Demanding the Tithe

NO!

The modern concept of a "tithe" has exactly ZERO support in Scripture.
The tithe in the Bible has nothing to do with:
1. income
2. money
4. a church

The idea of an obligation/suggestion/principle for members of a church congregation to yield 10% of their net/gross/gross+benefits monetary income to a church treasury is derelict of Scripture. To teach such an obligation is to add to Scripture and is wrong. Period.

NO! A pastor has NO right to know how much any particular person gives. The ONLY thing he should be concerned about is if expenses and needs are being met.

If a Baptist church is supposed to be congregational in nature, then the idea of a pastor knowing the incomes and giving totals of the members is turning congregationalism on its head. The church is not a business and the pastor is not a CEO. Rather, if the people are paying the pastor, the pastor is the employee. Employees have no right to know how much the employers make.

If anything, the congregation needs to know what the pastor makes, because they are paying him and the church. The employer knows what he pays the employee by necessity. The employee does not need to know how much the employer earns or his giving habits.

 

My church , when applying for official membership, requires one to agree with the spiritual leadership in the Church IF they are following biblical mandates, to become active in some ministry/using their gifts from the Lord, and are expected to tithe/offerings IF possible...

Those of us in "official" ministries in the church requested to tithe/offer, or to go into finacial counseling IF we are having money issues...

Just done in order to mature and grow in the faith, as IF Lord gets our hearts, He will/should also have our wallets!

 

Abraham's tithe was:
1. ONCE
2. to a priest-king in Canaan
3. according to an ancient Arab custom
4. of the spoils of battle
5. NOT from his personal income
and he gave the rest of the spoils to the king of Sodom.

Jacob's tithe was:
1. an ambiguous oath
2. a conditional bargain with God
3. possibly fulfilled in the Mosaic code

The tithe of the Mosaic Law was:
1. of crops and livestock ONLY
2. not of fish, birds, or anything not above
3. NOT of money!!!!!!
4. NOT from income
5. for landowners ONLY
6. not for wage earners who did not own land
7. part of a seven-year cycle
8. had three versions: the Levitical tithe, the festival tithe, and the poor tithe
9. NOT done on the Sabbatical seventh year or the fiftieth year of Jubilee
10. a system of ceremonial laws integrated with other ceremonial laws (feast of Passover, feast of Tabernacles)

Jesus said this to the scribes and Pharisees who "sit in Moses' seat" and were supposed to be guardians of the law.
He said of their tithing that is was of "mint, anise, and cumin [dill, and all manner of herbs]" which was a meticulous and overbearing expansion of the crops and livestock requirement. If you are going to use this to support the modern tithing myth, then you MUST deal with the actual words of Christ here. You CANNOT ignore the substance spoken of, and extrapolate only what you would want. That would be eisegesis and mishandling the text.

If circumcision is outdated, so should showing mercy.
If animal sacrifices are outdated, so should showing mercy.
If polygyny is outdated, so should showing mercy.
If the Sabbath years and Jubilee are outdated, so should showing mercy.

See the problem with this logic?

You need to prove this.

See above.

This is good. I would agree with this.

This is based on a premise that has NO support in the Bible.

The modern tithing myth is NOT being "obedient to God's Word" because it is totally absent from God's Word. Giving, nevertheless is.

 

'zactly.

You are correct about the crop and livestock part.

The landowner had the option of keeping the crop part of the tithe by giving instead its value in money + 20%. This option was not available for the livestock part.

Regardless of motive, you are correct that "the 10% of your net income is a fabrication" that is not supported in Scripture.

Exactly. And how many people actually "tithe" according to Genesis 14 and 28; Numbers 18; Leviticus 27; Deuteronomy 12, 14, and 26; 1 Chronicles 31; Nehemiah 10, 12, and 13; Matthew 23:23; and Luke 11:42?

Amen!

 

Give whatever you deem led by the Spirit and that meets needs. There is no problem with anyone giving 10% of his income to the church.
The problem is in saying that this is an obligation in ANY respect and that it has ANYTHING to do with the tithe in Scripture.

Read. The. Context.
You need to understand the prescriptions of the tithe laws in the Mosaic code:
Leviticus 27
Numbers 18

You need to understand the 24 rotating courses of Levites set up under King David who ministered in the Temple a week at a time for a total of about 2 weeks per year. All remaining courses worked in the fields of their cities farming.

You then need to understand the history and nature of the Temple storehouse. You need to understand that the people did NOT tithe to the storehouse. The people brought their (Levitical) tithe to the Levites in the Levitical cities. The Levites, in turn, brought the best tithe of these tithes to the priests at the sanctuary.

Under King Hezekiah, when the nation returned to the law, he build the storehouse chambers in the Temple to keep the abundance of tithes laid in heaps from spoiling or theft. This was not required by the Law.

Under Nehemiah with the remnant from Persian captivity, the storehouse practice was resumed, with the people bringing their tithes to the Levites. The Levites, in turn brought a portion of their tithes with them into the Temple during their week-long assignment as food for service.

You need to understand that Nehemiah and Malachi were contemporaries according to virtual every Biblical scholar. Nehemiah 13 shows that the priests made an unholy alliance with the enemy Tobiah and housed him in one of the storehouse chambers where tithes would be stored.

You need to understand the entire context of the book of Malachi. You need to follow the pronouns and the questions asked of God. The entire book is addressed to the priests who were robbing the Levites of the tithes that they would need to sustain their yearly ministry in the Temple. This fits perfectly with the scandal that was going on in Nehemiah 13. In fact, Nehemiah's inquiry "Why is the house of the LORD forsaken?" is strikingly similar to the issue in Malachi. Malachi 3:8-10 is NOT about the people of Israel. They did not worship in the Temple, and they had no access to the storehouse chambers.

DO YOUR RESEARCH! Taking Scripture out of context is NOT something that anyone should take lightly.

This idea of an "offering" as something "over and above the tithe" is pure tradition and is not based on a careful understand of what exactly are the tithes and offerings being discussed in Malachi 3:8-10.

The offerings[/u] were burnt sacrifices of which the priests were robbing God. See Malachi chapters 1-2. The priests were robbing God in offerings by shirking the law and offering stolen and blemished animals and food on the alter of the sanctuary. The offerings here were NOT monetary contributions given "in excess of" tithes.

The tithes were those portion of the Levitical tithes that the courses of Levites brought to do their yearly ministry in the Temple, and they were being robbed from the Levites to house Tobiah in the storehouse. God said to bring the "whole tithes" into the storehouse that there may be food in my house. He said this for a reason because the priests were stealing food from the Levites. The Levites could not minister and had to flee back to the fields in their cities.

One did not have to tithe first to perform an offering. Offerings were independent of tithes. There were different types of offerings given at different times of the year for different reasons. One did not have to tithe first to give a sin offering or a free will offering. Since the tithes were at the end of the harvest, you cannot be seriously suggesting that no one could offer a free will offering or a sin offering until September, right?

 

Well here is the problem. I only know of two who lead in the ways of men. God or satan. If God is not leading then satan is the only one left so if a person teaches the tithe for the NT church then it has to be satan because the NT does not teach the tithe for the church and God only teaches what is for the church.

 

We are all told to give, but to call it a tithe is not biblical and not of the Lord. They should be taught to give as their heart desires with absolutely no amount suggested or fixed. To teach anything else is sin and legalism.

 

Matt. is OT not NT teaching. The new testament does not teach the tithe for the church. Those who do so are in sin and rebellion because of legalism.

 

As a child growing up or in school I was never taught that tithing was a NT teaching. I was taught one could give any percent they were able to, many gave 30 to 50 percent, many who were losing their farms and business gave what they could. I was even taught that it was very important to pay your bills and get them under control then give more. Also was taught your house or your bank account as your storehouse and you give to the works that you feel you are being let by the Holy Spirit, maybe not all through your church.
Maybe it is different down here. All but for one church that I've been a member of the building of new building was the pastors deal and many backed the pastor and staff. You know if you don't back the pastor something is wrong with you.
Of the one's I was the pastor, we built as we went and had the money, I'm not for a church renting money. Sweat equity can cut cost greatly.

 

Take heed to a warning here.
Statements like these can earn you an infraction.
1. To call many on the board who believe in tithing as "in sin and rebellion" is inexcusable. Many of these people are godly people with different views than you.

2. It is not because of legalism. No one here believes in legalism--a works based salvation. Learn what legalism is. Go and study Acts 15.
Legalism is when a person adds to salvation.
Only if you believe that tithing is part of your salvation or necessary to be saved can you call it legalism. This is a false allegation on your part. Learn before you post.

 

I am not adamant on tithing. It is my opinion that it is a good place to start. The Bible does teach that we should give "a portion" of our income. What "portion" do you suggest, and out of what--the net or the gross?

 

You mean I am to be tolerant of you and your views and you are not to be toleratant of my views? Any time you are exposed by scripture of an improper belief you start throwing around your authority. What does that tell you?
You asked me what legalism is and I told you. It is trying to please God by doing things He does not call for and He does not call for the tithe for the church. I stand on all I said. You yourself have said about others certain beliefs that they are legalism. I will be glad to pull them up and post them for you is you like. Tithing is legalism unless you can show me in scripture where the church is told to tithe. If it is legalism, and it is, then it is not of God and the only one left is satan who is leading in the teaching of the tithe for the church.

 

You are acting as if you are unteachable.
Tithing is NOT legalism.

Legalism is adding to salvation.

And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. (Acts 15:1)
--These were the legalists of Paul's day. They taught that circumcision and keeping the law were necessary for salvation--one could not be saved without them.
--The COC teaches similar things. They teach one cannot be saved without being baptized. That is legalism.
--Oneness Pentecostalism teaches that both speaking in tongues and baptism are necessary for salvation. That is legalism.

You have a wrong definition of legalism. When a person has a belief that their church should tithe as a method of giving they are entitled to that belief. It is called soul liberty. It is not legalism. They are entitled to believe as they believe the Bible teaches. They are not forced to believe as you do.

 

Soul Liberty. Now that is a new one. You say legalism is one thing and I agree that trying to get saved by works is legalism but so it trying to please God by doing things that go beyond what he teaches. In this case it is actually going against what he teaches and that makes it not only legalism but sin. There is no tithe and no we do not have the right to teach the tithe as a way to give for the church. That too would be sin. We are told how to give and that alone is all we are allowed to teach or we are adding to scripture.
Your claim to soul liberty is spoken about in scripture.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;

 

And that is all it is. There is no need to add any other definition to the word.

This is not, and never has been a definition of legalism. It is something that you have made up. The Bible does not teach this at all. Don't insert your philosophy into the Bible, and especially into a definition, like legalism, which never had any such meaning. The changing of meanings of theological words is called neo-orthodoxy.

The sin is yours in this case. He is allowed to believe as he wishes. This is a Baptist tenet called soul liberty. You are trying to confine his beliefs to that of yours. If you were Mary of Tudor in England you would have him beheaded because his beliefs are not the same as yours. It is despicable. He is entitled to believe as he believes what the Bible believes without your condemnation. Further such condemnation can result in an infraction. You cannot tell a person what to believe.

That is your opinion. It is not the belief of all on the board, and you cannot force it on others. You can state it as your own, but that doesn't mean that everyone must accept it.

Only according to you, and your interpretation.
The Bible also says: "Let every man be convinced in his own mind."
Many here are not convinced like you are. In fact they are convinced that you are wrong. Would you like it if they started calling you the antichrist because your belief is different?

Perhaps you are the one not enduring sound doctrine. You are not tolerating other's beliefs. Anyone who disagrees with you, you tell them that they are in sin. Is this right? Is it Godly?

 

It is not me who is not being agreed with it is the word of God. If you know of a passage telling the church to tithe then present it and I will recant. Any person who disagrees with what is written is in sin. No exceptions.
If I go around and tell people that after we are saved (not for salvation or to stay saved) we need to continue to do animal sacrifices then that is legalism and sin. It is no different with teaching the tithe.

 

My position doesn't matter. I have stepped out of this debate. There have been plenty of people that have put forth arguments for tithing. If you don't accept any of them, then that is your problem. For you to call them legalistic and sinful is sinful in and of itself. It is against the BB rules, and will earn you an infraction. There are many Godly people who believe in tithing because they believe the Bible teaches it. Read the two threads and you will find some good arguments.

1. It is not legalism. I have explained that to you. If you continue with an off the wall definition of your own to try and defend yourself that is wrong, and you are accusing people of a belief they don't have. It is slander.

2. You have called them sinful. Personal attacks are not tolerated. It is time to take back your remarks and allow people to post their beliefs without being smeared by you.

 

I stand on what I said.

 

I whole-heartedly agree with what you say here. Disagree and then comes the portentous replies.

No where is the church told to tithe.

 

That is, almost word for word, the *CLASSIC* reasoning that I have heard from pastors and teachers, more times that I could count during my 30 years as a christian, to get the people to tithe........without coming right out and saying so.

I call it *stealth* tithing.

Under that new covenant....

Of course, if you are giving in that way, cheerfully and not grudgingly, or out of compulsion, then thats perfectly alright. Continue on. I'm not slamming you at all.