Featured Tithing

You must be referencing 1 Corinthians 9:14 as many do?

Please point out to me where Paul says tithes? The truth is he did not say tithes... nor was he implying tithes of the congregation.

That which the priest ate at the altar was not the tithe of the children of Israel. No, they did not take their tithe to the priest, for they were not allowed near the Tabernacle lest they bear sin and die.

So who took their tithe to the Tabernacle, you may ask? The answer may shock you, but no one took their tithe to the priest.

The Levites received the tithe of the congregation of Israel. The Levite took a tithe of that tithe to the Tabernacle. That's right, the priest only received a fraction of the original tithe... not the full 10%.

Was Paul telling the Corinthian Church to give their pastor 10% of their money? Hardly. He did say "Even so", did he not?

Yes, he did. And the priest of the Taberacle did not receive 10 of the congregation of Israel's money. He received 10% of that which the Levites received from the congregation.

But was Paul saying the Pastor/Elder/Bishop of the congregation was to receive 10% of a tithe even? No, he was not!

Paul said 'they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel', meaning they should be paid for their service to the saints, but he was not speaking of the stationery Pastor/Bishop/Elder. He was speaking of the traveling Missionary/Evangelist.

Everywhere in the New Testament where one is told to preach, that one is sent out from the congregation to preach, not stationery. Paul even referenced himself in the 9th Chapter in his first epistle to the Corinthians as having preached, or being sent to preach.

1 Peter 5 tells us the responsibility of the Elder/Bishop/Pastor... to feed the flock of God, taking the oversight of them.
Missionaries preached, Elders/Pastors/Bishops fed.

Sorry Allan, but there is no justification for a teaching of a monetary tithe in the New Testament.

Even if one was to say Paul was referencing the tithe in 1 Corinthians 9:13, the first two words of verse 14 destroy a monetary tithe...."Even so"

Even so, in the same manner. What was tithed to the priest in the Tabernacle? It wasn't money. It was food. Even so... in like manner.

Paul was saying to make sure the preacher was fed in verse 14, not paid a monetary tithe.

As to how the Apostles gave to God, it was not by tithing. The Apostles were still under the Mosaic Laws until the destruction of the Temple in 70AD.

Yet they never tithed. They were not required to. They did not breed livestock, nor did they grow fruit or produce on a farm. Their occupations exempted them from the tithe law.

 

No, actually it is verse 13

Please show me where Paul ever says the word omniscient?

So just because Paul doesn't state the word, we can see by the correlation of what was to be done now in direct relation back to the OT whereby the Levitical priests were sustained by the peoples worship, commanded by God in tithes and offerings.

Each had a distinctive purpose but the priests received from both aspects. The purpose of each was vital in understanding the principles God was teaching His people. Thus the tithe was never considered an offering (ie. like the atonement - offering) nor was the offering to ever be considered a tithe. Yet while never the same thing in relation to function.. they were in relation to form or essence (worship)

Additionally, it isn't the tithe itself I'm speaking to, it is the principle of the tithe we should be teaching regarding giving. no LESS than 10%.. NT giving is more than the tithe. The tithe simply showed what was the most most basic.. it became the norm... almost no one gave more than their tithe as it became their obligation. Even Jesus who was teaching regarding the Kingdom of God, never dismissed the tithe. In fact he states to the pharisees not only should you tithe but you should also not neglect the other important things. Not Jesus nor the apostles ever state the tithe was not a continued part of what was the norm.. but what was not the norm and need to be taught and instruction given on was 'giving' which was not something done in general. In and of itself was a 'new' concept for them, not because it was specifically new, but that it was known but wasn't understood and practiced.

They gave it as a tithe to Lord, and the Priest partook as it was his right. It doesn't matter who they gave it to, it matters 'that' they gave and 'why' they gave.

However lets clear something up quickly.. there is more than one tithe and various ways to give regarding each tithe and all were required. The principle of the tithe establishes not so much a 'what to tithe' but that we should be at minimum 'tithing' whatever we have been given, for the provision of others, which is our worship unto God who gave us every good thing.

Scripture says that God gave them ALL the tithes. However The issue is not what %, but that the illustration refers back to an OT principle you claim is no longer valid, yet here we see it being used to encourage NT believers in how to care for their minister and from whence it comes.

Exactly- Even so.. or, Do you not know, or Surely you know... he bringing the illustration home in the very fact they KNOW this and is the very reason he referred back to the OT teaching. There is a principle that is being brought in, but it is so knit or closely tied together with 1. how it was obtained and 2. to whom it was given; they cannot be tossed aside without both aspects loosing all meaning and principle illustration loose all cohesiveness and fall a part. If one doesn't understand the reason for tithes and for offerings, one will miss out on why they were given to the Priest, and how both aspects have a direct relationship with each other.

No one has said Israel gave only money, but Israel could give money in place of the tithe as per Lev. The point is what it was FOR.. and that was provision through the cultures common means. It did not negate the given of tithes or offerings in the form of money. Though due to times of when this was established as a command unto the people of Israel, the means of provision was most easily done through material means rather than monetary. Additionally the other main point is the symbolism it showed forth in each point and aspect. Thus again material was sought over monetary, though monetary was allowed.

It is of note that they DID in fact receive money for the things that were devoted to God and received a redemption price for the first born of men and this was part of the inheritance of the tithes and offerings they received from the peoples worship of God. Num 18:14-16 This states that every devoted things was to be theirs including the first born. Of men, a redemption price had to be paid - it was theirs, but again, they had to pay their own tithes as well. Another point in which payment was made was for various vows (vs 16) taken (types listed -Lev 27;1-33)

Numbers 18:21 - To the sons of Levi, behold, I have given ALL the tithe of Israel for an inheritance, in return for their service which they perform...

But we see in vs 26 - the Levite is to present a tithe of the tithe (so he get 90% of his share - not the whole amount)

Paul's point stood on two principle points, 1. the consistent giving of the people through tithes and offerings, which 2. was from where the minister was to be paid from

I disagree, it pertains to all who serve the lord in such a manner. Paul gives no such distinction nor it is implied. In fact I can't find any good commentary that makes any such distinction, whether Reformed or Non.. they all agree Paul was speaking of 'anyone' in said service.

Again, not true. Preach simply means to proclaim. Not every who proclaimed went everywhere doing it, many were in one location. Timothy was told to preach the word, and during that time, he was not travelling but pastoring and exhorted to do the work of the Evangelist - again, not traveling but in one location.

Hey, it's your opinion.

 

continued...

Even So - Do you 'not know' or another way of putting it - Surely you know,.. in any case it doesn't destroy money as a tithe, it even more so establishes my point and the very fact you are not seeing one of the main points the tithe was about - provision.

Scripture was written during a time when money was not often used and especially by the poor or middle class (which was a small group). One could sell their tithe to bring the money for tithing, purchase food and everything there and hold a feast for the them and priests which recieved their portion as well. We see in Lev 27:31 we see where Moses give allowance for money instead of the tithe but if they do this they must add to it 1/5 more. So the assumption that in the process of provision for the priest there was no money is to ignore the devoted things with could be redeemed by money (such as the first born), the vows which required money, and even tithe (+1/5 more if iin money form) These all feel under the unbrella of giving (tithes and offerings)

You seem to be not understanding the priest's inheritance (not just the tithe) encompassed all that was given (under both heading of tithes and offerings a as God sets them forth). Paul's point is a reflection of that inheritance (that which is rightfully his) and where it came from ... the people of God are to be giving in various ways and the minister/pastor/elder (whatever) was to be paid from that resource, if he so choose.

*sigh.. Nope.
In the same manner (if you wish) still refers back to what was being illustrated - the tithe was tied connectively with the offering, in that there was no distinction in it's essence- it was their inheritance. Thus if one wishes to state the minister must receive something for his work from God's people.. it must also refer - in same manner, as to where it came from. Thus while this passage might not explicitly state tithe is something done in the NT, one cannot assert with any biblical substance it negates such as it is directly related to why the mister is paid and where it comes from.. and that where encompasses both the tithe and the offering and all that falls under them..

Actually, it refers to whatever could be given to support him since priests received not only food but money as well as part of their inheritance. Why was Paul collecting money from various Church to support other Churches. Could it be some needed food due to issues in their particular lands.. or maybe clothes.. why didn't Paul tell the church to load up wagons with food and clothing. Because money can be used to purchase the necessary things that could be supplied by the church if it was there.. or if the church was able. But since it wasn't others were asked to help out.

 

Even so means in like manner, Allen. You can deny it if you wish, but it doesn't change the fact.

And that which the priest partook of at the altar was eaten.
It was food.

Even so... in like manner.

 

There is not one Scripture to support the claim that money was part of the priest's inheritance.

 

Israel could not give money in lieu of tithe.

The tithe was mandatory Leviticus 27:30-34.

The food tithe could be bought back if the tither wanted to buy it back.

How could one buy the tithe back if he didn't tithe in the first place? It would be an impossibility. He had to tithe first, then he could buy the tithe back with money if desired. But for the price of buying it back he had to pay more than what the tithe was worth.

 

Funny, I gave one.

 

Lev 27:31 If a man wishes to redeem some of his tithe, he shall add a fifth to it.

I agree.. the tithe was mandatory but you 'could' redeem it. However it wasn't considered a tithe after you killed it.. it was a tithe because it was a tenth of what you had to offer not because it was killed. (*edited).

 

Well, no one has said it yet, so I will. The tithe is an extremely low standard for the NT Christian. Christ demands all. I think if a Christian is only giving a tithe he's probably not given it all to God (no offense, anyone). The NT Christian should be giving more than a tithe from his paycheck, they should be giving to missions, they should be giving to the poor when they have opportunity. And Christ will give back, full measure, pressed down and overflowing.

"For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's" (1 Cor. 6:20).

"So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:33).

"And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all: For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had" (Luke 21:3-4).

 

I did John!!!

Back in most of my original postings I said things like this:

However I didn't elaborate.. got stuck on a rabbit trail and was hoping someone would ask how much more than 10%

Yes, I agree with you

 

We tithe 10% on our gross income. Not because the NT states that a 10% tithe is mandated. Instead it's the baseline we chose because of the biblical history assocated with that amount.

You're right. God doesn't NEED a single penny or a grain of wheat from us. All of it, everything we have, think we "own", etc. is His in the first place. Without Genesis 1:1, we wouldn't be here to argue about it. Argue, indeed we do. Among ourselves and with God, all the way back to Cain and Able. Argue to find justification for excuses to satisify the greed in our hearts to keep more of what we've "earned".

Say what you will, but there's no joy in the heart of a person, with an above average income, sitting beside me, dropping 4 quarters or a one dollar bill in the collection plate every Sunday morning. (It's hard to miss the sound of those quarters hitting the plate.) Once again, I'm reminded of "you'll know them by their fruit".

Over time, it becomes readily apparent when the flesh of their fruit is expensive jewelery, designer labeled clothing, new vehicles, travel, "entertainment" and more, results in a few apple seeds being dropped into the collection plate.

Yes, we tithe. It is a baseline, as we give far more than that percentage of our income to the Lord. Our fixed income is below the poverty level as measured by today's "standards". Yet, we are richly blessed with a roof over our heads, clothes on our backs, and food on the table. So, richly blessed that we can go to church as worship our Lord without fear of losing our heads.

So, instead of looking for excuses not to give, we look for opportunities to give more of ourselves, whether it's tithes and offerings in the collection plate, or time in direct service in His name, to our Lord. Yes, there can be joy in mopping the floor of the Fellowship Hall, when it's done to bring glory to God.

 

Your reply came in while I was typing mine.

Well said. Far better than mine.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

Because one cannot, by definition "give" a tithe...a tithe is a legal requirement, and it already "belongs" to those to whom it is rendered.....It was literally their inheritance. I would find the "pro-tithe" position more convincing if the adherents didn't equivocate between "tithing" and "giving". One cannot "give" a tithe (if we understand it correctly) nor could one similarly "tithe" anything more than exactly 10% of something.

"Giving" and "tithing" are apples and oranges. IF tithing is a command for the NT Christian....then don't bother encouraging them to do it with a "cheerful heart" or any of that non-sense....just tell them that you believe that it is a command and to merely obey it regardless of whether you are "cheerful" about it or not. You might then encourage the cheerful giving of freely rendered offerings....but let's have none of this "tithe cheerfully" mess.

Many people who are no longer enslaved to the tithing dogma DO TRULY GIVE...and quite cheerfully of their time, their effort, and indeed their money...and often in quantities FAR exceeding the lame 10% legality. My wife and I cheerfully give more than 10%....but we always slavishly obeyed our "school-masters" 10% legal requirement before then. Cheerfully though??? No, one doesn't obey a legal requirement "cheerfully"...they enjoy blessing others and "giving" to them "cheerfully"....Using that term with a tithe requirement makes no sense.

 

You said it pretty well!

 

Oops, sorry, I missed that. :wavey:

 

After bringing the Children of Israel out of Egypt God set aside the tribe of Levi to perform the services of the Tabernacle with the family of Aaron set apart as priests. The Levites as a tribe were given no share of the land of Promise though certain cities/towns, as I recall, were given them. The Levites were to receive the tithe [tenth] from the remaining 11 tribes, the priests were to receive a tenth of that.

Numbers 18:24-32
24. But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance.
25. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
26. Thus speak unto the Levites, and say unto them, When ye take of the children of Israel the tithes which I have given you from them for your inheritance, then ye shall offer up an heave offering of it for the LORD, even a tenth part of the tithe.
27. And this your heave offering shall be reckoned unto you, as though it were the corn of the threshingfloor, and as the fulness of the winepress.
28. Thus ye also shall offer an heave offering unto the LORD of all your tithes, which ye receive of the children of Israel; and ye shall give thereof the LORD’S heave offering to Aaron the priest.
29. Out of all your gifts ye shall offer every heave offering of the LORD, of all the best thereof, even the hallowed part thereof out of it.
30. Therefore thou shalt say unto them, When ye have heaved the best thereof from it, then it shall be counted unto the Levites as the increase of the threshingfloor, and as the increase of the winepress.
31. And ye shall eat it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation.
32. And ye shall bear no sin by reason of it, when ye have heaved from it the best of it: neither shall ye pollute the holy things of the children of Israel, lest ye die.

With the passing of the temple so passed the required tithe. Giving under the New Covenant is perhaps best expressed by the Apostle Paul, as follows:

2 Corinthians 9:7. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

 

Jesus endorsed tithing.
Matthew 23:23

How can the tithe be considered an Old Testament principle, yet endorsed by the Lord Jesus in the New Testament?

 

First, why do so many use O.T. tithing as a baseline, but not other O.T. laws? If you are going to tithe because it's in the law, then stone your child if he/she rebels against you. I know some preachers believe in storehouse giving, and the local church is the storehouse. They say if you take your tithe and give it to some other ministry, like Missions, you are sinning. Missions or any other ministry besides the local church should be an offering over and above your tithe. This is the basic teaching I have heard in IFB churches. They also have faith promise giving, which is over and above your tithe and offerings. It is a special offering that you promise to give for a building project, or some other project. I have even heard preachers say that you should pledge something that hurts, or you may not see how you can afford, and God will honor your faith and bless you and provide. I don't believe a lot of this is necessarily scriptural.

I think giving is explained for N.T. believers, but it has nothing to do with a tithe, but promise giving is ok.

First, it should be according to as God has prospered, according to I Cor. 16:2 I think that indicates a higher percentage for those more well off, but no specific percentage is given, and it should be on the Sunday, the first day of the week.

Second, 2 Cor. 9:5 indicates promise giving is ok.

Third, Romans 12:8 says that those who give should give liberally. Once again, no percentage, but liberally indicates a significant amount.

Lastly, but most importantly, the attitude of the heart is the main thing:

2 Corinthians 9:7-8 (ESV)
7 Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
8 And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work.

 

The tithe Jesus was endorsing was the Mosaic Law tithe, a tithe of food and livestock... not money. And it was Jews He was telling to tithe, not Gentiles.