The Tithe, for the Church or not?

[Standing Firm In Christ]

The Biblical definition is "a tenth; a tenth part".  

 

Tithing should not be in the Christian Church.  God did not think tithing was necessary, else he would have told us so in the Word.  And if God did not think it necessary to practice monetary tithing, who are we to say it should be practiced?

Edited November 23, 2015 by Standing Firm In Christ

[Alan]

The Law (excluding Abraham of course) of Giving of Offerings Church Statute

or

Further instructions from  the 'Internet Theologian' Committee 

Note: 1. Only pastors and members of Independent Baptist churches will be monitored.

Two men of the Pharisee committee will be placed at the front door of the church and announce, "No Tithing Allowed."

If any Jews are present, there will be another Pharisee, and scribe, making sure that all of the agricultural tithes (unless redeemed of course), are counted diligently by a Levite and placed in the 'storehouse.' There will need to be a lawyer present in order to make sure the proper amount of shekels are given in any redemptive process and a scribe to record the exact amounts.

A sign will be placed at the front of the door announcing, "This is Not a Storehouse." Directions will then be given, in Hebrew, for the nearest storehouse.

During the offering, the Pastor will have to announce the following:  "Anyone giving a tithe will be thrust out of the church." And, "No Money Accepted: Agricultural Products and Animals only."

The Offertory song will be: "Freed From the Law."

A list of the agricultural requirements for tithing will be placed on a prominent place on the Church Bulletin Board. A representative from the local law enforcement agency will give one warning to those breaking the law and 'tithing' or 'giving' shekels or any other form of monetary tender. On the observation of the second offence (with a Pharisee bearing witness), the offending widow will be publicly belittled in the next internet forum thread.

One of  the aforementioned Pharisees (on one side of the aisle), will make sure that the intents of the hearts of the people are in accordance to their interpretation that no Christian in the New Testament can give a monetary 'tithe.' If a person is found giving a 'tithe,' or a non-Jew, a tithe, then he will be denounced in accordance with the instructions from the 'Internet Theologian' in the following day in any, and all, available forums. A copy of the legal aspects of the giving in accordance to the Law will then be repeated to the offender. The following sign is to placed on the offending pastor, "Thief" in Hebrew, Greek, and English.

On the other side of the aisle, we will have the Holy Ghost present in the absence of the Lord Jesus. The Holy Ghost will commend all those saints who 'have purposed in their hearts to give joyfully.' If any note of cheer, or other method of joy, is noticed by the Pharisee on the other side of the aisle he will be able to countermand the commendation of the Holy Spirit and declare (with a declarative and spiritual voice), "You were robbed!" The evil pastor forced you to give a tithe! You were coerced into tithing! You are not allowed to do so."The aforementioned scribe will duly note the offense and repeat the offense as many times as possible in order to spread (gossip), the news of the robbery. This will be in accordance with the adage, "Bad news travels fast." A sign on the front door of the church will then be placed, written in Hebrew, Greek and English, "Den of Robbers."

Afterwards, the Pharisees will hold a quorum. The aforementioned, 'Internet Theologian,' will be the head of the quorum. If any one of the givers, no exceptions will be given to widows or widowers, the local  'internet theologian' will then spread the names of the offending  pastors in order to warn others of the 'robberies' being committed by these evil pastors.

Written by:Eliezer the Scribe.

Method: Windows 8

Approved by: Pharisees, Inc. The Pharisee Council of Laodicea

Sponsored by: The Internet Forum Promotional Company, Inc.

 

 

Edited November 24, 2015 by Alan
not completed spelling strike-out

[Standing Firm In Christ]

A better bulletin board...

[Alan]

Yes! A better bulletin board!

[Critical Mass]

7 hours ago, Standing Firm In Christ said:

The Biblical definition is "a tenth; a tenth part".  

 

Tithing should not be in the Christian Church.  God did not think tithing was necessary, else he would have told us so in the Word.  And if God did not think it necessary to practice monetary tithing, who are we to say it should be practiced?

You are misunderstanding what I am saying. There's nothing wrong with someone purposing to give 10% every Sunday (though, I believe the tithe was closer to 30% in the OT). I'm not talking about a precise, literal application of the OT commandment. I'm talking about a spiritual application. Abraham tithed and he was before the law. You don't just dump the OT because we are under a NT economy now. ALL scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness. I believe that the NT established grace giving but there is nothing wrong with establishing a principle of giving in your life. To insist that somehow that a tithe cannot be followed whatsoever in the NT is wrong, IMO.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Not misunderstanding you at all.  You said, 

13 hours ago, Critical Mass said:

Tithing means simply giving a certain percent of your abundance. 

I posted the correct Biblical definition of the word "tithe."

You further said

 

Quote

Christians should tithe but they are not commanded to in the NT. When I say tithe I don't mean in the manner as they did under the OT economy but I see no problem purposing in your heart to give a certain percentage of your income every week or month. The church has bills to pay too.

to which I explained that tithing should not be in the Church.  

Monetary tithing was not taught by the Apostles.  Nor was it taught by the Christian churches until late-nineteenth century.  In 1932, monetary tithing was still not taught in the Middle Tennessee Baptist denomination.  That year, John Harvey Grime, a MTB minister, said of monetary tithing, "Should a Baptist Church ever start teaching it, they will cease being Baptist."

Abram did tithe before the Law.  But that does not mean we should tithe today.  Abraham also married his sister.  Should we marry our sister too?  Abram also had a child by another woman while married to his sister.  Abram also gave his wife to another man,  do we imitate all these too?  After all, they all took place before the Law, did they not?

 

There are bills associated with the meeting place of any religious organization, no doubt.  However, that does not mean people have to tithe in order to meet those needs.  The first church had needs.  Yet, not once is it recorded in God's Word that the  Body of Believers had to tithe to meet those needs.  Instead, people gave what they purposed to give.  And the needs were met.

There is nothing wrong with a person giving 10% of their money if they choose to do that without being manipulated by deceitful sermons that guilt them, belittle them, or scare them into giving that ten percent.  However, it has been my experience over the last half century, that guilt, intimidation,  and fear play a major role in why people do give 10% of their money to the church.  Guilt, intimidation and fear instilled through preachers abusing Malachi 3:8-10 and other passages in our precious Bible.

 

One example of manipulation is when Robert Morris told his congregation that if they don't tithe, they open the door for demons to enter their life.  Who wants to open doors for demons, right?  Better get out that checkbook.  Another example is When Perry stone used intimidation by telling members of his congregation that if they didn't tithe they were stupid and thieves.

Earlier, I put up a meme of a bulletin board with the names of many leaders who use guilt and fear to coerce people into giving ten percent of their money to the Church they pastor.  I could name many more that use the same types of manipulation.

 

Abram's tithe was not from his own personal property.  Nor was it from his own household income.  

Edited November 24, 2015 by Standing Firm In Christ

[Alan]

4 hours ago, Standing Firm In Christ said:

Abram's tithe was not from his own personal property.  Nor was it from his own household income.  

According to your interpretation, then, the tithe that Abraham gave, was not a tithe as it was not his to give. Verse 20 clearly states, "...let them take their portion." Abraham did not tihe from the other men possessions. That is ludicrous. Abraham was a righteous man who walked with God in this instance and certainly he did not take another persons possessions and tithe from them.  From you own previous posts a tithe was to be taken from ones owns property, 'agricultural' or animal life. Not from somebody else's personal property.

All of the spoils of war that was Abraham's was his personal property.

As far as it Abraham tithing his other household income. How do you know he did not? Nobody else in the passage is tithing at all. Evidently Abraham was in the habit of tithing. Does God have to mention every occasion of tithing to satisfy you?  

Verse 20 clearly states, "... And he gave tithes of all." This would not only include the spoils of war, but, anything that Abraham had. The scriptures clearly separate the tithing of Abraham and the spoils of war of Aner, Eschol, and Mamre. Furthermore, the scriptures clearly state, ""...let them take their portion." Abraham did not take one item of the spoils of war that belonged to these men nor did he tithe from any of the items of these men.

You interpretation is a private interpretation in an effort to prove the New Testament saint should not tithe under any circumstance. You are twisting the actions of Abraham just exactly like you twisted the motive of the widow and her mites and preverted the very words of commendation from the lips of the Lord Jesus.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Nothing ludicrous about my stance at all.

 

Abram promised God that he would not take any of the spoils to himself.  This means they did not become his property.

 

so, yes, Abram did tithe the property of others.

History records the tithing of war spoils both long before, during, and long after Abram's life was over; and that by the people of the country Abram came from,... Babylonia.  So, not a surprise that he would tithe the war spoils to a king.  It was a custom to do so.  It is possible that Melchizedek went out to meet Abram for that very reason,... to receive the customary tithe of spoils.  

Melchizedek must have been aware of the victory Abram had obtained, for he brought refreshments with him to meet Abram.  Surely, after traveling more than 150 miles from his home, battling and defeating the wicked kings, Abram and his men were famished.

Abram did not say he had eaten any of the spoils, only that the men in his command had eaten some.  Had Abram partook of any of the spoils, he would have broken his promise to God that he would not take any as his own.

So, again, yes,... Abram tithed the property of others.

 

Under the Mosaic Law, tithes were to come from one's own agricultural produce and livestock.  However, Abram was not under the Mosaic Law.  He was living in a land where kings were to receive war spoil tithes.

"And he gave him tithes of all...".  What did the author mean by all?  Verse 16 holds the answer.  Abram brought back the goods that had been stolen.  Context shows that the "all" in verse 20 was the "goods" in verse 16.  

I am not twisting Scripture at all.  Rather, I am allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture.  I do see twisting in your post though.

Edited November 24, 2015 by Standing Firm In Christ

[Alan]

2 hours ago, Standing Firm In Christ said:

Nothing ludicrous about my stance at all. It is not only ludicrous but you own private interpretation.

 

Abram promised God that he would not take any of the spoils to himself.  This means they did not become his property. The

 

so, yes, Abram did tithe the property of others. Then Abraham, according to your interpretation, was a thief and a hypocrite.

History records the tithing of war spoils both long before, during, and long after Abram's life was over; and that by the people of the country Abram came from,... Babylonia.  So, not a surprise that he would tithe the war spoils to a king.  It was a custom to do so.  It is possible that Melchizedek went out to meet Abram for that very reason,... to receive the customary tithe of spoils.  In this instance, your are placing historical accounts above the veracity of the scriptures. That is a sorry interpretation and unworthy of any comment. Nobody else is mentioned giving tithes to Melchizedec.

 

So, again, yes,... Abram tithed the property of others. If this is so than Abraham was a total hypocrite.

 

Under the Mosaic Law, tithes were to come from one's own agricultural produce and livestock.  However, Abram was not under the Mosaic Law.  He was living in a land where kings were to receive war spoil tithes. Correct!!!!! he tithed, and gave offerings  to God, out of a sincere, loving, and heart of gratitude. Abraham did not have to tithe: HE PURPOSED IN HIS HEART TO TITHE WITHOUT ANY CORERCION FROM ANYBODY NOR THE LAW.

  

 

Your whole interpretation of the entire episode of Abraham is not only ludicrous, a bad interpretation of scripture, but is is also the false.

 

[Standing Firm In Christ]

2 hours ago, Standing Firm In Christ said:

 

I'd have to say it is YOUR interpretation that is both ludicrous and private.

 

The Biblical text reveals Abram promised God that he would not claim any of the spoils as his own.  Yet, your interpretation leaves the Biblical text and makes him to be a liar, keeping spoils as his own property.  The Biblical text reveals that it was spoils that Abram gave to Melchizedek.  Yet, your interpretation leaves the Biblical text and espouses the theory that Abram tithed items other than war spoils as well. 

 

No, I never said, nor did I infer, that Abram was a thief or a hypocrite.  You are trying to manipulate my words just as you are manipulating the Biblical text.  

 

It isn't mentioned that Abram tithed his own property, yet you are putting your opinion above the veracity of Scripture.  Historical facts of the customs do not take away from the Biblical account, nor do they add to the account.  They explain what was happening in history at that time.  Pastors use history quite often to show background surrounding a Biblical event.  Nothing wrong with it at all.

 

 

Edited November 24, 2015 by Standing Firm In Christ

[Heir of Salvation]

On 11/23/2015, 11:28:33, Ukulelemike said:

I believe we're making way too much of this than we need to.

Simply, the 'tithe' was an aspect of the OT law. Abraham gave to Melchizedek 10% of his war spoils and gave the rest back to the kings from the nations he helped. he kept nothing for himself, save that which the men ate of. And it was giving to God, through Melchizedek, recognizing him as the priest of the most High God. It was everything-money, jewelry, clothes, food, whatever they gained through the spoil. The Bible says nothing more about it, specifically, so to go any further is pure speculation.

Jacob promised to give 'the tenth part' of all he had, but it was actually conditional-it wasn't the first ten percent, but the tenth part, really, the last ten percent, by his words, and it was conditioned upon the Lord first being faithful to him and bringing him safely back home. We see nothing about that ever being followed through with, though we can safely assume it was. Was it a regular giving? To someone? Or was it, perhaps, 10% of his flock and herd given as a sacrifice? The Bible doesn't tell. So can we consider it a tithe? I don't think so, in the strictest sense.

I think the modern giving to the churches is comparable to Ex 36:3, "And they received of Moses all the offering, which the children of Israel had brought for the work of the service of the sanctuary, to make it withal. And they brought yet unto him free offerings every morning." When the tabernacle had to be built, and all the furnishings for it, the people gave a freewill offering, so much so that there was more than needed, and Moses had to command the giving be ceased. It was freewill, made up of money, jewelry, garments, whatever was needed for the tabernacle.   This seems more like what the churches do today. Like not long back when we had our own building, we had a need for new double-pane windows-so some gave money to buy them, while others just went and bought some windows.

I think the big problem comes when pastors refer to the giving AS 'tithing', specifically, because that brings the implication that it is an absolute requirement. And to say few pastors teach it is mandatory, well, my experience has been pastors who do, indeed, teach that. One pastor told a member of the church that was having financial troubles, that he HAD to give his tithe, but that, if he gave it, the pastor would give it back to him-he just HAD to show his faithfulness in his tithes. Then there ore the pastors who teach that God will take the tithe one way or another, be it in giving, or through car repairs, because we know that God is honored when our cars break down. Even the OT priests didn't teach that. "Verily thou must giveth the tithe of thy field and thy flocks, else the wheels of thy chariots shall fall off, or thy mule shall break his leg and God shalt collect His tithe in thy repair bill."

One of the most erudite descriptions explanations and examples of salient posting I've seen on the topic in my life. Everyone should read this.

You pointed out where the conversation, I think, usually goes off-track:

I think the big problem comes when pastors refer to the giving AS 'tithing',

I couldn't agreemore.  We have to divorce ourselves from the notion that "giving" and "tithing" are remotely related.  They really aren't.  We can't use those terms synonymously.  I've never "Given" anything to the IRS......A Jew never "gave" to God's work when he tithed.

Alan (for instance) means quite well, but the issue I see is that he's focusing on the Spirit and generosity and indeed Godly intent of New Testament giving and he's conflating it with passages about tithing.  Saying such phrases as that Abraham "tithed from grace"   etc....

While no disrespect is intended.........that's not what real tithing has ever been.

Tithing is, and always was, compulsory, and God could have cared less whether it was done in the right Spirit or the wrong one.  The Tithe was the tribe of Levi's due inheritance.  One is to "render" the tithe (whether from a right Spirit or not) but the New Testament Christian "GIVES"; lovingly, freely, with joy, and not under compulsion.

Simply put, if a Christian gives it must or at least should be from the right Spirit.......when a Jew tithed.....it was a tax and one's personal feelings were irrelevant.  Giving and tithing are entirely different.  Only by conflating the terms does the confusion set in. Once one ceases using those terms interchangeably......... the issue is MUCH MUCH clearer.  

Confucius had a point when he said:   “The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.”

 

 

 

[wretched]

1 hour ago, Heir of Salvation said:

One of the most erudite descriptions explanations and examples of salient posting I've seen on the topic in my life. Everyone should read this.

You pointed out where the conversation, I think, usually goes off-track:

I think the big problem comes when pastors refer to the giving AS 'tithing',

I couldn't agreemore.  We have to divorce ourselves from the notion that "giving" and "tithing" are remotely related.  They really aren't.  We can't use those terms synonymously.  I've never "Given" anything to the IRS......A Jew never "gave" to God's work when he tithed.

Alan (for instance) means quite well, but the issue I see is that he's focusing on the Spirit and generosity and indeed Godly intent of New Testament giving and he's conflating it with passages about tithing.  Saying such phrases as that Abraham "tithed from grace"   etc....

While no disrespect is intended.........that's not what real tithing has ever been.

Tithing is, and always was, compulsory, and God could have cared less whether it was done in the right Spirit or the wrong one.  The Tithe was the tribe of Levi's due inheritance.  One is to "render" the tithe (whether from a right Spirit or not) but the New Testament Christian "GIVES"; lovingly, freely, with joy, and not under compulsion.

Simply put, if a Christian gives it must or at least should be from the right Spirit.......when a Jew tithed.....it was a tax and one's personal feelings were irrelevant.  Giving and tithing are entirely different.  Only by conflating the terms does the confusion set in. Once one ceases using those terms interchangeably......... the issue is MUCH MUCH clearer.  

Confucius had a point when he said:   “The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.”

 

 

 

Very well explained except that last line. "Confusion" never said anything, the fortune cookie only credits him, it is the poor sweat shop laborer printing the cookie slips who actually said it.  

 

[wretched]

I guess the big conundrum is how on earth do men allegedly called of God to Pastor, who claim to be worthy of their hire because they labor in the Word and Doctrine, who claim to be worthy of double honor, don't understand this rudimentary difference. It is so obvious in Scripture that a babe could see it.

Makes me wonder sometimes just who are these pastors, really? Are they what they claim to be? Do they really want you mediating in God's Word day and night? I don't think so......I wonder if they prefer the tares over the real thing? The tares will never question unScriptural claims or practices (IMO a tare is a religious lost person who looks, acts and talks like a born again believer but worries over their pastor's and other members opinion of them more than God's) What God thinks rarely if ever enters their mind and our IFBs are full of them. You know the types, they surround you in services. They will do no work, nor speak of God nor pray unless someone down here is looking. It is about what people see them do or say but their hearts are empty sepulchers and when no one is looking all that enters their minds are the trappings and entertainments of the world.

No, I am not referring to babes in Christ. They should and will seek the guidance, correction and approval of those discipling them. BUT there always comes a reasonable time (if they are real) when they are eating the meat of the Word and they no longer care what you think of them; they are all about what God thinks from that point on and they will correct others if they display Scriptural retardation.

Any pastor who reads this thread and gets mad instead of getting convicted is suspect IMO.

I think fraud like this is only the tip of the iceberg still in some IFB circles. I used to think satan destroyed those huge IFB churches in the recent past but I wonder sometimes if it was God who destroyed them because they were LOADED down with tares worshipping the creature rather than the Creator who is God Blessed Forever.

[Standing Firm In Christ]

One has to wonder also, if the Pastor is wrong about this obvious doctrine, what else is he teaching that is misleading the flock?

 

A pastor who will not receive truth concerning tithing, should be suspect, in my opinion.  If they will not receive this truth, is it because of greed?  Is their heart desiring filthy lucre?  Is it pride?  Cannot humble themselves to the point that they are willing to admit to their congregations that they have been teaching a wrong doctrine, that they have wrongfully been taking money that God never authorized them to take?  

 

Either reason shows a root of sin in their lives.

Edited November 24, 2015 by Standing Firm In Christ

[Critical Mass]

Seems like the heard of the issue is driven by semantics and whether a pastor has the right to put a guilt trip on Christians for being tight wads.