At The Request Of The Ohio Patriot...

[John81]

I extremely dislike this attitude that my humble pastor, who gets by on little salary, and teaches tithing from his pulpit, is being lumped in with the false prosperity teachers. Not the same thing at all.

That would only apply if he's teaching in the same manner they are.

 

Also, not all "prosperity preachers" are of the extreme variety. There are some who are called "prosperity preachers" when what they actually preach is the same or virtually the same as many Baptists preach.

 

With regards to the tithe, there are those who wrongly preach the tithe for Christians in virtually every denomination, and most do so out of tradition.

 

For myself, I know for many years of my Christian walk I accepted the "Christians must tithe" preaching without question. It wasn't until I took the Berean approach and actually decided to study it out from Scripture (not looking to disprove it, I was simply looking for deeper understanding) that I discovered the tithe was 100% an OT command specific to the Jews. This caused me to have to do further study to learn the requirements for New Testament Christians with regards to giving. I was actually amazed at how clear and simple the requirements for Christian giving are.

 

In any event, I didn't mean, and don't mean, any disrespect at all towards your pastor.

 

When speaking of the "prosperity preachers" I was referring to the extremists, and comparing them to those Baptist pastors who denounce them from the pulpit but then use the exact same prosperity/tithe/punishment points they do.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

I extremely dislike this attitude that my humble pastor, who gets by on little salary, and teaches tithing from his pulpit, is being lumped in with the false prosperity teachers. Not the same thing at all.

Salyan,
Simple question that requires a simple answer...

"Can you provide Scripture that says the congregation is to tithe to the Church? "

The thing is, according to the Law, it was not the entire congregation of Israel that tithed to the Temple (even though all were required to tithe)... it was only one tribe that actually tithed to the Temple, the Levites.

And what was that tithe that they tithed? It was 10% of 10%. The Temple only received 1% of all of Israel's total produce and livestock, not 10%! So how does that agree with the doctrine that man who is not a Levite is to bring 10% of his money to the Church?

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Wow!  I am shocked, to say the least...

I just found out that my mother is breaking a federal law and doesn't even know that she is.  And the sad reality is, many others are also breaking this same federal Law.

In 1998, President Clinton signed the Religious Liberty and Charitable Donation Protection Act (RLCDP) which allows those who are in bankruptcy to continue their religious practice of tithing 10% of their money to the Church that they are members of.

But, in 2005, The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCP) overturned President Clinton's earlier decision.  The BAPCP does not allow the one in bankruptcy to tithe their money to religious organizations.

And who is to blame for those in bankruptcy breaking the law?  Not my mother, nor any other person who is breaking this law.  The blame lies with those who are telling us that we are to tithe our money.  All those church leaders who push the unbiblical monetary tithe.  They oppress their members with a burden that God never required and when they do, they encourage their members to break the law of the land.

[Salyan]

See, there you go again. Now my pastor is somehow responsible for burdening his congregation and encouraging them to break the law. I am not arguing tithing - I am objecting to your slanderous blanket statements. Cut it out already.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

See, there you go again. Now my pastor is somehow responsible for burdening his congregation and encouraging them to break the law. I am not arguing tithing - I am objecting to your slanderous blanket statements. Cut it out already.

If your pastor is teaching the monetary tithe, which is not supported by Scripture, then he is indeed placing a burden on the flock that God never intended to be put upon them. 

Like it or not, it is the truth.  It does not matter how humble a pastor is, if that pastor expects something of the members that God never gave him authority to place upon them, he is in err.

So, I ask again, can you provide Scripture that supports the monetary tithe?

Why is it OK for a pastor, (not necessarily yours, but any pastor) to teach a monetary tithe when Scripture doesn't support it?  Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees that because they taught for doctrine the commandments of men, even their worship was in vain.  When did that change?  When did God decide that He was OK with man teaching  for doctrine the commandments of men?

[Salyan]

I told you before, I am not arguing tithing any further in this thread.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Why not argue tithing? If I am wrong and you are right, it is your responsibility to show me where I am wrong. If you know for certainty that tithing is required, then you should be able to show me the Word of God more perfectly.

[TheSword]

Why not argue tithing? If I am wrong and you are right, it is your responsibility to show me where I am wrong. If you know for certainty that tithing is required, then you should be able to show me the Word of God more perfectly.

 

This argument is rather futile, and Salyan is perfectly in the right to step away from it, because neither side is going to change their mind.  Several people have put forth sound arguments from Scripture to support a tithing position (my brief arguments can be found in posts #61, #68, and #74), but you summarily dismiss most of them so I'm not going to restate everything.  The problem is everyone involved has their mind pretty well made up and we're working with two completely different hermenuetical principles.  Our arguments are based on the assumptiong that you can pull the principles out of the OT Law to discern God's mind on things, realizing that the Law does not specificially apply in detail, but that there was purpose behind the Law and it wasn't a list of arbitrary rules.  Your arguments are based on the assumption that because we are no longer under the Law none of it's prescribed practices are required in any capacity.

 

We all agree that the Law has been put away.  I'm fairly certain we all agree that tithing is not a requirement for salvation and should not be a requirement for church membership.  Beyond that there is one side arguing a transcending principle of the tithe and the other is arguing an anullment of the Law and all of it's requirements.  Until one side is willing to honestly accept the other interpretive principle, no progress toward a middle ground, or even changing positions, will be made.

 

In my opinion, your position against tithing is more legalistic (strict adherence, or the principle of strict adherence, to law or prescription, especially to the letter rather than the spirit) than is the position for tithing.  This is by no means a personal attack, but rather a critique of the argument.  Your argument says that the Law is abolished and therefore is no longer useful for us today (i.e., normative).  My argument says that based on 2 Timothy 3:16-17 the Law is still good for establishing principle about God's mind on things even though adherence to its requirements is unnecessary.  The logical conclusion of your view would naturally lead to the removal of Leviticus and a large portion of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy from the Bible whereas my view sees their richness for holy living in the manner of Romans 12:1-2.  Strictly speaking, your view would require also the dismissal of many New Testament principles established in the Gospels prior to the crucifixion and resurrection because the Law was still in effect prior His atoning sacrifice (He came to fulfill the Law and meet all of its requirements; Matthew 5:17-18).  You cannot simply draw a line between Malachi and Matthew or put a box around the Pentateuch with a caveat saying "not for today."

 

Now, lest anyone think I'm arguing for preaching tithing in the manners described above that seeks to present a prosperity gospel or impose a church membership requirement, I strongly disagree with both of those notions.  Just like other spiritual disciplines such as fasting, prayer, and church attendence, I believe tithing is a matter between the individual and God.  I believe it should be encouraged through preaching and not mandated or institutionalized.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

OK, let's pull principles out of God's Law to discern things.

Where are the principles? 

It is clear that not all of the children of Israel tithed, only those who were farmers and herders.  Of the millions of people in the eleven tribes that were required to tithe, that had to have knocked down that number quite a lot.

Shall we continue?  According to Nehemiah 10:37-38, the tithes that the children of Israel did not go to the Temple.  Instead, the children of Israel took them to the forty-eight cities (notice that it was not just any city they could take them to, it had to be one that the Levites were living in that were provided by the other tribes of Israel)  The Levites would then take a tithe of the tithe that they received of the children of Israel to the Temple storehouse.

Where is the principle?  God did not require eleven tribes, the majority of Israel, to tithe to the Temple.  He required one tribe out of twelve to tithe to the Temple.

I still do not see your principle.  I believe this 'principle' does not truly exist in light of what the Word of God says.

If there were a "principle" as you claim, it would be that only the workers who ministered in the Church were required to tithe.  That is all that were required to tithe to the Temple.

[DaveW]

You are wrong.
the Levites tithed.
you have said again and again.

So not only farmers and herders tithed......

[Standing Firm In Christ]

You are wrong.
the Levites tithed.
you have said again and again.

So not only farmers and herders tithed......

You are obviously not reading my posts right.  I have never said the Levites did not tithe.

Let me explain a little more clearly...  This is from my wordpress blog...
 

Nehemiah 10:37-38 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 of 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. 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.

To break it down and make it easier for all to understand, suppose a farmer from the tribe of Benjamin grew 100 bushels of wheat during the year of the Levitical tithe.  That farmer would take ten bushels of wheat to a Levite in one of the 48 Levitical cities that the Levites lived in.  That was his tithe.  The Levite, would then bring one of those bushels that he received to the Temple and take that bushel into the storehouse there.  As you can see, only 1% of that Benjamite farmer’s crop was to go to the Temple storehouse, not 10%.

Numbers 35:1-8 And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying, Command the children of Israel, that they give unto the Levites of the inheritance of their possession cities to dwell in; and ye shall give also unto the Levites suburbs for the cities round about them. And the cities shall they have to dwell in; and the suburbs of them shall be for their cattle, and for their goods, and for all their beasts. And the suburbs of the cities, which ye shall give unto the Levites, shall reach from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about. And ye shall measure from without the city on the east side two thousand cubits, and on the south side two thousand cubits, and on the west side two thousand cubits, and on the north side two thousand cubits; and the city shall be in the midst: this shall be to them the suburbs of the cities. And among the cities which ye shall give unto the Levites there shall be six cities for refuge, which ye shall appoint for the manslayer, that he may flee thither: and to them ye shall add forty and two cities. So all the cities which ye shall give to the Levites shall be forty and eight cities: them shall ye give with their suburbs. And the cities which ye shall give shall be of the possession of the children of Israel: from them that have many ye shall give many; but from them that have few ye shall give few: every one shall give of his cities unto the Levites according to his inheritance which he inheriteth.

An oft-used passage that pastors say proves we are to tithe our money is found in the last book of the Old Testament.

Malachi 3:8-10 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring 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.

Now, when used by itself, one might be convinced that the passage is speaking a command to the members of the New Testament Church to tithe their money to the Church.

But is that what that verse says?  Let’s be as the Bereans and search the Scriptures to see if it is as it is being preached…

First, we must see who is being addressed in Malachi 3.  Was it the entire nation of Israel?  If one rightly divides the Word of Truth, one will find that it was not the people.

If not the people, then who?

Let me give you just a little bit of historical background, specifically the time period when Malachi delivered this harsh rebuke and stern instruction.

Malachi delivered this message from God in the year 430 B.C., most pastors will agree that this is the correct date.  What they don’t tell you is that Nehemiah was a contemporary of Malachi’s, and to properly understand Malachi’s address one needs to know what is going on in the book of Nehemiah.

As I said, Nehemiah was a contemporary of Malachi.  This means they both lived in the same generation.  Malachi’s address was in 430 B.C., Nehemiah’s story was in 433 B.C…. just three years prior to Malachi delivering the message from God.

So how does Nehemiah fit into this, you may ask?  Let’s look at the Scripture…

We have already addressed the fact that the Levites were the ones who brought the tithes into the storehouse according to Nehemiah 10:37-38.  We have pointed out the fact that what was tithed to the Temple was not tithed by the Israelites, but by the Levites.

So was it the Levites robbing God?  No, it was not the Levites… it was the Priests, the sons of Aaron who were robbing God.  Notice:

Nehemiah 13:1-5 On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever; Because they met not the children of Israel with bread and with water, but hired Balaam against them, that he should curse them: howbeit our God turned the curse into a blessing. Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude. And before this, Eliashib the priest, having the oversight of the chamber of the house of our God, was allied unto Tobiah: And he had prepared for him a great chamber, where aforetime they laid the meat offerings, the frankincense, and the vessels, and the tithes of the corn, the new wine, and the oil, which was commanded to be given to the Levites, and the singers, and the porters; and the offerings of the priests.

Did you catch that?  Eliashib, one of Aaron’s sons cleared the room where the tithes were kept and moved an Ammonite into the Temple storehouse.

The Priest robbed God!  He took the tithes that the Levites had brought into the storehouse out and moved God’s enemy into the storehouse.

Blasphemy!

Malachi’s rebuke becomes clear now.  The rebuke was to the Priests.  They had taken the tithes out of the storehouse.  They were the ones guilty of robbing God.  The congregation was not guilty, they had taken the tithes where they were supposed to take them.  The Levites were not guilty, they had brought the tithes into the storehouse as they were supposed to.  The Priests were guilty.  They removed the tithes so they could move the enemy of God in.

Malachi was telling the Priests that they had robbed God.  They also robbed the whole nation because the food that was supposed to be in the storehouse was not there.  Because they had removed the food, the Levites had no food to sustain them at the Temple.  They had to return to their cities so that they could survive.

Haggai 1:9-11 Ye looked for much, and, lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it. Why? saith the LORD of hosts. Because of mine house that is waste, and ye run every man unto his own house. Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit. And I called for a drought upon the land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the new wine, and upon the oil, and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and upon all the labour of the hands.

Do you see the result of rightly dividing?  The truth is known when one rightly divides.  Because the Priests robbed God by removing the tithes, the Levites had to return to their land and the House of God laid waste.  The Priest’s actions infuriated God and He withheld the rain and allowed the locust to eat what little there was.  The actions of the Priests oppressed the widows, the orphans, the Levites, and the foreigners taking refuge in Israel.  It oppressed them because the food that should have been there was not there.

Why is it that the Church teaches its members that God requires 10% of their money (as tithes) when God only required 1% of Israel’s total increase to be put in the Temple storehouse in Jerusalem?  It was not the congregation’s responsibility to tithe to the Temple.  The responsibility to tithe to the Temple fell solely upon the Levites.  They kept 90% of the tithe that they received in their Levitical cities, while the remaining 10% of that tithe they were required to take to the Temple.

The Church has lied to its members ever since it first taught they were to tithe of their money. God never required a tithe of money. The Church is teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, and God says of those who do such, “Even your worship is in vain.”

What has happened to the Church? The Apostles never taught the Church was to tithe.

Psalms 106:38-39 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood. Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions.

The Bible reveals that God’s Holy tithe was not money, and yet, man (whether out of greed, or out of ignorance of what God’s Holy Word says) has invented a doctrine of a monetary tithe… and the Church has gone a whoring after that invention of man.

[TheSword]

I'm not sure you will see it because you choose not to.  That's why I said this is really a futile argument.  We're getting bogged in the strict and exclusive definition of "tithe" that you use.  The Scribes and Pharisees likely disagreed with your limited definition (see Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42, 18:10-14).  In order to assert that the tithe only applied farmers and herders, you would have to assume that all Scribes and Pharisees were farmers and herders.  Matthew 23:23 indicates that they tithed even of their herbs (an interesting sidenote is that this is the only time in the Bible that Jesus says the Pharisees did something right, even though they were missing the "weightier matters").  Perhaps this means that it was universal for people to grow herbs in their home which were considered a crop.  However, one herb mentioned in the paralell passage of Luke 11:42 is rue, an herb not native to the Levant area, and thus more likely to be bought and sold than locally grown.  In Luke 18:10-14, Jesus gives the example of a stereotypical Pharisee who gave tithes of all he possessed.  Either he only possessed plants and livestock or there is a principle of tithing that is rooted deeper than materialism.  The Pharisees lived out the letter of the Law and they seem to indicate it extends beyond the rural farmer/herdsman.

 

If you really want to find the principle in the tithe (or any OT Law mandate really), you have to look beyond the literal application of it and examine the WHY behind.  Why was anyone commanded to tithe? Why were the Levites commanded to give a tithe of the tithes they received?  My method of discernment is as follows:

 

- To fear/respect/honor the Lord:  Deuteronomy 14:23 - "that thou mayest learn to fear the Lord thy God always." 

- Provide for God's servants and needy: Deuteronomy 26:12 - "and hast given it unto the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat within thy gates, and be filled;"

- To recognize where the increase comes from: Deuteronomy 12:7 - "And there ye shall eat before the Lord your God, and ye shall rejoice in all that ye put your hand unto, ye and your households, wherein the Lord thy God hath blessed thee."

- To rejoice in God's blessing: Deuteronomoy 14:26 - "and thou shalt eat there before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household"

 

It's also interesting to note that there were exceptions to your rule of livestock and crops (and their byproducts).  Tithing was also allowed to include money and "holy things" (Deu 14:24-25; 2 Chron 31:6).  Even if the farmer and herdsman were the only ones who tithed, clearly God wasn't primarily interested in the material they brought, but rather their "increase" which, in an agrarian society where crops and livestock are the measure of wealth (consider the example given in Jesus' parable of the covetous man in Luke 12:18-21), means the wealth that their increase in stuff amounts to.  That's why the farmer could sell his crops and tithe with money instead of hauling his harvest across the country.

 

There you have a succinct example of my interpretive method for finding the principle.  You can take it or leave it and we can agree to disagree with no love lost.  Whether you choose to tithe or not makes no real difference to me.  However, I believe that telling people they shouldn't tithe because we're not under the Law is just as faulty and dangerous as telling people they have to tithe to be a part of the church. 

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Wrong TheSword!

Tithing was not allowed to include money. The money in Deuteronomy 14 was not tithed! It was used to buy back tithes that were to be eaten. If money were titheable, God would not have told them to spend the money.

And 2 Chronicles says nothing of money. Why read into the text what is not there?
Tithes were not money.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

From Godasagardener.com...

Rue
The rue of the Bible is the Ruta chalepenis called African rue, common rue, and fringed rue. Rue is native to the Middle East. In ancient Israel, rue grew wild; therefore, a tithe was not paid when the herb was used. In New Testament times, rue was grown in gardens, necessitating growers to pay a tithe on its sell. Rue can grow in almost any type of soil, but grows best in sand or clay loam. Young plants require average to moist soil; however, after plants are established they are drought tolerant. Rue enjoys full sun. In Israel, rue grows in the northern and central parts of the country, but not in the Negev region. It can tolerate only low levels of salt; consequently, rue is not grown along the Mediterranean coastline of Israel.

Rue did grow in Israel

[TheSword]

Wrong TheSword!

Tithing was not allowed to include money. The money in Deuteronomy 14 was not tithed! It was used to buy back tithes that were to be eaten. If money were titheable, God would not have told them to spend the money.

And 2 Chronicles says nothing of money. Why read into the text what is not there?
Tithes were not money.

 

Out of all that you focused in on one tangental subpoint...?  Are you just reading to check for an error you can hone in on so that it looks like the argument is refuted?  If you had thoughtfully read the rest you'd see my point is that the substance of the tithe is not what is most important.  As I pointed out, the act of tithing in this instance was to rejoice in God's blessing.  If this is what you want hang your argument on; ok fine, I concede perhaps they didn't drop shekels into the offering plate as a tithe so far as we know, but you still didn't deal with the substance of that paragraph nor the rest of the post.  I also never said 2 Chron was referencing money, that's why I included "holy things" as a direct quote.  If you want to explain how "holy things" can only mean crops and livestock, be my guest, but it's inconsequential to the point I made.

 

Clearly this isn't a productive conversation.  I'm all done on this topic.