encouraged, however, and should be a joyful, natural result of our generous character instead of an unsatisfying completion of a legal checklist.
ME: Wrong. Tithing is not encouraged. It was annulled in Heb 7:5, 12, 18 and it was replaced by the equality principle of 2 Cor 8:12-15. Again you have said something which cannot be validated. If pastors receive “tithes” then they should not be allowed to own land per the same law.
YOU: It is the Pastor’s job to oversee our souls and to guide us along in our spiritual development. We should see to our church’s temporal needs while they attend to our spiritual needs (1 Corinthians 9:11). While we may debate the requirement of tithing, we can’t debate that pastors still need to be fed and provide for their families. Pastors are scripturally entitled to a steady income (1 Corinthians 9:14)
ME: If a church calls a pastor and promise to support that person, then they should honor their commitment. However nowhere does God’s Word teach that Gospel workers must be full time. That is a myth which ignores 1 Cor 9:12-19.
You: tithing is not a New Testament command, it is a New Testament principle.
ME: Where is this found?
You: Are you up to the challenge?
Me: Are you? Start at any text and let us go from there. Any may God’ truth prevail to bless His people.
Russ Kelly
March 2nd, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Russ:
“I am merely waiting for you to reply to any of my arguments before beginning any new ones.” A better approach would’ve been “Hey CoolHappyGuy, Are you going to respond ?” Copying and pasting an identical response is spam and NOT “waiting.”
Anyway, I do acknowledge and appreciate your response. I do apologize for the delay in responding to your comments. I work on this blog part time and I did not want to interrupt the work on this latest post.
Having said that, I DO want to respond to the items you have brought up. However, due to my limited time (I’m working on this during my lunch), I will not be able to cover all of your points.
Abraham & Tithing
I don’t accept that Abraham’s tithe was just a pagan tradition and that this is not an example of faith (as noted in your prior comment). The fact that this episode is reviewed and applauded in Hebrews 7 clearly indicates that this IS an example of faith. If it were truly a pagan ritual, the Bible would not have given this episode such prominence.
Furthermore, I don’t accept that tithing was annulled in Hebrews 7. The context of the passage is the dissolution of the Levitical priesthood. Since tithing took place before the Law, as in the case of Abram, its practice is outside the law. Malachi 3:8 indicates that God is the real recipient of the tithes although they were utilized for the support of priests. Although the Levitical priesthood is no more, local places of worship still exists and still requires support.
Jesus & Tithing
Yes, Jesus was rebuking the Pharisees about matters of the law but in no other rebuke does he say “you ought …” in regard to a legal practice. Jesus was clearly endorsing the tithe while denouncing its legalistic enforcement.
Equality Principle
II Corinthians 8:12-15 does not apply to tithing. Paul was talking about an OFFERING dedicated to the relief of the Jerusalem saints.
Full-Time Gospel Workers
In 1 Corinthians 9:12-19, Paul was talking about his VOLUNTARILY working so as not to be a “burdern” to the local fellowship. These same passages say, however, that it was a right.
Tithing and Money
In your earlier comment, you say that the tithe was always about “food.” However in Malachi 3:10, the command is to bring the tithes (and offerings) into the “storehouse.” The Hebrew word for “storehouse” indicated the temple treasury. The passage was not rendered “bring the tithes into the field, barn, pasture, [fill in the blank].” Money was clearly a tithe instrument.
Well Russ, lunchtime is over. I have no doubt that you want to respond to my observations. I look forward to your comments. Hopefully, I can answer in a timely manner. However, I’m working on another post.
Thanks for your response. I do appreciate the ideas you are bringing to the table.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:47 am
CoolHappyGuy
Abraham’s tithe of pagan spoils of war was 10% while the spoils-of-war statute in Numbers 31 only required one per cent (1%). That ought to mean something. If you study 20 commentaries you will find at least 75% per cent of them explaining the 90% from verse 21 as a pagan requirement. My logic says that, since the 90% was controlled by pagan tradition, then so did the 10%.
The Bible does not state that Abraham freely gave anything in Genesis 14. Those who say he gave freely have added words to the Word of God.
Hebrews 7 is about the dissolution of the Levitical priesthood AND ALL LAWS WHICH SUPPORTED IT. Follow the sequence: 7:5 is the first mention of tithes and commandments in Hebrews; 7:12 says that it was necessary to change the law (of tithing from 7:5); 7:18 says the law has been annulled. What is wrong with that logic? If tithing still applies to the church, then why are those who receive tithes not to own or inherit land as the same law teaches?
Genesis 14 is important to Hebrews 7 because it furnishes the first biblical encounter of a priest-king. It is the order of the priest-king which becomes a type of Christ.
The fact that Abram tithed before the law does not make tithing an eternal moral principle. The same is true of multiple wives, circumcision, unclean foods, idolatry, temple prostitution, child sacrifice and worship of the heavens.
Neh 10:37 And that we should bring the firstfruits of our dough, and our offerings, and the fruit of all manner of trees, of wine and of oil, unto the priests, to the chambers f the house of our God; and the tithes of our ground unto the Levites, that the same Levites might have the tithes in all the cities of our tillage.
Neh 10:38 And the priest the son of Aaron shall be with the Levites, when the Levites take tithes: and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of the tithes unto the house of our God, to the chambers, into the treasure house.
The typical explanation of Malachi is seriously flawed because it ignores Nehemiah 10:37-38, the Levitical cities and the 24 orders of the priests. Malachi 3:10 only makes sense if it is directed to the priests who had already been cursed for stealing in 1:6-14; 2:1-2 and Neh 13:5-10.
The early church could not possibly be called a storehouse because buildings did not exist for over 200 years after Calvary. The OT priesthood and temple now dwell within the believer.
When Jesus said “you ought” he was telling his Jewish disciples to tithe garden herbs which were not prescribed by the law because the scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses seat from 23:2-3. That is the context. Jesus also told Jews to go to the temple and obey Moses. Why is that not taught along with tithing? How could he possibly have been telling his Gentile disciples to tithe when it would have been rejected?
“II Corinthians 8:12-15 does not apply to tithing.” This is correct because tithing was never commanded to anybody other than national Israel as part of the curses and blessings of the Old Covenant.
Nothing you said about 1 Cor 9 teaches tithing. 9:13 is self-destructive because it says too much. If 9:14 were only referring to 9:13 instead of 9:7-13 then Paul would have been telling the Church to follow ALL forms of support used in the Temple. God is capable of supporting his New Covenant church with Spirit-blessed New Covenant principles. Schools like Moody, Wheaton, Dallas, Talbot and Masters thrive without teaching tithing. So does John MacArthur and so did Martin Luther and J. Vernon McGee.
From my essay:
One argument to support non-food tithing is that money was not universally available and barter from food was used for most transactions. This argument is neither biblical nor historical. Genesis alone contains “money” in 32 texts and the word occurs 44 times before the tithe is first mentioned in Leviticus 27. Gold is first mentioned in Genesis 2:12. The words “jewelry,” “gold,” “silver” and shekel also appear often from Genesis to Deuteronomy.
Many centuries before Israel entered Canaan and began tithing food from God’s Holy Land money was an essential everyday item. For example Abraham was very rich in silver and gold (Gen 13:2); money in the form of silver shekels paid for slaves (Gen 17:12+); Abimelech gave Abraham 1000 pieces of silver (Gen 20:16); Abraham paid 400 pieces of silver for land (Gen 23:9-16); Joseph was sold for silver pieces (Gen 37:28); slaves bought freedom (Ex 23:11); court fines (Ex 21 all; 22 all); sanctuary dues (Ex 30:12+); vows (Lev 27:3-7); poll taxes (Num 3:47+), alcoholic drinks (Deu 14:26) and marriage dowries (Deu 22:29).
Joseph gave Benjamin 300 pieces of silver (Gen 45:22). According to Genesis 47:15-17 food was used for barter only after money had been spent. Banking and usury laws exist in Leviticus even before tithing. Therefore the argument that money was not prevalent enough for everyday use is false. Yet the tithe contents from Leviticus to Matthew never include money from non-food products and trades.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:21 am
Russell:
Thank you for sharing the results of your examination. It’s clear that you are passionate about this topic.
A few observations …
Abraham and Tithing
You give your commentaries equal footing with the Bible while observing that other arguments are “not biblical.” You yourself are guilty of trying to add to the Word of God. I don’t give a flip about your commentaries. You cross-reference to Numbers even though this took place many years after this event. You submit that the Bible doesn’t say that Abram gave freely when the context of the passage clearly says otherwise. It was Abram’s discretion to give 10% to the King of Salem. Furthermore, the Bible does not say the he was “compelled” to give anything.
Your “eternal moral principle” paragraphs is especially disingenous “unclean foods” were not mentioned before the law. Multiple wives were tolerated but not encouraged (some of the levitical laws even made provision for fair treatment of multiple wives); idolatry, temple prostitution, child sacrifice, and worship of heaven were all forbidden by God in the strongest terms.
Storehouse
“buildings did not exist for over 200 years after Calvary.” This must be a mistake! Buildings were ancient even in that time. (This would be a good place for a reference.)
The storehouse refers to the temple treasury. A local place of worship. This is where tithes are kept. The institutions you mention are schools and teaching ministries — not churches and thus not subject to the tithes.
Anyway the treasury held money — not animals.
Nice to hear from you. See you tomorrow.
God Bless You!
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:21 pm
CoolHappyGuy
Every scholar from every church on the face of the earth attempts to prove their points from the Word of God and back them up by quoting authorities who agree with them. My hermeneutics are no different from your own church and that was a cheap shot. The commentaries I quote in my thesis are Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, Nazarene and are representative. They are scholars who at least deserve a hearing.
You have absolutely no biblical or historical proof that Abraham gave freely. I at least have some proof from 14:21 that something else may have pressured him to give 10% of spoils of war. My argument has something to back it up and yours has none.
“You submit that the Bible doesn’t say that Abram gave freely when the context of the passage clearly says otherwise. It was Abram’s discretion to give 10% to the King of Salem. Furthermore, the Bible does not say the he was “compelled” to give anything.”
Please tell me where you find this in the Bible. Declaring it to be so does not make it so.
Now I am “dangerous.” Unclean animals were brought onto the ark by Noah.
I was pointing out that merely because something is very old and very common does not make it an eternal moral law. Yet that is the same false principle usually presented to argue that tithing is an eternal moral principle.
You know very well that I was referring to “church buildings.” You want a reference. I have about 20 different sets of books on the history of the Christian Church which will verify my point. Oh, but you do not accept anything but the Bible it seems.
Those institutions I mentioned graduate preachers who go to churches which survive without teaching tithing. Your comments sound like you are more interested in mind games than actually discussing Bible texts.
The food storehouse in the Temple was brought there by the Levites and priests so they could have something to eat while rotating a week at a time per Neh 12:44 and 13:5-10. The bulk of the tithe food was stored in the Levitical cities per Nehemiah 10:37-39. Why do you keep ignoring those texts?
Thus far you have only attacked my comments and have not offered any texts to discuss which prove my arguments wrong. If that is all you intend to do I have more important things to do.
Russ
March 4th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Russell:
Commentaries or Hearsay
Yes backing up scripture with authorities from insightful commentators is a legitimate way to justify or challenge doctrinal tenets. However, you didn’t actually do that. You just mentioned “any serious study in a number of commentaries …” without referencing a specific commentary. That is not “backing up” that is hearsay. That is not a “cheap shot” but a challenge. As one who has submitted a doctrinal thesis, you know that you have to cite references and defend your assertions. I have not “attacked” you, I have “challenged” you.
We at WFTB will always go to the Bible first. Please read our Focus.
Abraham’s Compulsion?
Now as for the Abraham freely giving a tithe. I stand by that. Let’s look at the verse you referenced to support that Abraham was “pressured.”
That is not “pressure.” If anything it backs up my point! The King of Sodom was willing to let Abraham have all the spoils of war because he recognized that Abraham’s army did what his troops could not: rescue Lot (and other citizens) and property from the kings warring against Sodom and its allies. This is not intimidation!
Furthermore, the giving of the tithe to Melchizedek was formal recognition by Abraham that Melchizedek was a Priest of the most high God. That is why this episode is reviewed in Hebrews. If he was threatened, the transfer of property would have no meaning.
The King of Sodom only laid claim to the “people” (presumably citizens of Sodom). People were never a tithed object.
Not Dangerous No Attacks
Just for the record, I never said you were “dangerous.” I said that your comparing topics simply because these were mentioned before the law was disingenous especially considering that 4 of the 7 topics were condemned by the law. (Mulitple wives were tolerated but not encouraged.)
(You were right about unclean animals. I had forgotton about Noah. You caught me on that one.)
As for the “Buildings” comment, I thought it was a mistake and mentioned it as such. This was an appeal for clarification — and you supplied it. If I had done the same thing you would’ve called me on it — and rightfully so.
Jesus and the Tithe
I would like to review Matthew 23:23-24.
Jesus wasn’t merely talking about tithing spices. He was calling the Pharisees to task for their legalistic enforcement on the smallest of tithes while overlooking bigger priorities (i.e. justice, mercy, faithfulness). In this context, the spices were analgous to the “straining out a gnat” while neglecting the more “important matters” were compared to swallowing the camel whole. Again Jesus said “should have” indicating that he endorsed the tithe. He didn’t have to say “should have” to make his point.
Thank you for visiting WFTB. I do appreciate your comments.
March 4th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Thank you for continuing the dialog.
“We at WFTB will always go to the Bible first.”
O. K. Show me where the Bible says that Abraham freely gave. You have forced this into God’s Word.
“Now as for the Abraham freely giving a tithe. I stand by that.”
I am still waiting for your text(s).
You use your own interpretation of what verse 21 means to counter my own interpretation of what verse 21 means. The only difference is that I have backed up my interpretation with at least six very divergent commentaries.
“Furthermore, the tithe to Melchizedek was formal recognition by Abraham that Melchizedek was a Priest of the most high God.”
Where does the Bible say this? You are confusing your opinion with what God’s Word actually says. What would have happened if Abraham had dared pass through the king-priest’s territory without offering tithes from spoils of war? My opinion that he gave in response to very widespread and very common Arab custom concerning spoils of war is just as legitimate as your opinion. At the very least we have a draw.
“That is why this episode is reviewed in Hebrews.”
That is your opinion. The Bible does not state such. My opinion is that Psalm 110:4 was quoted so often in Hebrews because the emphasis is on the fact that Melchizedek was a king-priest. I see the emphasis on “king-priest” and you steer it towards the tithe to give it NT post-Calvary credibility. I guess it is legitimate to follow Abraham’s example and tithe non-holy pagan spoils of war. That is all the text allows.
“If he was threatened, the transfer of property would have no meaning.”
He was not threatened. He could have kept the entire 90% according to Arab tradition. Do you think believers should follow Abraham’s example and give their 90% to Satan?
“The King of Sodom only laid claim to the “people” (presumably citizens of Sodom). People were never a tithed object.”
Read Numbers 31:17-18. They were allowed to keep the women and children as slaves and resale them as slaves. This is the statute of the Law regarding one per cent spoils of war. Should we follow that example?
“Again Jesus said “should have” indicating that he endorsed the tithe.”
Before Calvary Jesus MUST say “should have” because he was living a perfect sinless life of law-observance in order to redeem those under the law. You did not comment on the fact that he could not have told his Gentile disciples to tithe.
Again why do modern “tithe-recipients” own and inherit property?
Russ Kelly
March 5th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Russ:
It’s obvious that you don’t believe tithing has a place in the New Testament Church. It’s also apparent that you have done a lot of research into this subject and there is a passion that is evident in your comments. While I don’t agree with many of your conclusions, I want you to know that I respect the efforts of your research into this area.
With your permission, I would like to change the topic somewhat and ask you to present your perspective on the financial contributions to ministries. It’s obvious that you believe that the tithe no longer has a place in such ministerial support. I especially want you to describe this in the context of the local church since many of us have used the tithe for this purpose. What do you see as the Biblical pattern in this area of giving?
March 5th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Mr Cool
The place of tithing in the Old Covenant has been greatly exaggerated. It was only from food producers inside Israel and the inheritance laws pushed most off the land within 3-4 generations. First Corinthians 9:13 is self-destructive because it allows about 15 different types of Temple support.
I have never found a church historian (not theologian) who admits that tithing was taught in the early church. It never did have a place. Acts 15 and 21 reflect that the Gentiles were never expected to observe laws such as tithing, circumcision, Sabbath observance and unclean food laws. I am convinced that the Jewish Christians in Acts 21:20 were still paying tithes to the Jewish system 30 years after Calvary.
2 Cor 3:10 says that the OT has ZERO glory unless it has the blessing of the NT. That is my hermeneutic. It must be repeated to the church in terms of grace after Calvary. History proves that tithing did not become an enforced law until AD 777.
My son attended Moody and his tuition was free. Yet Moody does not teach tithing. The secret to a successful church is personal evangelism and a view of souls lost and on the way to hell —not tithing. There are a lot of dead or dying churches which teach tithing and still fail.
Early synagogue rabbis such as Paul considered it a sin to accept money for teaching the Word of God. They accepted limited support because they were among the poor.
The OT tithe was never used for mission work and the tithe cannot be used from OT principles to support missionaries.
If a church calls a full-time minister then it should support that person full time. However the Bible neither supports nor rejects the idea that gospel ministers should be full-time. It is wrong to say that OT Levites and priests were full-time Temple workers. That is a huge error which ignores the Levitical cites from Joshua 20-21, Numbers 35 and the 24 courses from 1 Chronicles 23 to 26. The OT tithe-recipients were herdsmen, farmers, artisans, bakers, guards, treasurers, politicians, rulers and very few ministered in the Temple.
“What do you see as the Biblical pattern in this area of giving?”
I have two chapters in my book on the subject. One quotes Chafer and Walvoord’s book and another is my own outlines of 2nd Corinthians 8 and 9.
From my essay:
POINT #1: CHRISTIAN GIVING PRINCIPLES: New Covenant Giving Principles in Second Corinthians 8 and 9 are Superior to Tithing.
The false teaching is that tithing is a divine mandatory expectation which always must precede free-will giving.
Christians are commanded to give freely, sacrificially, generously, regularly, joyfully and with the motivation of love for God and man. The following New Covenant free-will principles are found in Second Corinthians, chapters 8 and 9: (1) Giving is a “grace.” These chapters use the Greek word for “grace” eight times in reference to helping poor saints. (2) Give yourself to God first (8:5). (3) Give yourself to knowing God’s will (8:5). (4) Give in response to Christ’s gift (8:9; 9:15). (5) Give out of a sincere desire (8:8, 10, 12; 9:7). (6) Do not give because of any commandment (8:8, 10; 9:7). (7) Give beyond your ability (8:3, 11-12). (8) Give to produce equality. This means that those who have more should give more in order to make up for the inability of those who cannot afford to give as much (8:12-14). (9) Give joyfully (8:2). (10) Give because you are growing spiritually (8:3-4, 7). (11) Give because you want to continue growing spiritually (9:8, 10-11). (12) Give because you are hearing the gospel preached (9:13).
March 5th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Russ:
I TOTALLY agree that the secret to a successful church is one that has personal evangelism as its top priority.
The last paragraph of your response is TOTALLY AWESOME. There is a lot of great info in just a few sentences. It’s as good as a summation of Christian giving principles as I’ve seen. Every single one of those points would make a great sermon!
Thank You for your viewpoints. I’ve enjoyed this exchange.
3 John 2
CoolHappyGuy
March 8th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
I believe we still need to pay 10%. And I do.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Great answer. No Biblical proof. Just what you think.
If you get into an accident and lose everything you have (God forbid but it happens to good Christians also), will you tithe and not buy pain killers and food for your family?
Not everybody in the Bible was capable of giving 10% of their income to God. The poor were never required to do so and did not even qualify if they were not food producers. In fact, they received much of the 2nd festival tithe and all of the 3rd year poor tithe.
Do you tithe 23% as required from food producers in the Bible? If not, then you are not giving a true biblical tithe anyway.
Give sacrificially to the best of your ability and God will bless you under New Covenant promises. Take off the shackle of the law and give freely under grace. 2 Cor 3:10-18.
March 10th, 2009 at 1:08 am
Hello, I can’t understand how to add your blog in my rss reader
————————
sponsored link: http://werato.ru/
Do you have IE 6? I’ve noticed problems with that browser. I have notified Feedburner.
Please try again. If it doesn’t work, please contact me.
Thanks!
Webmaster,
WealthFromTheBible.com
March 10th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Russell:
For many of us, tithing is not a shackle of the law. I am one of these. I am not compelled to tithe. I CHOOSE to tithe.
I recognize what you say about the various tithes and the challenges that must be overcome to follow them to the letter of the law. I just give my church (at least) 10% and call that my tithe.
I tithe not because of commandment or teaching but because I think it is the right thing to do. I love my church and she has blessed me over the years. If they minister to me spiritually, I can certainly provide for her out of my substance. Additionally, our church supports great causes (support for missionaries, evangelism, poor, et al.) that I want to participate in. So, for me, tithing is also efficient. (Not to say that I don’t support other causes outside of the tithe.)
As for myself, I HAVE been in a situation where my income was inadequate. I came to the Lord exactly at this point in my life. My bills were overwhelming. The day after payday, I would find myself as poor as the day before. One of my creditors would be missing out. One day, I made the decision that I would try this “tithing thing.” I would surrender 10% to the Lord before paying anything else. You know what? The Lord has been blessing me every since! My bills somehow get paid. I have been blessed financially as well as in every other part of my life.
If you surrender an area of your life to the Lord, there’s not telling how He WILL work on your behalf. There’s no turning back for me.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Hello, I can’t understand how to add your blog in my rss reader
————————
internet signature: http://joneri.ru/
March 23rd, 2009 at 2:46 am
For the christians: What is the most receptive, biblical way of sharing the Gospel of Jesus? Let me know also if you have tried online-evangelism. If you have, how do you go about doing that?
March 23rd, 2009 at 3:56 am
Hi CoolHappyGuy and everyone,
Having read the interesting excahnge of ideas above, it’s obvious that most anti-tithing arguments are tenuous and often made from shoddy scholarship. Let me address a few misconceptions that anti-tithers use to spam blogs on the net. This will be detailed in series, and I beg the patience of the reader who desires to understand these matters.
#1. Abraham’s Faith
The example of Abraham as a man of faith is definitely taught in many New Testament verses for the Church. Romans 4 gives an outline of how the patriarch was not justified by works but by faith, and then goes on to record that it was “not written for his sake alone. . but FOR US ALSO” (see verses 23-24). Galatians 3 also makes much the same point – that Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness; and then boldly proclaims that “they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham” (vv. 6-7). It is not a legalistic application of Abraham’s experiences in the OT that is taught in the NT, but rather the value of the principle of his faith. Hence, it’s quite strained to assert that ‘nothing Abraham did is an example of faith for the Church’.
#2. Abraham’s Tithes – ‘Pagan’?
The attribution of “paganism” to Abraham’s faith is dishonest. It is clear that Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God in both references of the OT (Gen. 14:18) and the NT (Heb. 7:1); and Abraham’s tithe was a response to the pronouncements of the priest-king. If Melchizedek was a ‘pagan’ priest, it would have been clearly stated in Scripture; but since there’s not a single verse that teaches such, it is unhealthy to argue such a notion into Scripture. More fascinating is that some of the references cited by Russell to argue paganism for Abraham’s tithes actually teach the direct opposite! Here’s an example:
Under the title “PAGAN TITHES: GENESIS 14″ on his website, one of the references Russell cited was Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis” (tr. by A. C. Campbell, 1814), where he quotes only part of the reference. However, anyone who consults the quoted page (available online), would find a completely different inference was made by Grotius, as quoted below (emphasis mine):
In the next paragraph, it goes on to say:
It is remarkable that Russell cites this reference for his argument of “paganism” for Abraham’s tithes, whereas the reference itself loudly declares that “Abraham devoted to God” a tenth of the spoils. However, this demonstrates even in ancient history, the general rule of warfare was that ALL the spoils belonged to the conqueror (Abraham), and not to the defeated king(s) who fled and FELL in the vale of Siddim (Gen. 14:10), as we shall see below in #3.
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:04 am
#3. Actually, the spoils of war belonged to Abraham, for that’s what Scripture teaches. You do not take someone else’s property and adjudicate over them in any way if they do not belong to you – that would be theft, and would seriously violate the principles of conscience and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Here are reasons why the “not his own property” argument is a fallacy:
(a). First, the Bible warns against the practice of interpreting a verse all by itself without comparing it with other verses – “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” (2 Pet. 1:20). What many folks have done is interprete those verses in Gen. 14:18-24 ‘privately’ on their own without comparing them with other verses to see if their assumptions stand.
(b). Hence, the fact that the spoils of war belonged to Abraham is found in Melchizedek’s declaration: “blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand” (Gen. 14:20). When you read the OT, you find the statement that God would deliver their enemies into their hands meant clearly that the spoils belonged to the conquerors. See Deut. 20:12-14 for example (emphasis mine) -
Thus, to argue that the spoils were not Abraham’s is to deny Scripture and read one’s eisegesis into the text.
(c) Now if the spoils did not belong to Abraham, there’s a serious question for Russell and his colleagues: why would Abraham take something that was not his and give to other people (Melchizedek, Aner, Eschol and Mamre)? That Abraham gave all the spoils away does not negate the fact that they belonged to him in the first place – for it would make absolutely no sense at all for him to have treated the spoils as his own in presiding over them, if the spoils did not belong to him in the first place. Even Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis” cited by Russell strongly makes the point that the spoils belonged to the conqueror Abraham, as quoted earlier: “…the Law Giver Himself. . . gives ALL the spoils to the conqueror” (http://www.constitution.org/gro/djbp_306.htm) – the very same fact explicated in Deut. 20:12-14.
Perhaps it never occured to Russell that his ‘private interpretation’ was violating 2 Pet. 1:20; and that Melchizedek’s pronouncements in Gen. 14:20 clearly agrees with Deut. 20:12-14.
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:11 am
#4. That’s another often recycled fallacy, and it may shock these folks that Genesis 14:18-24 does not teach that Abraham gave the 90% of the spoils to the king of Sodom. It is merely assumed by many people that he did so; and this assumption is completely unsupported by the verses cited for it, nor by any other verses in the Bible, nor even by the external references cited for it (such as Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis”). Here are reasons why the king of Sodom did not get a 90% from Abraham:
(a) What could possibly be meant by Abraham’s response to the king of Sodom in verses 22-24? It’s easy to see – the moment we ignore what Melchizedek said to Abraham (because people dubiously see “pagan tithes” there), then we miss everything else. It was the Most High God that gave everything to Abraham – that was what Melchizedek recognized when he blessed Abraham: “blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand” (Gen. 14:20).
(b) From the same inference given in Deut. 20:14 (“and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies“), we can understand WHY Abraham made the statement in Gen. 14:24 – “Save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; LET THEM HAVE THEIR PORTION“. Abraham was not presiding or adjudicating over what did not belong to him; indeed, it would have been wrong of him to have taken what was not his in the victory of that war and then given them to other people (Melchizedek; and his confederates – Aner, Eschol and Mamre). Melchizedek’s pronouncements in Gen. 14:20 (“the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand”) should not be ignored when reading the verses following therefrom.
(c) Now if Abraham gave 90% to the king of Sodom, what “portion” was he referring to in verse 24 – “and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion“? The spoils belong to the conquerors (according to Deut. 20:12-14); therefore, Russell and his colleagues would have to intelligently explain where Abraham got the “portion” for his confederates if he gave 90% to the king of Sodom.
The inconsistencies and vacant assertions often made by many anti-tithers leaves one wondering if they have a good grasp of what they argue. Hopefully, as these are examined, they will become redundant and consequently retired.
Many blessings.
March 23rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
Gwaine
You ridicule me as using “shoddy scholarship.” I am in agreement with such SHODDY scholars are Martin Luther, John Calvin, Lewis Sperry Chafer, D L Moody, Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, Merril Unger’s Bible Dictionary, Walter Elwell’s Evangelical Dictionary of the Bible, Craig Blomberg and John MacArthur.
Your use of Abraham’s examples of faith from Romans 4 and Galatians 3 are not discussions of tithing and are, therefore, irrelevant. You might try explaining Galatians 3:10: 3:1-5 and 1:8-9 which oppose your use of law.
I still ask you to tell me exactly what Abraham did concerning tithing which was an example of faith? You seem to ignore the basic statement.
You manipulate my words by saying “The attribution of “paganism” to Abraham’s faith is dishonest.” While living in the midst of a pagan society, Abraham was expected to obey some pagan traditions which did not violate his faith. Tithing spoils of war from Sodom was one of those traditions.
You manipulate my argument again when you FAIL to note tithing pagan spoils of war was found in almost ALL ANCIENT SOCIETY and did not begin with Abraham. Shame on you.
You are full of knowledge about what you oppose but you have little or nothing to say about what you personally believe. How sad.
March 23rd, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Dear Russell,
I’m sorry to observe that the several names you mentioned, to my knowledge, have not attributed the sort of assertions you made concerning Abraham with regards to “pagan” tithes. That was not taught in Scripture; and I’d be happy to say the same thing to anyone who tries to read his eisegesis into Scripture, especially because I don’t argue from demagoguery.
Second, some of the references you cited to force that assertion of ‘pagan tithes’ for Abraham actually teach the direct opposite – an example was demonstrated in my posts (Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis”). I haven’t seen where you tried pointing out that was not so, and that was why my remark about ‘shoddy scholarship’.
My use of Abraham’s example of faith both from Romans 4 and Galatians 3 was in direct response to your assertion that “nothing” Abraham did was an example of faith for the Church – and I explained my answer, that the sort of literalism you often argue is unwarranted in Biblical exegesis. Thanks for the recommendation of Gal. 3:10: 3:1-5 and 1:8-9 – but even you can see that I did not discuss Abraham as being under the Law. If I did, please show me where, thank you.
I did not ignore the basic statement(s), and discussed the assertions you made in those four points in reference to Abraham’s tithe, viz:
- (1) only pagan spoils of war,
- (2) not his own property,
- (3) he gave it all away and
- (4) he gave the 90% to the king of Sodom.
These were your assertions, and my response was addressing them to show how untenable they were. Have you commented to show how, why or where I might have been mistaken in responding to those points?
I did not manipulate your words. Rather, you have recycled that fallacy one too many times without showing directly from Scripture that Abraham was obeying any pagan traditions. Forcing your own eisegesis into the texts does not establish your assumptions. On the contrary, I demonstrated the weakness in your presumptions by following basic principles of Biblical exegesis -
(a) by comparing verses instead of giving them a ‘private interpretation’ (2 Pet. 1:20);
(b) by buttressing my points with other verses (Deut. 20:12-14);
(c) by showing that your external reference (Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis”) taught the direct opposite of what you asserted;
(d) by asking basic questions around the Genesis 14 narrative (see #3 (c) in my post above);
(e) and by calling attention to the meaning of Melchizedek’s declaration (Gen. 14:20) in connection with Deut. 20:12-14.
To keep recycling the same assumptions as you have done without showing Biblical proof for your notion of “pagan” tithes for Abraham is unhealthy. You were forcing your own ideas into Scripture, and I think that’s a bit weathered now – so please retire that fallacy.
I have not made any assertions that tithing pagan spoils was unknown in ancient societies – so what substance is there to your allegation? What I questioned was your duplicity in referencing Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis” to argue “pagan tithe” for Abraham, when infact Grotius argued that “Abraham devoted to God a tenth part of the spoils”. Does that amount to “pagan tithe”?
I’ve maintained that your hubris is of little consequence to me, so I’d rather not trade invectives with you. In other blogs where I’ve tried to discuss with you, my convictions have been well articulated – nevermind that you keep taking these cheap jabs to deny the fact. More to the point would be how you show from Scripture that my response to your four points above are untenable – that’s what gentlemen do, rather than whine and yet address not a single line of what I’ve offered.
Regards.
March 23rd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Gwaine
You have been playing this game long enough. Stop it right now and get serious. Go to the Yahoo Group Tithing-
Study, log in, and tear me apart in front of all my friends if you have the courage and ability. This is your opportunity to embarrass me in front of my audience. Otherwise I have nothing further to say to you.
Russ
March 23rd, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Russell,
I’m just wondering: why are you so vexed anytime you read comments from ‘Gwaine’? There’s been no game up my sleeves; and if you’ve got anything to say about issues in my reply, I invite you to do so amicably. I’m not inclined to bellicose engagements, so why are you often taking such an attitude?
Please, please and please, refrain from this inclination to be hastily up in arms. You made assertions, I responded directly to them by pointing back to the Bible. What is the “game” or quarrel there? How is it that you always complain, hastily leave an engagement unfinished, and yet have absolutely nothing to say anywhere about the answers I offer to your assertions?
As in other blogs, again I maintain that it’s not my style to ‘tear’ you apart. That’s why I’d go one step further to offer my apologies where you feel offended anywhere in my posts – sincerely from my heart, I offer apologies – just so we can encourage an enabling atmosphere for discussion. If you’d rather not, I won’t push it – and thank you again for your comments.
Regards.
March 24th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Wow… I was just going to leave a simple comment here, but there is some serious discussion going on.
I believe it is a commandment. I know the Bible leaves some debate (it always does). But that’s just my belief.
April 26th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Just looking at the comments above and I feel its necessary to go back to what can not be debated about our faith. “Love God and Love thy neighbor the whole law hangs on these two laws. ”
I said that because I viewed some rhetoric that was borderline Un Christ like. We can PEACEFULLY speak about the WOrd and our observable differences and opinions , BUT it must never become a shouting match or a tool to divisiveness. (Titus 3:9-10)
With that being said,
I was once an avid tither but the Lord has open my eyes and now my giving is my higher and my understanding is better on stewardship.
Before we go to tithing we must first agree that God eternal principle is Giving. Throughout the Scripture, HE mandates what, how much when and where to give. I found thru time, that people add things and take away from the things He stated as eternal law or temporal law.
With that being said. One can not Biblically support tithing as an eternal command based on the grounds it occurred before the Law. If that was the case, then we are still bound by cicumsion, and animal sacifices. ( many other things I will not mention) Noah gave an burnt offering waaayyyy before the tithe was mentioned in the Bible but I seriously doubt ANYONE in the modern world would follow his example. Gen 8:20 Afterall, God stated Noah was the only righteous man on Earth in his time. (GEN 6;6-12) What was the difference between Noah’s character and Abramham’s character ? Nothing. They both were men of God. Notice that God never commanded Noah to tithe or give an offering as well. Drwa your concuclsuions from that
Now lets get to Abraham. I find it amazing that whenever tithing is discussed, abraham’s name always come up. Lets REALLY look at the Scripture. Lets look at Abram’s meager beginnings: Gen 12: 5-7 state he had posessions. But, what happened after he went to Egypt? ( verse 15-16 ) Pharaoh gave Abram sheep, cattle, male and female donkeys, camels, etc. So we see he was a little bit richer than he started off with.
Chapter 13 begins stating, Abram had BECOME VERY WEALTHY in livestock silve and gold. Notice how the author puts emphasis on VERY and HAd BECOME. These are factors telling us that Abram wealth drastically increased from what is was.
Why?
The Comtemporary teaching of Malachi 3 Tithing is an ETERNAL command by God and if you pay your tithe, God will open the doors of heaven and give you a blessing you can not physically store.
Hmmmmm…. Well we know Abram did not give anything to anyone at this time so If the tithing Law is Eternal , why is Abram receiving these material blessings and he did not give nothing to anyone at this time ? In fact, The Scripture tells us he was so rich , that he and his nephew had to part ways. Gen 13; 5-12
Now we go to Chapter 14, simple put, there was a war, 4 kings against 5. The 4 kings won, and they pillaged Sodom and the 5 other kings. Now Sodom is were Abram nephew lived. The Scripture states that it was the info that his nephew was captured that prompt him to fight these 4 kings. Notice, he DID NOT go to war to bring back a tithe to Melchizedek. ( verse 14 ) The Word Says , when he heard his nephew was captured, he called out 318 men from his household. ( another indication of how rich he was )The Scripture DIRECTLY tells us what was the prompt for this excursion. It was not paying annual tithing tributes to Melchizedek.
Notice what he took on his journey. Warriors !! 318 of them. He DID NOT TAKE ANY OF HIS OWN POSSESIONS ! In fact, it is luducrous to assume or believe a warrior would take 10% of his INCREASE ( go back to chapter 13 and see how rich he was ) to fight a war. The Word says he started from Mamre, (Gen 13; 18 ) and went as far as Dan than pursued the 4 kings to Hobah. ( Gen 14:14-16 ) Now how far is this distance that Abraham presumably traveled to fight a war and carry his tithe ? Well from Mamre to Dan is 130-140 LINEAR miles. From DAn to Hobah was 40-60 LINEAR miles. Then the Scripture says they went all the way back to Jerusalem. ( verse 17, Valley of Shaveh was near Jerusalem, about ten miles away from it. ) Thats about another 130-140 LINEAR miles. I put linear to indicate how far Abram traveled, ON FOOT if he was in a modern day jet! Thats roughly over 350 LINEAR miles. Now, i forgot to mentioned that there were two mountain ranges on this linear path. The actual path of travel is estimated to be over 800 miles ON FOOT ! (This has been verified in my ESV study bible) So, now Abram returns with all the spoils, peoples and his nephew , Lot. He meets up with this King, receives a blessing and the WOrd says Abraham gave him tithes of all. Some Christians today do not read any other passages inn the WOrd to clarify what was ” tithes of all”. Many equate this to all Abram accumalated at that time. Heb 7: 4 confirms that ” tithe of all ” was NOT ” tithes of all Abram’s wealth or increase. NO ! The Word tells us that this was ONLY from the spoils of war. The Word tells us that Abram did NOT give from his wealth or increase but it was from the spoils of war. Many tithing advocates use this verse as a premise and model for all Christians to follow. This is dangerous because it does not follow the model of giving from one’s salary, wealth or increase or the Spirit. Its a model followed only when accumulating goods from going to war. I do not understand why would a follower of Christ would desire or phathom to follow a stewardship system that mandates him/her to give from goods from accumulating from war. Notice, I did not Assume NOWHERE in this passages. I just let the Lord reveal HIS Word in its ENTIRETY. I want us to track and review this incident of stewardship then we can go to the next place where tithing is mentioned. Now let’s ask some questions and ASSUME that Abram tithed in accoradnce to God’s unspoken Eternal Law of giving 10% off one’s increase.
If Abram was acting on this unspoken principle, then he himself violated because he did NOT give from what he had accumulated in Gen 12 and 13. The Scripture states he gave from the spoils of war, not from his personal wealth.
Now, if he broke God’s eternal Law, then according to Malachi 3, He is under a curse for not giving the whole tithe.
????
Wait a minute, I thought Abram was declared by God Himself as being credited Righteous and ALL nations will be BLESSED thru him. (GEN 15; 6) Gal 4;7-9) Why Is God heaving these blessings on Abram when He broke God’s eternal command of tithing ? Why did God not speak of this tithing violation like he did in Malachi 3? Lastly, why is the whole world considered bless thru him by GOD ? God , himself stated that ALL NATIONS WILL BE BLESS THRU YOU.
Historical studies outside the word informs and confirms us that giving 10% to the local king was common practice and WAS MANDATED. It was NOT optional ! Now , since we Can not assume that Abraham was acting on this eternal principle, only two probables come to mind:
He was giving in accordance to local customs or he was giving acknowledging the Kingship of Melchizedk as respecting his authority by God, or a combo of both.( Also, Abram character was displayed when he gave everything thing to Sodom. He did not keep nothing for himself.)
Either one of these can possibly fly, BUT, BIBLICALLY, we can not assume that this was an unspoken principle of God. If we open this door, we open a plethora of pandora box’s following this premise.
There are other passages I desire to touch on but I implore all my brothers and sisters in Christ to review these passages mentioned, pray on them and let the Spirit reveal in accordance with Scripture what really happened.
Deut 12;32 must be taking in consideration as well when dealing with the tithe, afterall, this was ALSO apart of the tithing LAW as well.
please comment, no nastiness… please
or
April 26th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
On that last comment, Abram only kept a share that belong to the three of the men that went with him on this battle. ANer, Eshkol and Mamre. Abram contended they have their share, then he kept nothing for himself. Now, the rest of this I do not know how it was divided but I do know that Abram did NOT keep anything for himself.
I had many spelling errors as well.
The beginning paragraph should read
I was once an avid legalistic tither but the Lord has open my eyes and now my giving is MUCH higher from God’s standpoint and my understanding is better on stewardship with finances…
May 16th, 2009 at 9:07 am
Hi tavares,
Your observations are interesting. However, there’s a basic problem in your summations, which was well expressed in the second post:
The thing is that God didn’t expect legalism of anyone; and to suppose that being “legalistic” was what tithes were about, only shows how many people miss the point. God never called His people to be legalists at anytime; and if people turned out that way, the problem emerged from them, not from God’s calling.
However, it’s great to know you’re seeing things in a different light now.
I wonder why you would be amazed about that. Does Scripture not mention Abraham at all in discussing tithes? Indeed it does; but your persuasions on his tithes are deeply flawed, and that’s why you had problems with it. Let’s cut to the chase and skip the ’800 miles’ idea, as it’s not pertinent to the discourse at hand. Here’s the basic point in yours:
First, there’s nothing to suggest any “mandates” in his giving tithes to Melchizedek – at best, that is deliberately read into the text, not from the text. Once you take that approach, it won’t be long before you begin to see Melchizedek as a ‘pagan priest’ and then infer ‘pagan tithes’ for Abraham, as many people have done. To solve this problem for yourself, you’d have to either “prove” the Bible did not mean what it said in declaring that Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God (Gen. 14:18 and Heb. 7:1), or otherwise find another way of discrediting what Scripture declares. If this won’t help you, then no need to resort to extraneous ideas and force them into the texts.
Second, Abraham was not acting on any compulsion in giving tithes to Melchizedek. The latter was a king (of Salem) as were other kings (of Sodom, of Gomorrah, of Admah, of Zeboiim, etc). If Abraham was following mere customs that compelled (ie. ‘mandated‘) him to tithe, then he could have done so to some other king and not to Melchizedek. Why? Simply because Abraham was dwelling in the plains of Mamre (Gen. 14:13), and not in Salem where Melchizedek was the king. Mamre was in Hebron (see Gen. 13:18 and 35:27), not in Salem. Thus, the ‘local custom’ that you had inferred as a “mandate” upon Abraham immediately poses a huge problem for you, because such a “mandate” would rather have compelled Abraham to tithe to some other king rather than to Melchizedek. Further, notice that in just the same way that the king of Sodom “went out to meet” Abraham (Gen. 14:17), so it was the king-priest Melchizedek “who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings” (Heb. 7:1), not the other way round, that Abraham went to meet Melchizedek.
Sorry, tavares, but another flawed assumption in yours. Abraham did not break God’s Law – and he gave tithes, nothing less. Your idea of the “whole tithe” is easily answered in Gen. 14:20 (“tithes of all”) and Heb. 7:2 (“a tenth part of all”). How then did he break the Law?
Besides, Abraham’s tithes were not based on ‘the Law’ – this is something that anti-tithers have to carefully bring themselves to consider. It is unhealthy to try and evaluate Abraham’s tithes on a “Law” that did not even exist until several centuries later.
However, if your problem is about whether Abraham tithed from his own wealth (or what belonged to him), I’ve discussed that in detail – he could not have given tithes to anyone, or given portions to his confederates, if those things did not first belong to him.
By the same anti-tithing logic, Numbers 31 would be “breaking” the Law! Why? Simple: the “tithes” in that chapter taken as heave offering for the priest (verses 28-29, 41) were not the personal property of the tithers. I wonder why most anti-tither argue tithes in that chapter, and have never seen this same point! If they could argue tithes from Numbers 31 and understanding that such “tithes” were not the personal property of the tithers, what then has been the big quarrel about Abraham’s “tithes” to Melchizedek? If the Bible refers to Abraham’s giving to Melchizedek as “tithes”, why are we belivers so busy looking for excuses to argue against the clear and simple declaration of Scripture?
Bottomline: good to know you are no longer living as an “avid legalistic tither” – for God never called anyone to legalism. Many blessings.
August 14th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Gwaine,
thanks for the comments. Its good to see dialogue thats not going at each other’s necks.
When I stated ” avid legalistic tither ” I was referring to what contemporary Christianity taught me. All the churches I attended coming up, taught legalistic tithing. As a result, I fell into that same category. I did not understand the Spirit of giving. It wasn’t until I started reading the Word for myself and praying and listening to the Spirit, thats when I started to undertsand things clearer.
Also, let me clear something up. I’m not against giving 10% of one’s income for the service of the Lord. I pray that all God’s children can give 90% of their income to the kingdom of the Lord and live off the rest. What I’m against is Scripture been used to put believers in Christ under compulsion and renders them deaf to what the Spirit of the living God is really saying. You opened my eyes to the reason behind Abraham’s giving. You were correct. The is NO specific BIBLICAL reason to why he gave 10% of the spoils to Melchizedek. My guess is he was recognized Melchizedek’s kingship as one representing the TRue and Only God. I seen previous posts that refers to Melchizedek as a pagan god worshipper. I STRONGLY disagree. Hebrews 7 compares the priesthood of aaron to the priesthood of melchizedek ( a type for Jesus’ priesthood/kingship ) The author of Hebrews was a master of the Law. I refuse to believe he would include a pagan king / priesthood symbolizing Christ’s kingship & priesthood.
Also, when I spoke of Abraham breaking God’s Law this was under the assumption of tithing as an eternal Law. Once again you are correct. Abraham did not break God’s Law. BUT, IF tithing is AN ETERNAL LAW, than he did indeed break it. This is because he did NOT give from what he accumulated in the previuos two chapters. Abraham was VERY rich but the Scripture undeniably confirms that his giving was from the spoils of war. ( Read Heb 7 all, i believe the 4th verse clarifies to us what “all” really is ) I used the first part of Gen 14 as narrative to explain how ludicrous of would of been if he did pay 10% of what he had. Plus, the Scriptures stated the only thing he took to war was 318 men from his household. How could he give 10% of what he had before the war, if he never took his posessions with him to this war and/or he never traveled back to his hometown to get his posessions and then give a tithe of it to Mel. ? I wanted to take this common sense approach because God works in the natural as weel as the supernatural.
Bottomline is :
My standpoint of financial giving is one commanded by the Spirit. The are some individuals who can give far more than 10% but think their 10% gift is all what is required by God. Then there are some individuals who can not give 10% because of their poverished lifestyle. They need help from their well off brothers and sisters in Christ. However, they never receive financial help because the some of the well of brothers and sisters in Christ gave their 10% and firmly believed that is all what God’s requires. They negate the Spirit of the Law which is Love. It is hard to truly love your neighbor and not help him financially if your are capable of doing so. I’m eager to see your comments because you have opened my eyes to some things as well. I hope I can do the same.
Lastly, I say this is in humility, If im wrong about my standpoint in financial giving, I pray the Lord will show me through the Spirit, his beleivers & in His Word where I went astray. If your wrong about this subject, then I hope you will humble yourself and do the same. If we are both wrong, Then I pray God open both of our eyes to see HIS truth.
I love all of you in Jesus’ name….
October 2nd, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Dear tavares,
Thank you for your very refreshing reply and observations. My apologies for the delay of my rejoinder, as I’ve been quite busy lately. However, your last paragraph captures for me the true essence of a spiritual dialogue in Christ – I deeply appreciate how you touched my heart.
There’s nothing much to improve upon in your post, tavares. I agree mostly with your perspective and for helping me to see your contexts. Please forgive me where I might have failed to see your point earlier, as my previous observations were not meant to domineer yours in any way.
That said, you made a most beautiful point about your standpoint of financial giving. Like you, my persuasion is that we should not be rigid on any particulars. If anyone wishes to express their stewardship by any certain percentage (more, less or exactly 10%), they are free to do as they purpose in their hearts (2 Cor. 9:7) – and may God bless them all.
The one thing we should all consciously gaurd against is legalism from any quarter. Arguments against “10%” are as legalistic as arguments for a “compulsory 10%” – both positions are clearly unbalanced. An anti-tither should not try to impose his own ideas upon believers who tithe, especially in the face of the fact that God has evidently blessed many tithing Christians: and we cannot deny that, regardless the arguments. In just the same way, a tither ought not to make a rigid “10%” as compulsory or mandatory to God’s people. Many of us today understand that tithing is just ONE expression of our stewardship to God; and yes, we can all lovingly encourage one another to sow abundantly in the example and spirit of our Macedonian brethren who gave “beyond their power” (2 Cor. 8:1-3).
Now, by way of clarifying some issue, could I share something on this interesting point you raised (emphasis mine):
That’s true. You explained that your point in the above was because you wanted to take a common sense approach because God works in the natural as well as the supernatural. Good point, and I shall bear that in mind.
Here are the reasons (among others) why I have no problem with Abraham’s tithe:
1. The Bible refers to Abraham’s gift to Melchizedek as tithes in both the OT (Gen. 14:20) and the NT (Heb. 7:4 & 6). If God’s inspired Word calls it “tithes” without worrying about whether it was from the ‘spoils of war’ or whether it was done only once, that should humble and teach me to raise no objections to call it something else.
2. The Bible also shows that what Abraham did in that very act (tithing from his ‘spoils of war’) did not break God’s law at any point; for it was also the very thing that is recognized and affirmed in the Law. An example is found in Numbers 31:28-29, where the “tribute” offered as a “heave offering” was NOT the personal goods of any of ‘the men of war which went out to battle’. As a matter of fact, whatever they offered as ‘heave offering’ to the Lord came from their conquest over the Medianites, OUTSIDE the land of Israel (see vs. 9 & 11). The ‘heave offering’ in that instance was not from the personal incomes of enterprise of those men. You will remember that Num. 18:24 refers to the ‘heave offering’ as a type of tithes (“the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD”). So, in just the same way, Abraham’s tithing to Melchizedek from the spoils of war tessellates with what we find in Num. 31:28-29 & 41; therefore we can trust he did not break any law, even though he was not even under any Law to begin with.
3. Earlier, I’d explained that the spoils of war belong to the victor – in this case, Abraham. Citing Deut. 20:12-14, for example, we note that God gives the spoils to His own people in any conquest: “ALL the spoil THEREOF, shalt thou take unto THYSELF; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.” Again, I butressed that very point with attested sources as Hugo Grotius’ “De Jure Belli ac Pacis” which affirmed the very same thing. Abraham’s spoils of war belonged to him; and if they did not, it would have been wrong for him to take stuff belonging to other people and given them to others, such as his confederates (Aner, Eschol and Mamre) as well to Melchizedek. In plain English, to do so would be stealing – but since the spoils belonged to Abraham as Deut. 20:12-14 demonstrates, we can safely infer that he was not stealing from anyone.
Perhaps you’d find those three points helpful as to why Abraham’s tithing is no problem to me. Even so, I enjoyed yours, and it’s refreshing to perceive the freedom which you enjoy in your persuasions in financial giving.
May the Lord Jesus Christ who we serve ever bless you.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
More important than the issue of tithing and stewardship, I love the fact believers in Christ are coming together and expressing their viewpoints without hurting one another verbally. For we know that inflicting pain on one another is non debatable amongst Christians. I Loved your post and both viewpoints. There are some very solid interesting points on both sides. I will leave my comment on this final statement.
If someone has made up in their mind to give to the work of the Lord a set figure of 10%, whom am I to stand between that person offering and the Lord ? I also believe unequivocally that the ministers and workers of the Lord should be paid by the monies that come into the church ( tithes and offerings including ). Throughout the bible Old test, and new test, believers and doers of the Lord was supported by offerings and Tithes. There are some anti-tithers that dispute tithing as a underhanded self pious way to be stingy in their giving. I pray the Lord bless all the readers of this blog and to be able to give 90%+ of their income to work of God. I also pray for the individuals that have the heart to give by not the financial means to do so. I pray those who can give listen to the Spirit and help those out who can not. I believe ( in my opinion ) the epitome of biblical stewardshipping ( biblically ) lies in ACts 2 and Act 4. These beleivers sold everything that had and helped one another. The Word said they were lacking NOTHING, and they did this voluntarily under the influence of the Holy Spirit !! WOW ! Thats what I would like to see.
THANKS MY FAM IN CHRIST !!
I hope this reach all in good spirits !!!!
March 13th, 2011 at 8:26 am
I hope this is done in good spirit.
March 13th, 2011 at 9:11 am
I have read all the posts and comments about tithing and this is what I have to say.Tithing is extremely UNSCRIPTURAL.I will begin with Abraham’s tithing in Genesis 14:20.Abraham paid that tithe as a pagan for at that time,he had not yet believed God.It was in Genesis 15:6 that he eventually believed God and righteousness was credited to his account ; just like righteousness is credited to the account of a believer in Christ (Romans 10:10).In truth, you cannot be said to be righteous unless you have believed and at the time Abraham gave the tithing, he had not yet believed.Otherwise, the Scriptures wouldn’t mention that it was in Genesis 15:6 that he believed – several years after paying the tithes. Now some think of that very act of Abraham paying the tithes as an act of faith but it is not.The reason is that the righteous and the unrighteous do not exercise the same kind of faith.You may have faith but if you have that faith outside Christ, it is no faith at all.We as believers have faith based on what Jesus did in his death, burial and resurrection (1 Peter 1:21).More than that, the new creation do not exercise the same kind of faith as the Old Testament folks.No one exercised faith in Jesus as the Son of God (Galatians 2:20) before the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.So it is wrong to compare our exercise of faith with that of Abraham and those who lived before it was possible to believe in Jesus.Actually, a new faith was revealed in Christ (Galatians 3:23,25) which Abraham did not and could not exercise.Besides, we as believers are greater than Abraham ! We are not ordinary.Abraham was born of a woman but we as born again Christians are born of God Himself.We are like Jesus in this world.Abraham never had that privilege (John 1:12-13, 1John 4:17; Matthew 11:11).Abraham was unrighteous at time he paid the tithes and his acts can never be compared with the righteous acts of what God expects or does not expect from the righteous who is the new creation in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 6:14-16).
December 20th, 2011 at 7:45 am
Tithing Test
The Word says that The Lord Jesus tithed (true or false)
Peter, a fisherman and Paul, a tentmaker tithed (true or false)?
It is written that everyone in the OT (farmers, merchants, shepherds, shipbuilders, hunters, etc.) seeking to obey the law tithed (true or false).
Abraham tithed to Melchizdek in the same way the NT believers did to Jesus Christ (true or false)
It is written that tithes paid for temples, temple maintenance, etc. (true or false)
Jesus taught his disciples to tithe (true or false)
There are many examples in the Bible of people tithing of their money from wages (true or false)
The NT teaches that we should tithe to ministers in the same way the Jews tithed to Levites (True or false)
The Bible teaches that God‘s standard of giving from our wages is ten percent
It is written that the righteous poor tithed in the OT (true or false)
Jesus fulfilled everything under the law but tithes (true or false)
It is written that Abraham kept the 90% of the spoil after paying Melchizdek 10% (true or false)
It is written that Abraham tithed on his own personal property or livestock (true or false)
Jacob gave tithes even before God blessed him (true or false)
Only Levite priests could collect tithes under the Old Covenant, the New Covenant says that our pastors are Levite priests today (true or false)
Under the law, money was a tithable commodity (true or false)
Christian converts were asked to tithe to the Church (true or false)
Tithes were not a part of the Law (true or false)
We should pay the church that we attend 10% of all of our income because we owe it to them; this is how we pay God (true or false)
We pay tithes because the Bible tells you to pay 10% of your wages to your local church (true or false)
We pay tithes because the scripture says that fruit, crop and all food in any form were changed into money, for there was no money in biblical times (true or false)
God told Israel to tithe on spoils (true or false)
It is written that Israel paid tithes on spoils as according to the law, etc. (true or false)
There were no spoils in the Bible for Israel to pay tithes on, therefore spoils became money (true or false)
We pay tithes because the book of Malachi was rebuking and giving instruction concerning the Law of God to Israel as well as to the believers of Christ today (true or false)
Genesis and Malachi are the only books in the OT that Christians should take instructions from (true or false)
Christians should obey all of the laws and directives God gave in the bible from Genesis to Malachi (true or false)
We pay tithes because Abraham paid 10% of his wages to Melchizdek (true or false)
Jesus was talking to Christians about money in Matthew 23:23 (true or false)
Get your answers from the Bible!
January 26th, 2012 at 9:20 am
@Kelechi,
I read your comment and came to the simple conclusion that you do not know your Bible. Your initial argument about Abraham being a pagan is simple FALSE. Let me quote you:
Two quick answers to show your fallacy:
1. There is not a single verse that teaches anywhere that Abraham gave tithes as a pagan. The idea of Abraham giving tithes as a ‘pagan’ is a fallacy often dribbled into Genesis 14 by cheats who no longer read their Bibles.
2. BEFORE Genesis 14, Abraham is known as one who believed God. Twice EARLIER (in both Gen. 12:8 and 13:4), we read of Abraham as a man who ‘called on the name of the LORD’ – the very feature that marked the lives of those who believed in and worshipped God (see Gen. 4:26).
Your argument is weakened on the basic flaw of your misreading the texts and drawing false conclusions. This is also shown in your claim that, ‘Actually, a new faith was revealed in Christ (Galatians 3:23,25) which Abraham did not and could not exercise.‘
What exactly did you mean by ‘a new faith’?!? Perhaps you never read such passages as Romans 4:12 (NLT) which affirms that Christians have and walk in ‘the same kind of faith‘ which Abraham had before he was circumcised? I’m not sure where you got your idea of a ‘new faith’ from, for we know that there is ‘one faith’, not two or three of a different ‘new faith’ (Eph. 4:5).
There is nothing in the Bible that condemns a believer for tithing – as long as that is willingly rather than by coercion or manipulation. It is a big shame to us Christians to waste so much time arguing against the giving of a tenth whereas the Jew under the Law gave far more than, and many reports show unbelievers giving a tenth of their resources without arguments.