Tithe

[Allan]

Can all of the law be "spiritualized"? How generic or ambiguous are you allowed to be, especially with laws that are only manifest in detailed and specific instances?

You are 0 for 1 here.

"The Law" IS spiritual unless you deem scripture to be in error, that means ALL of the Law. It all has a spiritual context in some form or fashion. God said and that settled it, regardless of if you believe it or not (as my OT survey Prof would say)

I do understand and practice stewardship. What did OT tithing "teach"? Feeding the fatherless, widows, foreigners, and ministers.

Many things more. Maybe you need to go back into scripture and see for yourself.
It taught stewardship, commitment, compassion, faithfulness, and others...

Outside the ceremonial tithe laws given to the nation of Israel specifically for blood Levites, festivals, sacrifices, and the crops and livestock of the physical land of Canaan, there is no command by God for Christians to give specific amounts or percentages of monetary income to anything. Yes, we are told to give cheerfully and abundantly, but the amount and percentage is not specified and is totally up to the giver and his conscience through the Holy Spirit.

Does there need to be?
Funny however that Paul states to the Corinithians "...Upon the first [day] of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as [God] hath prospered him,..." It appears they were to give weekly (that sounds like no option) and store it (hold on to it) according to that which God gave them (weekly). It sounds awefully close to manditory giving and giving of a percentage regarding that which God prospered you. And not Give as you feel led or when you desire or see a need. I'm not speaking of the tithe here. Just that manditory giving and a portion (or percentage) of that which God has prospered you (increase) both things you vehemently deny.

Giving 10% of one's income has zero to do with the tithing that actually took place in the Bible, and no where does the Bible ever extrude anything from tithing in any other sense than how it was specifically spell out.

Yes it did.
They were to give a tithe of their increase, and of their first fruits, and other things as well. These these were considered income in those days just as much as money was and it took place in the bible. Your wrong again. Paul states

1Cr 9:13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live [of the things] of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
1Cr 9:14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.
.

Appearently the Law of tithing has spiritual application here. The priests were fed by the tithes and offereings, just as (according to Paul via the Holy Spirit) they which Preach the gospel...

I could just as easily give testimonies of people were blessed by giving any other amount, or who were blessed when they realized that so-called "tithing" was not a requirement.

Again, you are speaking of something I have never said. I never said it is a requirement, I said tithing is a spiritual principle. I'm glad they came out of that because if they gave because out of obligation they were taught incorrectly.

God blesses people based on their faithfulness, cheerfulness, and generosity. God's blessing has zero to do with any "universal" threshhold.

That is not what scripture says. If you do, God says He will do...That is a universal threshold.

There is no hardcore evidence that one is not blessed by faithfully giving 9% of his net/gross/gross+benefits income to something and that one who is giving 10% of his net/gross/gross+benefits income is substantially and notably blessed more, while one who is giving 11% of his net/gross/gross+benefits income is not noticeably blessed much more than the 10%-er.

I find it funny to hear people try to find the least amount possible to be able to be appeasing to God. In giving, witnessesing, study, church gathering I see people trying to vindicate their lack of faith by being the best testimony of doing the least possible and still be most holy. :laugh:
That is not what "I'm" trying to get across, but appearently what you are stuck on.

I do not need to prove such a negative. You would need to prove such an experiment that I have laid out to demonstrate that a 10% factor has a noticeable impact on the blessing threshhold while other percentages do not. The blessings come from the matter of the heart, not from the specific amount.

I don't need to prove anything, anymore than you do.

You are 0 for 3 here.

Your not very good at keeping score either I see :thumbs: :laugh:

 

[Allan]

Hebrews 7 disannuls the command to tithe.

It disannuls the Law, which includes manditory giving of their tithes for various things at various time. But WE are not talking about the Law of Tithing, YOU are.

The rest of you post is entrenched in this same line of thought and pointless to get into. I agree we are not required to an obligation of 10%.

I have never stated we are to maintain the Law of the Tithe, and neither does anyone (mainline) teach it either.

 

[mes228]

After reading some of the above post about the Temple etc. I believe that the Temple
was always funded by a "Temple Tax" not tithes. I also believe the "widows mite" in the NT was this tax being paid. As for produce etc. being same as "money" - don't think so. Every society has had money, no matter how old. Also I think the "tithe" was only paid by the land owner not his servants. Also notice that the "10th" animal that passed under the rod was a "tithe" not the "first" animal. So much for the "first tenth" belongs to God statements. If a land owner only had 9 sheep he did not pay a tithe. All this is from memory so do not trust it until you look it up.

As an aside I personally know two elderly Baptist, on Social Security, with very little other income. Devastated with major illnesses economically to the point of having to take bankruptcy. Out of being mis-taught, fear, etc. they continue to tithe their very meager income. And believe they must tithe or they rob God. They are admirable in many respects, but those that taught them this are not. Tithe only applies to "increase", and earned increase at that. Gifts, social security, insurance proceeds, are not earned increase and never subject to tithe. Most every church I'm aware of (except the Baptist and a few cults) recognize this. Happily, the official doctrine of the Baptist (Baptist Faith and Message) is quite biblical. But, unfortunately, is not what most Baptist believe and are taught.
It's really quite a shame.

 

[Tom Butler]

Where did Jesus endorse "tithing" as a "principle"? When Jesus referred to the Pharisees' tithing, He was referring to their adherence (or rather their meticulous and legalistic addition) to the ceremonial Mosaic tithe code. The Pharisees were Jewish religious leaders who were outward examples of the Mosaic Law. They "[sat] in Moses' seat." There is no valid Scriptural reason to assume any other context than that which only exists in Scripture itself, namely the actual intricate system of ceremonial tithe observances prescribed by the Mosaic Law itself. This is exactly what Jesus meant when He referred to their tithing. Jesus was not declaring anything new, forming a "principle", or referencing anyone other than these scribes and Pharisees and their act of tithing mint, anise, and cumin in supposed obedience to the Mosaic ceremonial code. You know that what I am saying is exactly the truth.

With due respect, I see it differently. Jesus told the Pharisees that they should tithe. He gigged them for their legalistic attitude, and their hard-heartedness toward those in need, but passed up a perfect opportunity to tell them they needn't to the tithe thing anymore. Because Jesus fulfilled the law perfectly, he obviously tithed, and so taught his disciples (who, by the way, comprised the first church). If the members of the first church tithed, we have pretty good example to follow.

As a New Testament believer, I would not characterize tithing as mandatory. I was careful to describe it as the Biblical ideal. Iwon't quibble over the fine points of OT tithing. That can get legalistic quickly, and would violate the spirit of NT giving.

Nor will I condemn anyone who does not tithe. I am somewhat bothered, though, by anyone who would argue against tithing as a NT ideal, using it as an excuse for giving little or nothing. I'm glad none of the posters here are like that.

Now, before anybody demands scripture for Jesus' teaching his disciples to tithe, I'm simply deducing that Jesus endorsed tithing, thus practiced what he endorsed; and it would be inconsistent of him to teach his disciples that they didn't have to.

 

[Allan]

After reading some of the above post about the Temple etc. I believe that the Temple
was always funded by a "Temple Tax" not tithes. I also believe the "widows mite" in the NT was this tax being paid. As for produce etc. being same as "money" - don't think so. Every society has had money, no matter how old. Also I think the "tithe" was only paid by the land owner not his servants. Also notice that the "10th" animal that passed under the rod was a "tithe" not the "first" animal. So much for the "first tenth" belongs to God statements. If a land owner only had 9 sheep he did not pay a tithe. All this is from memory so do not trust it until you look it up.

As an aside I personally know two elderly Baptist, on Social Security, with very little other income. Devastated with major illnesses economically to the point of having to take bankruptcy. Out of being mis-taught, fear, etc. they continue to tithe their very meager income. And believe they must tithe or they rob God. They are admirable in many respects, but those that taught them this are not. Tithe only applies to "increase", and earned increase at that. Gifts, social security, insurance proceeds, are not earned increase and never subject to tithe. Most every church I'm aware of (except the Baptist and a few cults) recognize this. Happily, the official doctrine of the Baptist (Baptist Faith and Message) is quite biblical. But, unfortunately, is not what most Baptist believe and are taught.
It's really quite a shame.

It is most odd that scripture does not agree with you on "temple taxes". I'm pretty sure they knew what taxes were, and I am comfident that God knows the difference between the words 'tax' and 'tithes and offerings'.

God stated they were tithes and that they were offerings. God never stated they must pay taxes because Taxes are manditory. If you don't pay taxes you are jailed. If you didn't tithe or give offerings you were... nothing by the Jewish government. It wasn't mandated by the Jewish Government nor was it enforced by them.

What you have is not "taxes" but something by far greater and more spiritual...tithes and offerings of which the Jews in the OT participated.



However, Tom Butler - I'm in agreement with you.

 

[AresMan]

"The Law" IS spiritual unless you deem scripture to be in error, that means ALL of the Law. It all has a spiritual context in some form or fashion. God said and that settled it, regardless of if you believe it or not (as my OT survey Prof would say)

What is the spiritual application of the ceremonial tithe laws? Who gets to define it?

The tithe laws clearly showed that only those who owned land in Canaan tithed. The spiritual application is that every single Christian individual should tithe??
The tithe laws specified that crops and livestock (because they came from the land of Canaan) were to be tithed. The spiritual application is that Christian individuals should tithe money?
The tithe laws specified that tithes were brought conglomerately to Jerusalem for annual feasts, eaten by the tither, shared with blood Levites, given in heaps to the poor every three years, eaten locally every Sabbath year, and not done at all every fiftieth year (Jubilee). The spiritual application is that none of this matters, no cycle exists, the tither never eats his own tithe, and that every Christian is supposed to simply give all "tithe" money to the local church and only the local church?

The likely spiritual application of the ceremonial tithe laws is not the amount, but the point: to care for the fatherless, widows, and foreigners, and to fear God, remembering that He is the source of everything.

By the Law being "spiritual," it was not meant that every command could be paralleled into a different but new one, changed, reapplied, redefined, extrapolated, taken out of context, or otherwise ambiguated. By the Law being "spiritual," each law assumed a heart condition. Jesus explained the spiritual reason for the adultery and murder laws; He did not simply give it a new context.

Many things more. Maybe you need to go back into scripture and see for yourself.
It taught stewardship, commitment, compassion, faithfulness, and others...

No disagreement there.

Funny however that Paul states to the Corinithians "...Upon the first [day] of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as [God] hath prospered him,..." It appears they were to give weekly (that sounds like no option) and store it (hold on to it) according to that which God gave them (weekly). It sounds awefully close to manditory giving and giving of a percentage regarding that which God prospered you. And not Give as you feel led or when you desire or see a need. I'm not speaking of the tithe here. Just that manditory giving and a portion (or percentage) of that which God has prospered you (increase) both things you vehemently deny.

I Corinthians 16:1-2 has nothing to do with Sabbath, worship services, tithing, or even a mandatory/suppository giving scheme for all Christians. Here is the whole context:

1Co 16:1 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye [church of Corinth].
1Co 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.
1Co 16:3 And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.
1Co 16:4 And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me.
1Co 16:5 Now I will come unto you, when I shall pass through Macedonia: for I do pass through Macedonia.
1Co 16:6 And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you, that ye may bring me on my journey whithersoever I go.

Paul was talking about a specific need (famine) for the saints (church) in Jerusalem. He was telling (at least) the churches in Galatia and Corinth, which were in the way of his journey, to help him meet their need by giving (food) that he would take to Jerusalem. Paul mentions this need to the Romans, and tells them that it will hinder him from visiting them.

Rom 15:22 For which cause also I have been much hindered from coming to you.
Rom 15:23 But now having no more place in these parts, and having a great desire these many years to come unto you;
Rom 15:24 Whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come to you: for I trust to see you in my journey, and to be brought on my way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat filled with your company.
Rom 15:25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints.
Rom 15:26 For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem.
Rom 15:27 It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things.
Rom 15:28 When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you into Spain.
Rom 15:29 And I am sure that, when I come unto you, I shall come in the fullness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ.

The saints at Jerusalem had a great need. Paul had a plan for meeting it by telling churches on his way ahead of time to set aside "by him [the giver] in store" (not in a collection plate) every first day of the week (weekly wages, not church attendance) so that Paul would not have to ask when he arrived. Paul would then take these gifts to Jerusalem to feed the saints there.

This was not a command to all believers in general, although the principle could be gleaned as to how to meet remote needs efficiently by budgeting and planning ahead.

They were to give a tithe of their increase, and of their first fruits, and other things as well. These these were considered income in those days just as much as money was and it took place in the bible. Your wrong again.

No. This is your presumption. Tithing was tied to the land of Canaan only. Only those who actually owned parcels of land in Canaan were required to tithe. Money was prevalent when the tithe laws were given prior to the Canaan conquest. Tithing was specifically only of crops and livestock at all time, because it was from the land. Tithing was always only in crops and livestock even during the Roman empire with Caesar's coinage. Tithing was only from crops and livestock because it was to be used for festivals, food for the Levites and poor, and for burnt offerings. The reason that the tithes were always only food from the Promised Land of Canaan was because the prosperity came directly from God through nature, and not from man's economy. As long as the people of Israel tithed of the land, God blessed the land through excellent weather, always providing abundant rain. When the people of Israel were unfaithful in their tithing, God withheld the rain and allowed locusts to devour their crops. Tithing did just cause an added blessing; not tithing caused a curse (famine). If you believe that Malachi 3:10 applies to Christians, then you would have to believe that not giving alleged "tithes" results in a curse (famine).

The purpose of the tithe was to fear the Lord, and remember that He and He alone was their provision. They could not control the weather, and they had to obey God's Law and know by faith that God would always provide the rain.

Appearently the Law of tithing has spiritual application here. The priests were fed by the tithes and offereings, just as (according to Paul via the Holy Spirit) they which Preach the gospel...

"EVEN SO" (1 Cor 9:13-14)

Again, you are speaking of something I have never said. I never said it is a requirement, I said tithing is a spiritual principle. I'm glad they came out of that because if they gave because out of obligation they were taught incorrectly.

I am saying that saying that the alleged "tithe" is a measurable factor in any respect (whether mandatory or a threshhold of blessings/cursings) is a misapplication of Scripture.

That is not what scripture says. If you do, God says He will do...That is a universal threshold.

This is a misapplication and out-of-context use of Malachi 3:10.

I find it funny to hear people try to find the least amount possible to be able to be appeasing to God. In giving, witnessesing, study, church gathering I see people trying to vindicate their lack of faith by being the best testimony of doing the least possible and still be most holy. :laugh:
That is not what "I'm" trying to get across, but appearently what you are stuck on.

Have I done this? Does the end justify the means? Must one misapply Scripture to achieve a "desirable" end? You seem to be stuck on the idea that 10% has to mean something when it comes to giving thresholds.

I don't need to prove anything, anymore than you do.

If you intend to present testimonies of people being uniquely blessed by giving alleged "tithes" and that these testimonies represent proven promises from Scripture (which are actually taken out of context), then you would need to prove through both Scripture and experiment that these testimonies differ from ones of others who give under other schemes or ones who have testimonies "out of 'tithing'".

Your not very good at keeping score either I see :thumbs: :laugh:

You're not good at proving me wrong.

 

[AresMan]

It is most odd that scripture does not agree with you on "temple taxes". I'm pretty sure they knew what taxes were, and I am comfident that God knows the difference between the words 'tax' and 'tithes and offerings'.

The temple tax (which was money) was not a big tax and it was not on income. It was merely a small toll for entering the temple to pay for its expenses.

God stated they were tithes and that they were offerings.

Yes, there was the ceremonial tithe cycle of crops and livestock. There were several different types of offerings; most of them things to burn on an altar. Tithes and offerings were completely different things, although some of the tithe of the herd (which could not be redeemed for 120% of the value) was used for burnt offerings. Offerings were not monetary contributions "above and beyond the 'tithe.'"

God never stated they must pay taxes because Taxes are manditory. If you don't pay taxes you are jailed.

True. God never spelled out "tax" laws for Israel. The temple tax was not really a tax, but a toll. Under Roman rule, of course, the Jews were required to pay taxes to Caesar.

If you didn't tithe or give offerings you were... nothing by the Jewish government. It wasn't mandated by the Jewish Government nor was it enforced by them.

Yes, the government of Israel could not really enforce the tithe laws as such, but if enough of those who were required to tithe did not, God sent famines in the land. Obviously, there was no jail sentence for not tithing.

What you have is not "taxes" but something by far greater and more spiritual...tithes and offerings of which the Jews in the OT participated.

And these "spiritual" tithes and offerings have nothing to do with the church or Christian giving. Complete apples and oranges.

 

[mes228]

Allan, I was not complete in my statement. I believe that the tithe for the Priest was a tenth of the tithe given to the Levites. This tithe was always agriculture in nature, not money. Note that Malachai speaks of "food & drink" not money. The Temple was monetarily funded by a tax, I believe.

 

[AresMan]

With due respect, I see it differently. Jesus told the Pharisees that they should tithe.

Of course He did. Why shouldn't He?

He gigged them for their legalistic attitude, and their hard-heartedness toward those in need, but passed up a perfect opportunity to tell them they needn't to the tithe thing anymore.

With due respect, I do not understand this line of reasoning that I see many times that Jesus "passed up the opportunity to abolish the tithe, but He didn't." There was no reason for Him to do so. He did not cancel any part of the Law while He was in the flesh. As Pharisees (Jewish religious leaders), they were supposed to tithe (i.e. bring tithes of crops and livestock to Jerusalem annually, give heap tithes [at this time to the temple storehouse chambers built by Hezekiah] every three years, observe the seven-year cycle and release debts and free servants). What does this have to do with the church or Christians not living in the land of Canaan?

Because Jesus fulfilled the law perfectly, he obviously tithed,

No He did not. He was a carpenter. He did not own land. He did not raise crops and livestock on a parcel of Canaan land. He did not tithe. He was not among those who were required to tithe. Not every law applied to every individual. Tithing was one of them.

and so taught his disciples (who, by the way, comprised the first church).

If any of them owned land and farmed, then He probably taught them to tithe. Also, there are many views as to when the church began; this view proves nothing.

If the members of the first church tithed, we have pretty good example to follow.

There is no Scriptural evidence of any early church "tithing." I would assume that prior to A.D. 70 when the temple was destroyed and the Levitical priesthood was dissolved through the Diaspora under persecution, Jewish Christians gave of their abundance to the church while also obeying the ceremonial Mosaic tithe laws and bringing their third year tithes of crops and livestock to the Temple storehouse chambers.

As a New Testament believer, I would not characterize tithing as mandatory. I was careful to describe it as the Biblical ideal. Iwon't quibble over the fine points of OT tithing. That can get legalistic quickly, and would violate the spirit of NT giving.

Then, do not get confused into thinking that the ceremonial tithe laws have any other context other than exactly what the Scripture says. Let the Scripture speak for itself. Tithing in the Bible and Christian giving are completely different subjects. They are complete apples and oranges. Stop confusing the two

Nor will I condemn anyone who does not tithe. I am somewhat bothered, though, by anyone who would argue against tithing as a NT ideal, using it as an excuse for giving little or nothing. I'm glad none of the posters here are like that.

No one can tithe, although we can "tithe." If you just understand what tithing in the Bible really was, read every passage about it, read the surrounding context, read them over and over again, it will click that tithing was never intended to have anything to do with the church or refer to anything outside its own context.

I do give more than a "tithe" and I also give a lot to charity. I hope that God considers how I handle His money good stewardship. It is all His, and not a "tithe."

Now, before anybody demands scripture for Jesus' teaching his disciples to tithe, I'm simply deducing that Jesus endorsed tithing, thus practiced what he endorsed; and it would be inconsistent of him to teach his disciples that they didn't have to.

I explained this above. Not every law applied to every individual person. There were some laws that applied to the rich and others that applied to the poor. There were some laws that applied to the land owners, and some laws that applied to the servants. There were some laws that applied to men, and some laws that applied to women. The scribes and Pharisees (allegedly) taught all the Law, even though they could not obey every indivual law themselves. There is no reason that Jesus could not have told some to tithe for whom the tithe laws applied, and not tithed Himself. He was poor; He did not own land; He likely ate from the tithes that were given for the poor every three years.

 

[AresMan]

Allan, I was not complete in my statement. I believe that the tithe for the Priest was a tenth of the tithe given to the Levites. This tithe was always agriculture in nature, not money. Note that Malachai speaks of "food & drink" not money.

Indeed. The land owners who tithed gave a tenth of the crops and every tenth animal that passed under the rod (whether it was good or bad) to the Levites. The Levites, from that tithe, in turn, gave the best tenth of that to the priests.

The Temple was monetarily funded by a tax, I believe.

Yes. This tax was a toll for entering and doing required activities in the Temple, not unlike paying a toll on the turnpike. It wasn't much (maybe equivalent to a dollar or so).

 

[born_baptist]

tithing

In my mind i would assume that Jesus did grow crops, and did tithe from them. I assume that he grew crops because, the scribes and pharisees in Matt. 23, who didn't have an occupation of farming either are found to have tithed from their agricultural efforts. Most of the people, regardless of their main occupation probably did some sort of farming. That's just an opinion based on some speculation. It doesn't matter to me whether Jesus grew crops or not. If he did, he most definitely would have tithed from the increase, because he was born under the effects of the law.
Gal 4:4-5
But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law

 

[JerryL]

In my mind i would assume that Jesus did grow crops, and did tithe from them. I assume that he grew crops because, the scribes and pharisees in Matt. 23, who didn't have an occupation of farming either are found to have tithed from their agricultural efforts. Most of the people, regardless of their main occupation probably did some sort of farming. That's just an opinion based on some speculation. It doesn't matter to me whether Jesus grew crops or not. If he did, he most definitely would have tithed from the increase, because he was born under the effects of the law.
Gal 4:4-5
But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law

Jesus didn't tithe. Here is proof.
Lev 19:9 'Now when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest.
Lev 19:10 'Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God.
The gleaning incident is recorded three times (Mat 12:1-12, Mark 2:23-24, and Luke 6:1-2
The Pharisees never got on to them for gleaning the crops as the poor were allowed to do under the law, also they never made him tithe of the gleanings he was getting either. They were trying to nail him for doing it on the Sabbath. Only the poor and strangers(travelers) were allowed to glean. Jesus never tithed. He was poor so that allowed the gleaning incident. Otherwise He was a thief. We know better than to say he was thieving. Even the Pharisees didn't accuse him of that when they confronted Him. Craftsmen and the poor didn't tithe, Jesus was both. Only farmers and herdsmen. Not entering this debate, just showing some Biblical facts.

P.S. The Pharisees of Mat 23 were such sticklers for keeping the Law they added stuff to it, such as tithing spices(dill, cumin and other garden spices) which weren't even titheable by the Law.

 

[Alcott]

"You were actually malnourished? You had no means to go where you needed to go? Did you actually lose the apartment and were homeless?"

That has nothing to do this. If if it does then explain it. Must a person be malnurished FIRST to begin tithing, or stranded, or homeless??

What happened to your quote, "Lack = not of enough of something"? No, a person need not be malnourised first to begin tithing, but you did say you had "lack," which you defined as "not enough of something." If you didn't have enough food, you were malnourished, were you not?

What do you think I ment by it?
We had not seen, talked to in ANY form to our reletives OR friends about our situation.

"We?" How do you know for an absolute certainty what your roomies talked to any relatives or friends about? Did you hear every word said by everyone of them to anyone during the time period you are referring to?

I got a credit from AT&T for being double-charged on a recent phone bill;and for the record, I haven't contributed anything for a couple of months to a church or ministry.

and your point?

That it is obviously not a prerequisite to tithe to get a refund from being overcharged by a utility company; therefore the connection you make is not competent.

Do you pray much?

No.

Are you ever lead to do or give something in to a person in which you have no knowledge of the situation.

No.

As far as we knew it had nothing to do with 'back payment' for birthdays or missed Christmas. She said (to best of my recolection): "...she felt very burdened to send this to him right away. Not to buy his love but share Gods love with him and that whatever he was going through, God was about to reveal He is faithful to His word."

You are still trying to be mystical when the situation is not that. If she left JW, which coerced her into cutting ties with family and friends, she likely wanted to reestablish those ties-- 'back payments' or not. Frankly, if you wanted to get reacquainted with a young relative who you, for a time, refused to have contact with, would you not include some type of gift, preferably which suits the situation as you know it? And she knew something from some source about you guys and your situation, or she couldn't even have found you to give that gift.

Was the mechanic a complete stranger to you? [and I wonder why you capitalize Gas]

He was actaully. Capitalize Gas? maybe I was emphasizing it - since he fixed my car for free AND "filled her up" so to speak.

Do you know for certain? How was it done anyway? Did he own the shop? [If not, how was there not trouble, unless there's an owner or manager involved you left out?] Was there no shop, he just came by and somehow realized you had a car on the blink?

Was it his first raise? If not, how much was the previous one before you resolved to tithe?

Second one, The first was his 60 day trial period of 15 cents. But he got THIS raise 5 months into work, before his yearly evaluation or next scheduled raise.

I have know that to happen before; and it has happend to me before.

I was hit head on by a drunk driver and became disabled at 21.

Tithing didn't keep that from happening? You're pulling my leg!

You can't explain it nor the myriads of others where by God blesses. You can explain MAYBE where it came from but NOT why at THAT moment it came.

No, and I can't explain why you were hit by the drunk driver at that moment, either.

Nothing. I given my whole paycheck before and God still provided my needs. But most people (like yourself) can't even grasp simple principles.

Why don't you give your enteire paycheck all the time? How "simple" would the principle be then?

 

[HankD]

In my mind i would assume that Jesus did grow crops, and did tithe from them. I assume that he grew crops because, the scribes and pharisees in Matt. 23, who didn't have an occupation of farming either are found to have tithed from their agricultural efforts. Most of the people, regardless of their main occupation probably did some sort of farming. That's just an opinion based on some speculation. It doesn't matter to me whether Jesus grew crops or not. If he did, he most definitely would have tithed from the increase, because he was born under the effects of the law.

The Scripture says that he was called the "carpenter's son".
The word "carpenter" has a wider scope than the English word and could even include the idea of an architect.

If Joseph and Mary raised Him in the traditional Hebrew social culture, then in all probability Joseph taught Jesus (especially as their first born) his own trade.

As such He-they were not under the law of the agricultural tithe nor were wage-earners, only landowners who use the land for a living or profit were to tithe on the increase in the currency of that increase e.g. sow 2 bushels of wheat seed, reap 100, pay a tithe on 98 bushels in that same grain brought to the Temple store house or given to the local priest.

Also of any animals grown there was the Law of the Firstborn as well as the tithe of the increase. If your herd of sheep went from 100 sheep to 140 sheep you owed a tithe on 40 sheep as well as giving any firstborn of your flock to the Lord.

If you couldn't do this (see reasons below) then you could redeem the 9.8 bushels of wheat and 4 sheep (sell them) and throw a party inviting the poor and/or levitical family members (who were not landowners).


Deuteronomy 14

23 And thou shalt eat before the LORD thy God, in the place which he shall choose to place his name there, the tithe of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the firstlings of thy herds and of thy flocks; that thou mayest learn to fear the LORD thy God always.
24 And if the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it; or if the place be too far from thee, which the LORD thy God shall choose to set his name there, when the LORD thy God hath blessed thee:
25 Then shalt thou turn it into money, and bind up the money in thine hand, and shalt go unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose:
26 And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household,
27 And the Levite that is within thy gates; thou shalt not forsake him; for he hath no part nor inheritance with thee.​

HankD

 

[AresMan]

Jesus didn't tithe. Here is proof.
Lev 19:9 'Now when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, nor shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest.
Lev 19:10 'Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God.
The gleaning incident is recorded three times (Mat 12:1-12, Mark 2:23-24, and Luke 6:1-2
The Pharisees never got on to them for gleaning the crops as the poor were allowed to do under the law, also they never made him tithe of the gleanings he was getting either. They were trying to nail him for doing it on the Sabbath. Only the poor and strangers(travelers) were allowed to glean. Jesus never tithed. He was poor so that allowed the gleaning incident. Otherwise He was a thief. We know better than to say he was thieving. Even the Pharisees didn't accuse him of that when they confronted Him. Craftsmen and the poor didn't tithe, Jesus was both. Only farmers and herdsmen. Not entering this debate, just showing some Biblical facts.

Exactly.

P.S. The Pharisees of Mat 23 were such sticklers for keeping the Law they added stuff to it, such as tithing spices(dill, cumin and other garden spices) which weren't even titheable by the Law.

I have pointed this out other times as well.

 

[pops]

I suppose that one could make a point that since we are living under Grace that we are not required to Tithe. Paul had a few words to say about this 'freedom' when he spoke in regard to sinning and I think we can apply his words to tithing. So all we have is Gods and we recognize this and offer Him a portion of our earnings in thanks. We can use 10% as a guideline however even if you reference the old testament a case can be made to 30%. The thing is to give with a thankful heart and not to misrepresent our giving to be more than it is.
Now I would like to give you my personal experience in this matter and if I use the word Tithe you can use free will offering if it pleases you.
With that said I firmly believe in tithing and I use 10% as my guideline. In the past I wrote my check after all my other obligations were taken care of and I noticed that not much was left at the end of the month to do this. At some point I became convicted that my offering should be at the beginning and not the end and I vowed to do this. (honestly this did not occur all at once). Once I got into this routine I kept it up and every time my income increased so did my offering. Then I started adding to it and included missions, and other organizations. Do you know that not once have I ever felt in need. As a matter of fact this year my monthly income has been reduced by over $800 per month, and my donations have remained the same AND I/we are still doing fine. Which leads me to think that I should have given more.
I hope this has helped someone out there with their question on tithing.

 

[JerryL]

QUOTE
With due respect, I see it differently. Jesus told the Pharisees that they should tithe. He gigged them for their legalistic attitude, and their hard-heartedness toward those in need, but passed up a perfect opportunity to tell them they needn't to the tithe thing anymore. Because Jesus fulfilled the law perfectly, he obviously tithed, and so taught his disciples (who, by the way, comprised the first church). If the members of the first church tithed, we have pretty good example to follow.
UNQUOTE
He had to tell them to tithe he was still alive therefore the Law was still in effect.

 

[Bro. Williams]

My family gives 10% as a minimum. We try to give more as well.

 

[kubel]

Jews were commanded to tithe according to the letter of the Law. I am commanded to give cheerfully according to what I decide in my heart.

:tonofbricks:

 

[jshurley04]

Tithing

There is no Scriptural justification for changing what was clearly commanded
(1) to the people of the nation of Israel
(2) to give tithes of crops (which could be redeemed) and livestock (which could not be redeemed)
(3) to the Levites (blood decendents of Levi), priests (blood Levite descendents of Aaron), and poor
(4) from what was provided by God Himself through nature
(5) from the Promised Land in Canaan
(6) in a ceremonial seven-year cycle
(7) in which people annually ate their own tithes in a ceremonial festival,
(8) gave heap tithes to the Levites and poor every three years,
(9) celebrated a local feast every seventh year
(10) and gave no tithe on the fiftieth year (Jubilee)

I guess, more or less.

Helloooooo,

Are we forgetting the the tithe pre-dates the law AND the covenant between God and Abraham. In fact, it was tithing that provoked the first murder. The tithe is a constant scriptural principle that ALL Christ-Followers are expected to follow. God knew that if He did not include the tithe in the law the ignorance of the Jews would not allowed them to tithe and we would be talking about tithe as something way different than what God meant for it to be. As for the %, the figure of 10% is just the starting point, not the exact spec that God required. In fact, in the nation of Israel the expected level of giving was never as low as 10% but rather closer to 23% as I have seen some calculate.

The New Testament teaches tithe for the Christ-Follower to be out of the aboundance of what God has blessed them with. An example would be the church at Jerusalem in which most of the membership sold all that they had and then turned the profits of the sales over to the church to be used to help those during the hard times they were experienceing.

Paul taught the Corinthian church to tithe as part of the milk he was re-teaching them in his letter to that church. Tithe is a starting point for the N.T. Christ-Follower that is to be given with a joyful attitude and a right heart. It is to be from what you are blessed by, as I teach our people, if you do not recieve an increase for a week or a month you are loosed from the instruction to tithe but we are never released from the obligation to give of our abundance.

We are to also understand that we are not giving to the pastor, church board or budget requirements, what we give, we give to God only. If we give for any other reason then we are not giving for the right reasons. We are to give as a return to God for what HE blessed us with, the church is just the name of the bank God accepts payment as.

One pastor said once "The tithe is the debt that we owe, while the gift is the seed that we sow." There is much truth in that statement.

As to the OP, I give according to what I am able. I give more than 10%, I take the total and figure the 10% then round up, then give another $40 or so to missions and other funds. This is where I start from, sometimes God leads me to do much more than this, so I listen.