You are not logged in.
Bill said:
Also I assure you that I did in fact examine the mainstream denominations and movements and found that, in my opinion, they were seriously lacking in doctrine and practice even more so than the weaknesses of the SDA movement.
I am also frustrated with some of the dogma taught in the churches I have attended. I am displeased with the hierarchies for promoting ideas that are not in any way Biblical. I have resolved myself to the fact that we are all humans and I will never find a church that has the same understanding that I have developed over the years.
I really dont understand how you can say that other churches are more lacking than the SDA Church, but I will accept your thoughts. As for me, the SDA church is locked in to the writings of Ellen White and without dealing with her will never advance their teachings and I can not accept that. There is hope for churches that teach only what they have gleaned from scripture. There are those who change as we have witnessed in the Armstrong group.
Offline
Tom Norris, I have been waiting patiently for you to answer the following post. After all tithing is your topic and you are probably the the most critical of the practice yet you will not take a stand on the validity of the prophet who endorsed it.
Has the cat got your tongue.
Who is correct Tom or Ellen?
Tom, You are telling the flock that it is not a requirement to tithe, yet the prophet is telling the flock that if they don't they will be cursed. The Lord showed her all about tithing and how it is to be used. Who are you to debunk the tithe that is caring for the needs of all those who receive the benefits from the sacred system? Who is correct, Tom or Ellen?
Why are you going against the will of the prophet when she so adamant in her statements below??
"The Lord will not hold guiltless those who are deficient in doing the work that he requires at their hands,--in seeing that the church is kept wholesome and healthy spiritually, and doing all their duty; in allowing no neglect which will bring the threatened curse upon his people. A curse is pronounced upon all who withhold the tithe from God." {PH166 20.3}
The command to pay tithe is so plain that there is no semblance of excuse for disregarding it. He who neglects to give instruction on this point, leaves undone a most important part of his work. {CS 105.1}
The Lord's messengers should see that His requirements are faithfully discharged by the members of the churches. God says that there should be meat in His house, and if the money in the treasury is tampered with, if it is regarded as right for individuals to make what use they please of the tithe, the Lord cannot bless. He cannot sustain those who think that they can do as they please with that which is His.--R. & H. Supplement, Dec. 1, 1896. {CS 106.2}
Offline
William Diehl said: This is the real sin of the way tithing is taught in the SDA church. It is taught that not to pay tithe is to rob God. Malachi 3 is used as a proof text to prove that New Testament Christians are still under the tithing law; which was in force during the theocracy of Israel.
It's a good thing that Paul specifically tells us that circumcision is not mandatory for Christians or else if the majority of SDA leadership had their way all the male baptismal candidates would have to endure this rite also!!
Tom said: The real sin is that the SDA’s have become so arrogant, as to think that whatever they say--is truth. They are misreading the Bible--on purpose, even as they refuse to be corrected by anyone about anything.
So the real underlying problem is that the Adventists today have become Laodicean liars and hypocrites. They are not trying to better understand the Gospel Story or church history. They like their present collection of myths and fabrications, and tithe is just one of their many false doctrines that underscores their wretched and blind condition.
Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,
Thus their real sin is their stubborn, arrogant, blindness, which they refuse to admit. This bad Laodicean attitude is preventing them from pursuing truth and from repenting and embracing Gospel Reform.
John 9:39 And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.”
John 9:40 Those of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?”
John 9:41 Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.
The SDA’s claim to see better than all others, even as they refuse to admit or confess to any errors. Although their false doctrines are numerous and obvious, and millions of their own members have left the church in disgust, they still refuse to admit or address the issues, much less confess and repent.
But stonewalling is not salvific, nor can the blind instruct others how to see. Unless the SDA’s get humble and confess their many false doctrines and errors, they are just as doomed as were the 1st century Pharisees.
Bill D said: Don, using the words of our Lord to the Pharisees which commends their obedience to this tithing law does not mean that Christ was therefore setting down the same norm for the New Testament community.
Tom said: Bill, this is obviously correct. But why would an SDA Pastor, like Don, not know this simple fact?
Answer: Because those that are paid by tithe do not want to be honest with this issue for obvious reasons. So they double-talk, and pretend that they can’t understand, even as they take absurd positions and try to pretend that false doctrine is true.
Bill D said: None of the apostles urged believers to tithe and they certainly did not say that to neglect to tithe was akin to robbing God. Tithing was a law for the community of Israel because the entire civil legal system and its administration of civil and religious law was supported by the tithe of the community.
Tom said: Correct. The great claims made for tithe by the SDA’s were never made by the apostles. Nor did the apostles ever tell anyone that they were stealing from God by not paying tithe. The SDA’s are great blasphemers and deceivers, and there is no excuse for what they have done. Tithe is not a NC doctrine any more than the Sunday lord’s Day, and it is a sin to try and make it so.
Bill D. said: The sin of the SDA leadership is that they place needless guilt upon those members who do not tithe.
Tom said: The sin of the SDA leaders is that they have long ago rejected the Gospel and the teachings of the NT. This great error, which is accompanied by a false hermeneutic and a RC organizational structure, has led to legions of false doctrines, corruption, and failed polices that have only gotten worse over time. The SDA church is very cultic and out of control.
The SDA leaders no longer understand the Bible, nor do they want to try. They think they have all the truth they need, which of course is the great sin of Laodicea. This is also why they don’t want to think about repentance or reform, --they don’t think they are wrong, even though they now embrace the confusion of pluralism.
Tithing, and the guilt trip that is associated with it, is the result of the rejection of the twin pillars in the 1st Angels Message, which are the Protestant Gospel and the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment. Until the SDA’s repent of their false gospel of works, that is connected to a false, Pre- Advent Judgment, they will remain confused, divided, and self-destructing for all to see.
There is no excuse for their legion of false doctrines, or for their incompetent blindness, and tithe is but one of their many errors.
Bill D. said: It is neither a sin to tithe, nor a sin not to tithe.
Tom said: Stop the double-talk. It is a great sin to tithe in the church. In fact, it is blasphemy for anyone to say that God demands our tithe, or that it is a sin to rob God by not paying tithes. Who can speak such lies in the name of God and not be guilty of great sin?
How can such deception, and the taking of Gods name in vain, not be sin? How can the repudiation of the apostles teaching about church finance, not be sin? How can false doctrine in the church not be wrong and sinful?
Why hesitate to call sin by its right name? Tithing in the church is a great sin that underscores an even greater sin; that of distorting the Gospel, and embracing a fraud.
Bill said: God loves a cheerful giver, but God is NOT making demands like tithing upon us which if not fulfilled will place our salvation or church membership in jeopardy.
Tom said: God does not want anyone in the church to pay tithe to any organization. He has made it clear, through his apostles, that sharing, and free will giving is the proper way to finance the Gospel. Any that stand up and say otherwise, like the SDA’s, are guilty of fighting against God and the Gospel. They must be cursed as Paul commands in Galatians 1. They have become like the Judaizers, and enemies of Paul.
Bill D. said: Just a year ago the local SDA pastor in north San Diego county would not baptize my wife because she refused to yield to his teaching that tithing was a condition of membership into the SDA church.
Tom said: Good for her! At this point in church history, I would never want to be baptized into the SDA cult. That makes no sense for anyone that understands the Gospel.
There are so many false doctrines in the church; I don’t understand why anyone today would want to join any group with so much cultic error, corruption, and schism.
Bill D. said: She also refused to accept the date of 1844 as the beginning of the High Priestly ministry of our Lord in the most holy place and also the writings and visions of E.G. White as being a continuing authority for SDA Christians.
Tom said: Good for her again!
Bill D. said: So he stopped the Bible studies with her and we never heard from him again regarding her baptism.
Tom said: I don’t understand how anyone educated about the Gospel can join the SDA church today. Only those with a very limited knowledge of the Bible and church history can buy into their silly story, which came out of the White Estate and, which can no longer be defended.
But as you can see, the Pastors are going to stick to their fraud of TA no matter what. Why? Because thy get paid good money to promote the errors of Adventism. This is their job, and unless the new member is going to play by their rules, then what is the point for the hired hand? The Pastors are in this for the money; they are not going to waste their time on those who will never sign up and embrace tithe paying as their duty.
The SDA’s want people who will do what they are told, pay as they are told, and not ask questions.
Too bad that such people are getting harder to find…
Elaine Nelson said: Bill, it can't be said to often: Jesus was teaching only to Jews. As a good Jew he endorsed all the Jewish laws. He didn't come to establish a new religion.
Tom said: Three points Elaine…
First: the teachings of Jesus are the foundation of the church, even as he is the head of the church. So his teachings are for both Jew and Gentile, for all time and eternity. Thus his teachings were not only for the Jews.
Second, Jesus did not “endorse all the Jewish laws,” rather he refuted a number of them, including their view of the Sabbath, which he dramatically re- interpreted to the horror of the Jews.
Third: Jesus came to establish the Church, which would become the New Israel. Thus he did come to earth with the specific task of establishing a new kind of religion; the Church. Mission accomplished. Jesus established the Church, even as he cursed Judaism and predicted its death. The church was no accident, but the plan of God.
Elaine said: Only when pagans began joining the new movement that began at Pentecost, did it begin an integrated movement, no longer limited to Jewish followers. As the gentile believers became a larger part of this new church, the problem of the Jews wanting to force the gentiles to first become Jews by practicing circumcision and all their practices.
Tom said: Correct. This history also explains why Sunday is a myth in the early church. The apostolic church was Jewish, and the only Lord’s Day they knew, was the Sabbath of Jesus, their Lord.
Elaine said: Eventually, the new church became a gentile church. This occurred ONLY because they were not forced to submit to circumcision and the dietary laws and rituals. After the Temple was destroyed, there is no record of Jewish Christians and by the first century, it was a gentile Christian church.
Tom said: A number of books, like Matthew and Revelation were written late in the first century, after 70 AD. So it is not true that there were no works made by the Jewish apostles after 70 AD. Some of the NT was written after that date.
Elaine said: There was never any instruction to the gentiles to begin to practice tithing, Sabbath, or Kosher.
Tom said: While there was NEVER any instruction about tithing, there was about eating Kosher and the Sabbath.
The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 speaks about being Kosher, even as Hebrews contains an explicit command about the Gospel Sabbath. Moreover, the NT shows Paul observing the Gospel Sabbath on a number of occasions.
Acts 15:19 “Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles,
Acts 15:20 but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.
Acts 16:13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to a riverside, where we were supposing that there would be a place of prayer; and we sat down and began speaking to the women who had assembled.
Heb. 4:9 So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.
Elaine said: Adventists have attempted to re-introduce many Jewish laws but there is nothing in the entire NT to which they can refer showing that this should be done. Only by going back to the Torah, do they find these Jewish laws to mandate them for Adventists.
Tom said: This is not fair because both the OC and NC are Jewish. Moreover, it was the church fathers that correctly separated the Moral law from the Ceremonial. Thus the Jewish and Gentile church embraced the Moral law from the beginning. It was Marcion that repudiated everything associated with the OC.
So the SDA’s were correct to want to reform the error of the church fathers where they declared that the Sabbath was part of the ceremonial laws, so that it could be changed to Sunday and then become part of the Moral law. This was a great error that took place long before the SDA’s ever existed.
The SDA’s do not correctly understand the difference between the Two Covenants. Few people do. This was their problem in 1888, and it is still their problem today.
Don Sands said: The New Testament does not present a Church Manual. It tells stories and presents letters from church leaders to the faithful.
Tom said: The NT IS the church manual for the church. The present SDA version needs to go in the trash. It is not worth the paper it is printed on.
Don said: It remains the task of the church to interpret the canonical assertions for its own life.
Tom said: The task of the church is to preach the Gospel. If it can’t do that correctly, nothing else matters, nor is there any reason for the church to exist.
The organized church has made many errors about doctrine, even as the last church has become the worst in all history. No organized religion today can be trusted to understand the Bible correctly, much less the divided and dishonest SDA’s.
While I agree that the Adventists wanted to instruct all others about the Gospel, they have failed for all to see. They can’t even figure out what is truth and what is myth, which is why they embrace Pluralism. They no longer seek or value truth.
This is why there must be protest, debate, and Reform within the Advent Movement. The status quo is neither sustainable nor functional. It is causing more harm than good. Thus, it is time to stop all this incompetency and self-delusion, honestly confronting the issues and correcting the problems.
Besides, the real definition of the church is individuals. Not groups. Each individual is part of the church, and the true definition of the church. No organization can ever change this true definition. So the real church is the members, not the leaders or their Temples, or some governing body of Laodiceans. People are the church, and the leaders are supposed to serve the people, protect and care for them, making sure they have both Eternal Life and their basic needs met.
Don said: First Corinthians 9 certainly links the Old Testament practice of supporting the priesthood to the support of the Gospel Worker in the New Testament. To refuse to support a bonafide Gospel Worker can still be called robbery of God, IMO.
Tom said: First of all, your “opinion” does not matter, so spare us. And neither does mine. Rather, it is the teachings and opinions of the apostles that determine all doctrine. If you cannot support your practice of tithe by the proper use of NT, then your “opinion” is irrelevant.
Second, forget this talk that Paul has “linked” OC Tithing to the Gospel because of his reference to in Cor 9. While Paul is making some comparisons between the Two Covenants in this passage, he is not promoting or embracing a system of tithing in the church. No NT scholar will ever take such a position, and once again we see the cultic SDA’s making things up and by the use a false, proof text method.
Third, Paul is not advocating tithe in this passage, and it is very dishonest for any SDA Pastor to try and say otherwise. The NT shows how the church was financed in Acts. They used a voluntary method of sharing, as well as a congregational organizational system. They did not practice tithing, nor did the apostles own the local churches or control or pay the local Pastors, much less through a hierarchy that censors the members and gives them no rights.
If the apostolic church did not tithe, and they did not, then the SDA’s will have to confess their great error and repent.
So when are the leaders going to admit the obvious?
When are the SDA pastors and teachers going to stop defending their many errors and false doctrines? There is no defense for tithe in the church. It has no more credibility than does the Sunday Lord’s Day, which all SDA’s freely admit is a theological fraud. So too is tithe in the church.
False doctrine is false doctrine. The apostles have the first and last word when it comes to all such debate. It is clear that they do not support tithe in the church, nor did anyone in Heaven say otherwise.
It is a great and arrogant sin to fight against the apostles and ignore their Word or example. It is also blasphemy to speak lies in the name of God.
So Don, I ask again, when are you going to admit that tithe is not a valid doctrine for the church? It is not God’s will for any Christian to pay tithe to anyone, much less to the fictional SDA “storehouse.”
Don said: However, it is ill-advised for the organized church to make a big deal out of money and offerings. Jesus did not consider Caesar's pennies to be essential to His ministry.
Tom said: It is ill advised for any Adventist to pretend that tithing is a NT doctrine. It is only a matter of time before the Adventist Community comes to know that their leaders are both incompetent and dishonest with the Word. Then what will you say? That you had permission to lie in the name of God for the good of the church?
Woe to the SDA leaders if they do not confess and reform…
William Diehl said: When I was at Andrews University there were SDA ministers and conference workers who were fired because they refused to allow the conference paymaster to withhold from their paychecks.
Tom said: This is the way it is in the SDA church. All church workers, including all ministers, must embrace, promote, and defend tithe. Thus a major part of their job description is based on false doctrine, dishonesty, and greedy error.
Bill said: Also, in practice, tithing is regularly taught by the ministers and bible instructors as being a scripturally mandated practice for members and candidates for membership. Even if they may or may not require tithing as a condition of membership they still teach that to NOT tithe is a sin and is robbing God. Thus not to tithe is akin to breaking one of the Ten Commandments, namely, Thou shalt no steal.
Tom said: Correct. Which means that the SDA’s are great liars and deceivers.
The Adventists blaspheme God every Sabbath as they stand up in church and claim that God requires their tithe. God has no such requirement or doctrine in the church, which is why the SDA’s need to repent and reform before the Almighty gets tired of their wicked and stupid rebellion.
This SDA tithe doctrine is a great scam, in the name of God, to get money and power. Thus the name of God is blasphemed while their religious leaders ROB the people. Tithe is robbery against the local church. It is a great sin.
Bill said: This is a terrible misuse of guilt motivation; which is practiced denominationally world-wide. It is any wonder that thousands of good Christian people who are willing to change from Sunday-keepers to Sabbath-keepers turn away from the SDA church because of insistence by the denomination that they embrace not only tithing, but E.G. White as a continuing authority, foot washing as a literal injunction for the believer, 1844 as a date for the entrance of Christ into the most holy place, and no jewelry wearing for women.
Tom said: Today, the SDA church is a corrupt, corporate cult. They teach far more error than truth. Their Pioneers do not support much of anything they say or do, and neither do the apostles or reformers. Shame on the SDA’s.
Bill said: Even when we started to fellowship at our present church, the head elder offered to buy me a suite and tie for me to wear to church. My wife on her first visit was openly, albeit indirectly, criticized in the Sabbath School class for having earing studs in her ears.
Tom said: Like I said, they are a cult. They have no idea what they are doing. But yet they think they have all the answers…
Bill said: So, I am able to overlook these cultic practices and still fellowship in the SDA church because I truly believe that the Lord raised up this movement to finish the Protestant Reformation.
Tom said: At some point there is only so much rebellion, stupidity, and error that can be tolerated. At some point a line in the sand must be drawn, and a REFORMATION must take place within Adventism. Glacier View drew that line in the sand for me, and I will never support the SDA’s until they repent for Glacier View and return to the original Three Angels Messages.
While I also agree that Adventism has a noble and worthwhile mission, who says that the General Conference has to be the entity that goes forward to develop and proclaim the Loud Cry of the 4th Angels Message?
It would appear they want nothing to do with the Gospel or the real version of the Three Angels Messages, nor do they have any desire or motivation to tell the truth about Ellen White or remove error.
So who cares about this corrupt and self-deluded group? Truth moves on…and so too the Advent Movement. The SDA’s are fast becoming irrelevant and useless. Which is why it is time for a paradigm shift within Adventism. It is time for a New Covenant style denomination to replace the failed, 3rd Angels Message of the SDA’s.
It is time for the 4th Angels Message. The 3rd has terminated in chaos and schism for all to see.
Bill said: But just as Israel was dominated by Pharisees and Sadducees in Christ's day, so the SDA movement has a work of reformation to accomplish in its day. I would like to encourage some who participate in this forum to read Geoffrey Paxtons book on the SDA movement;The Shaking of Adventism;
Tom said: Bill, you seem to be living in the past. I met Paxton 30 years ago, and it is time to see his vision move forward in a meaningful way.
Adventists need a contemporary template for Reform. I suggest that you try and understand the 12- Point Reform Agenda. It is the correct path to genuine reform.
Bob Sands said: Trying to say tithing is a fraud, is so self-defeating. Because of the 10% contribution, churches are more successful materially and possibly spiritually than those that don't suggest it to their constituents.
Tom said: True Doctrine is not based upon how much money is collected. Only if the apostles teach tithe in the church can this practice ever become legitimatized. They did not teach tithe and this is the end of the matter for all those that bow to the authority of the apostles.
There can be no debate about tithe as the record is clear that the church did not practice it.
Bob said: I asked my accountant what the average secular/religious person contributes on average to charity/church. His answer, 3%. If we all contributed 3% to our favorite charity, they would be very healthy, bump it to 10% think of the possibilities in an economy like ours.
Tom said: This is not how to determine doctrine.
Elaine Nelson said: Tithes, as well as offerings, should ALWAYS be voluntary. See 2 Cor. 8:12-15:
Tom said: There is no such doctrine as tithe in the church. So it is a false, phantom, and delusional doctrine whether it is “voluntary” or not.
Elaine said: Denominational employees are often required to tithe as a condition of employment; like union dues--yet union membership has frequently been warned against.
Tom said: To pay tithe is to join the cultic union of the SDA’s. Which creates two different classes within the church. Thus it creates division in the church, which is sin.
Bob Sands said: Elaine, tithing is a personal matter.
Tom said: Since when is false doctrine a “personal matter”?
First, there is no such doctrine as tithe in the church.
Second, no one is free to practice false doctrine in the church regardless of his or her personal opinions to the contrary.
Third, “giving” is a personal matter. Tithe in the church is a public and private fraud.
Bob said: You don't want the control of the church, don't work for them.
Tom said: The way the SDA’s organize and control the church membership is not Protestant nor valid. The Gospel is not about controlling the church, much less empowering a special group to become all-powerful and take over everything. This is how the RCC works.
Is tithe an approved method to finance the Gospel? Answer: No. Tithe was never practiced or promoted in the apostolic church. Period!
Neither Peter, Paul, nor James ever paid tithe, or received tithe from others. Those, like the SDA’s, that claim tithing is a valid NT doctrine, have been caught promoting false doctrine of the most blasphemous sort. There can be no OC Tithing in the NC church. Those that embrace such confusion should be marginalized, not supported.
Bob Shields said: First of all it is not the pastor's or the church board's business whether or not the membership is paying the tithe tax. No one should know accept the treasurer.
Tom said: While you may think there is an invasion of privacy here, there is none. Why? Because the SDA leaders own everything and run everything in the church, and thus all must play by their rules or leave. So they have the right to do most anything on their property and with their employees and to those that are foolish enough to join them. Remember Glacier View?
If you don’t pay tithe, you cannot teach SS or have any position in the church. Period. Thus the Pastor has to keep track of those that pay and those that don’t. Those that pay tithe can help run the church and serve on the board, etc. Those that don’t are not allowed any management role in the church. They are second-class members that will stay that way until they learn how to pay tithe and move up the SDA ladder.
No one should ever allow this false system of tithe to control them or take their money. It is against the Gospel and the NT.
Bob said: My daughter's job was threatened because she chose to take part of her tithe and give it to the poor she knew needed help. The school board found, somehow from the treasurer, she was not paying a full 10% to the church.
Tom said: This is how the SDA’s operate. When it comes to tithe, they take it very seriously. The fact that it is a total fraud is beside the point. They pretend it is true and take it very seriously, as if they were OC Jews living in the 1st century, and the SDA church is now the Jewish Temple. It is absurd.
Tithe & Ellen White:
Bob Shields quoted Ellen White: "The tithe, unlike freewill offerings, is not controlled by the discretion of the one who gives" {5BIO 391.7}
"The portion that God has reserved for Himself is not to be diverted to any other purpose than that which He has specified. Let none feel at liberty to retain their tithe, to use according to their own judgment. They are not to use it for themselves in an emergency, nor to apply it as they see fit, even in what they may regard as the Lord's work."--9T, 247. {5BIO 391.8}
Tom said: It is necessary to know the dates of these statements, because Ellen White changed her view of tithing over time. Thus it is necessary to know not only the dates of these statements, but also the back-story, which has been suppressed by the White Estate.
Bob said: That is good for the flock, but as for the prophet, she was "shown" something else was OK for her.
Tom said: The fact that Ellen White was “shown” that she could ignore how the SDA practiced tithe speaks volumes to us today. The fact that the Spirit encouraged her to disregard Canright’s tithe doctrine and move away from it means that there was something WRONG.
Ellen White’s re-actions about tithe at the end of her life are a signal to the church that there is error in this doctrine. This is the meaning of her tithe rebellion against the leaders that they did not want the people to understand. But it has been discovered and now there are more problems for the dishonest leaders.
Bob quoted Ellen White: "The Lord has shown me that the experience which your father and I have passed through in poverty and deprivation, in the early days of our work, has given to me a keen appreciation and sympathy for others who are passing through similar experiences of want and suffering. And where I see workers in this cause that have been true and loyal to the work, who are left to suffer, it is my duty to speak in their behalf."
"If this does not move the brethren to help them, then I must help them, even if I am obliged to use a portion of my tithe in doing so." {5BIO 393.2}
Tom said: What do you think would happen today if any Pastor declared that they were going to send their tithe directly to this or that church project, bypassing the Conference? They would be terminated right away. But yet, this is what Ellen White did for years. And she was not sorry in the least, even though the leaders were furious at her.
This is the real Ellen White. She was a rebel with a cause. No wonder the leaders decided to hide so much or her material and pretend that she was on their side. After 1888, Ellen White went to war against the hierarchy, but the leaders covered it all up after she died so they could use Ellen White to dishonestly control the church.
I know the real Ellen White. She condemns the White Estate and the GC for a long list of error and sins. She supports Adventist Reform, including cleaning up the dishonest and incompetent White Estate.
Bob asked: Tom, You are telling the flock that it is not a requirement to tithe, yet the prophet is telling the flock that if they don't they will be cursed.
Tom said: As usual, when it comes to Ellen White, nothing is what is seems. Just as few today knew that she drank wine as medicine, few also know how she really viewed tithe.
Bob said: The Lord showed her all about tithing and how it is to be used. Who are you to debunk the tithe that is caring for the needs of all those who receive the benefits from the sacred system? Who is correct, Tom or Ellen?
First off, the SDA’s invented another version of tithing before Canright came up with the doctrine that is now in use. Ellen White was not the one that came up with any of this, so it is not correct to say, “The Lord showed her all about tithing…” Ellen White was not the author of tithe in the SDA church. In fact, she has done much to weaken this doctrine.
Second, Canright was hardly a trained theologian, much less someone who understands the Gospel clearly. He is the author of the SDA tithe doctrine, not Ellen White. Within a decade of his twisted doctrine, he would repudiate it, and the Sabbath, and leave the church.
Third, it is the authority of the Apostles that alone can determine how the church is financed. Not Canright, Ellen White, or Tom Norris. We must follow Peter and Paul in this matter.
Bob said: Why are you going against the will of the prophet when she so adamant in her statements below??
Tom said: Ellen White has zero doctrinal authority; she is neither an apostle nor an OT Prophet. So I make no pretense of following her will or her interpretations. Only the teachings of the NT can determine if tithe is valid for the church; not anything that Ellen White can ever say or write.
Thus I follow the Protestant Hermeneutic, and treat Ellen White as a historical source and gifted person. But she is not to be viewed as someone who has any claim to understanding doctrine above the apostles or anyone else. She has been wrong many times, even as she points to the Bible as the only authority for doctrine. (See also, the Sabbath debate with Andrews).
Although tithing was developed at a time when the Battle Creek church thought all their views were correct and easily defended, such arrogance would not last long. Within 20 years after Canright introduced his version of tithe, the Battle Creek Empire self-destructed as one doctrine after another was repudiated by once faithful SDA’s. Canright was the first to go, leaving the church in 1887. But soon most all the other leaders would leave, including Jones, Waggoner, and Kellogg.
So tithing played a role in the demise of the Battle Creek SDA’s, as did the IJ. These were both very legalistic doctrines that re-enforced their false views of the Two Covenants and underscored how confused the SDA’s had become about the Gospel.
Consequently, Ellen White had only a short time to deal with this tithing doctrine. And even then, she was out of the Country for about a decade, and then there was the great schism and the move to Takoma Park when she came back. Besides, by this time, her life was almost over. But we do have her private and public views of tithe, and they are not what the SDA church teaches.
While the modern SDA’s have long pretended that the issue of tithe, and most everything else, has long ago been settled by Ellen White’s writings, this is not true. Thus the White Estate has presented a dishonest and inaccurate view about Ellen White and tithe, just as they have about so many other things. They have not told the full story and only promoted what they wanted people to hear.
The fact of the matter is that Ellen White does not agree with the SDA leaders about their rules and regulations covering tithe. She never followed them, and by 1890’s, she was so fed up with the incompetence from the GC that she used her tithe, and that of others, to help fund the work in the South. And she refused to ever change her view on this point.
This is what the Watson letter, written in 1905, was all about. It was Ellen White telling a Conference President that she could use her tithe for the work of the church and that he should “keep cool” about it so that others do not follow her example.
Thus Ellen White’s own words and actions do not support what the SDA’s teach about tithe. She was “shown” that the church leaders do not have to be followed, and that special circumstances trump their rules.
Watson was furious by Ellen White’s dismissal of his authority, which not only cut into his budget, but also seemed to deny the doctrine of tithe. This position could easily open a Pandora’s box if everyone decided, like Ellen White, how his or her tithe should be spent.
In fact, after President Watson read the letter, he could not believe it was from Ellen White. He called it “spurious” and accused Edson White of being the real author. Watson was so angry that he confronted Edson and declared that this letter about tithe was “a product of his own evil brain.” But both Edson and WC White strongly denied this charge.
Here is the letter:
Mountain View, Calif., Jan. 22, 1905.
Elder Watson:
My brother, I wish to say to you, Be careful how you move. You are not moving wisely. The least you have to speak about the tithe that has been appropriated to the most needy and the most discouraging field in the world, the more sensible you will be.
It had been presented to me for years that my tithe was to be appropriated by myself to aid the white and colored ministers who were neglected and did not receive sufficient properly to support their families. When my attention was called to aged ministers, white or black, it was my special duty to investigate into their necessities and supply their needs.
This was to be my special work, and I have done this in a number of cases. No man should give notoriety to the fact that in special cases the tithe is used in that way.
In regard to the colored work in the South, that field has been and is still being robbed of the means that should come to the workers of that field. If there has been cases where our sisters have appropriated their tithe to the support of the ministers working for the colored people in the South, let every man, if he is wise, hold his peace.
I have myself appropriated my tithe to the most needy cases brought to my notice. I have been instructed to do this; and as the money is not withheld from the Lord's treasury, it is not a matter that should be commented upon; for it will necessitate my making known these matters, which I do not desire to do, because it is not best.
Some cases have been kept before me for years, and I have supplied their needs from the tithe, as God has instructed me to do. And if any person shall say to me, Sister White, will you appropriate my tithe where you know it is most needed, I shall say, Yes, I will; and I have done so. I commend those sisters who have placed their tithe where it is most needed to help to do a work that is being left undone; and if this matter is given publicity, it will create knowledge which would better be left as, it is.
I do not care to give publicity to this work, which the Lord has appointed me to do, and others to do.
I send this matter to you so that you shall not make a mistake. Circumstances alter cases.
I would not advise that any should make a practice of gathering up tithe money. But for years there have now and then been persons who have lost confidence in the appropriation of the tithe who have placed their tithe in my hands, and said that if I did not take it they would themselves appropriate it to the families of the most needy minister they could find. I have taken the money, given a receipt for it, and told them how it was appropriated.
I write this to you so that you shall keep cool and not become stirred up and give publicity to this matter, lest many more shall follow their example.
Signed Ellen G. White.
Spalding and Magan Collection, p. 215, 216
http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/contra1.html
This is the real Ellen White that the White Estate did not want the church to know.
The aged and dying Ellen White not only wrote this tithe letter, but also stood behind it, refusing to back down whatsoever. It was Ellen White’s position that because the church had failed to do their duty, she could use the tithe to address these failures.
More specifically, she had been shown by God that she could use her tithe in this manner, and thus she had no apologies to offer.
Of course this means that Ellen White is not as pro tithing as the church has pretended all these years. And that no one can use Ellen White to defend tithe paying as the SDA church teaches today.
After 1888, Ellen White knew that she and the church held many errors about doctrine. Thus she called for honest and fair investigations of the issues. But the leaders refused over and over again. As a result, she has gone on the record as not only ignoring and revising Canright’s tithe doctrine, but of saying that there are many doctrinal errors that need to be addressed and corrected, including tithe.
"There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation."
Review and Herald, Dec. 20, 1892
"Those who sincerely desire truth will not be reluctant to lay open their positions for investigation and criticism, and will not be annoyed if their opinions and ideas are crossed." Review and Herald, July 26, 1892
"Those who cannot impartially examine the evidences of a position that differs from theirs, are not fit to teach in any department of God’s cause."
Review and Herald, February 18, 1890
Bob quoted Ellen White: "The Lord will not hold guiltless those who are deficient in doing the work that he requires at their hands,--in seeing that the church is kept wholesome and healthy spiritually, and doing all their duty; in allowing no neglect which will bring the threatened curse upon his people. A curse is pronounced upon all who withhold the tithe from God." {PH166 20.3}
"The command to pay tithe is so plain that there is no semblance of excuse for disregarding it. He who neglects to give instruction on this point, leaves undone a most important part of his work." {CS 105.1}
"The Lord's messengers should see that His requirements are faithfully discharged by the members of the churches. God says that there should be meat in His house, and if the money in the treasury is tampered with, if it is regarded as right for individuals to make what use they please of the tithe, the Lord cannot bless. He cannot sustain those who think that they can do as they please with that which is His."
R. & H. Supplement, Dec. 1, 1896. {CS 106.2}
Tom said: After the second tithing system was developed by Canright in the late 1870’s, Ellen White supported this method wholeheartedly. It seemed better then what they had tried before and thus they all used the Bible to promote tithe for the good of the church.
Lacking theological training, they incorrectly assumed that tithing was like the Sabbath, a Moral law and duty that applied to the church. They also assumed it was practiced by the apostolic church. Which is why Ellen White says the following:
“The New Testament does not re-enact the law of the tithe, as, it does not that of the Sabbath; for the validity of both is assumed.” The Faith I Live By, page 244.
Of course this is wrong. Tithing is clearly part of the OC ceremonial laws, while the Sabbath is located in the center of the Moral law, and is a moral law. The SDA’s were very naive to think they could invent such a doctrine like tithe without the specific authority of the apostles. But they had become very confused about the Two Covenants as well as very legalistic and hierarchical.
Ellen White did not understand the Gospel correctly until after the 1888 debates, and it took her less than a decade before she questioned tithe and made some dramatic changes about how she embraced this doctrine. Thus Ellen White practiced a variant form of tithing that the leaders did not approve or want to spread.
But guess what? AT Jones, who had left the church, widely circulated the Watson letter. It made a stir. Daniels wrote that Ellen White’s tithe letter was being used-in 1907, by many as an excuse not to pay tithe to the newly relocated Denomination.
In order to stop the “evil” use of the Watson letter by the denominations critics, WC White proposed that Ellen White write a pro tithe section for the Testimonies, -quoted previously in 9T, -in 1909 which says the opposite of what she said in the Watson letter.
This in turn led Watson to once again think the letter was a fraud, but WC White again refused such a characterization.
WC White admitted that while it would be easier to “repudiate a few documents that perplex us, and say they were forgeries, it is the truth that makes us free…”
WC White refused to re-classify the Watson letter. He firmly held to the position that these anti-tithe words of Ellen White could not and would not be repudiated by her. One day the church would better understand.
WC White & Ellen White, Jerry Moon, 1993, Andrews Press, pp 410-413.
http://www.tithetruth.org/authority_egw.htm
So Ellen White did not have a rigid view of tithe.
In fact, she defied the rules and used her tithe as she saw fit for years. See quote below:
She had a real burden for retired ministers who were in financial need because at that time the church did not have a retirement plan. She wrote: "Where I see workers in this cause that have been true and loyal to the work, who are left to suffer, it is my duty to speak in their behalf. If this does not move the brethren to help them, then I must help them, even if I am obliged to use a portion of my tithe in doing so.
Quoted in W. C. White, Regarding the Use of the Tithe, Unpublished manuscript, DF 384, EGWRC-GC, ca. 1932.
Now that this information has become public, the church has tried to show that Ellen White is very special and that no one should take such liberties with tithe like she did. Why? Because they do not have the same gifts as Ellen White, nor is anyone else on her level. So she has special privileges.
But of course the NT does not teach that there are such distinctions, much less that there can be tithe or a hierarchy in the church. In fact, the NT teaches the opposite.
Listen to the modern church say that what Ellen did with her tithe was fine, but we must never follow her example:
It is obvious that on the occasions in which E. G. White appropriated her tithe and the tithe given to her by others, she had good reasons to do it and the support of the Lord.
The tithe was not being misused in any way, but was fulfilling God's intention for the sacred fund.
Because of her very peculiar ministry within the church, her practice in this area cannot be used as a model by anyone to appropriate tithe for particular projects.
We should also keep in mind that her use of tithe to support Bible workers and retired workers have become accepted practices in the church.
http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.or … gy-EGW.htm
Ellen White endorsed a variant view of tithe that made the leaders angry. She refused to endorse their rigid view, and even accepted the tithe money from others for special projects. Her actions regarding tithe, as well as her advice to investigate doctrine and follow the Word, do not support the present view, practice, or attitude of the church.
If Ellen White joined our conversation today, she would understand that there is no such doctrine as tithe in the church. And that the present tithe based hierarchy must be replaced with a Protestant system that is democratic and transparent, as well as honest and true.
Sirje Walkowiak said: It's another one of those cases where you pull out something EGW said to prove your own bias or to make a point. Do you do everything EGW said to do?
Tom said: It’s another one of these cases where the White Estate has not been honest. It’s just one more example of how the church hides half the story, so that they can promote their point of view.
Who ever heard that Ellen White drank wine? But she did and it was in the Review, and on the record, for all to see. But who knew such a simple fact? The White Estate knew, but they covered it up and promoted Ellen White as if she would never in a million years drink a drop of evil spirits.
There is no excuse for such incompetence and dishonesty.
While the church today uses Ellen White ‘s writings to promote faithful tithe paying, they failed to explain that Ellen White did no such thing, and that she was so disgusted with how the church was being managed, that she made up her own version of tithe that made the administrators hot with anger.
Even more important, she claims that the Spirit encourage her to ignore the SDA tithe doctrine and take another direction. Those that follow the same Spirit today will take the same position. Tithe is not a valid doctrine in the church.
So once again, the White Estate is the problem. If only the White Estate had told the full story, we could have seen the progression of Ellen White’s views about tithe, and many other doctrines, in a very different light. But now, because of the massive suppression and fraud in the White Estate, the real story looks very different from what we have all been taught. Once again the SDA leaders are caught deceiving the people about church history and doctrine.
Don Sands said: I think you may have misread his purpose in posting the EGW quotes. Tom is not supporting EGW but rather pointing out to Tom the impossible stance Tom has taken. Tom is a strong supporter of EGW and a strong opponent of tithing as a Christian practice.
Tom said: The real problem is that Ellen White changed her mind about tithe. Thus she has opposing definitions on the record, even as she has made up her own variant and followed it. This greatly weakens the church’s position that uses Ellen White as a justification for the doctrine of tithe.
"The Lord has shown me that the experience which your father and I have passed through in poverty and deprivation, in the early days of our work, has given to me a keen appreciation and sympathy for others who are passing through similar experiences of want and suffering. And where I see workers in this cause that have been true and loyal to the work, who are left to suffer, it is my duty to speak in their behalf. If this does not move the brethren to help them, then I must help them, even if I am obliged to use a portion of my tithe in doing so." {5BIO 393.2
Note the last sentence where she is saying that she is going to use the tithe as she thinks necessary. This is what should be highlighted. This is what made the leaders so angry.
Don said: One of the lesser-known roles, which EGW took on, was to be a supporter of the oppressed employees of the church. She used her magisterial status within Adventism to help employees who were being mistreated.
Tom said: This is correct. Furthermore, she used her tithe and that of others, for this work. Not only that; she was shown by heaven that Canright’s tithe doctrine was not sacred and that it could be ignored and revised as the situation demanded.
Thus, no one today can really use Ellen White to support the present tithe doctrine of the SDA church. Heaven encouraged her to depart from the SDA tithe doctrine, which she did for the rest of her life. She knew it was flawed, even as she knew that one day, the SDA’s would once again have to deal with their many false doctrines and repent.
Bob Sands asked; Bob Shields, you don't have to work inside the denomination or belong to it to be saved. Like the nun taking the vow of poverty, what is wrong with a denomination having its own rules especially on the flip side the SDA’s are being criticized about exorbitant salaries. If they are mandated double tithe from that salary, both benefit.
Tom said: The only rules that can govern the church are those that are based on the teachings of the apostles. Any doctrines, principles, or polices that do not have their approval is very wrong. There never was a tithing doctrine in the NT church. Such a fact prevents any church today from embracing such a practice in the name of God, Jesus, or the apostles. Any that do so, like the SDA church, are great liars and blasphemers.
Bob Sands posted some pro tithe views: First, let’s put the level of giving in perspective. Whether or not you think the tithe is a biblical requirement, it is valid as a consistent baseline measure.
Tom said: NT Doctrine is not based on “baseline measures.”
While one must understand the context of Judaism to comprehend the NT, it is only the teachings of the apostles that determine true doctrine.
Bob quoted: According to Barna’s research, “The proportion of households that tithe their income to their church – that is, give at least ten percent of their income to that ministry – has dropped by 62% in the past year, from 8% in 2001 to just 3% of adults during 2002.”
Tom said: People are no doubt giving less because they do not perceive value. They don’t like the product or service.
Moreover, many are also starting to understand that tithe is a fraud. It is not “sacred” nor anyone’s duty. The SDA’s have been caught promoting a big fat lie that happens to fund their empire and keep their hierarchy in power and control. Tithe will continue to go down as more people discover that it has no place in the church. And neither does a hierarchy.
Bob quoted: Second, even if you agree with Russell Earl Kelly, Ph.D., that the tithe is not a biblical requirement, it is a far more difficult case to make that the tithe is “unbiblical” or anti-Scriptural.
Tom said: If tithe is not a biblical requirement for the Christian, how can it ever be made into “sacred” and true doctrine?
If Peter, Paul, and James never paid tithe, how did this practice find the approval of God for the church?
It is very easy to show that both tithe and circumcision belong to the OC ceremonial laws.
There can no more be tithing in the church then there can be ritual circumcision, which the Judaizers claimed was still a duty to God that all male Christians must embrace. But the book of Galatians makes the point clear. Those that support circumcision or tithe have distorted the Gospel and fallen from grace.
Bob quoted: The category of adiaphora would apply here, I think. So, for example, the assertion that the New Testament does not explicitly endorse or teach tithing does not necessarily mean that Christians cannot practice it or that it is “wrong” to tithe.
http://blog.acton.org/archives/1181-Tithe-and-Tith</a> e-Again.html
Tom said: Tithe is a false doctrine that parallels the Circumcision debate in the apostolic church. Just read Galatians and understand that when the word Circumcision is used, tithe is also covered in Paul’s Gospel teaching. This is what the passage is really saying to us today:
Gal. 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.
Gal. 5:1 It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.
Gal. 5:2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, (or pay tithe), Christ will be of no benefit to you.
Gal. 5:3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision (or embraces tithe), that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
Gal. 5:4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
Tithe cannot be practiced in the church. It is not God’s will, nor the duty of any Christian, or the practice of any apostle. It is a very false doctrine that has lead to a corrupt Adventist Hierarchy.
Bob Sands quoted a pro- tithe, minority pastor: “The five churches I am pastoring are giving double tithes every first Sunday. The blessings from the double tithing have blessed my congregations immensely and they will be a blessing to you as well.”
http://www.refugetempledc.com/specialmessage.cfm
Tom said: I never said that false doctrine does not make money. This is the problem, false doctrine can make people and institutions rich beyond belief, just like robbing banks can make thieves wealthy. This is why the Vatican is so full of wealth, and why the Mormons are so successful. There is big money in false doctrine, and the SDA’s have brought in BILLIONS of dollars with the fraud of tithe. It is a real moneymaker!
I have no doubt that this pastor, whose flock is very poor, uneducated, and naive, has pulled in much more money by promoting tithe as Gods will, and a double tithe,- as double his will. Richard Fredericks also uses this tithe scam and so too do many others. So Tithe is very effective, as evidenced by the fact that it brings in BILLIONS of dollars to the Adventists. But it is still very wrong no matter how profitable it is. Money is not the point of the Gospel, nor can money justify any doctrine.
William Diehl said: I would like to add this thought to my post above so as not to have given the wrong impression as to how I feel about giving to support the propagation of the Christian faith in the world. My wife and I give much more than a tithe in our giving but we give this as a -free-will offering- not out of any law-based compunction.
Tom said: Bill, you are correct, the issue is not about anyone not wanting to support the church, but how this is done. There are many ways to support organizations, but the question is this: what do the apostles teach about church finance?
Bill said: My objection is to mandated tithing as if it is a sin not to tithe.
Tom said: How can those who refuse to embrace false doctrine be charged with sin? This is absurd! Either God requires the church to tithe or he does not. NT tithing is either true and sacred or it is not. There is no in-between.
Besides, there is another issue associated with tithe that must be repudiated. Tithe creates a hierarchy, and this form of church organization, which mimics the RCC, is forbidden in the NT. Thus both tithe and the present hierarchal system must both be repudiated and replaced.
Bill said: I read the Ellen White quotes which were posted above and I now realize that this is what the SDA denomination bases its mandated tithing upon. The SDA ministers and administrators who are so emphatic about the imperative to tithe are using Ellen White's opinions as a continuing authority and a thus saith the Lord in order to justify their guilt motivation.
Tom said: BINGO! The SDA leaders have been dishonestly misusing Ellen White’s words to support tithe and many other false doctrines, like the IJ. In fact, they have been hiding the fact that Canright is the real author of the present tithing doctrine, and that Ellen White was instructed by Heaven to ignore it, and she did. This of course set off a little known debate about tithe at the end of her life that was also kept from the church.
As usual, when it comes to Ellen White, things are not what they appear to be. The leaders are misusing Ellen White, and this is what must stop.
Bill said: They promote this view of tithing so much that any member of the denomination who does not tithe would be very much inclined to doubt his salvation if he did not tithe.
Tom said: You are correct. But guess what? The real Ellen White refused to tithe the way the leaders outlined, and she never changed her mind. So this idea that our salvation is in danger if we do not pay tithe comes from the leaders, not from Ellen White. Because if it did, she too would be condemned.
The problem is the White Estate, not Ellen White. They have not honestly or accurately explained Ellen White’s views to the church about wine, tithe, eschatology, hermeneutics, or the law and the Gospel. And until this massive fraud is repudiated and the record corrected, the SDA’s are doomed.
Bill said: This is the real sin of promoting tithing in this way. They erect barriers and heap burdens upon the SDA people, which could and in most cases actually do cause them to doubt their acceptance with God if they don't tithe.
Tom said: Tithing in the church is the same sin as the Judaizers claiming that God wanted all Christians to be circumcised. Paul clearly states that this is a great doctrinal error and he would say the same for tithe today. The only reason he did not say it is because none of them tried to embrace such an impossible doctrine.
Bill said: I honestly believe that if any of the apostles, and especially the apostle Paul, were to view this situation in the SDA church they would be apoplectic with rage towards those imposing these barriers to God FREE grace in Christ. Woe unto those who dare to tamper with the gospel in this way.
Tom said: I agree 100%. Paul would condemn the SDA leaders just like he did Peter and James. He would curse the Adventists and demand that they repent and reform.
Bob Shields said: If we would really study the Old Covenant tithing system we would find that only a portion of the Israelites paid the tax. Adventism and other religious organizations impose the tax on all their flock and tell them if they don't pay it they are less than... It is a sin to teach such heresy.
Tom said: I agree with you. However, the early Pioneers, and many others, embraced many things that have turned out to be wrong. There is a big difference between being uneducated and naïve, and thus being wrong about doctrine, versus refusing to investigate the facts for fear of being wrong.
The Pioneers were uneducated novices, honest but sincere. Today, the leaders are the opposite; they are educated professionals that are insincere and very dishonest.
The SDA hierarchy is an affront to God and the Gospel. This evil and corrupt system must be replaced, or the SDA’s are doomed. Others will complete their mission.
Bob said: Mrs. White got her wires crossed on the tithing issue. She must have had several sources of information being fed into her visions. She should have studied a lot more before she went off half-cocked and said all that she did.
Tom said: First off, D. M. Canright developed the present doctrine of tithe for the SDA church, -not Ellen White.
Second, I have not researched to see what Ellen White said about tithe in chronological detail so as to know the extent of her endorsement in the late 1870’s.
This would make a good study for the White Estate, and it should have been done long ago.
Third, I do know that after 1888, probably in the early to mid 1890’s, she refused to follow Canright’s doctrine, and embraced a variant and forbidden view that she would never give up. In fact, she said that heaven supported her rebellion in this matter, which is why she would never say she was wrong.
Who knew that Ellen White did not embrace or practice tithe the way that the leaders taught? Well, the leaders knew, but they kept this point, and many others out of sight.
Ellen White was not afraid to follow the truth or to stand up to the leaders. She was not afraid to change as the circumstances warranted. Such an open attitude leaves conflicting statements in their historical wake.
Bob said: Tom has a big big problem with claiming that Mrs. White is a true prophet and then denying her prophesies on tithing and also her stand on the IJ. I await his response.
Tom said: Ellen White can have Spiritual Gifts and still be wrong about doctrine. In fact, she had such gifts and yet embraced many errors at the same time. This does not make her a false prophet, but a real human being.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … rophet.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ipture.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … n-White-tr
Last edited by tom_norris (03-19-10 10:53 pm)
Offline
Tom, Why is this using the words of our Lord to the Pharisees which commends their obedience to this tithing law does not mean that Christ was therefore setting down the same norm for the New Testament community not also applicable to Jesus mention of the Sabbath directed to the Jewish community, never to the gentile Christians?
Offline
Bump for Don Sands. Tom has more than questioned your beliefs. He has made serious statements that needs your response.
Offline
He has made serious statements that needs your response.
Tom has done so since I joined this forum. Serious statements don't always need to be answered.
Offline
True, but if you have Biblical answers to his charges the World would certainly appreciate another perspective. Otherwise, we are left with only Tom's and my perspective which appears to be Biblical.
Offline
Otherwise, we are left with only Tom's and my perspective which appears to be Biblical.
I have presented my Biblical perspective already. Look back over what I have posted.
Offline
On October 20, this is what Don wrote:
"I do have a problem with any restrictive idea. i. e. If it is not mentioned in the NT then to design it is a sin. The Christian Church is to be free from Old Covenant rule making and restrictiveness. Let freedom, in Christ, reign. If a church wants to use the tithing principle, there is no prohibition of it found anywhere in Scripture."
Since tithing is never given as an instruction to be followed by the NT church; i.e., how then can any design to tithe not be a sin, according to your own statement?
Then, you seem to backtrack and say that if a church wants to use the tithing principle, there is no prohibition against it.
Which is it: never designed by the NT church, therefore it is a sin; or no prohibition against it?
Offline
I will restate my view:
I believe the Christian era emphasizes freedom and creative endeavor. This is a function of the Holy Spirits inspiration.
If a Christian group likes Gods idea of tithing and wishes to follow it, there is no sin in doing so.
I believe that Matthew 23:23 and 1 Corinthians 9 support the principle of tithing as a free enterprise within faith. The tithing principle I support resembles how Abraham and Jacob tithed rather than the cumbersome Mosaic provisions.
The early Adventist church discovered systematic giving before they discovered the tithing principle.
I have explained my thinking quite clearly in these posts:
http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus … 8#POST7208
http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus … 4#POST7434
Which is it: never designed by the NT church, therefore it is a sin; or no prohibition against it?
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I could have stated it better.
Like the early Adventist church, the early Christian church had to develop new ways of doing things. Paul led the way, it seems, regarding Gospel finance. He found in the Hebrew system the principle that those who work in Gods cause should live from the offerings of Gods cause. I understand this to include the practice of tithing. But, Paul is not saying, let;s implement the Hebrew system of offerings. Rather, he is bringing forward the principles found in that Hebrew system. This is the correct way for the Christian to relate to Mosaic practices. Find the principle but dont lock yourself into Mosaic regulations.
Offline
So... instead of stoning Sabbath breakers, we should ..........fill in the blank.
How do we pick and choose which OT principles we should adopt with provisions and which we should totally abandon? How do we decide which practices were cultural,even extending into the NT period and which have to do we spirituality and are to be modified to the Christian experience?
Offline
How do we pick and choose which OT principles we should adopt with provisions and which we should totally abandon?
The NT stories and counsel provide guidance to the Christian.
Jesus counsel is for His disciples. Since He gave very little counsel, in person, after His death, we must consider His counsel before His death as valid for us.
Acts 15 provides an essential foundation to how we view the relationship of Christianity to its Mosaic roots. The Mosaic package of regulations, etc. did not receive foundational support. The problem was not taken to the high priest, as dictated by Deuteronomy 17. Rather, they took their problems to the Jerusalem church. Peter called the Mosaic system a yoke of bondage. Only four regulations came out of that meeting. The issue was not the grand principles of life preserved by Judaism. Much does not get addressed in Acts 15. But, it is obvious that the Jerusalem Council did not view the Mosaic package as its constitution. The Book of Acts reveals the Holy Spirit as the guide for them. These Holy Spirit provisions were written down, partially, in the NT.
Christians believe that a great portion of the Holy Spirits counsel came to them through Paul. As we regard Pauls relationship to the Mosaic package we get a further view of the early Christian churchs foundation.
At one point, Paul refers to the righteous requirements of the law. I understand these to be the eternal principles found in the Mosaic package.
The principles of the Mosaic package remain essential to the Christian life. The NT writers show us how to adjust to the new reality. The regulations found in the Mosaic writings do not carry forward into the Christian church. They provide some guidance, but only that. Eg. Stoning in the Mosaic system becomes shunning, or disfellowship, in the Christian system. See 1 Corinthians 5 and 6.
I present this just as my personal, Biblically reasoned, view. I do not claim to have the final, or dogmatic, answer.
But, I repeat, I view the Christian church as free from most dogmatic encumbrances. Some Christians specialize in creating a new yoke of bondage based on the New Testament. eg. Womens role in the chruch. This is not the Spirit of Christ. Adventists prone to this yoke of bondage approach have an added burden with the whole body of EGWs writings. I believe that I can sit down with my Bible and the Holy Spirit and arrive at an understanding of my responsibility before God. My fellow believers can seek to inform my experience, but the final decision is between myself and my God. As I rise up from my encounter with God, I seek out fellowship with those who reach similar conclusions to what I have concluded.
Re: Tithing
The tithing principle easily forwards into the Christian system; the tithing regulations don't.
Offline
God designs that the exercise of benevolence shall be purely voluntary, not having recourse even to eloquent appeals to excite sympathy. God loveth a cheerful giver.He is not pleased to have His treasury replenished with forced supplies. The loyal hearts of His people, rejoicing in the saving truth for this time, will, through love and gratitude to Him for this precious light, be earnest and anxious to aid with their means in sending the truth to others. The very best manner in which to give expression to our love for our Redeemer is to make offerings to bring souls to the knowledge of the truth. The plan of redemption was entirely voluntary on the part of our Redeemer, and it is the purpose of Christ that all our benevolence should be freewill offerings. {3T 413.3}
Oops, that must have been written before Canright devised the modified false tithing system for the flock.
Don, I respect an organizations legal right to choose whatever laws or rules they see fit to incorporate to manage their system. When a Christian organization uses the Old Covenant tithing laws as the premise for their building up the treasury and say that said tithing law is binding on its members and quote Malachi robbing God if they dont, I say that is false representation of the real facts.
The real facts are that God did not require all Israelites to pay the tithe. How can said organization then say that its membership is robbing God if all the members do not pay tithe? If said organization is truthful, and is using the old system as a pattern, it should not be a requirement that all come under the rule. Said organization is not truthful when it repeats Malachis statement about robbing God. That statement first of all pertained to the Levitical priesthood and even if it is stretched to cover the common Israelite it would only pertain to those who raised crops and/or livestock. The remainder of the Israelite community didnt pay tithe.
The Adventist Church is one of many churches that is teaching heresy. Ellen White is the root of this heresy for the SDAs. Canright was wrong in ever suggesting such a scheme, but the propagation of the lie is on the shoulders of the prophet.
Offline
Don said:
But, I repeat, I view the Christian church as free from most dogmatic encumbrances. Some Christians specialize in creating a new yoke of bondage based on the New Testament. eg. Womens role in the chruch. This is not the Spirit of Christ. Adventists prone to this yoke of bondage approach have an added burden with the whole body of EGWs writings. I believe that I can sit down with my Bible and the Holy Spirit and arrive at an understanding of my responsibility before God. My fellow believers can seek to inform my experience, but the final decision is between myself and my God. As I rise up from my encounter with God, I seek out fellowship with those who reach similar conclusions to what I have concluded.
Women's roll in the church is one of Pauls teachings that I do not entirely understand. I do know he was very emphatic that women not be in leadership roll, whether he was referring to the entire New Testament congregations for all generations is not clear in my mind.
To discount the rule is not facing the reality that it is in scripture for our edification. And to say that it is against the spirit of Christ is bold and walking a fine wire. Just because the SDA Church isnt embracing the rule does not make it void. The church cannot pretend it is not in scripture.
Offline
Yeah, Bob shields, but you need to remember that demanding a tithe makes the SDA church an exclusive club. The excluded are those that live on the other side of the tracks, you know, the lower income folks. Why would Jesus want anything to do with them? A lot of them are govt cheese eaters anyhow, they wouldnt fit in. They dont have much money to offer, probably dont even own a suit and tie either. Theyd be an unnecessary burden.Screw em!!!
Offline
Oops, forgot. Happy Sabbath.
Offline
Lets look at Malachi 3
Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you ask, How do we rob you?
In tithes and offerings.
9 You are under a curse—<the whole nation of you<because you are robbing me. 10 Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse,
that there may be food in my house.Test me in this, says the LORD Almighty, and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it.11 I will prevent pests from devouring your crops, and the vines in your fields will not cast their fruit, says the LORD Almighty. 12 Then all the nations will call you blessed, for yours will be a delightful land, says the LORD Almighty.
Now, look again at 1 Corinthians 9<Dont you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? 14 In the same way, THE LORD HAS COMMANDED that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.offering principle of Malachi 3 applies. The Christian gives offerings so that there will be food in Gods house.
The tithing regulation is not what applies here, it is the tithing principle. Offerings on the altar regulations dont apply here, it is the offerings on the altar principle that applies.
Should the Adventist church oppress the person who does not give? No. Compassion goes a long way in Church economic matters.
The tithe and offering principles are of God. Church harrassment of the poor is not.
Offline
Lets look at 2 Cor. 8:12
As long as the readiness is there, a man is acceptable with whatever he can afford; never mind what is beyond his means. This does not mean that to give relief to others you ought to make things difficult for yourselves; it is a question of balancing what happens to be your SURPLUS now against their present need.
Tithing has been supported by the SDA church as robbing God, regardless if ones family is almost destitute. Should that family throw itself on the church for sustenance? How has that been working? Teaching OT principles to Christians is advocating Moses Law, which Paul particularly prohibits. There is no mention of tithing in the Decalogue. It was added as a later pattern to pay the Levitical priests. Today, there are no priests, as the Protestant declaration was The Priesthood of All Believers.
As a denominational employee, their salaries depend on faithful tithe payers, for which they also must tithe. But defending an OT rule contrary to Christianity which realizes that the Law has now become obsolete. Do you believe that?
Isn't that what Paul preached?
Offline
Tithing has been supported by the SDA church as robbing God, regardless if ones family is almost destitute.
As a church, it is not our place to accost the almost destitute in this manner. The tithing principle enjoys a long and distinguished career beginning, in the Biblical text, with Abraham and Jacob.
The Christian Church does not operate from Mosaic regulations. Those regulations are dead for the Christian. The tithing principle, on the other hand, remains part of Gods plan, as do all the other principles He has led His people to implement.
Offline
Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you ask, How do we rob you?
In tithes and offerings. 9 You are under a curse—the whole nation of you—because you are robbing me. 10 Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the LORD Almighty, and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it. 11 I will prevent pests from devouring your crops, and the vines in your fields will not cast their fruit, says the LORD Almighty. 12 Then all the nations will call you blessed, for yours will be a delightful land,says the LORD Almighty.
Don, it appears that you might be trying to make the point from Malachi that everyone in the nation was to pay tithe and was cursed because they didn't. Why would God curse someone whom He previously exempted from the tithing system? I can see in those verses that God was referring also to offerings. I believe everyone under the law was subject to give something to the Lord. that is not an issue. Ellen White used Malachi repeatedly in expressing her views on tithing.. I really do not think she knew what she was doing scripturally in demanding the 10th from her flock. She just came up with the needed visions when there was a demand for them.
New Covenant Christians are to give out of love. We are to support the ministry, the building and upkeep, and give to the needy. This may require a real sacrifice to the believer. What is great about this system is that all is given because we love doing it. No set amount is demanded as in the SDA Church. I don't have to sign on the dotted line before I am baptized.
Offline
New Covenant Christians are to give out of love. We are to support the ministry, the building and upkeep, and give to the needy. This may require a real sacrifice to the believer. What is great about this system is that all is given because we love doing it. No set amount is demanded as in the SDA Church. I don't have to sign on the dotted line before I am baptized.
I agree with this. The tithing principle is in accord with it. The Old Covenant worked from a testimony against perspective. The New Covenant works from the law within the heart perspective. This is why principles guide the Christian and not regulations.
If you have studied the Scriptures and have concluded that tithing is not Gods will, then live accordingly. If another fellow believer views tithing as God's will, then he, too, should live accordingly.
The Adventist Church began with its leaders sacrificing their whole lives for the cause. The tithing system was not considered. They all gave 100%.
Years later, when most believers were not so committed as to give of themselves entirely and the Gospel enterprise of the church took on heavy financial obligations, it became obvious that systematic giving could help the church accomplish its goals.
If we view the tithing principle as a good idea rather than a controlling regulation, we would maintain the Christian concept of freewill giving based on the heart.
Offline
We need to more carefully separate church practice from biblical commands. Not to do so, has resulted in many Adventists being told that not paying tithe was robbing God. Do you deny this has been the practice?
Offline
Many Adventists being told that not paying tithe was robbing God. Do you deny this has been the practice?
Yes, it is still taught.
There are two ways to teach the concern expressed by God through Malachi:tithing as a regulation OR systematic giving in support of the Gospel.
As I have stated before, I don't view the Mosaic regulations as to be enforced within Christianity. I do believe that the principles, such as systematic giving, to be commanded by God for the Christian. Look over 1 Corinthians 9 again.
If a believer withholds their offerings so that their bonafide Gospel workers cannot do their work, they are robbing God. First Corinthians 9 says that Gospel finance is commanded by God.
The principle found in Malachi applies to the Gospel economy.
Offline
There was no Gospel prior to Christianity, was there? Isnt Gospel defined as Good News? The Jews never used the term Gospel, did they? The principle in Malachi applied only to the Levitical priesthood.
Offline
The system of modified tithing is one of demand. It has nothing to do with free will giving. It does not allow the Holy Spirit to work with the giver. It is a sign on the dotted line business transaction. It has nothing to do with a heart felt desire to give out of love. It is requirement of all who will submit to it.
Some may give a 10th out of love and not think of it as required, but the requirement is still there and the reminder that if you don't you are somehow robbing God. The system is based on a lie and those who propagate the lie will have to answer.
When cornered and couldn't give me a Biblical answer concerning the SDA modified false tithing system an Adventist pastor told me that all was fine with the system because it is a practical adaption. I ask him why he is so against people who call Sunday the Sabbath after all it is only a practical adaptation. I suppose we could look at infant baptism gay marriage, gay clergy and almost any other deviant practice as a practical adaptation.
Offline
