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

[Yitzchak]

Yes , giving to an organization to which you belong that only or mostly supports that organization is the same as a club that accepts donations to continue functioning . There is no "giving to god" in that . One is simply giving money to themselves - used for their own enjoyment .

Consider this. Abraham gave to a wealthy king who did not really need any more wealth. Yet the scripture considered it to be legitimate scriptural tithing that was fit to be a model and type of tithing to Jesus, the high priest. Abraham received a blessing for it too. Your premise only sounds good if people downgrade the church into some man made thing. God established this " organization " which you are speaking of.

 

[Frogster]

Consider this. Abraham gave to a wealthy king who did not really need any more wealth. Yet the scripture considered it to be legitimate scriptural tithing that was fit to be a model and type of tithing to Jesus, the high priest. Abraham received a blessing for it too. Your premise only sounds good if people downgrade the church into some man made thing. God established this " organization " which you are speaking of.

but it was not even Abrahsm's money, it was spoils, so it seems that you just want to go by that u want from the text, and besides, it was once, and we all know the tithe word now has become an all the time thing.

was hebrews 7, teaching the church to tithe, is that what the tithing usage was about in 7?

 

[Frogster]

Consider this. Abraham gave to a wealthy king who did not really need any more wealth. Yet the scripture considered it to be legitimate scriptural tithing that was fit to be a model and type of tithing to Jesus, the high priest. Abraham received a blessing for it too. Your premise only sounds good if people downgrade the church into some man made thing. God established this " organization " which you are speaking of.

in other words, heb 7 is not a tithe teaching for the church, so why turn it into that, if the text was not originally a tithe teaching?

 

[Yitzchak]

2 cor 3:6, the letter kills, the tithing law kills, they take away the joy of giving, by turning it into a legal compulsion, and of course the guilt ruins it all too. Tithe is a power word in the church.

I think this is what people mean when they talk about building a straw man. I have been in the Church for almost thirty years now and the vast majority of Christians who tithe , that I have known , do not resemble what you are describing , at all.

I guess I can agree with you about these theoretical people who you describe as doing it wrong. But since they are not representative of the average christian who tithes and since they are not following the traditional teaching of the tithe in the Christian church , it seems like we are only speaking of a straw man.

Not that I am opposed to using a straw man , on occasion. It is a useful teaching technique which the Bible itself uses sometimes. Just so that we stay aware that it is a technique being used to make a point and not an accurate protrayal of my Christian neighbor who tithes.

 

[Frogster]

I think this is what people mean when they talk about building a straw man. I have been in the Church for almost thirty years now and the vast majority of Christians who tithe , that I have known , do not resemble what you are describing , at all.

I guess I can agree with you about these theoretical people who you describe as doing it wrong. But since they are not representative of the average christian who tithes and since they are not following the traditional teaching of the tithe in the Christian church , it seems like we are only speaking of a straw man.

Not that I am opposed to using a straw man , on occasion. It is a useful teaching technique which the Bible itself uses sometimes. Just so that we stay aware that it is a technique being used to make a point and not an accurate protrayal of my Christian neighbor who tithes.

the teaching is what turns it into a law, guilt or curses, or the ever popular.."shoulds", shoulds is a word that carries guilt, wielded from a tithe pulpit.

 

[Yitzchak]

but it was not even Abrahsm's money, it was spoils, so it seems that you just want to go by that u want from the text, and besides, it was once, and we all know the tithe word now has become an all the time thing.

was hebrews 7, teaching the church to tithe, is that what the tithing usage was about in 7?

I don't believe that Hebrews 7 was teaching the church to tithe in the way that it is done now. Meaning it was not meant to be a rule and it was not meant to be on 100% of our earnings.

The Scripture highlights the example of Abraham to show us an example of how a man of faith behaves. There are things to be learned from it , but it is a big jump to make a doctrine that we must give 10% of all of our income or we will be cursed. One thing is certain , if we as Christians decide to tithe , it is not under the law of Moses , it is in the example of Abraham.

Hebrews 7 mentions Abraham as an example of legitimate tithing which means that tithing is not just under the law. It is something we can choose to do anytime. Scripture is silent upon whether Abraham tithed all of the time. But it must have had an impact upon his grandson , Jacob. Otherwise Jacob would not randomly vow to tithe to God. Jacob saw it as something which would please God.

 

[Frogster]

I don't believe that Hebrews 7 was teaching the church to tithe in the way that it is done now. Meaning it was not meant to be a rule and it was not meant to be on 100% of our earnings.

The Scripture highlights the example of Abraham to show us an example of how a man of faith behaves. There are things to be learned from it , but it is a big jump to make a doctrine that we must give 10% of all of our income or we will be cursed. One thing is certain , if we as Christians decide to tithe , it is not under the law of Moses , it is in the example of Abraham.

Hebrews 7 mentions Abraham as an example of legitimate tithing which means that tithing is not just under the law. It is something we can choose to do anytime. Scripture is silent upon whether Abraham tithed all of the time. But it must have had an impact upon his grandson , Jacob. Otherwise Jacob would not randomly vow to tithe to God. Jacob saw it as something which would please God.

legitimate must include the spoils of war also, and not my money, we can't just use some of the text.

Silent? Naaaa...why would he subordinate himself to others often, you forget that this was Abraham the lesser in 7:7, was Abraham lesser that other people? Who was greater than Abe other than Mel? It says greater in 7:7? No way the writer would subordinate Abe to others. Even he who had the pormises, as of to say even the mighty Abe, the man of the promise was subordinate, that was the point, and contextual usage, so we can't go around trying to turn it into something that the writer did not do.

When he mentioned the promises, that meant alot, one with promises did not go around tithing to all, again, i say that about Abraham, eve though others may have. It would cheapen the usage of him in 7 if the might Abe tithed all over the place.

Besides, it does not say he tithed again.



7 But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.

The lesser greater words are because of the greater priest, very important in the usage of Abe in 7, he was even lesser.

 

[GaryArnold]

Again, the scriptures do NOT tell us that Abram tithed from faith. Not there.

Was what Abram did considered a "legitimate" tithe? First of all, the word tithe, in Genesis 14, is a mathematical term. It has nothing to do with God. It was common in Biblical times to use a tenth for taxes, etc. Biblical historians say it was either custom or law of the land to give a tenth of the war spoils. To say Abram tithed in faith is to add to the scriptures.

Since there is NO example shown in the scriptures where Abraham ever tithed from his income or other wealth, or that he ever tithed "in faith," it is dishonest to use Abram's one-time example to justify tithing in faith today from one's income. IF Abram showed any faith in that example, it would be the fact that he kept NOTHING for himself.

 

[Yitzchak]

in other words, heb 7 is not a tithe teaching for the church, so why turn it into that, if the text was not originally a tithe teaching?

I think that the main point of the Hebrews seven passage is to teach that there is a better priesthood than the one which came through Aaron and the Levites. The better priest came out of the tribe of Judah , meaning the better priest is Jesus.

Now if you and I were to present that to some recent Jewish converts , would we include tithing as a part of our argument ? I must confess that if I had never read this passage , I would not have thought to do so.

Which brings me to your question. The tithing issue is one of the secondary points of the passage , in my opinion. But it is raised as an issue and is profitable for doctrine nonetheless.

As a secondary point though , it does not stand alone very well to build a doctrine upon for the New Testament church. Without some other basis , it is quite the jump in thinking to require tithing based upon the Hebrews 7 passage.

I don't think that Hebrews 7 settles the issue one way or the other. It does emphasize that tithing under the law is not appropriate for Christians , but we already knew that from other passages.

Since Hebrews 7 goes back to Abraham , then the whole discussion about the law and tithing is irrelevant. Just like the other passages where the law is skipped over and Abraham is used as a model of faith for the Gentiles.

What I feel more confident saying is this. Abraham is the model of faith. First principle is if we are going to tithe , we should tithe in faith and not under law. Second principle , if we are going to tithe , we tithe to Jesus. Abraham tithed to Melchizedek , the type of Christ.

I would say that Hebrews 7 gives us a model of how to tithe but does not require tithing.


Also.....

The potential exists within the Genesis passage to teach that Christians can tithe.

I think that you will agree that Melchizedek is a type of Christ. Melchizedek was both king and priest.

So in the passage , it was not just some random king that Abraham decided to pay taxes to. It was a spiritual act of worship in giving a tithe of the spoils to God.

The fact that the scripture highlights the story first by including it as scripture and then by using it as an example to teach the New Testament church makes it important.

The fact that Jacob vowed to tithe and that Israel tithed shows that tithing was not just a one time random event in the history of the world. there is something important there or it would not be recorded in scripture.

 

[Frogster]

I think that the main point of the Hebrews seven passage is to teach that there is a better priesthood than the one which came through Aaron and the Levites. The better priest came out of the tribe of Judah , meaning the better priest is Jesus.

Now if you and I were to present that to some recent Jewish converts , would we include tithing as a part of our argument ? I must confess that if I had never read this passage , I would not have thought to do so.

Which brings me to your question. The tithing issue is one of the secondary points of the passage , in my opinion. But it is raised as an issue and is profitable for doctrine nonetheless.

As a secondary point though , it does not stand alone very well to build a doctrine upon for the New Testament church. Without some other basis , it is quite the jump in thinking to require tithing based upon the Hebrews 7 passage.

I don't think that Hebrews 7 settles the issue one way or the other. It does emphasize that tithing under the law is not appropriate for Christians , but we already knew that from other passages.

Since Hebrews 7 goes back to Abraham , then the whole discussion about the law and tithing is irrelevant. Just like the other passages where the law is skipped over and Abraham is used as a model of faith for the Gentiles.

What I feel more confident saying is this. Abraham is the model of faith. First principle is if we are going to tithe , we should tithe in faith and not under law. Second principle , if we are going to tithe , we tithe to Jesus. Abraham tithed to Melchizedek , the type of Christ.

I would say that Hebrews 7 gives us a model of how to tithe but does not require tithing.


Also.....

The potential exists within the Genesis passage to teach that Christians can tithe.

I think that you will agree that Melchizedek is a type of Christ. Melchizedek was both king and priest.

So in the passage , it was not just some random king that Abraham decided to pay taxes to. It was a spiritual act of worship in giving a tithe of the spoils to God.

The fact that the scripture highlights the story first by including it as scripture and then by using it as an example to teach the New Testament church makes it important.

The fact that Jacob vowed to tithe and that Israel tithed shows that tithing was not just a one time random event in the history of the world. there is something important there or it would not be recorded in scripture.

overpressing the text.

 

[GaryArnold]

There is nothing in the scriptures saying that Abram tithed the spoils to God. There is nothing in the scriptures saying that Abram tithed in faith. There is nothing in the scriptures telling us HOW to tithe to Jesus. You are very good at making up things.

 

[Yitzchak]

legitimate must include the spoils of war also, and not my money, we can't just use some of the text.

Silent? Naaaa...why would he subordinate himself to others often, you forget that this was Abraham the lesser in 7:7, was Abraham lesser that other people? Who was greater than Abe other than Mel? It says greater in 7:7? No way the writer would subordinate Abe to others. Even he who had the pormises, as of to say even the mighty Abe, the man of the promise was subordinate, that was the point, and contextual usage, so we can't go around trying to turn it into something that the writer did not do.

When he mentioned the promises, that meant alot, one with promises did not go around tithing to all, again, i say that about Abraham, eve though others may have. It would cheapen the usage of him in 7 if the might Abe tithed all over the place.

Besides, it does not say he tithed again.



7 But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.

The lesser greater words are because of the greater priest, very important in the usage of Abe in 7, he was even lesser.

I agree there was not another greater than Abraham for him to tithe to other than Melchizedek. But Melchizedek did not cease to exist after this incident. Why is it impossible for Abraham to have tithed to him on multiple occasions ?

I admit that it does not prove that Abraham tithed all the time. But it does not say that he did not either.

This incident is highlighted for a reason. I think that the main reason is as a fore shadow of Christ. But if that is the case , that begs the question of why the father of faith who is our model of faith as Christians is highlighted as tithing to a type of Jesus. That does at least open the possibility that this is an example for Christians to follow.

Also with regards to focusing on certain details , that can be like saying that baptism does not apply to us because we can't go to the Jordan river to do it.

While every detail in scripture is there for a reason , we need to use common sense and extract principles when we are speaking about following an example. We baptism with water and not with sand but we don;t require going to the Jordan. We use wine and bread for communion but we don't have to say a Hebrew passover meal blessing over it. To focus on details in that way , obscures the main issue rather than helping us to understand what the scripture is teaching us.

The thing I focus upon is that Hebrews 7 counted what Abraham did as just a legitimate tithe as the tithes paid to the Levites. It does not treat it as some lesser form of tithing. That says to me that whether it is a cow or spoils of war , it is the act of tithing to God as an act of worship that is most important. We cannot tithe what does not first belong to us. The fact that we are tithing it means it belongs to us.

 

[Frogster]

I agree there was not another greater than Abraham for him to tithe to other than Melchizedek. But Melchizedek did not cease to exist after this incident. Why is it impossible for Abraham to have tithed to him on multiple occasions ?

I admit that it does not prove that Abraham tithed all the time. But it does not say that he did not either.

This incident is highlighted for a reason. I think that the main reason is as a fore shadow of Christ. But if that is the case , that begs the question of why the father of faith who is our model of faith as Christians is highlighted as tithing to a type of Jesus. That does at least open the possibility that this is an example for Christians to follow.

Also with regards to focusing on certain details , that can be like saying that baptism does not apply to us because we can't go to the Jordan river to do it.

While every detail in scripture is there for a reason , we need to use common sense and extract principles when we are speaking about following an example. We baptism with water and not with sand but we don;t require going to the Jordan. We use wine and bread for communion but we don't have to say a Hebrew passover meal blessing over it. To focus on details in that way , obscures the main issue rather than helping us to understand what the scripture is teaching us.

The thing I focus upon is that Hebrews 7 counted what Abraham did as just a legitimate tithe as the tithes paid to the Levites. It does not treat it as some lesser form of tithing. That says to me that whether it is a cow or spoils of war , it is the act of tithing to God as an act of worship that is most important. We cannot tithe what does not first belong to us. The fact that we are tithing it means it belongs to us.

besides, you have to admit, the writer was not using the one time event to promote tithe on the church, was he?

see what I mean? u can't use slective methods, u goota include spoils, and one time too.

 

[Yitzchak]

overpressing the text.

As I said , the main point of Hebrews seven is not tithing. So extracting doctrine out of the passage about tithing is going to seem to some to be overpressing a text. That does not make it wrong. Just seems sensible for me to not be overly dogmatic about it.

 

[Frogster]

I agree there was not another greater than Abraham for him to tithe to other than Melchizedek. But Melchizedek did not cease to exist after this incident. Why is it impossible for Abraham to have tithed to him on multiple occasions ?

does it say he tithed more than once? NO! again, if he did, that means he was subordinate to others, and that minimizes the special thing the wirter was pointing out, a fact you can't disprove.

I admit that it does not prove that Abraham tithed all the time. But it does not say that he did not either.

This incident is highlighted for a reason. I think that the main reason is as a fore shadow of Christ. But if that is the case , that begs the question of why the father of faith who is our model of faith as Christians is highlighted as tithing to a type of Jesus. That does at least open the possibility that this is an example for Christians to follow.

Also with regards to focusing on certain details , that can be like saying that baptism does not apply to us because we can't go to the Jordan river to do it.

While every detail in scripture is there for a reason , we need to use common sense and extract principles when we are speaking about following an example. We baptism with water and not with sand but we don;t require going to the Jordan. We use wine and bread for communion but we don't have to say a Hebrew passover meal blessing over it. To focus on details in that way , obscures the main issue rather than helping us to understand what the scripture is teaching us.

The thing I focus upon is that Hebrews 7 counted what Abraham did as just a legitimate tithe as the tithes paid to the Levites. It does not treat it as some lesser form of tithing. That says to me that whether it is a cow or spoils of war , it is the act of tithing to God as an act of worship that is most important. We cannot tithe what does not first belong to us. The fact that we are tithing it means it belongs to us.

but yet, even the levite tithe was temporary.

 

[Frogster]

As I said , the main point of Hebrews seven is not tithing. So extracting doctrine out of the passage about tithing is going to seem to some to be overpressing a text. That does not make it wrong. Just seems sensible for me to not be overly dogmatic about it.

well...since writer was not using him to teach tithe, why do some grope around the text, to promote tithe?

 

[Frogster]

u can't use selective methods, u gotta include spoils, and one time too, and slaughter.

 

[Yitzchak]

besides, you have to admit, the writer was not using the one time event to promote tithe on the church, was he?

see what I mean?

I do not feel obligated to tithe. But those who do should follow their conscience on the issue.

I don't keep Sunday sabbath either but I was eye witness to miracles done and have heard countless testimonies from those who did. God seems to back people up who operate in faith even when they don't get the details quite right. I believe God honors vows that people make and keep.

I am humble enough to admit that I could be wrong on the tithing issue. I can see where someone can get tithing for Christians out of the Genesis account. I feel that the overriding factor though, is the overall teaching about giving that indicates we give as we purpose in our heart and not under compulsion. The passages about tithing are only a small part of what the scripture says about giving.

if you want a direct answer though. If I were stranded on a desert island with my Bible , I do not think I would get tithing for Christians out of the Genesis account regarding Abraham. I would focus more on the worship of God through giving and not the detail of tithing.

 

[Frogster]

I do not feel obligated to tithe. But those who do should follow their conscience on the issue.

I don't keep Sunday sabbath either but I was eye witness to miracles done and have heard countless testimonies from those who did. God seems to back people up who operate in faith even when they don't get the details quite right. I believe God honors vows that people make and keep.

I am humble enough to admit that I could be wrong on the tithing issue. I can see where someone can get tithing for Christians out of the Genesis account. I feel that the overriding factor though, is the overall teaching about giving that indicates we give as we purpose in our heart and not under compulsion. The passages about tithing are only a small part of what the scripture says about giving.

if you want a direct answer though. If I were stranded on a desert island with my Bible , I do not think I would get tithing for Christians out of the Genesis account regarding Abraham. I would focus more on the worship of God through giving and not the detail of tithing.

well...i think we all agree it is good to give to the poor.

 

[Yitzchak]

well...i think we all agree it is good to give to the poor.

I agree.