Tithing!

[Strong in Him]

Yes , thanks for showing that tithing is not giving .

Well I wasn't, actually. I was trying to show that tithes can be given in many ways. 10% doesn't have to mean 10% given as cash in the collection plate - that 10% can be used to buy coffee etc, offer hospitality to people, buy gifts/cards for them, buy flowers, paint for the church, stationery for the church office and so on.

As I said, the NT gives no guidelines about how to tithe - probably because tithing was not a NT concept or practice.

 

[Strong in Him]

In never fails, any time a pastor, or tv preacher talks about tithe, "faith seeds", giving, it is always to them, never the poor.

I haven't watched too many of those programmes, but in one I saw once the guy was saying something like "make a donation; sow a seed in faith and we will pray for you".

Are people now teaching that we have to PAY someone to pray for us??
No thanks, I think I'll sit here and talk to the Lord for myself - and for free.

 

[tturt]

Some things established in the OT aren't discussed in the NT. For example, musical instruments aren't mentioned in the NT. But we don't have very many discussions if we're to have music in our services. But for the most part we look at it very differently when it comes to money.

 

[Frogster]

I haven't watched too many of those programmes, but in one I saw once the guy was saying something like "make a donation; sow a seed in faith and we will pray for you".

Are people now teaching that we have to PAY someone to pray for us??
No thanks, I think I'll sit here and talk to the Lord for myself - and for free.

yes, it is "but a miracle" from the prosperity teaching from the Word of Faith movement..

sow a 48 dollar "seed", get back 4,800.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

We're to be surrendered to Christ in every area. If this doesn't include our money (100%), He doesn't have all of us.

While Jesus was on earth, He watched the offering plate and noted who gave and how much. (NT).

So, are you saying that you agree with handing over to a church organization the primary, largest portion of your giving?

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

In never fails, any time a pastor, or tv preacher talks about tithe, "faith seeds", giving, it is always to them, never the poor.

Never forget the warm fuzzy factor.

Many charismatics tend to disregard what scripture REALLY says when they use the terms "sowing" and "seed."

Because so many professing believers don't know the scriptures, they fail to realize that what was sown in the NT scriptures was poured out on the other side toward the meeting of genuine needs of fellow believers first and foremost, not in support of buildings, staffing, and all the other trappings modern charismatics currently enjoy heaping back upon themselves in this life.

The latter goes for most institutional church-goers, not just the charismatics.

Scripture, at NO time, EVER winks at the modern practice of raking in the people's giving, and pouring out only a small percentage toward benevolent outreaches and missions, and call that "sowing good seed."

It makes me ill when I hear that garbage spewed from pulpits, radio and TV, and observe the ignorant masses gobbling it up like pigs at the slopping trough, grunting in self-satisfaction.

BTW

 

[Strong in Him]

Some things established in the OT aren't discussed in the NT. For example, musical instruments aren't mentioned in the NT. But we don't have very many discussions if we're to have music in our services. But for the most part we look at it very differently when it comes to money.

That's not quite the same though.
We know they had music in the NT; Jesus and his disciples sang a hymn after the Last Supper, in the parable the prodigal son heard music as he got near to the house, we are told to make music in our hearts to the Lord and the angels in heaven have harps. Music was part of Jewish culture, worship and celebration and I've no doubt it continued in the early church as they sang Psalms.

Tithing in the OT is different. Tithing is part of the Jewish law - the Jews were given specific instructions about their tithe; how to bring it and where to.
Jesus did not tell his followers they had to tithe, nor was tithing imposed on Gentiles, as far as I can see. Paul said to one of his churches that each person should give what they have decided in their heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, because God loves a cheerful giver (2 Cor 9:6). The early church pooled resources, sold possessions and gave the money to the poor. But Peter told Ananais and Sapphira that even after they sold their field, their money was theirs to do with as they pleased. (Acts 5:4). as with music, they used what they had to worship God; there was no law imposed though.

 

[New_Wineskin]

In never fails, any time a pastor, or tv preacher talks about tithe, "faith seeds", giving, it is always to them, never the poor. But they don't talk about the pastor-nchief, who while preaching and getting beat up all the time, worked not to burden the church, and said to do what Jesus actually said to do.


Acts 20;33 I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. 34 You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. 35In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'"

WHat gets me is that there are millions of idiots out there that can't put two and two together . If the pulpiteer insisted that what they said was right , they would tell the people to give to anyone *but* them . If they were correct , they would already have been giving and recieving all they could ever ask for . So , why would they want people to give to them ?

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Well I wasn't, actually. I was trying to show that tithes can be given in many ways. 10% doesn't have to mean 10% given as cash in the collection plate - that 10% can be used to buy coffee etc, offer hospitality to people, buy gifts/cards for them, buy flowers, paint for the church, stationery for the church office and so on.

As I said, the NT gives no guidelines about how to tithe - probably because tithing was not a NT concept or practice.

I hope you don't mind that I disagree with you:

The NT is replete with examples of what was done with what believers gave.

Can you show me where the largest, primary portion of their giving didn't go for the meeting of genuine needs?

I'm not saying that supporting one's communal organization they want to call their church is wrong. What I'm saying is that far too many people have their priorities in giving completely backwards.

People should ALWAYS come before the needs of the facility, programs, staffing, the lawn care, cards, paper for the office, et al.

Do you now see more clearly the difference between what scripture actually shows us, and modern/historic practices?

BTW

 

[New_Wineskin]

Well I wasn't, actually. I was trying to show that tithes can be given in many ways. 10% doesn't have to mean 10% given as cash in the collection plate - that 10% can be used to buy coffee etc, offer hospitality to people, buy gifts/cards for them, buy flowers, paint for the church, stationery for the church office and so on.

As I said, the NT gives no guidelines about how to tithe - probably because tithing was not a NT concept or practice.

If it isn't a "NT" concept , why call it by the same term ? What you described is something completely different in every way from the "OT" tithe . Instead of simply calling what you are describing as "giving" or "club dues" , you use the word "tithe" . The tithe was not given as in the way that you describe giving . "Pay" is a much better word for what is done with tithes as it was commanded - a point of obligation - not generousity .

Can you use the word "tithe" in the way you do ? Of course , and the English dictionary has several definitions because of the continued misuse of the word .

You can see why I ask OP's to define what they mean by "tithe" as early in the thread as possible so that people do not mix and match definitions .

 

[Frogster]

Never forget the warm fuzzy factor.

Many charismatics tend to disregard what scripture REALLY says when they use the terms "sowing" and "seed."

Because so many professing believers don't know the scriptures, they fail to realize that what was sown in the NT scriptures was poured out on the other side toward the meeting of genuine needs of fellow believers first and foremost, not in support of buildings, staffing, and all the other trappings modern charismatics currently enjoy heaping back upon themselves in this life.

The latter goes for most institutional church-goers, not just the charismatics.

Scripture, at NO time, EVER winks at the modern practice of raking in the people's giving, and pouring out only a small percentage toward benevolent outreaches and missions, and call that "sowing good seed."

It makes me ill when I hear that garbage spewed from pulpits, radio and TV, and observe the ignorant masses gobbling it up like pigs at the slopping trough, grunting in self-satisfaction.

BTW

They really twist 2 cor 8-9. all the denominations do it.

 

[Frogster]

WHat gets me is that there are millions of idiots out there that can't put two and two together . If the pulpiteer insisted that what they said was right , they would tell the people to give to anyone *but* them . If they were correct , they would already have been giving and recieving all they could ever ask for . So , why would they want people to give to them ?

I hear ya, after church, they, the little tithers, get into their regular cars, going to the regular jobs on monday, while the prosperity teachers often live in mansions...joyce meyer, Creflo dollar, the copelands, jesse duplantis, all of em!

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I hear ya, after church, they, the little tithers, get into their regular cars, going to the regular jobs on monday, while the prosperity teachers often live in mansions...joyce meyer, Creflo dollar, the copelands, jesse duplantis, all of em!

Actually, I have no anger, envy, or resentment toward them.

I pity them.

As a matter of fact, they have their reward right here on earth...those that make it into Heaven.

Just think what it would be like to hear the Lord say,"Your reward was your riches on earth. Now you're the least in Heaven..."

BTW

 

[Jig]

Actually, I have no anger, envy, or resentment toward them.

I pity them.

As a matter of fact, they have their reward right here on earth...those that make it into Heaven.

Just think what it would be like to hear the Lord say,"Your reward was your riches on earth. Now you're the least in Heaven..."

BTW

What does it mean to be the least in Heaven?

 

[BeforeThereWas]

What it means to be the least in Heaven...

...is to be greater than any purely mortal man who has ever walked this earth...

...and is something we will more fully understand when we get there...

BTW

 

[David64]

What it means to be the least in Heaven...

...is to be greater than any purely mortal man who has ever walked this earth...

...and is something we will more fully understand when we get there...

BTW

It does not say that person, or anyone else will be in heaven.
What it says is they will called least, by those in the Kingdom of Heaven, not that they will be the least in that kingdom.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

It does not say that person, or anyone else will be in heaven.
What it says is they will called least, by those in the Kingdom of Heaven, not that they will be the least in that kingdom.

If you're saying, by what you're implying here, that those who are called least in Heaven may not be among the saved in that Kingdom, then you must also say the same about those who are called great in that same Kingdom.

It's one way or the other for both. You can't split them apart as opposites.

How can anyone assume that those who would be called great in Heaven are cast out?

Do you see the problem in your reasoning?

BTW

 

[Frogster]

If you're saying, by what you're implying here, that those who are called least in Heaven may not be among the saved in that Kingdom, then you must also say the same about those who are called great in that same Kingdom.

It's one way or the other for both. You can't split them apart as opposites.

How can anyone assume that those who would be called great in Heaven are cast out?

Do you see the problem in your reasoning?

BTW

there are some here on the forum that don't believe in being born again, or that there is heaven...

all ya gotta do is ask em, whey it says we WERE dead in sin, in eph 2;1.

 

[Strong in Him]

I hope you don't mind that I disagree with you:

Not at all.

The NT is replete with examples of what was done with what believers gave.

Can you show me where the largest, primary portion of their giving didn't go for the meeting of genuine needs?

Yes, giving. There is no suggestion that they tithed - i.e. gave only 10%, and of their produce as commanded in the OT.

People should ALWAYS come before the needs of the facility, programs, staffing, the lawn care, cards, paper for the office, et al.

I know, but these things are important too. And while it wouldn't worry me if we sold our building tomorrow, hired a place to worship and used the money for something else, for a number in our congregation, our building is important, a part of their life and heritage and makes them feel secure. It is also widely used by the community.

Do you now see more clearly the difference between what scripture actually shows us, and modern/historic practices?

The early church sold their belongings and used the money for the poor; I know, I've already said that. It seems they lived in a community and met in each others homes for worship - that too is different than today.

But this thread is about tithing. There is nothing in the NT which says that they continued to tithe after the resurrection. The only teaching about tithing comes from the OT where it was always produce that was given - 10% carried to the temple, offered to God by the priest and then eaten as way of celebration. Not forgetting the priests and the poor.
It seems that even though 10% of produce was set aside and dedicated to God, it was eaten, enjoyed and shared by his people.

 

[Strong in Him]

If it isn't a "NT" concept , why call it by the same term ?

Because this thread is about tithing. The word tithe means 10%; there is no reason at all why a person can't decide to give 10% of their income to God, (whether they believe that giving to God means giving to his people, to charities or to the church). But it is not commanded in the NT that we do so.
Titihing as described and commanded in the OT is not what we practice today.

What you described is something completely different in every way from the "OT" tithe.

That's the point.
All the threads that I have seen about tithing, and books that have been written seem really to be asking the question, "should we give 10% of our money to God?" Old Testament passages about giving 10% of produce are then quoted to back the idea that enforced giving of 10% of our money (usually to the church) is a Biblical teaching.

I'm saying that people should be encouraged to give; giving and sharing God's resources and blessings to us IS taught, and demonstrated, in the NT. The early church gave all their possessions; the Son of God gave us himself. If pastors/leaders want to teach that 10% is a either a good starting point or something to aim for - fine. They could even use the word 'tithe' which means 10%. But I don't believe it's correct to take the Old Testament law on tithing and insist that it applies today and we have to tithe because it says so in the Bible.

In short, I don't believe the OT law on tithing is applicable, practical or enforceable.