Featured What Do You Base The Tithe On?

2Co 9:7 Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

 

Not sure what translation you're using there, but that isn't even close to what the passage actually says, and "purposed/decided" isn't in reference to the amount but refers instead to the initial decision to give "out of our bounty (v. 5, and I'll explain that).

2 Corinthians 9, NASB
7 Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. ​

"Purposed" here, "decided" in your translation, means "to bring forth from one's stores; to choose for one's self before another;" that is, making an affirmation (in this case, before God) that we will will do as He would expect of us. The Greek is proaireomai and has no reference whatsoever to the actual amount of the gift.

Also, you're attempting to cherry-pick the verse. Let's look at the whole context.

2 Corinthians 9[/I]
5 So I thought it necessary to urge the brethren that they would go on ahead to you and arrange beforehand your previously promised bountiful gift, so that the same would be ready as a bountiful gift and not affected by covetousness.
6 Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.
7 Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
8 And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that always having all sufficiency in everything, you may have an abundance for every good deed;
9 as it is written, "HE SCATTERED ABROAD, HE GAVE TO THE POOR, HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS ENDURES FOREVER."​

The word "bountiful" in v. 5 sets the tone for the whole passage, and in and of itself removes any concept that Paul could be approving anything less than a gift that matches the giver's excess. The Greek for "bountiful" is eulogia from which we get "eulogy" and means to praise, laud, and it specifically, in most biblical uses, refers to praise, laudation or panegyric for Christ Himself.

Not a percentage, not a "tithe" nor certainly not a niggardly amount. The idea here is that the gift is what is left over from the gift-giver's bill-paying from his income, for whatever time period referenced -- it appears to be a week, elsewhere in Paul's writings to the Corinthian church in his letters to them. Give to the glory of God out of your abundance, and that is not a number you decide, but represents an actual number that varies from week to week.

So I would ask you, if, after paying bills from your week's income, do you give everything that's left over? Some weeks, for us, that would be 50% of our income. No, I don't give that much. I probably should, because in reality, it appears that is what Paul is saying. If you have five percent of your income after you meet your obligations, give it. If you have 80%, give it. Are you willing to give on that basis? Because that is what your passage actually says, not "what I decide" it means.

 

I tithe 10% gross. The tithe is before paying any bills.

At the end of the year I tithe any capital gains I have been blessed with during the year.

 

I think its reasonable to say that absolutely the minimum we should give. Chuck Swindoll and his wife prayed very early on in their ministerial career that they would be faithful to give, and as they had greater and greater abundance to give, they would exceed what he refers to as "the biblical minimum." Last reports from his kids that I saw indicated they are giving 90% of their income to their church and their ministry, and living on 10%. How many of us are willing to do that? And I'll be the first to admit, at this stage I am not.

 

I have no problem at all with your statement. I met a doctor from Baltimore years ago who was doing the same as Swindoll. He said that after visiting India he came back a changed man because of the need he saw there. He gradually increased his giving until he was at 90%. God bless all who can do this.

 

Actually, I am reading the Greek. I gave the ESV rendering, because it is accurate.

And no, it is speaking of the amount. You can "explain" all you want, but that is what the text SAYS. I'll take what the text says, over your "explanation" any day.

That is simply not true. You are dead wrong. Not sure where you learned to parse.

The word Proaireomai comes from two Greek words, "pro" which means "in front of" and "aeromai" which refers to a persons preference. This literally means a persons chief preference.

It is directly in regards to the amount of the gift. Kathos refers to an amount. The command here is to give the amount which you desire to give in your heart.

The ESV reflects this, perfectly IMO.

No, I am not.

That is a HORRIBLE translation. The word "bounty" does not appear in the Greek at all. To base the interpretation of the entire text upon it, is the worst sort of hermeneutics.

The word being translated "bountiful" (not "bountiful" at all, really....again, that is a horrific translation. Not even the right form), is the word eulogia, which refers to a commendation or blessing. Al Paul is saying in verse 5, is that he doesn't want to force or extort anyone to give, but rather they should give whatever "blessing" they wish.

That fits in perfectly with verse 7, AND with verse 6, BTW, which is clearly indicative of giving whatever you choose.

The passage actually doesn't say that at all. It says exactly what the text says, which is that we give "whatever we have decided in our hearts."

 

Yeah, I'll buy an "I'm right, you're wrong" argument every time.



How about we ask John Gill, who says of the early part of the passage the NASB renders "Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart ..."?

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/2-corinthians-9-7.html​

Whatever. Anyone who can use Thayer's Bible Dictionary will see that my parsing is absolutely correct. Perhaps you'd like to see for yourself:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/eulogia.html

And your parsing doesn't negate the fact it has nothing to do with the amount, and everything to do with the decision to give in the first place. The context of the 2 Corinthians passage makes that abundantly clear for anyone who wants to see it.

That's a third-tier meaning, not indicated as the appropriate translation by the context. The preferred meaning is "according to" which is related in the NASB's rendering of "just."

Unfortunately, the ESV, though an excellent translation, often relies on a seeking a more conversational translation, even when doing so wrecks the meaning of the passage, as it does here.

I'll ignore this deliberate effort to misrepresent what I said, other than to say exactly that.

And here you misrepresent the clear rendering of the passage, and have latched onto the ESV's choice, because it says what you want it to say.

Not even close. But I'll let others decide for themselves, as you clearly want it to tell you that you may give whatever you want, rather than giving first choosing to give and the, upon making that choice, to give out of your abundance, which is not only what Paul says here, but what he says in other passages in his writings as well.

 

Here is a pretty clear way of saying it?

 

Yeah, because the Hyper Calvinist Primitive Baptist John Gill is a WAY better authority on the Greek, than the group of Greek Scholars who translated the ESV (which is a formal equivalence translation). ...:laugh:

Um, perhaps you need to look up what "parsing" means.

And no, Thayers does not agree with your at all. "Bountiful" is not listed as even an acceptable translation. From the site you give, BTW:

"praise, laudation, panegyric: of Christ or God
fine discourse, polished language
in a bad sense, language artfully adapted to captivate the hearer: fair speaking, fine speeches
an invocation of blessing, benediction
consecration
a (concrete) blessing, benefit"

You are confusing the NAS (New American Standards) word usage, with the meanings given by Thayers.

I own multiple copies of Thayers, and none of them give "bountiful" as an acceptable translation for eulogia...from one of them:

"1) praise, laudation, panegyric: of Christ or God
2) fine discourse, polished language
2a) in a bad sense, language artfully adapted to captivate the hearer: fair speaking, fine speeches
3) an invocation of blessing, benediction
4) consecration
5) a (concrete) blessing, benefit
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from the same as G2127
Citing in TDNT: 2:754, 275
"

Not true. Verse 6 makes it very clear that Paul is saying, "Hey, I am not forcing you to give anything. Give what you want."

You fail to understand the dynamics of language. You don't just randomly pick one of the translations. However, even if you rendered it "Just as" the plain translation of the text, is still "Each one must give as he has decided in his heart"

The ESV is a direct translation, here. Anyone who can read the Greek (I Can) can see that. The NAS uses an almost unheard of translation in verse 5, that completely skews the meaning of the text.

I am not misrepresenting ANYTHING. The word "bounty" is not in this text, anywhere. You said...

"The word "bountiful" in v. 5 sets the tone for the whole passage..."

Even though the Greek word for "bountiful" is not in the text AT ALL. The word that the NAS wrongly renders "bountiful" means "praise" or "blessing."

No, I am using the ESV rendering, because it is the plain meaning of the text itself, with no interpretation.

Your accusation that it "says what I want it to say" is ridiculous. I am a pastor. If their is no giving, I don't eat. If anything, I would be biased TOWARD the meaning you are forcing on the text.

I have no dog in this hunt, other than to be true to the text, which clearly teaches giving whatever you wish.

Yes, they can choose for themselves. Choose what the text actually SAYS, or choose what you are forcing on the text. It says clearly to "give as he has decided in his heart." Thats what the text SAYS.

 

The laugh is that you think Calvinistic, or Arminian, or even Bozo-the-Clownian thought has anything to do with the proper translation of the passage. As I said, you're obviously not going to reasonably discuss the question, but take a selfish view that suits your preconceived notions, while also taking part in thinly veiled personal attacks questioning scholarship, lexical knowledge and hermeneutical experience that have no place in such exchanges of views. Feel free to engage in such third-grade snippishness if you wish. I'll pass, and as stated earlier, let the arguments stand on their own.

 

Yeah, because theological positions don't influence ones interpretation...oh, wait! That is exactly what you accuse ME of, Mr. Inconsistent.

Nope. Because "reasonableness" to you, apparently means "Don't call me on my inconsistent hermeneutics and lack of understanding of the Greek text."

Sorry, but what the text actually says, matters.:tonofbricks:

Yeah, cause I like being poor. Thats right. I am selfish. Instead of making up stuff, and inventing some New Testament "giving" requirement, I just chug along on Ramen noodles and hot dogs.

How selfish of me!

You certainly don't live up to your Avatar, my friend. You are INFECTED with political correctness and hypersensitivity.

Lexical Knowledge, Scholarship, and heremeutical experience ABSOLUTELY have part in a discussion such as this. It is foolish to say otherwise.

If you consider calling someone out on bad hermeneutics, and inventing terms from nothing "childish", then I suppose you should pass. You are not suited to discussion.

Your arguments, by the way, are not standing at all....:tonofbricks:

 

Just to clarify for you, I don't say you base your misinterpretation on bad theology. I say you misinterpret the passage based on your own selfish desire for it to give you permission to "decide" what you will give, rather than giving as directed. Not necessarily a "tithe" but "out of your abundance," which is what I am saying the passage directs, and what anyone can see if they look at the matter closely. And again you engage in personal snipes through the rest of the post. Done with you. God bless.

 

There are no personal snipes in any of my posts. You are just hypersensitive, apparently.

And no, what is plain is what the text actually says, if you just read it. We give what we want.

That is just so plain.

2Co 9:7 Each one must give as he has decided in his heart

 

I think I could be wrong.

I am and have been all day today rethinking my position and am almost ready to post a retraction.

My argument has been thus:

The tithe predated the law, was part of the law and was affirmed by Christ.

Those three pillars are beginning to look shaky as I ponder the matter more closely.

The fact that Abraham DID it, doesn't mean that anybody else did it or that anybody else should do it.

The tithe indeed was designed to support temple worship which has been abolished.

Jesus affirmed that it ought to be done but he made that affirmation while the Temple still stood and the ceremonial system was still in full force.

The only thing that I think I have argued that stands firm is this: the New Testament never requires less of God's people. Remember the "But I say unto you..." passages of Christ in the Sermon on the Mount.

But this is not a point in contention between HD and me. He agrees that ALL OF IT BELONGS TO GOD.

The only thing I would say at this point is that a NT saint who gives less to a greater work than an Old Testament saint gave to a lesser work ought to examine his own heart- for where his treasure is there will his heart be also.




Thanks for the rigorous debate!!!!


..........

 

Amen to that!

Let me add: provided the person is ABLE to give. There are plenty of retirees, disabled, etc., who live on an extremely small income, who may not be able to give ten percent. There is a big difference between a farmer, giving ten percent of his grain, and a grandmother living in a rent controlled apartment, with barely enough to get by, trying to give the same of her income.

Such a person might struggle to give 5 percent. But if it is out of love for the Lord, and is sacrificial, it is definitely acceptable and pleasing to the Lord.

 

There is no Scripture standard of tithing for the Church.

 

My deceased pastor father in law mistakenly preached laymen should tithe on total gross income. After he retired and did secular work, I ask him on what he tithed on. He said he only tithed on what his paycheck since he had no control over the other money. It is interesting how pastors and laymen tend to differ on what the tithe should be based on. But since Christians are not required to tithe, it really should not be an issue.

 

Id do it on performance.

 

None of the above. I don't follow the tithing system which was under the law. I follow the NT system and give as it states in 2 Cor. 9:6-7.