To tithe, or not to tithe. That is the question!

GodismySalvation said:

I liked how the tithers said they tithe by faith, AND follow the Lord on where to give their tithe. I would like to hear more on how they started tithing and what happened when they did. AND more on how they hear from the Lord on where to give. Their experiences are inspiring to me.

Click to expand...

mjere said:

Isn't this always the argument between law verses grace. Whether or not we keep doing the right thing in the face of bad motives.

Abraham tithed, but how did God look upon Abraham? He blessed him and declared him righteous long before his righteous and unrighteous deeds. He believed God's promises, and therefore acted from there. If you believe God's promise of give and it shall be given back to you- you would give.

But the tithe/offerings/sacrifices came long before Abraham. Even Cain and Able gave from the first of their fruits. Although, I never hear people mention their example. God looked upon one offering and had respect, and looked upon the other offering with no respect. Both were born sinners, and in need of a savior, but we assume, Cain's offering was rejected because he was "bad", or had the wrong attitude. The guy was looking to please God just as much as his brother. What makes the differences is not apples and oranges.

I would like to add that Jacob's revelation of God was pretty dim in comparison to what we have by revelation today, but he desired the things of God, and wanted God's blessing in His life more than life itself. WE should follow his example and seek after our inheritance with that kind of passion, but the NT says they are already an accomplished fact. We have it by grace through faith.

I take issue with the statement that God would have us combine the tithe with weightier issues.
Jacob lived in something that was considered an abomination under the law (Abraham as well). Of course no one would argue we follow those lifestyle examples. God's perfect standard was still alive before the law was given. But God never condemned Abraham for marrying his sister. He never condemned Jacob for marrying two sisters while the other was alive. But we say God would rather us tithe in conjunction to weightier issues, such as sexual morality or pride. If God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow; the alpha and omega; why were these issues not communicated to Abraham or Jacob? Why did Jesus pick on the Pharisees for being hypocrites, when God didn't condemn Abraham for lying about his wife? In fact God defended Abraham and rebuked Pharaoh when he lied about his wife to save his own neck, and gave her over to be defiled.
What are some of these weightier issues? Love thy neighbor? Do unto others? Abraham did the exact opposite and was declared justified by God. Jacob committed identity theft in order to receive his blessing. Sounds pretty selfish to me, and yet God was with him, and kept his promise through him. Perhaps we're talking about tithing along with Man's weightier issues, and not God's.

The NT is not about doing good by God's power. It's about us admitting we couldn't do good, and allowing a savior to do it for us- live for us, die for us, give for us. Any good flowing through us, is not us at all- it's Christ living in us. A person receiving prior to their righteous deeds has a hard time taking credit for getting it right. Able understood this, as did Abraham, David, and to some degree so did Jacob.

Click to expand...

probinson said:

I wish that I cold say that the anti-required-tithe proponents were all about giving graciously, as you have demonstrated to me that you are. But unfortunately, that has not been my experience with the majority that I've spoken with.

You have made clear to me that you believe in generous, Spirit-led giving. But you're not the only one posting in this thread. Furthermore, I think you should realize that the anti-tithe group by and large focuses on not giving. Now that I am a part of the anti-required-tithe ranks myself, I just have to accept that people are going to assume that means I don't want to give. But I would concede to those people that is not just a baseless accusation, although it is a sweeping generalization that certainly doesn't apply to everyone. There are scads of anti-required-tithe folks who are only looking for reasons to criticize, complain and not give.

If the anti-required-tithe folks would spend more time talking about how we should give generously as the Spirit leads as you have done in this thread, then it would be easier to overcome the stereotype. But as long as people are talking about how they don't want to tithe and give because their pastor shops at better stores than them, it reeks of greed and jealousy. These are not earmarks of someone whose heart is in generous giving.

Personally, I could care less what pastors wear, what kind of cars they drive or how big their house is. That's between them and God. My focus is on giving generously as the Spirit leads (in case you missed it the first 50 times I said it in this thread).

Click to expand...

WordofHisPower said:

Christ says in Matthew 23:23, “For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone."

Click to expand...

probinson said:

I wish that I cold say that the anti-required-tithe proponents were all about giving graciously, as you have demonstrated to me that you are. But unfortunately, that has not been my experience with the majority that I've spoken with.

You have made clear to me that you believe in generous, Spirit-led giving. But you're not the only one posting in this thread. Furthermore, I think you should realize that the anti-tithe group by and large focuses on not giving. Now that I am a part of the anti-required-tithe ranks myself, I just have to accept that people are going to assume that means I don't want to give. But I would concede to those people that is not just a baseless accusation, although it is a sweeping generalization that certainly doesn't apply to everyone. There are scads of anti-required-tithe folks who are only looking for reasons to criticize, complain and not give.

If the anti-required-tithe folks would spend more time talking about how we should give generously as the Spirit leads as you have done in this thread, then it would be easier to overcome the stereotype. But as long as people are talking about how they don't want to tithe and give because their pastor shops at better stores than them, it reeks of greed and jealousy. These are not earmarks of someone whose heart is in generous giving.

Personally, I could care less what pastors wear, what kind of cars they drive or how big their house is. That's between them and God. My focus is on giving generously as the Spirit leads (in case you missed it the first 50 times I said it in this thread).

Click to expand...

GaryArnold said:

But Christ did NOT say in Matthew 23:23 that they pay tithes FROM THEIR INCOME as teachers and scribes. Jesus upheld ALL of the law. Natually that "ought to have done tithing" as they were under the law.

You still fail to have a clue as to what the Biblical tithe was. IT CAME FROM GOD'S MIRACULOUS INCREASE, not from man's income. To ignore this fact shows your 100% lack of understanding of the scriptures.

Every tither I have ever known is always talking about all the blessings they receive because they tithe. They stress the blessings, not the giving. VERY SELFISH MOTIVES. Every non-tither I know is a giver by nature. They want to give. They expect nothing in return. Not 100 fold. Not 20 fold. NOTHING. That's the difference between an honest giver and a selfish tither.

Click to expand...

WordofHisPower said:

Abraham was counted as righteous before God by believing God, just as we are, but we're told not to use this grace as a license to sin. Romans 6:15, Galatians 5:13, 1 Peter 2:16

Tithing, offerings, and alms to the poor, and other instructions on righteous living don't disappear from the bible. They cease to be laws for NT believers, but they don't cease to be instructions.

Christ says in Matthew 23:23, “For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone."

Click to expand...

BeforeThereWas said:

He won? You make it sound like it was a game show.

Are you telling us you believe it was Abram's intent to keep what he knew was not his from the beginning...to keep property he knew belonged to someone else? If so, on what solid foundation are you basing that assumption?

Are you telling us you personally would retrieve property you knew belonged to someone else, and that you would keep it as what you had "won," even if you had to fight and defeat someone for it? That's the immoral grounding you stand upon?

I ask that because Abram made it abundantly clear that his intent was to retrieve his nephew, not acquire loot and servants.

Where did Israel ever follow Abraham's example of tithing from the spoils of war? If he established some sort of principle, where do we see Israel, his offspring, following that example from the spoils of war?

How does tithing from spoils of war translate over into wages earned as an EXCHANGE for one's labor and skills as a matter of survival? I don't see the connection. Perhaps you could explain it?

You consider Jacob an example for tithing? Where does it say he ever followed through with his promise?

How do you fit into your regiment of belief those elements about Jacob's tithe that are....less than admirable? Do you lay down expectations and requirements the Lord must meet before you tithe, or do you just do so on the basis of feelings and emotions about the subject?

How do you know Jacob ever fulfilled what he promised as an ongoing practice? How did He give it to God, as if God needed it?

Can you explain to us how a claim of obedience to tithing from all his increase from his garden, which the Law required, has anything to do with us today?

If you're going to point at Jesus' acceptance of obedience to the Law as something that automatically translates Lawful elements to us today, then what will you do about Luke 5:14 where He told the man to offer up the burnt sacrifices ALSO required by the Law? Do you offer up such in obedience to what the Lord told him to do under the Law, as with the tithe?

The NT covenant had not yet been established, so what do you mean by saying they're NT? The cup of the New Covenant was passed to mankind LONG AFTER that discussion with the pharisees, so by what authority could anyone move that line of distinction away from the authority of Christ Jesus?

That's indeed an encouragement to adhere to what the Law commanded of those who received increase from fields, orchards, vineyards, flocks and herds. Can you show where the wages of wage earners was EVER a consideration in the system of tithing? Can you show us where even fishermen were required to tithe? Got anything to say along that line?

You've ignored the short dissertation I provided in post 545 about your misuse of Hebrews, and you offered no rebuttal to it, so this one is meaningless until you provide something to back up your misuse of that book.

Can you show us where that instruction within the Law, BASED upon the the Law-ful definition of the tithe, had anything to do with the wages of wage earners, such as you and me? If not, then the use of this and all other references based in the Law fall flat, as well as the parallels between Abram's tithe from spoils of war and us.

These are all fine examples of the Law, as you pointed out, and its requirements of those who were under the Law, and who were required to tithe ONLY from the increase from the fields, orchards, vineyards, flocks and herds. You still haven't produced anything in relation to the wages of wage earners.

Given that the tithe was tied directly to the Levites and the tabernacle, or temple, and that the veil was ripped by the Hand of God from top to bottom, thus illegitimizing the temple and the Levitical priesthood, there's nothing left to which to tie the tithe requirement. Considering how much mention made about tithing throughout the OT, and the lack of any supporting command from any of the apostles, I'd say you're doing nothing less than trying to prove something from silence.

It's one thing to point at a slew of verses ripped from their contexts as alleged proof for tithing today under the Law, but quite another to build your case by way of explaining your use of those verses as applying to us today.

Are you willing to support your use of those verses with explanations for each, and answering the questions asked of you?

For those who assume the anti-required-tithe position is nothing more than a matter of NOT giving, get a life!

If such people's reading comprehension skills are so under-developed that they can't comprehend otherwise, then perhaps they should go back to grammar school and learn to read what others have actually stated. At no time have I ever said or implied cheerful giving is not a standing principle. My premises and conclusions have always been based upon giving, first and foremost, in the direction exemplified by scripture, and to do so based upon whatever amount one purposes in his mind and heart, just as the scriptures instruct. Those who accuse otherwise are by nature and trade NOT bastions of TRUTH and intellectual honesty.

BTW

Click to expand...

WordofHisPower said:

10% is the common denominator. All the other variables change depending on what tithe you're talking about. You're trying to use the variable details to make tithing a law.

Click to expand...

WordofHisPower said:

Abraham was counted as righteous before God by believing God, just as we are, but we're told not to use this grace as a license to sin. Romans 6:15, Galatians 5:13, 1 Peter 2:16

Tithing, offerings, and alms to the poor, and other instructions on righteous living don't disappear from the bible. They cease to be laws for NT believers, but they don't cease to be instructions.

Christ says in Matthew 23:23, “For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone."

Click to expand...

Frogster said:

u quote matt 23, and the ordinances, saying jesus said to tithe, well, ok, can we eat shrimp? Jesus swould have told those same law tithing pharisees u keep quoting, about tithing ordinces, no shrimp. Ok, can we eat shrimp, yes or no!?

u can't uphold just some jewish ordinances...hahahahaha

Click to expand...

mjere said:

IA, that we shouldn't use grace as a license to sin, but do people really need a license? It goes on to define in Romans that whatsoever not of faith is sin. (My quick definition of faith: You're positive response to what God's already done.) If you're tithing to earn something from God, pay Him off, you could say that's a payment made in sin. I believe Abraham's tithe was given in faith. He even said at one point that he didn't want anyone to take credit for him getting rich. It was all going to come from God.

I also agree, that the Bible carries instructions for a believer, but it's more than just a book of principles, a manual, and text book... It is a perfect representation of a person. There is so much to be said about giving to the poor, helping those in need; and unfortunately, what has been taught has been grossly misunderstood and miscalculated, and meant to pray on people's emotions, etc. But this is a fruit of relationship not a means to satisfying requirements! It also says to lay hands on the sick and they will recover, but I don't see alot of people acting on that principle on the regular.

America/ the western world has some of the most wealthiest nations since the beginning of time. Even a poor person in America fairs alot better than in some other parts of the world. Where, when, and how does one begin to minister and give to the needy, is dependent upon that person hearing from the Lord. How do you keep from having your emotions preyed on, from giving your house to feed some starving child in halfway across the world? You give where the Holy Spirit directs you.

I mentioned this earlier, but In Matthew the Pharisees had neglected those weightier matters, because they saw themselves accomplishing God's instructions so much in one area, they deceived themselves into believing they were doing alright.They were trying to keep the law. They hadn't kept the law, or even come close; for if they had Jesus wouldn't have been necessary. Jesus put the law back in their face to show them how far short they'd fallen. Religious hypocrisy was the only thing Jesus ever rebuked. A person believing they lived up to the principles so much they saw no need for a Savior. They can accomplish their own salvation/deliverance.

Many people feel that way about the tithe. "God just tell me how much and I will pay it along with my bills, and care for my family. I've got this! Only 10%! I can manage that! Oh, and here's my offering. *change rattles in the bucket**conscience soothed*." It's like Jesus came down here and redeemed us but we never read our contract. Nevertheless, every believer receives their contract in full and the tithes are in the fine print and in bold. Should we be informing people of this at salvation?

Click to expand...

WordofHisPower said:

Ordinances are laws. There's no laws for us in Christ. There's only instructions. You're free to follow His instructions or not.

There's probably a reason God said not to eat shrimp. Aren't shrimp, pigs, crows, eels scavengers (eat dead things)? I'm not interested in eating a scavenger, are you?

I haven't searched scripture on the food topic yet, so I've nothing deep to say on the subject.

Click to expand...

WordofHisPower said:

NT faith-tither is someone who tithes by faith as an act of worship and gratitude, because he wants to, not because he has to.

Click to expand...

BeforeThereWas said:

Hebrews 7:8 is absolutely not saying that the practice of tithing was being followed by the New Testament church at the time the book of Hebrews was written. It is also not talking about a practice of tithing that is supposed to be in effect permanently, throughout the church age. The phrase “here men that die receive tithes” is not talking about Christian ministers in the church, now or then. It is talking about priests at the temple in Jerusalem. The context bears that out. The “he” that is being referred to by the phrase “but there he receiveth them” is Melchizedek, 4000 years ago, not Jesus.
This verse is incorrectly interpreted by some to say in effect:

And here (in the New Covenant), men that die (our pastors and other ministers) receive tithes (from born-again Christians); but there (up in heaven) he (Jesus) (is the one who actually) is receiving them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.​

This erroneous interpretation of the verse does not comprehend the theological argument that is being made in the passage. This misinterpretation is carelessly taken to be a scriptural proof that tithing is the will of God and the standard mode of operation in the New Covenant.
Objectively interpreted within its context, the verse is actually saying:

And here (in Israel at the time that Hebrews was written) men (who are priests under the Old Covenant) that (will eventually) die (and be succeeded by another mortal man after them) receive tithes (from those who are following the Law of Moses); but there (2000 years prior, during the time of Abraham in Genesis 14) he (Melchizedek) receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.​

Scholars and theologians debate whether this language referring to Melchizedek's endless life is literal or symbolic. In either case the verse is not a reference to tithing in the New Covenant. “Here men that die receive tithes” is referring to Old Covenant priests not to New Covenant ministers. “There he receiveth them” is referring to Melchizedek in Genesis 14:18–20, not to Jesus up in heaven now. Nowhere in the verse is the New Covenant being referred to. This passage is not teaching that tithing is the way of giving that God has ordained for the New Covenant.
Consider some other translations of Hebrews 7:8:

Furthermore, here [in the Levitical priesthood] tithes are received by men who are subject to death; while there [in the case of Melchizedek], they are received by one of whom it is testified that he lives [perpetually]. (The Amplified Bible. Copyright © Zondervan Publishing House 1965)​

And here, on the one hand, men subject to death are receiving tithes, but there he [Melchisedec] receives them, concerning whom the testimony is that he is living. (The New Testament: An Expanded Translation by Kenneth S. Wuest. Copyright © Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1961)​

The “he” referred to in Hebrews 7:8 is the same “he” referred to in verse 6. That “he” is Melchizedek. That “he” is not referring to Jesus in the New Covenant. Melchizedek is the subject of verse 1 and is referred to in verses 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 15, 17, and 21.

Anyone who reads scripture for what it actually says will know form the CONTEXT that this is true.

No amount of emotional argumentation will ever change what can be gleaned from a study of the OVERALL texts surrounding these pulled-out-of-context verses WOHP seems to enjoy casting about as nothing more than several disjointed verses ripped out in order to RE-weave together the same old tapestry of falsehood we've all seem for many years. This wasn't a false doctrine he made up himself. He's merely a product of someone else's falsehoods.

BTW

Click to expand...

Frogster said:

well why do u use matt 23 to uphold tithing ordinances, but not food ordinances, that those same pharisees were under, as u use them to support Jesus upholding the "shoulds" of tithing using selective ordinances?

Click to expand...