tithes

Sam
You missed the context of 1 Cor 16:2 in verse 1. Paul is on a ship heading for Judea to feed the famine strickened church. He is collecting food supplies. If this text is speaking about tithing (which it is not), then it is saying that we should tithe to the poor which is part of the 2nd and 3rd OT tithes. Therdfore the text says notihing about church support.
................................
Why would 100% of the tithes be brought to the Temple when 98% of the Levites adn priests it is to feed were not there most of the time? Please read the following from my book and tell me where I am wrong.
...........................
7 Bible Reasons to Rethink the Tithe Text of Malachi 3:10 [as 2%, not 100%]

1. The first tithe (of three) was intended to replace property inheritance and to feed the Aaronic priests and their Levite servants. The Levite servants to the priests received the whole tithe and the Aaronic priests received one tenth of the whole tithe, plus many other offerings (Numbers 18; Deu 12:12; 14:27-29; 18:1-2; Josh 13:14, 33; 14:3; 18:7; Ezek 44:28)

2. The vast majority of the priests and Levites lived in their Levitical cities around Jerusalem. Jerusalem was not a Levitical city. (Joshua 20, 21; Numbers 35; First Chronicles 6:51-81; Second Chronicles 31:15-19; Nehemiah 10:37; 11:29; 13:10.) Naturally, most of the tithe was sent to where most of the Aaronic priests and their Levite servants lived with their families.

3. There were far too many priests and Levites than needed to serve in the Temple. Therefore, both the Aaronic priests and Levite servants were divided into twenty four (24) courses for one week terms of service in the Temple -- roughly two weeks per year, plus special holy days. Thus, only four to six percent (4-6%) of the families who required the tithe as food were ministering at the Temple at any one time. (1st Chronicles 28:13, 21; 2nd Chronicles 8:14; 23:8; 31:2, 15-19; 35:4, 5, 10; Neh. 11:30; 12:24).

4. Among this 4-6% of the families of priests and Levites ministering at the Temple, only male priests over thirty yeas of age and male Levites over the age of twenty went to the temple.
Therefore, even if these composed half of the family, the total percentage of priests and Levites at the Temple at any given time period would not exceed 2-3% of the total. (1st Chronicles 23:3; 2nd Chron. 31:15-19).

5. Nehemiah 10: 35-39 and 2nd Chronicles 31:15-19 are very clear that the tithe went to the Levitical cities and was distributed to the 96-97% of the priests and Levites living in those cities as their food supply.

6. Therefore, common sense teaches us that the “portions” “as each day required” found in Nehemiah 12:44 and 47 and 2nd Chronicles 31:14 was only this 2-3% of the total tithe required to feed the 2-3% of the priests and Levites taking their turn ministering for one week. It is equally clear that the remainder of the tithe was given by “portion” to the families of the priests and Levites --not at the Temple-- but in their
Levitical cities, per 2nd Chronicles 31:15-19.

7. Conclusion: Unless the above biblical presentation can be proven to be wrong, then there is a fundamental error in the usual interpretation of Malachi 3:10. For much greater detail on the level of a Ph.D. dissertation, please read my book for FREE at home.earthlink.net/~russkellyphd
Neh 10:35 firstfruits of land to temple storehouse for priests

Neh. 10:36 firstfruits of herds to temple storehouse for priests
Neh. 10:37a firstfruits of bread to temple storehouse for priests
Neh. 10 37b WHOLE TITHE to LEVITICAL CITIES for LEVITES
Neh 10:38 1/10th of tithe to temple storehouse for priests

2 Chron 31:14-19 most of both tithes stayed in the cities

Neh. 12:44, 47 those ministering had their portion of their tithe

Gleaned from : www.shouldthechurchteachtithing.com

[ February 22, 2004, 07:26 PM: Message edited by: Russ Kelly ]

 

Dr. Russ
OVERLOAD, OVERLOAD, too much information.
I did not relize I was dealing with someone who had research the subject as much as you had !!

Back to basics, how do you propose that the physical church meet it's financial needs ?

I would assume by your comments, website and book that titheing by definition can not be a demand of the church body, but does it not serve as a appropriate guide to the individual Christian to acknowledge God's blessings. Would it not be in-line with the spirit of scriptual intent if not with the letter of intent ? (does that make sense ?) I do not take my stand on titheing from a legalist point of view but as a guide that is provided in the scriptures. I think Paul said give willingly so it would be a matter of the heart.

 

IMO the Scripture(s) which puts legalism to death is

Romans 1:17...The just shall live by faith.
Galatians 3:11 ... The just shall live by faith.
Hebrews 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith...

And

Romans 14:3 ... for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

It should be our faith which determines our giving not the amount or the percentage.

Even if we give 100 percent, without faith it is sin.

HankD

 

Sam
I appreciate your honest sincerity. I have been ostracised from the last three Baptist churches I have joined because of my views, even though I am am a proficient soul-winner.
The typical Baptist line is "tithing is a good place to start" and "NT believers should not set a lower standard that the OT."
(1) While both of these lines sound good, they are simply not biblical.
(2) They ASSUME that everybody in the OT qualified as tithe-payers and paid tithes --which I previously showed is wrong.
(3) Freewill-offerings built teh original tabernacle and freewill-offerings built Solomon's temple. In fact, the tithe did not even exist in the 40 year wilderness because they had not yet entered Canaan.
(4) We stand in the pulpitd adn boldly proclaim that everything in the NTY is solely "by grace through faith alone." Yet we sneak back into the OT to finance our churches and missions. This is a shame.
(6) This not necessary. The gospel spread rampantly with the freewill contributions of women, children, slaves and soldiers who did dnotd tithe. May I suggest SChaff's History of the Christian Church, Volume One. Asceticism, not tithing, was the lifestyle chosen by most church leaders.
(7) I am an old school dispensationalist. SChools llike Wheaton, Moody, Dallas, and John MacArthur

 

Sam
I appreciate your honest sincerity. I have been ostracised from the last three Baptist churches I have joined because of my views, even though I am am a proficient soul-winner.
The typical Baptist line is "tithing is a good place to start" and "NT believers should not set a lower standard that the OT."
(1) While both of these lines sound good, they are simply not biblical.
(2) They ASSUME that everybody in the OT qualified as tithe-payers and paid tithes --which I previously showed is wrong.
(3) Freewill-offerings built teh original tabernacle and freewill-offerings built Solomon's temple. In fact, the tithe did not even exist in the 40 year wilderness because they had not yet entered Canaan.
(4) We stand in the pulpitd adn boldly proclaim that everything in the NTY is solely "by grace through faith alone." Yet we sneak back into the OT to finance our churches and missions. This is a shame.
(6) This not necessary. The gospel spread rampantly with the freewill contributions of women, children, slaves and soldiers who did dnotd tithe. May I suggest SChaff's History of the Christian Church, Volume One. Asceticism, not tithing, was the lifestyle chosen by most church leaders.
(7) I am an old school dispensationalist. Schools like Wheaton, Moody, Dallas, and John MacArthur FLOURISH without teaching tithing. to me, at least, that PROVES that it is not necessar to teach tithing to finance a NT church.
(8) 2 Cor 8:12-14 and 2 Cor 9:7 are thest NT guidelines. "12 For if the readiness is present, it is acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what he does not have. 13 For this is not for the ease of others and for your affliction, but by way of equality -- 14 at this present time your abundance being a supply for their need, so that their abundance also may become a supply for your need, that there may be equality; NASU

I am moving this to another debate forum on Malachi 3:10. Follow me there.

Herc -- Please do not use name-caling since it is against the BaptistBoard.com policy.

 

Russ
I'll see you on new site. I agree that anything in the SBC that goes against old teachings is not well received even if it should be re-examied.