You are not logged in.
It has nothing to do with free will giving
With all due respect, I disagree.
This seems similar to saying any Law has nothing to do with free will
Note Psalm 40:9, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.
Statements of Gods will in the form of a law is not contrary to the Holy Spirit if the heart is already filled with the Spirit. For such a spirit-filled person the question is, What do you want me to do?
There are Adventists, I suppose, who give out of spirit-less obligation. There are other Adventists who gladly give the tithe, offerings, etc. etc. The anti-establishment person will say, The Church demands it of them to protect and fill its institutional coffers. Any church that stoops to such greed deserves the scorn of the people. This same greed will make a church insensitive to the plight of the destitute.
But, a fellowship-based agreement to return tithe is not wrong, Biblically. Rather, it enjoys:The endorsement of Paul; The favorable mention of Jesus;
The precedent of Abraham and Jacob; and presented in the Mosaic Book of the Law from which the tithing principle can be further understood.<
The Adventist Church has some ways to go before it adequately defends its concepts and practices of tithing. As a church we often slip back into a regulation orientation and forget the message of Matthew 23
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead mens bones and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
Message edited by Don on November 08, 2009
Offline
There was no Gospel prior to Christianity, was there? Isn't Gospel defined as Good News? The Jews never used the term Gospel, did they? The principle in Malachi applied only to the Levitical priesthood.
The principle found in Malachi applies to us today. Note this study of 1 Corinthians 9:1-14
First Corinthians 9
1 Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2 If I am not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
3 My defense to those who examine me is this: 4 Do we have no right to eat and drink? 5 Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? 6 Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working?
Paul raises the right to preach the Gospel without having to work in some other way for money.
7 Who ever goes to war at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk of the flock?
Paul presents non-scriptural arguments first: practices of war; farming, shepherding. The practice of benefiting from one's work for others is clear.
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.”[a] Is it oxen God is concerned about? 10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. The Ox should be allowed to benefit from the grain as it tread the grain. Also, He says it altogether for our sakes. The Hebrew Bible is there for our sakes. Malachi is there for our sakes. God's plan to finance the Gospel finds its roots and rational in the Hebrew Bible and the Torah in particular
11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things? 12 If others are partakers of this right over you, are we not even more?
Now he applies it. We have preached the Gospel to you. Don't we have a right to take up an offering? To receive tithe, or whatever?
Nevertheless we have not used this right, but endure all things lest we hinder the gospel of Christ.
But, Paul refused to take tithes and offerings from the people. He did not want money to get in the way of his work.
13 Do you not know that those who minister the holy things eat of the things of the temple, and those who serve at the altar partake of the offerings of the altar?
Paul refers here to the Levitical system. The Levite who administers the holy things eats of the temple. Those who serve at the altar partake of the offerings. As I consider the sacrificial system, I note that this includes the tithe.
14 Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.
Here is a clear mandate for Gospel finance and it comes out of natural observation and the divinely inspired practices of the Torah. Plus, The LORD has commanded it. As the Adventist Church seeks to implement the LORD's command on this, it seemed wise to them and the Holy Spirit, to establish the tithing principle.
Offline
But, a fellowship-based agreement to return tithe is not wrong, Biblically. Rather, it enjoys:
1. The endorsement of Paul;
2. The favorable mention of Jesus;
3. The precedent of Abraham and Jacob; and
4. The type presented in the Mosaic Book of the Law from which the tithing principle can be further understood.
================================================ ======
1. Paul does not endorse tithing. He endorses free will giving. 2 Cor 9:6Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. 7 Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. 8 And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work.
Does this quote sound anything like the tithe system? Paul never mentioned the Levitical system as a requirement. Paul avoids anything similar to the old system. It would appear that Paul's system was dealing in coin. Read 2Cor 16:1-4.
2. Oh yes, Jesus mentions the Pharisees giving tithes of their crops. Do you suppose that had anything to do with the fact that Jesus was still under Levitical law and so were the Pharisees? This only proves that tithes were not paid in coin. They actually brought their pittance of crops, probably from their gardens, as the letter of the law required.
In all due respect, I do not consider that a favorable mention.
3. Lets see what the book of Hebrews has to say about Abraham's tithing. Speaking about Melchizedek the writer says: Heb 7:4 4Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder!
That is the only recorded tithing event by Abe that is found in scripture. As far as Jacob is concerned, he mad a vow with God that he would return a tenth only if god would give him the land. It is not recorded that that event ever transpired during Jacob's lifetime.
Both Jacob's and Abe's tithing is a very weak premise for our paying it. In fact, I know the SDA Church and Ellen use these two events as a reason the flock should anti up, but any person who knows the full story would know that
Ellen and the church are grasping at straws.
4. The type or tithing principle is not endorsed in the New Covenant.
In summery, the tithing system was not coin based, it did not include all Israelites and it was not free will. It was part of the covenant God made with Israel and if fulfilled would have provided God's part of the deal. It was fully a requirement, a tax if you will,and had to be fulfilled by those subject to it before God's blessing would be seen.
Offline
Don said: Paul refers here to the Levitical system. The Levite who administers the holy things eats of the temple. Those who serve at the altar partake of the offerings. As I consider the sacrificial system, I note that this includes the tithe.
--------------------------------------------------
S T R E A C H
Please provide evidence from scripture that eating the sacrifice includes the tithe. Sin offerings had nothing to do with the tithe. Levites are not recorded taking tithe into the Temple and mixing it with sin offerings.
Don, I really hope you are not teaching your students this stuff. they have a hard enough time digesting the doctrines with what scripture actually tells us. No wonder they come out of SDA schools and never look back at the church. They know they cant swallow all the garbage and the problem is that many never find a church home and some convert to non Christian isms.
Don quoted and said: 14 Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel. Here is a clear mandate for Gospel finance and it comes out of natural observation and the divinely inspired practices of the Torah. Plus, The LORD has commanded it. As the Adventist Church seeks to implement the LORDs command on this, it seemed wise to them and the Holy Spirit, to establish the tithing principle.
-------------------------------------------------
S T R E A C H
The Lord never commanded the New Testament Church to tithe. The Old Covenant Levitical system is history and nothing but history. That is why the New Testament is void of any teaching on paying the tithe. Even the Jews today do not pay tithe.
Offline
To confuse free-will offerings with tithe shows a total disregard for specific terminology, and a conflation of terms. When this is done, then all those millions of Christians who observed Sabbath on the first day were doing exactly the same thing: conflating terms. It is misreading the clear Bible text, which no Bible student should ever confuse. In doing so, they adulterate scripture.
Offline
Oh no Elaine, it is merely practical adaptation. How could it be wrong the prophet spoke. All hail to the prophet. Even if the scriptures have to be twisted to fit to the prophet's box, by George it will be done.
Offline
How else could all the heavy administrative load be paid? Ever see the number of administrative positions compared to pastors? Quite an interesting graph.
Offline
I believe the house needs to be cleaned anyway. so be it if there isn't enough money to fund all the top heavy hierarchy. Let them go out and get real jobs.
Offline
Too often it's forgotten that Paul had a trade as a tent-maker. If a good portion of the hierarchy paid by tithe had another vocation, it would save the problem of being almost unemployable if they lose their position. It has happened before. Hundreds found themselves out of work during the debacle following Ford. Some went into teaching, but how many Adventist theology grads are equipped to do ordinary work?
Offline
Elaine asked: 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?
Tom said: There is a correct method to understand the NT. It is called the Protestant Hermeneutic. It is very different from the proof text method, which makes far too many assumptions with its self-serving interpretations.
One cannot read any passage about Jesus in the Gospels, and assume its meaning, without understanding the historical context, as well as how the apostles later viewed this same point for the church. The apostles spoke for Jesus and thus their word is his teaching in the church.
For example, we can be sure that Jesus was not teaching tithing for the church in his discussion with the Pharisees because the apostles never set up any such practice, even as they set up something very different shortly after Pentecost. (See Acts 4 & 5).
So Jesus could not have been endorsing tithe in the church as some might think. Because if he was, the apostles have failed to explain his will to the church. More than that, they have misrepresented church doctrine and betrayed how Heaven really wanted the church to be financed.
But the apostles did not make an error about Gospel finance and neither did Jesus or the Holy Spirit. The early church never tithed, nor did they ever teach this OC doctrine as a method to finance the Gospel. Rather, they correctly set up a system of SHARING, combined with a CONGREGATIONAL organizational system that was free from apostolic ownership or control of the local church. The record is clear about this.
Furthermore, Jesus never paid tithe as a Jew, nor did he instruct his apostles to embrace this OC doctrine in the Church. Because all Christians were considered Priests in the church, tithe no longer made any sense. Which is why it never became a doctrine or practice in the apostolic church as the incompetent SDA’s have been claiming all these years.
There is not one NT scholar in the world today that will support the SDA claim that the apostolic church practiced tithing. The record is clear that they did not. And no amount of SDA double-talk and proof texting can ever change the facts.
All the Denomination can do at this point is hang their head in shame and repent. This must be the first reaction to the stunning truth about tithe. Confession and Repentance.
I remember when this tithe discussion was first posted on the old CompuServe Forum. It caused quit a stir as no one had ever challenged this doctrine in such a bold and broad manner.
As it became obvious that there was no proof for this doctrine in the NT, the SDA posters were stunned and shocked.
Then one of the GC Leaders came online and proceeded to admit that while there was no place in the NT that shows tithe being practiced by the church, he was nonetheless certain that the apostles practiced it anyway. The problem, he said, was that they failed to make a record of their practice.
In other words, the apostles forgot to explain that they all paid tithe in the church. It was an oversight on their part, and thus we should assume that they tithed and so should we.
Of course, trying to blame the apostles for not fully disclosing their doctrines is absurd and insulting. But this is how cultic and confused the SDA’s have become. Rather than admit they are wrong, they will twist things until they can somehow claim they were correct all along.
Jesus never tithed and he never taught that anyone in the church should tithe, and neither did his apostles. This triple fact overturns the SDA doctrine of tithe and proves that not only are they NOT the Storehouse for tithe, they are not even a storehouse for the Gospel. Rather, the SDA’s have stored up plenty of false doctrine, corruption, and blasphemy for all to see.
Bob Shields said: Tom has more than questioned your beliefs. He has made serious statements that needs your response.
Tom said: Ha! This is too funny, and sad. No SDA scholar, Pastor, or apologist can defend the many errors of Traditional Adventism. Not Bill Johnson, or Goldstein, or Doug Batchlor, much less our own Pastor Don. None of them can make a coherent response to the issues, tithe being but one of many.
This is why the TSDA’s always end up tongue tied and stuttering, having to explain why they do not have to answer the questions or speak to the issues. We all had great fun for years as Clifford Goldstein would run away from this discussion over and over again, red faced and confounded by the facts.
How many years will it take for all to understand that TA is a fraud and a farce? The 3rd Angels Message has terminated. It is now time to move forward to develop the next Adventist Message, the 4th, which will not allow either double-talk or tithing, much less a long list of false doctrines and fabrications that were featured under the 3rd Angels Message.
So Bob, don’t expect a serious or honest response from those wolves that have gained control of the Advent Movement. They have no intention of having a fair or honest discussion about Adventist Reform, because they don’t understand the Gospel, nor do they want to be reformed or educated. They like things they way they are—with themselves in control of course.
The SDA leaders have an agenda to keep the sheep under their control, and they will do and say whatever it takes to sustain their dominant position. Tithe is one of their favorite tools of power and control, should this popular fraud lose favor with the lambs, the era of the wolves would quickly come to an end.
The wolves know this, so they will never tell the truth about tithe or admit that it is wrong.
But it is too late; the truth is now available for all to see. Censorship will no longer work. The evil wolves must be exposed and chased away…
Don Sands said: Serious statements don't always need to be answered.
Tom said: Serious QUESTIONS about doctrine must always be answered. This is what the NT teaches.
1Pet. 3:15 always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you,
It is wrong for the SDA leaders to run from this discussion, refusing to answer the questions that prove them wrong. They have no permission from the apostles to act in such a dishonest manner. Those that have truth have no need to stonewall or run away. But the SDA’s don’t have truth, so they double-talk, stonewall, and run away.
Don’s view of tithe, which is the same as that of the SDA hierarchy, has been proven wrong for all to see. His inability to defend his position is obvious, and thus he has lost the debate, even though he refuses to admit this fact and surrender.
Consequently, he has been asked to repent of this false doctrine. His refusal means he has no intention of crossing over and joining the lambs. He does not support Adventist Reform, nor does he want to repent of a long list of associated SDA errors. Like the IJ.
He has cast his fate with the evil hierarchy. So be it.
Bob Shields said to Don: 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.
Tom said: There is no excuse for Pastor Don to refuse to address the issues and answer the questions. His behavior, and that of Goldstein and all the Adventist talking heads, is very wrong and against the teachings of the NT.
Moreover, there is nothing that Pastor Don can ever say to Tom Norris that will make false doctrine true. His position, on tithe and many other things, is hopelessly wrong and impossible to defend. This is the real reason why he no longer wants to continue. He has lost the debate.
But so what? He will continue to follow the Hierarchy and promote tithe paying in the church-as if he won this discussion. He will pay tithe, promote tithe, and receive tithe, even though he has no credible support for such a practice from the NT.
Thus he has proven that money is more important than following the Words of the Apostles, even as he has embraced a false and worthless Gospel.
Don Sands said: I have presented my Biblical perspective already.
Tom said: First, you have presented and defended the SDA view, which you support. It is not really your personal view, but what you have been taught from your youth. Your so-called “Biblical perspective” represents nothing more than cultic, SDA tradition and propaganda.
Second, your view is not biblical. It may come from the Bible, but so too does the supposed justification for snake handling in church, Sunday Sabbath, and baptism for the dead.
Your views on tithe are based on the twisted mind of D. M. Canright, the author of the tithe doctrine for the SDA’s. Your views are also based on the White Estate’s dishonest manipulation of Ellen White’s view of tithing. Although she was a tithe rebel, the leaders covered this up and promoted her very differently and very dishonestly.
Third. You have done the best you could with such a bad position. I salute your attempt, which was futile from the start. But you have lost the debate. Tithe is not a NC doctrine and you have not come close to proving such a case.
Don said: Look back over what I have posted.
Tom said: I have done this. You have still lost the debate. It is an open and shut case for those that are honest, educated, and Protestant.
Elaine Nelson said to Don: 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?
Tom said: Don will retract what he said. He has embraced a RC view that allows the church to make up whatever doctrines it wants. Which of course includes tithe and the IJ, and on and on…proving once again how close the SDA’s are to the RCC. They have many evil things in common.
Don Sands said:I will restate my view: I believe the Christian era emphasizes freedom and creative endeavor. This is a function of the Holy Spirit's inspiration.
Tom said: It is very wrong for any Protestant to think that doctrine can be “created” by the post-apostolic church. The church has no freedom to invent new doctrines, much less repudiate those, like church finance, that the apostles clearly established, promoted, and practiced.
The Laodicean era of the church is the most “creative” and wrong. It contains thousands of opposing voices all declaring that they speak for God and understand his will. But of course this is impossible, even as there is not one true church among any of them as yet.
The SDA’s are just one of many delusional denominations that have been judged wretched, blind, and naked in the PAJ, and it is because they have been so very creative and dishonest with the Bible all these years. They have learned how to make it say what they want it to say, even to the extent of speaking great blasphemy about God’s will.
Should those that know better, protest, like Dr. Ford, they will be silenced and removed
Today the Adventists no longer know how to honestly or correctly understand the Scriptures. They are content with the status quo of legalism and pluralism, regardless how absurd or wrong it may be. So their claim about being Bible experts is fanciful and impossible. They have no idea what the Bible is really saying about anything. Which is why they are so divided and fractured.
Tithe is a good example of their biblical incompetence. While it is true that the apostles did not embrace or even know about a Sunday Lord’s day, as the SDA’s correctly claim, it is not true that they tithed, as they incorrectly claim. The Apostolic Church no more tithed than they embraced Sunday. But the SDA’s cannot understand anything except the errors of others. They cannot see their own errors and mistakes.
This is because they are truly blind and spiritually unable to understand the Gospel or the Word. They really cannot see truth, nor do they want to.
Don said: If a Christian group likes God's idea of tithing and wishes to follow it, there is no sin in doing so.
Tom said: If this is how doctrine is developed, then truth is anything that a “Christian group” determines it to be. In fact, this is why there are so many different denominations and doctrines. This is also why most all worship on Sunday and many believe in the Secret Rapture and other myths.
Doctrinal truth cannot be determined by any group except the apostles. This is a fundamental Protestant and Adventist position. To take any other position is sin.
Don said: I believe that Matthew 23:23 and 1 Corinthians 9 support the principle of tithing as a free enterprise within faith.
Tom said: Wrong. The underlying “principle” of tithing is that the majority pay tithe to support a minority of religious elites. Tithe is based on the principle of inequality and division. The inferior and “lesser” giving tithe to the superior and “greater.”
But the church abolished this unequal paradigm by declaring that all are now priests, both male and female; and all are equal, thus there are no Levites in the church, much less any other separate priestly caste. Jesus is the High Priest and all the members are his Priests. Thus the law of tithing was no longer necessary or functional.
Heb. 7:12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also.
Without any Levites in the church, there is no basis for tithing.
Heb. 7:5 And those indeed of the sons of Levi who receive the priest’s office have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brethren, although these are descended from Abraham.
Heb. 7:6 But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed the one who had the promises.
Heb. 7:7 But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.
Heb. 7:8 In this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on.
Heb. 7:9 And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes,
Heb. 7:10 for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.
There can be no law of tithing in the church, because the basis of it, spiritual inequality and religious superiority, has been removed. There is no separate class of priests in the church. Nor are there any lesser or greater people in God’s sight. All are now equal in the NC. All are priests. There can be no division in the church, much less one based on the OC paradigm of division, inequality, and tithing.
This is why NC SHARING replaced OC Tithing. All the NC priests members shared with each other. Tithing could never work because they were all equal priests and tithe is based on inequality and on a superior group of religious elites receiving from their lessers.
Gal. 6:6 The one who is taught the word is to share all good things with the one who teaches him.
Eph. 4:28 He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need.
Thus when Paul is speaking about giving money to the church, he makes it clear that whatever is done must be based on equality. Tithe was not based on equality but on the opposite. It is a one-way street away from the giver and to the receiver. It is a bad deal for the givers. It is not based on equality or reciprocity, as giving should be in the church.
Listen to Paul teach about giving in the church:
2Cor. 8:12 For if the readiness is present, it is acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what he does not have.
2Cor. 8:13 For this is not for the ease of others and for your affliction, but by way of equality —
2Cor. 8:14 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;
Note the SHARING principle, when one has a need, they give out of their surplus, and then the process is reversed. And the resources flow back in the opposite direction. This is the opposite of tithing, which only went one way, in a very unequal manner.
When the underlying OC principle of inequality changed, there was no basis, point or purpose for a minority of priests to receive tithe from the rest of the priests. There was no such configuration in the Bible or the church. All in the NC were equal, and all were priests. Thus NC SHARING and voluntary giving replaced OC Tithing in the Jewish/ Christian paradigm.
So Don, there is no basis for tithe in the church in any of the passages that you have quoted, or in any others you may still want to quote. It never happened in the apostolic church, and it was wrong for it to have ever happened in the church later.
Tithe is an impossible church doctrine that not even the Judaizers tried to promote. The SDA’s are making fools of themselves to think they can embrace this doctrine in the name of God. They have only proven to all that they are blind and wretched blasphemers that are doomed unless they repent.
Don said: The tithing principle I support resembles how Abraham and Jacob tithed rather than the cumbersome Mosaic provisions.
Tom said: Ha! You and the SDA’s support a system of church finance that was meant for a time when the Kingdom of God had a Temple, along with a separate priesthood that was supported by the majority of the Jewish Congregation.
You support OC doctrines in the church.
Besides, who cares what you support? Not me. You are not an apostle. And neither was Abraham or Jacob, much less that Pharisee D. M. Canright. So unless your view of church finance “resembles” that of Peter and Paul, you have made a big mistake.
Only if the apostles teach, practice, and support tithe, is the church free to do so. In fact, this is what the church must do if this is what the apostles teach.
So the question is this: Do the apostles support tithe in the church. Yes or No?
Answer: No. So neither can we.
You can claim to follow Abraham, Jacob, and Moses all you want, but you are making a grave mistake. Church doctrine can only be established by following the Apostles. You and the SDA’s have decided to follow the doctrinal fiction of Canright, the most unstable enemy of the SDA’s. How stupid is that?
Don said: The early Adventist church discovered systematic giving before they discovered the tithing principle.
Tom said: This first attempt was still referred to by them as tithe. They were trying to figure out how to support the ministers, and they were trying to make some version of tithe work. It was not an accident. But it was innocent and sincere. They did not know any better and they are guiltless in this matter.
How fitting that the young and talented D. M. Canright came up with tithe in the basic form we have today. It made perfect sense to them all because they had embraced so many OC interpretations anyway. They were all uneducated legalists at this time and made many mistakes.
Don said: Like the early Adventist church, the early Christian church had to develop new ways of doing things.
Tom said: Be very careful here. The Apostolic church had living apostles to guide them; the SDA’s did not. Besides, there is only one Gospel, and one Christ. There is no need for “new ways” as you claim.
While the apostolic church had to develop new ways, because they were promoting a New Covenant, this cannot be said for the SDA’s. They are part of the NC that had been in force for almost 2,000 years and thus they have to submit to the authority of the apostles like everyone else. They don’t get to invent any “new ways” or doctrines.
In fact, it is more true to say that the SDA’s were trying to go back to the primitive teachings of the apostles, i.e. Second Coming, Sabbath, Foot Washing. They were not trying to invent new, false doctrines as you suggest, even thought this is what they ended up doing.
Don said: Paul led the way, it seems, regarding Gospel finance.
Tom said: Wrong. Peter is the one that developed church finance and made sure everyone knew the rules about giving. He set up how the local church should deal with finance. This account can be found in Acts 4 and 5.
Acts 4:32 And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them.
Acts 4:33 And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all.
Acts 4:34 For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales
Acts 4:35 and lay them at the apostles’ feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need.
In fact, it was very early on, when Peter and the Spirit made sure that the entire church knew that this new system of voluntary giving and sharing was not to be taken lightly. Long before Paul became a Christian, Peter made it clear how the church was to be financed, even as the Spirit also set his seal of Judgment and approval on honest giving from the heart.
Acts 5:8 And Peter responded to her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for such and such a price?” And she said, “Yes, that was the price.”
Acts 5:9 Then Peter said to her, “Why is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Behold, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out as well.”
Acts 5:10 And immediately she fell at his feet and breathed her last, and the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband.
Acts 5:11 And great fear came over the whole church, and over all who heard of these things.
In fact, if ever there was a time in the early church when tithe, or some system like it, would have been promoted, this was it. But note that people could keep their property and sell it for whatever they wanted and owe nothing to the church. Such a statement by Peter is additional proof that tithing was not being promoted whatsoever.
Acts 5:3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land?
Acts 5:4 “While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.”
Acts 5:5 And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it.
The SDA’s today are just as guilty of trying to deceive the Holy Spirit as was Ananias and his wife. While he tried to change his pledge and lie about it, while the SDA’s have lied about the entire doctrine of tithing. They too have tried to fool both heaven and earth, but they have failed.
The Apostolic church did not tithe and anyone who says otherwise is guilty of great blasphemy against the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They will meet the same judgment as did those in the early church that played fast and loose with the teachings of the apostles.
Paul was not even a Christian at this time, and was in fact its greatest enemy. But when he joined, he also took the same position as Peter and strongly repudiated any idea that tithe could be a practiced by the church.
2Cor. 9:5 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.
2Cor. 9:6 Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.
2Cor. 9:7 Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
Don said: Paul found in the Hebrew system the principle that those who work in God's cause should live from the offerings of God's cause. I understand this to include the practice of tithing.
Tom said: Paul never embraced tithing in the church any more than ritual circumcision. He would never promote such an OC doctrine that represented legalism and a repudiation of the Gospel. You obviously do not understand the book of Galatians.
Paul does not support tithe or a hierarchy, much less the IJ and the false Gospel of the SDA’s. Those that think otherwise are not being honest, and thus they are blind and deaf on purpose. Seeing only what they want to see and hearing only what they want to hear.
Don said: 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.
Tom said: The SDA claim that the apostles practiced and promoted tithing in the church is an outrageous fabrication. It NEVER happened. It is a lie.
Moreover, this idea that the church morphed into the Temple Storehouse for tithe is absurd and mythical. This was NEVER taught in the apostolic church and the SDA’s are in danger of hell fire if they continue to promote this self-serving nonsense and blasphemy about tithe.
Because all in the NT were now Priests, SHARING with all in the church made sense and replaced tithing. There is no such doctrine as tithe in the church. Those that have embraced it today have made a serious error and are in great danger. They need to repent and reform or end up like A & S.
Don said: This is the correct way for the Christian to relate to Mosaic practices. Find the principle but don't lock yourself into Mosaic regulations.
Tom said: Wrong. Christian doctrine is based ONLY on the teachings of the apostles. Moses and his many laws are not the basis for any church doctrine. The apostles teach SHARING, not tithing. And that is the end of the matter for all the lambs. Those that take another view are wolves, not lambs.
There is nothing that anyone can say to defend the false doctrine of tithe in the SDA church. There is no basis for such an OC doctrine and the apostles do not allow or support it, much less the evil hierarchy that it has spawned.
Sirje Walkowiak said: So... instead of stoning Sabbath breakers, we should .......... fill in the blank
Tom said: This answer depends on which Sabbath you are trying to define.
If the OC, SDA Sabbath, then yes, the Sabbath breakers should be corrected and reproved, lectured on the evils of work or play on the Sabbath, blah, blah, blah…No TV, no eating out at a restaurant, no fun or work, etc.
But if we are talking about the Gospel Sabbath, that is very different. The GS is not to be regulated or policed. It is all about real Freedom in Christ to rest, play, worship, or work; it is a day that should be used to understand that we are priests of God, and thus we are not under the old Sabbath laws.
Why is the NC Sabbath so different from the OC Sabbath? Because in the NC, all are Priests. The OC Priests were never subject to the OC Sabbath rules. They were exempt because of their status and the necessity for them to work on the Sabbath. So too all believers today.
Col. 2:16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day —
Rom. 14:4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
Rom. 14:5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.
Rom. 14:6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.
Rom. 14:7 For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself;
Rom. 14:8 for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.
Today, all in the church are Priests and all are exempt from the OC rules that govern OC Sabbath keeping. Thus there is a very different Sabbath for the church to understand—a Gospel Sabbath. It is not at all like the SDA Sabbath, or the Sabbath of the Circumcision Party.
Heb. 4:9 So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.
Sirje said: How do we pick and choose which OT principles we should adopt with provisions and which we should totally abandon?
Tom said: Relax; we do not have to make this choice. The apostles have already made it. We either listen and follow them, or we do not. Most all have turned their backs on their teachings, including the SDA’s, they are very confused and wrong about the Two Covenants.
All need to also understand the Reformation. This is where many of these issues were debated and made part of the Protestant Faith, of which the SDA’s hail. Too bad that the SDA’s have forgotten most everything that took place in the Reformation.
Sirje said: How do we decide which practices were cultural even extending into the NT period and which have to do with spirituality and are to be modified to the Christian experience?
Tom said: The NT contains all the necessary information to understand such things. With the help of the Spirit and those honest scholars that explain the historical context, the Gospel path will become plain for all that seek truth.
The issue of tithe for example is not hard to figure out. The church did not do it. They did something else, for a very good reason. It is easy for those that have the Spirit, and are honest, to see this NT fact. But for others, they will never see because they have chosen to remain blind and in the dark. They will never understand or repent.
Don Sands said: 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.
Tom said: All Jesus teachings, both pre and post cross, comes to us through his apostles. He never wrote a book of the bible, or even one verse. So we are fully dependant on his disciples to instruct us about his teachings. Thus Jesus instruction to us is in the entire NT. The better we understand the NT the better we understand the mind of Christ and the purpose of the Gospel.
1Cor. 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
1Cor. 2:15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.
1Cor. 2:16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.
At this point, the SDA’s do not understand the NT or the mind of Christ. If they did, they would not be trying to defend false doctrine and fight against Gospel Reform and the clear teachings of the apostles.
Don said: Acts 15 provides an essential foundation to how we view the relationship of Christianity to its Mosaic roots.
Tom said: It is the book of Galatians that best explains the Gospel debate that almost destroyed the early church. Too bad that the SDA’s have never understood this book correctly. In fact, this book was at the heart of the 1888 debate and the reason why the Battle Creek SDA’s were destroyed shortly thereafter.
The 19th century SDA’s failed to be honest with the Gospel or the book of Galatians. So too the SDA’s today. They have failed to understand the law and the Gospel correctly, as well as the Judgment, church organization, hermeneutics, eschatology, the Eucharist, and even the Sabbath. The list just keeps growing, as the fraud of both tithe and abstinence must also be added.
Wow! Look at all those errors. No wonder they need to repent and reform. They have most everything wrong.
Don said: 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. <
Tom said: The debate about the law was never fully settled in the church. The Judaizers did not surrender their position after the Acts 15 meeting, nor did the church go on to better understand the relationship between law and Gospel.
In fact, things got worse, and eventually as the Gentiles took over the Jewish church, they followed in the same false path as the Judaizers.
Thus the Gentile church also blended the OC law with the Gospel, even as the developed a separate Priesthood, built a large Temple, and set up what was essentially a NC version of the Levitical system, complete with a High Priest called the Pope, who also pretended to be an apostle.
Today, the RCC represents the theological position of the Judaizers. They are the Gentile offspring of the Circumcision Party, even as they are the theological enemies of Paul and the Gospel. Too bad that the SDA’s are so much like the Judaizers and the RCC.
Unless the SDA’s stop following a false hermeneutic that allows them to read the Bible any way they want, they are doomed, and all should repudiate them.
Unless they return to the fundamentals of the Protestant Faith, and to the original Prophetic Pillars of the Three Angels Messages, they stand condemned.
The Advent Movement, which is supposed to be the extension of the Protestant Reformation, will go forward with others.
Don said: 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.
Tom said: The Jerusalem Council never contemplated nor approved tithe in the church. This was never an issue because no one in the church ever attempted to embrace tithe as the SDA’s dishonestly claim. So let’s tell the truth and stop the double-talk.
In fact, the Temple, and its Storehouse, were still standing at this time, thus the Jews were still practicing tithing the way they had done for many years ,which is not like how the SDA’s tithe. The apostolic church never tried to co-opt such an OC method, nor is there any hint or record that the apostles tried to copy or mimic tithe in any way.
Paul would curse you to your face for what the SDA’s are saying because it is against the Gospel. He would think your ancestors lived in Galatia, and consider you part of the Circumcision Party, condemning you, and all those that embrace tithe and a hierarchy in the church.
Tithe in the church is a total and complete fraud. Those that embrace this position do not understand the Gospel or church history correctly. And many SDA’s do not want to be corrected by the facts, which condemn them. This is beyond sad. It is fatal.
Don said: 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.
Tom said: Neither Paul nor the Holy Spirit promoted tithe in the church. Period. It never happened and you need to stop pretending otherwise.
All SDA’s should be thankful that God does not strike them dead for way they have promoted the false doctrine of tithe. Has they tried this nonsense in Peters day, when the church was forming, they would have been judged just like A & S for all to see.
Who knows, maybe the next time some SDA elite steps up to the pulpit to extol the virtues and duty of tithe paying, they will be struck dead by the Spirit for their great blasphemy. That might put a damper on this false doctrine for the next few Sabbaths, but I doubt it.
The SDA’s are as wedded to tithe as the Judaizers were to Circumcision and obedience to the Moral law. They can’t imagine their religion without it. They have such a deep and personal connection to tithe, that they can hardly comprehend the notion that it could be false doctrine. It has become part of their theology, tradition, and practice, even as it is considered a sacred truth and duty of all.
But regardless of what the SDA’s teach, tithe in the church is a false doctrine. Those who defend it do not understand the book of Acts or the mind of Peter, Paul, or Christ. Tithe is an OC doctrine that is against the Gospel on numerous levels, and thus it was NEVER promoted or practiced in the apostolic church, much less called sacred.
Such a set of facts will stand forever.
The same is true of a Sunday Lord’s day. It was never a practice or doctrine in the apostolic church. The SDA’s can understand this point about the Sabbath, but for some strange reason they can’t see it when it comes to tithe.
Don said: 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.
Tom said: What are these new terms you are using? Mosaic Package. Stop it. You need to stick with the terms that all theologians use and stop trying to promote your own fictional story about the early church. Moses “package” was an Old Covenant paradigm, while the New Covenant represents a different and improved religion.
No matter how you or others spin the facts, the apostolic church did not embrace OC tithe or a Sunday Sabbath, or the IJ. None of these doctrines were ever part of the early church, nor can they ever be part of church.
Don said in attempt to defend tithe: The principles of the Mosaic ;package remain essential to the Christian life.
Tom said: You sound like a member of the Circumcision Party. No doubt you would have been on the wrong side of the debate in Galatia. In fact, the SDA’s have always taken the wrong view of the book of Galatians, which was the cause for not only the 1888 debates and the destruction of the Battle Creek Empire, but also for Glacier View and the present SDA schism.
Galatians does not support Tithe, nor does Paul teach that it is a valid or “essential” doctrine in the church. In fact, it is a fraud. A scam. A hoax. It is a doctrine that robs the local church of its natural resources that should be used for the benefit of the local congregation. It gives control of the local church to those that do not understand the Word or the Gospel.
Tithe Robs the members of their money and their Eternal Life, and it is only a matter of time before all SDA’s discover that their modern leaders have been deceiving them in many ways, tithe being but one of them.
No one who understands the Gospel can pay tithe. Those that do so are proving that they do not understand the Bible or the Gospel.
Don said: 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.
Tom said: The apostles promoted SHARING instead of tithing. Acts makes this clear, long before Paul was a Christian. The apostles did not permit or promote tithing as the SDA’s claim. It never happened and thus the SDA’s must hang their heads in shame and admit their error and repent.
It is just this simple.
The SDA doctrine of tithe is pure fiction, fraud, and error. All SDA’s must admit this truth and repent for being so wrong about tithe and church organization, as well as the Gospel and the Judgment and hermeneutics, and eschatology, and church history, and on and on…
This is why there must be Adventist Reform. The status quo is not correct or workable. The Pioneers do not support the present course and neither should anyone else. It is time for all to admit the obvious and re-organize the Advent Movement, once again making the pursuit of truth the driving force.
Don, wouldn’t you like to see the Advent Movement come alive and take their prophetic mission seriously? Wouldn’t you like to see the SDA’s lose their cultic ways and move forward to develop a super charged and correct articulation of the Gospel and the end of the world that will energize Adventism?
Don said: I present this just as my personal, Biblically reasoned, view. I do not claim to have the final, or dogmatic, answer.
Tom said: Ha! Those who have long embraced the many errors of SDA’s are not fit to use their “reason” to understand doctrine today. Their minds have been so warped and indoctrinated with myth and confusion that they are unable to think clearly or honestly, much less understand the Bible. Thus your personal view is irrelevant, and so too is anything that the SDA’s have to say on this or any other topic.
We want to know what the apostles teach about tithe. Only what they think and teach matters. Only their “reasoned view” is important and should be followed. Not the self-serving confusion of those wolves that claim to have all truth. True SDA’s can only follow the teachings of the Bible. Period. This Protestant point can never change.
The issue is this:
Did the apostolic church teach, practice, or promote the SDA doctrine of NC tithing?
Did they teach that the church is the Storehouse for tithe?
Did they use tithe to set up their own Empire so that they could own and control all the local churches that were paid for by the members?
Did they use censorship and indoctrination to control the local church and did they deny freedom of speech and ownership of the local church?
Answer: No, no, no, no, and no.
The SDA doctrine of tithe, as well as the hierarchical manner in which the church is organized is wrong, wicked, and sinful. The Advent Movement CANNOT have a tithe-based hierarchy. Those that think otherwise are not Protestant or Adventist. They do not understand the Gospel or the Reformation.
Don said: But, I repeat, I view the Christian church as free from most dogmatic encumbrances.
Tom said: HA! Too bad that the SDA’s are not free from OC tithing and their corrupt leaders who have been robbing them blind all these years.
The SDA church teaches that tithe is the will of God and the duty of all church members. But this is not true, and thus they are going to have to repent of this great blasphemy or else…
Don said: Some Christians specialize in creating a new yoke of bondage based on the New Testament. eg. Women's role in the church. This is not the Spirit of Christ.
Tom said: The SDA’s specialize in OC thinking and doctrine. This is why they practice OC tithing and think the PAJ of the church is in the OT book of Daniel. They are so very confused that they remain divided and dysfunctional. They obviously have nothing much to brag about except for their 19th century exploits in Battle Creek, which are fading fast. Even Kellogg left them and became their enemy.
The only way they can save themselves and the Advent Movement is for them to repent from the many errors of Traditional Adventism. Tithe is a good place to start, because it will test the sincerity of the church.
Are the leaders willing to tell the truth about tithe and dismantle the hierarchy? Are they ready to transform Adventism into a church that seeks truth no matter the cost?
Tithe is not endorsed by the Holy Spirit for the church. Jesus never paid tithe, nor did he teach his disciples to do this in the church.
Tithe is a false and blasphemous doctrine that is an insult to the Gospel and all Church members. Those that teach and practice this fraud do not understand the Gospel or the nature of the church.
Don said: Adventists prone to this yoke of bondage approach have an added burden with the whole body of EGW's writings.
Tom said: All SDA’s have embraced a false Gospel, which is nothing more than a yoke of bondage. This is what the church teaches. They were legalists in Battle Creek and once again in Takoma Park. Now, in Silver Spring, they have become so corrupt and dysfunctional that they are worse than ever.
Too bad that the leaders hid the 1888 debate, which showed how Ellen White went to war against the leaders because they did not understand the Gospel or the Two Covenants correctly. What a pity that they suppressed and changed church history so that they could keep the Advent people under their “yoke of bondage” to a false Gospel and a false view of eschatology, church finance, and history.
Don said: I believe that I can sit down with my Bible and the Holy Spirit and arrive at an understanding of my responsibility before God.
Tom said: Ha! While all SDA’s arrogantly think they understand the Bible better than all others, the opposite is true. They don’t understand either the OC or the NC properly, much less better than anyone else.
It is apparent that you are NOT able to understand the NT as easily as you claim. In fact, your understanding about tithe, as well as the Gospel and the Judgment, church organization, and the Lord’s Supper, and even the Sabbath are dead wrong.
Although tithe is an ancient and simple OC doctrine, it is not a NC one. Thus you have been chasing delusions in your attempt to defend your life-long practice that is making you look very foolish and dishonest in the process.
So you have not been able to “arrive” at anything but confusion and SDA tradition, all of which is facilitated by the typical Laodicean arrogance that claims to have all the truth.
Those that choose to remain blind, remain in the dark for a reason.
Don said: My fellow believers can seek to inform my experience, but the final decision is between myself and my God.
Tom said: First off, the Laodicean Message, as well as the facts on the ground, show that your “fellow believers” are just as wrong and confused about doctrine and church history as you are.
So who cares what others say that think like you? It is only the apostles who have any authority in the church and the sooner that you pay attention to what they say and do the better for you.
Second, the only decision you have to make is to embrace the Gospel or not. You have failed to make the correct choice, which is why you embrace so many false and OC doctrines like tithe.
Those that think tithe is a NT doctrine and that OC Sabbath keeping is necessary for salvation and that there is a Celestial Judgment taking place in heaven to examine the Sanctification levels of all professed Christians, etc, etc,-- have embraced the wrong Gospel. Their religion is worthless.
The SDA Gospel is a fraud. Their Jesus is double-talking, tithe paying, AA member, who obsesses about Sunday laws and the Moral law. Those who have been trained to embrace this false SDA Gospel should hang their heads in shame and fear. Their only hope is to repent and pray that God will open their minds to comprehend the true Gospel and genuine Pillars of the Three Angels Messages.
It is time for all SDA’s to demand honesty and truth from their leaders in all things.
At this point, the SDA leaders are great liars, fools, and frauds. They are enemies of the Gospel and of the Pioneers. Unless they repent and embrace Adventist reform, they are doomed, and so too all that support and defend them.
Don, your decision to remain loyal to those that misunderstand and even hate the Gospel, will be fatal for you and others. Instead of repenting and repudiating so much obvious error, your decision to continue to defend and promote the many false doctrines of the SDA’s will seal your fate-- in the wrong direction. Very sad.
Don said: As I rise up from my encounter with God, I seek out fellowship with those who reach similar conclusions to what I have concluded.
Tom said: Those that embrace so much false doctrine have been having an affair with a false Christ. Their religion is worthless no matter how many agree with them. They are to be exposed and condemned in the church as Peter did with those liars A & S, and as Paul teaches in Galatians about Peter.
Who ever dare lie about the Gospel, promoting false doctrines like tithe and the IJ, is playing with fire. Which is why the SDA’s should be considered the world’s greatest pyromaniacs. They are outrageous liars and blasphemers for all to see.
Moreover, it is natural for those who embrace false doctrine to associate with others that also think like they do. It is also prophecy being fulfilled, as many in the last days come together to worship a false Christ and a distorted Gospel.
2Tim. 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,
2Tim. 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.
The fulfillment of Pau’s prophecy is here, and you are part of it. Congratulations.
There are many churches and denominations in Laodicea, all gathered around their own special set of false and “wretched” doctrines. Which is why they are all declared blind and naked. Including the SDA’s!
Tithe in the church is NOT a sound or true doctrine, and neither is a hierarchy, or the IJ, or even the OC Sabbath. The SDA’s have so many things wrong, and so too all others, that tithe is but one of their many great errors and sins.
All those that have gathered together to practice, promote, and defend false doctrine are fulfilling prophecy. They have turned aside from the truth so that they can embrace numerous myths and false doctrines.
Then to add wickedness on top of evil, the SDA’s also practice censorship and repudiate free speech and honest management, even as they have turned their backs on sound hermeneutics and honestly trying to understand the Word. Pitiful.
Don said: The tithing principle easily forwards into the Christian system; the tithing regulations don't.
Tom said: First off, the SDA doctrine of tithe is not about the “principles” of OC tithing, as if they don’t have a firm and clear position about tithe.
They teach and promote a very complex and detailed doctrine of tithe in the church. Complete with theological justification and biblical support, and on and on. They claim it is God’s will for all members, even as it is their duty and obligation. If you don’t tithe, you can NEVER be a pastor or church worker, much less hold any office or duty at the local church.
So let’s not pretend that the SDA’s are only “promoting some principles.” No. They have developed a full blown, rigid, and very sophisticated position about tithing that has a major effect on how the church is organized, managed, funded, and controlled.
Too bad that tithe in the church is a total and complete fraud. It is as bad as ritual circumcision was for the early church, and even worse than the Sunday Sabbath fraud that came into the church after 70 AD. Tithe in the church is a wicked doctrine that wars against the freedom and definition of the Gospel, even as it prevents the local church from carrying out its role to provide for its members.
The SDA’s must repent of tithe and their hierarchy or face the same Judgment as those in the early church that also lied about church finance. They have no excuse for all this false doctrine and incompetence.
Many have made this same mistake of dragging OC principles and doctrines into the NC. The Judaizers in the apostolic church started down this path and then the RCC mastered these errors, but the SDA’s are trying their best to catch up.
According to Rome, a separate Priesthood, including a high priest, called the Pope, and a large Temple, “easily forwards into the Christian system.” But does this make it right? Hardly.
Sunday also seems very correct to most all Christians today. It has come forward very nicely and seems to fit very well. Does that make it true doctrine?
NC doctrine is not to be confused with OC principles. If the apostles teach sharing as the method to finance the church, then who has the authority to stand up and declare that OC tithing is now “sacred” and required by God?
Do the SDA’s have such authority?
Hardly.
Then on what basis can they claim that tithe is a duty that we owe to God? Who gave them permission to speak lies in the name of the Almighty? Who gave you permission to defend, support, and practice false doctrine in the church?
No doubt your “pretend” Jesus has given you such permission, but I can assure you on the authority of the Word that the real Jesus has condemned you in the PAJ of the church. You have no more permission to uphold OC tithing in the church than did Peter to uphold ritual circumcision. Those that practice tithe paying have fallen from grace just like the foolish Galatians.
Neither tithing nor any such OC regulations are valid in the church, and the SDA’s are guilty of great arrogance and blasphemy in this matter. There is no theological defense or justification for tithe or a hierarchy in the church. It is a total and complete fraud and so too are those Laodiceans that are pretending it is the will of God.
It is time for all SDA’s to understand the truth about tithing in the church. Tithe is very wrong and should be stopped. It is a disgraceful practice that insults the Gospel, robs the local church of their resources, and enables a corrupt hierarchy to mismanage and destroy the Advent Movement.
I hope this helps those that can still be helped.
Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform
Message edited by tom norris on November 12, 2009
Last edited by tom_norris (03-20-10 12:01 pm)
Offline
Tom, I see that you still will not face the issue of Ellen White being the driving force for SDAs doctrine of tithing. Your previous attempt to answer does not stack up with the council she gave in her later years. She never once renounced her previous stand on tithe. She never went soft on the issue.
She counciled others to do what she wouldn't do herself.
Offline
No one who believes the Gospel should ever pay tithe to anyone. Those that do, must fulfill all the many OC laws, rules, and regulations. They will never be saved with such a warped view of religion.
If I believe the Gospel, I will recognize my right and obligation to support the Gospel workers with my means. If I choose for that to be a systematic giving of 1/10 of my income in accordance with the Adventist Church's plan for paying ministers, I may do so conscience free. My decision to use the tithing principle to guide my financial support of God's workers is not following the Mosaic regulations on tithing. The Mosaic tithing system worked for the Mosaic era, but it would be a yoke of bondage if applied legally today.
But, the tithing principle is a sensible approach to financial support. One that has proven its divine wisdom over and over again.
I am free to follow good ideas. After all, where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. It is for freedom that Christ has set me free. I am uninterested in burdens that anyone wishes to place on me because I don't conform to their ideas of the Gospel.
It was the same God who guided Moses to record the laws and regulations as who walked on earth in the person of Jesus. All those ancient rules and regulations emanated from the mind of God, at least the principles. I treasure all of them. The Christian Church has new wineskins with which to hold the ideas and principles of God. The structures may have changed but the ideas have not. They are as wonderful as ever. Jesus spent his life on earth explaining and defending the ways of God.
Message edited by Don on November 12, 2009
Offline
Bob said: Tom, I see that you still will not face the issue of Ellen White being the driving force for SDA’s doctrine of tithing.
Tom said: I am not sure what you mean, or what time period you are referring to? But Ellen White did not invent the tithe doctrine for the SDA’s, nor did she follow Canright’s version that became the norm for all Adventists.
In fact, now that we all know it was Canright who developed SDA tithing, it better explains his attitude. Most anyone would feel pretty good about their abilities if they were responsible for bringing in a never-ending stream of money into the organization. Canright was a rising star in Battle Creek, he could write and debate as well as invent new doctrine that made money for the church. No wonder he expected to follow James White as President.
Although few know it today, Canright is responsible for bringing in BILLIONS of dollars into the SDA treasury. Of course it was not that much back then, but it was a substantial amount for that time period. Though he became an enemy of the church at the start of the 1888 debates, his doctrine has nonetheless helped fund the growth of the SDA church in 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries. Too bad it has turned out to be totally and completely wrong.
No wonder Canright thought himself more than qualified to be President. No wonder he claimed to be one of their leading men and got angry when he was passed over for the top spot.
Canright was a man of great ability and ambition, even as his tithe doctrine brought in a steady and growing stream of cash into the church. Ellen White had little to do with any of this. Canright worked directly with James White, and thus he learned from the best leader that the SDA’s ever produced.
The SDA leadership, starting with James White did not need Ellen White to tell them how to promote tithe in the church. James White recognized a gold mine when he saw one, and this is exactly what Canright’s doctrine of tithe turned out to be. It was a very successful, pre- 1888 doctrine that is still a great obsession of the SDA’s to this very day.
Who knew that D. M. Canright is actually responsible for bringing in BILLIONS of dollars to the SDA’s? How ironic is all this? No wonder he was bitter and revengeful about how things ended up.
So the youthful protégé of James White, Dudley Canright was the “driving force” behind tithe. Not Ellen White. More precisely, James White was really behind it, he is the one that was in charge of church finance, not his wife. He is the one that gave Canright the task to figure out a better way for the church to tithe than the unsatisfactory system that they had already developed. Ellen White was not really involved.
In fact, Ellen White refused to follow Canright’s teaching on tithe, even though at the end of her life she agreed to lend her name to this dubious doctrine.
Why did she do that? Because she wanted the SDA church, now relocated to Takoma Park, to recover from the Battle Creek disaster and grow so that it could do its duty in the future to prepare the church for the Second Coming.
She did not want the issue of tithe to become a matter of debate at this time. Nor did she want to see the newly relocated Denomination fail because of this issue. She knew that the Watson letter was being used in Battle Creek to encourage members to stop paying tithe to the church and to defect from the Denomination, thus she was forced to take some action.
But even then, she refused to ever back down from the Watson letter or her testimony that the Spirit was leading her away from Canright’s doctrine of tithe.
She only supported tithe as written in 9T because of the crisis situation. She fully expected the White Estate to explain this background and context, including the Watson letter, when the time came to study these issues. But of course that time never came, because Arthur White hid thousands of documents and only made public what he wanted Ellen White to say. Thus the White Estate misrepresented Ellen White’s views about tithe and many other things.
Too bad that the White Estate hid this information and pretended that there was no back-story or context that needed to be made public. Too bad they hid the Watson letter and portrayed Ellen White’s views about tithe in a false and incorrect light. They never told anyone that Canright developed tithe, or that the Spirit led Ellen White away from it.
There needs to be much more research done in the White Estate about all these issues. Thanks to this incompetent and dishonest archive, the SDA’s have a very wrong view about the history of tithe in the SDA church, as well as how Ellen White really views this teaching.
Bob said: Your previous attempt to answer does not stack up with the council she gave in her later years.
Tom said: Few people know that Canright developed the SDA doctrine of tithe. Few also know that Ellen White did not personally follow this tithe doctrine, and that she was encourage by the Spirit to move away from it.
But the White Estate knew it all along and they should have let everyone know years ago. This would have greatly moderated those that used her words in public to support tithe. Why? Because there was more to the story than the leaders were telling. Ellen White’s views about tithe are far more complex and rebellious then the leaders wanted anyone to know.
Now you know.
Perhaps you have been confusing the Ellen White of the White Estate with the one that I discuss. The Ellen White that is in the public domain is a very different character from the real one of history. I am not sure you understand this point as yet.
Bob said: She never once renounced her previous stand on tithe. She never went soft on the issue.
Tom said: She went very soft on tithe. So much so, that she cut out the Conference and allocated her tithe, and that of others, directly as she saw a need. This infuriated some leaders who thought that tithe money must go into the Conference, as the doctrine of SDA tithe teaches.
So she broke the rules and never said she was sorry for doing it! In fact, she threatened to publicize her independent view of tithe if the leaders did not keep their cool and back off. They backed off, and she gave them a pro tithe article for 9 T that was needed to stop the ongoing Battle Creek Schism. It was only a compromise until the day came when tithe would be discovered to be a massive fraud.
That day is here.
I agree that she never renounced tithe. But so what? I never said she did. But she never treated it as if it were a sacred or a rigid doctrine. Nor did she ever claim that this doctrine would stand forever. Even though this is what the White Estate has led everyone to believe.
Tithe is not a pillar, as many pretend. And Ellen White demonstrates this fact for by her purposeful disregard of its rules. Not only that, she writes that the Spirit urged her away from this official version of tithing. Not exactly something that was ever mentioned by the SDA’s or given any press. How could something like that even be true?
In fact, when some church officials tried to declare the Watson letter a forgery that should be destroyed, W. C. White and his brother had to step in and protest. The letter was real. Thus the aged Ellen White, a few years before her death, refused to let anyone try and pretend that she did not have serious reservations about tithe. She did, and even as an old woman, she would not allow herself to be intimidated by any of the leaders.
Tithe is not beyond investigation, critical examination or removal. Ellen White was on the right path. She knew it would fall flat one day, and that the shaking time would occur. That time has come.
Bob said: She counseled others to do what she wouldn't do herself.
Tom said: So what? I never said she was perfect? Maybe she thought she had good reason to do so? Or maybe she was just wrong? Again so what? This is a thread about Tithe in the church. Not about how Ellen White views anything.
Ellen White does not profess to be perfect or have doctrinal authority. She is on the record as saying that there are many SDA doctrines that need to be corrected. Tithe was never exempted from such statements.
Don said: If I believe the Gospel, I will recognize my right and obligation to support the Gospel workers with my means.
Tom said: If you believe in the Gospel, you will carefully follow the teachings of Jesus and the apostles in all things, including church finance and organization.
Don, you have the right to follow the Word, but not the right to invent doctrine or to speak false doctrine in God’s name.
Any beliefs or obligations that you have in the church must fall in line with the teachings and practice of the NT. Your only “right” is to follow the teachings of the apostles in church finance as well as the Gospel and the Judgment and all things.
Neither you, nor the SDA’s, have the right, or authority, to invent new doctrines like tithe and the IJ.
Moreover, you cannot support the Gospel with “any means” you desire. Rather, you must follow the teachings of the apostles in this matter. You must support the Gospel only as directed by the apostles.
Don said: If I choose for that to be a systematic giving of 1/10 of my income in accordance with the Adventist Church's plan for paying ministers, I may do so conscience free.
Tom said: Ha, this is too funny! You have been lost in a fog for so long that your words betray you. On what basis can you claim to be a Protestant?
Don, pay attention; You DON’T GET TO CHOOSE how you think the church should finance the Gospel. And neither do the SDA’s. ONLY THE APOSTLES CAN CHOOSE how church finance can operate and function.
You get no choice in the matter! Nor do you get to invent or manufacturer any doctrine about anything else. I know this must be shocking, but any Christian that thinks they can go to the Bible and choose this doctrine or that principle, as if at a buffet, are delusional. They may claim to have a clean conscience as they play such games, but they will be lost nonetheless.
Besides, it is God that chooses us to follow him. Those that think they are authorized to invent their own doctrines, have not been called by God or chosen by him for Eternal Life. Those that are chosen act like it.
John 15:14 “You are My friends if you do what I command you.
John 15:15 “No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you.
John 15:16 “You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit,
1Pet. 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, andfBithynia, who are chosen <BR> <BR>
1Pet. 2:9 But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God’s OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;
1Pet. 5:13 She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you greetings, and so does my son, Mark.
2John 1 The elder to the chosen lady and her children, whom I love in truth; and not only I, but also all who know the truth,
2John 13 The children of your chosen sister greet you.
Don, none of these “chosen” Christians paid tithe in the church, nor do they have any such option. Those today that are chosen by God will not think they are free to invent doctrines as you claim. No Christian is free to make such choices and remain a follower of Christ and the apostles.
Don said: My decision to use the tithing principle to guide my financial support of God's workers is not following the Mosaic regulations on tithing. The Mosaic tithing system worked for the Mosaic era, but it would be a yoke of bondage if applied legally today.
Tom said: Neither you nor the SDA’s can “decide” that the church can tithe. This is a “decision” that can only be made by the apostles. But they made no such decision as the SDA’s dishonestly claim. There is no basis or authority for anyone in the church today to practice tithe or set up a hierarchy.
No one has such a choice to make, because it is not a NC doctrine. It is not a valid option. Thus your attempt to practice tithe is simply false Doctrine and arrogance.
Don, the SDA’s embrace so much false doctrine, that tithe seems correct when placed alongside all this other error. But this is not how to test doctrine. Only the NT can approve any doctrine. Your only “decision” is to follow the apostles or not. You have clearly chosen the latter, when the former is the correct position for any Protestant or Adventist.
Don said: But, the tithing principle is a sensible approach to financial support. One that has proven its divine wisdom over and over again.
Tom said: Who said doctrine has to fit your mind? What may be “sensible” to you, or someone else, may not be to God. Which is why there is no such hermeneutic that depends on any doctrine being “sensible.” That is not how doctrine is defined.
This reminds me of Peter acting to prevent Jesus from going to the cross. Why did he do that? Because he thought it made no sense for Jesus to die on a cross. So he acted on his views, which turned out to be very wrong. Peter was thinking logically and correctly he thought, just like you are now, but he was wrong. Just like you are now.
Matt. 16:23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s.”
Tithe in the church is mans idea, not God’s or the apostles. The SDA’s have made a major error about church finance and organization, (as well as many other doctrines), and they must repent or else.
Don said: I am free to follow good ideas. After all, where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
Tom said: No Christian is free to follow anything but the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Only their ideas are good and approved. Not our confused attempts to “follow our own good ideas.”
John 10:27 “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;
2Th. 3:7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example,
2Th. 3:9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example.
Those that do not follow the teachings and example of the apostles are viewed as following Satan. There is no in between. Those that think they can practice OC tithing in the church are not, not, not following the apostles, which means they are following Satan unawares.
Who knew that tithe in the church is evil? Who knew that it is a doctrine of devils?
1Tim. 5:15 for some have already turned aside to follow Satan.
Don said: It is for freedom that Christ has set me free. I am uninterested in burdens that anyone wishes to place on me because I don't conform to their ideas of the Gospel.
Tom said: It is obvious that you do not care to “conform” to the teachings of the Apostles. This is your problem, and that of the SDA church. They have made up their religion, complete with a long lost of fabricated and false doctrines that the pretend are true. This is why they are condemned in the PAJ and why they will remain under such judgment until they repent and reform.
Rom. 12:2 do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.
Don said: It was the same God who guided Moses to record the laws and regulations as who walked on earth in the person of Jesus. All those ancient rules and regulations emanated from the mind of God, at least the principles. I treasure all of them.
Tom said: Stop the cultic double-talk. You treasure legions of false doctrine supported by double-talk and propaganda. You are not here to find truth but to defend the SDA cult that pays you with the tithe.
You have already admitted that you think it fine to ignore the apostles and make up your own doctrines. But Moses is not an apostle, nor is any Christian authorized to follow his Old Covenant teachings. The SDA’s are truly a wretched, out of control cult. Their pastors are not Protestant, not do they even make any such pretensions any more. They think its fine to make up numerous doctrines, and tithe is one of their most important and profitable, and they have no intention of repenting. Pity for them.
Mark 8:36 “For what does it profit a man, (or a church) to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul?
Don said: The Christian Church has new wineskins with which to hold the ideas and principles of God.
Tom said: The New Wineskin is the Church. It holds many new and improved ideas, but tithe is not one of them. Tithe is a very old doctrine, meant for very old wine. There is no tithing in the New Covenant Church.
New wine will soon explode out of old wineskins, thus the metaphor is trying to show the danger and loss of mixing OC doctrine with the Gospel. This is a great error that is the basis for the RCC. Too bad that the SDA’s have gone their own way and also made the same mistake.
The SDA wine skin of the 3rd Angels Message, which is the law based hierarchy, with all their OC rules and doctrines, has burst open for all to see, and the genuine Gospel wine is being lost and wasted. The Gospel and the genuine Fundamentals that govern both the Protestant and Adventist Movements can not co exist with the legalism and dishonesty of Traditional, Official Adventism. They don’t mix well.
There must be a new organizational system for the Advent Movement, one that is not built on the error and fraud of tithe. There must be new and truthful doctrines to replace the legions of nonsense, error, and incompetence.
Don said: The structures may have changed but the ideas have not. They are as wonderful as ever. Jesus spent his life on earth explaining and defending the ways of God.
Tom said: Not only did the “structure” of the Old Covenant change, it was replaced with a very different Covenant. One that was so dramatically different it was considered NEW. Thus the New Covenant.
Many ideas in the NC are materially different from the OC. One had to do with the priesthood and the Temple. In the OC, only a few were priests, and thus the non-priests paid tithe to support those priests that worked for the Temple system.
But in the NC, the Temple was not a building, but the individual members. All were now priests, with Jesus being the High Priest in Heaven. With such a new configuration, or “structure”, tithing made no sense for the church, which is why they never tried to practice such an OC and outdated method of Gospel Finance.
The SDA’s are very wrong to teach that the apostolic church embraced tithing. It is a fact that they could not, and did not. So it is time for the SDA doctrine of tithe to be exposed for the false and evil doctrine that it is.
It is time to tell the truth and stop this massive lie that is being perpetuated by the greed, incompetence, and blasphemy of the church leaders. Heaven has already condemned them in the PAJ, (which is the LM), but there is no reason why the rest of us should not co-operate with the Spirit and also make the necessary earthly condemnations.
This New Covenant idea about the Priesthood of all believers renders tithing in the church impossible, obsolete, and dysfunctional. Those that follow this OC teaching today are repudiating the Gospel and misunderstanding the NT.
But the SDA’s don’t care. They still defend tithing even when they know it has no apostolic support. Money and power trumps truth for the SDA leaders. This is why they stand condemned.
The SDA’s have made the mistake of following Moses and Canright in the matter of tithe. They have also embraced the false hermeneutic of the RCC that allows the church to create whatever new doctrine it fancies, including their false hierarchical form of governance. They claim it is their right to do all this, and so too the SDA’s. But neither Rome, Silver Spring, or Salt Lake City has any doctrinal authority. Only the apostles can approve how the Gospel is to be defined and financed. The SDA’s have failed to get either of these correct
In conclusion, there is no such doctrine as tithe in the Church. It is a total and complete myth. Those foolish or stubborn enough to think otherwise are only proving that they do not understand the Two Covenants or the Gospel correctly.
Those that embrace tithe in the church have decided to repudiate the apostles and do as they please. Pushing aside the NT, they have made up their own doctrines about church finance and organization, as well as the Gospel and the Judgment and many other things.
Those who act in such a reckless and rebellious manner are neither Christian nor Protestant. They are not Adventist, but only pretenders, hired hands, and wolves.
Shame on all that follow the Old Covenant doctrine of tithe and the RC doctrine of a Hierarchy.
Shame on the SDA’s, with their wicked leaders and double-talking pastors who have misled many away from the Kingdom of God and Eternal Life. Let all beware the dishonest and cultic-minded Adventists.
“FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL, AND WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR, AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES; OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT SEE WITH THEIR EYES, AND HEAR WITH THEIR EARS, AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN, AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.”’ Acts 28:27
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Last edited by tom_norris (03-20-10 12:09 pm)
Offline
Tom, do you belong to a local congregation which follows the principles you advocate?
Offline
Ellen endorsed the tithing system Canright introduced.
She quoted Malachi and as much as told the flock they were going to hell if they didn't. She paid tithe till the end and quoted her angel on the subject. She is the reason for the system is being used today and the brethren are still quoting Malachi. Too bad
Ellen also endorsed the IJ. She never refuted it and she is responsible for the belief as it exists today.
Any attempt to play her role down is futile to those of us that have studied her writings on the subjects. Tom, you throw the so whats around like my statements are of no value.
You, for some reason, will not face the facts. I believe you have been brainwashed concerning Ellen.
Offline
She is the reason for the system is being used today and the brethren are still quoting Malachi.
There should be no doubt that Ellen G. White's writings carry strong influence within Adventism even in 2009. But, there are many other Christian denominations, whose Gospel integrity does not come under scrutiny as Adventism's does, who also practice tithing as a Scriptural mandate.
To put the Adventist defense of tithing mainly on the shoulders of Ellen White is to ignore tithing history and doctrinal formation.
Offline
What Babylon does should never be a reason or excuse for the remnant to follow suite.
First of all this is an Adventist web site. Normally we discuss doctrines of SDAs. Baptists and other churches are Babylon and what they believe should not influence the elect.
http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/lol.gif
I suppose if I had spent 40 years as a Mormon and found out the real truth, I would tell my friends what caused me to jump ship. I want all to know that there is the Gospel truth.
Offline
Ellen White’s views about tithe are far more complex and rebellious then the leaders wanted anyone to know.
Huh? Tom, do think that throwing that spaghetti out there is going to confuse and fog Ellen White's clear stance on the issue? It won't! It won't be any more effective than your typing out extensively long and repetitive statements will serve to get anyone to think that because of this method that what you present is true.
So, it is true that there is no biblical directive for tithing for the New Covenant Church, but it is not true that Ellen white disagreed with it.
She did agree with it, the only thing that she did disagree with was whether it was mandatory that it be sent to the big house, scuze me, G.C. storehouse. She decided she could send it where it would best be used, and she did just that. But she never made any inference that the New Covenant Church was in error in proclaiming that tithing was mandatory. She wholeheartedly supported tithe.
I hope this helps,
Cadge
Offline
Don asked: Tom, do you belong to a local congregation which follows the principles you advocate?
Tom said: I wish! No, I belong to a local SDA church that pretends tithe is the will of God. There is so much false doctrine in the SDA church today that I don’t waste my time there on Sabbath.
I would rather sit at my computer and associate with those that are not so confused about the Gospel and that are open to find truth.
Bob Shields said: Ellen endorsed the tithing system Canright introduced.
Tom said: So too did James White, Uriah Smith, and all the rest of them. So what? They all endorsed tithe. But that does not make it right.
Ellen White made many errors, even as she changed her views over time. So what? This is normative for her, even though the White Estate has not been honest about any of this.
For example, Ellen White endorsed Bate’s view that the Sabbath started and stopped at 6 pm, and that the law in Galatians was only the Ceremonial law. But she later changed both of these positions. The fact that she would also change her view about tithe fits the historical pattern of her life.
The fact that almost no one knows this fits a dishonest pattern of fraud and spoliation in the White Estate.
Canright left the church and repudiated Adventism less than 10 years after his late 1870’s revision about tithe. Such behavior no doubt caused doubts in the mind of Ellen White about anything that Canright ever wrote, promoted, or developed. So maybe this is when Ellen White started to wonder about it?
More research needs to be done.
Bob said: She quoted Malachi and as much as told the flock they were going to hell if they didn't.
Tom said: They all believed that they had discovered the “truth” about tithe. They all thought their views were biblical and thus they preached tithe like everything else, -with fire and brimstone.
All those that practiced and promoted tithe used the OT and much guilt, to sustain their view. Ellen White is no different. That is how they all preached to motivate the flock.
Over a period of 15- 20 years, Ellen White changed her view about tithe. She moved away from it. And she never looked back. It was one of the last things she did before her death.
Bob said: She paid tithe till the end and quoted her angel on the subject.
Tom said: Bob, you must not be paying attention: She DID NOT pay tithes the way the church required and taught. She refused to pay her tithe TO THE CHURCH, and she never repented or said what she did was wrong. In fact, she said the opposite.
Moreover, she justifies her long running refusal to follow Canright’s Tithe doctrine by claiming the Spirit was moving her AWAY from the tithe doctrine. Although she still believed in the concept of tithe in the church, she is claiming special circumstances, even as the Spirit was still moving her away from Canright’s view of tithe.
This testimony from Ellen White about receiving an ongoing warning about tithe needs to be heard by the Adventist Community. It will change the way they view tithe and once again prove that the White Estate is has been deceiving and misleading the church about Ellen White’s view of tithe and many other things.
Listen to Ellen White:
“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…”
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;
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.
Spalding and Magan Collection, p. 215, 216
So Ellen White is not “quoting an angel” in support of the official SDA position about tithe, but rather, she is doing the OPPOSITE. She is saying that the Spirit is leading her away from tithe, “for years,” because of “special circumstances.” So she was not following the rules, nor were the leaders pleased with her behavior.
Bob said: She is the reason for the system is being used today and the brethren are still quoting Malachi.
Tom said: The White Estate has dishonestly used Ellen White to support every possible doctrine, policy, and position. But what they say about Ellen White and her views is not fully complete, or true.
In fact, many of the strongest points of TA are based on a massive fraud in the White Estate. Which is to say that Ellen White does not support TA as the leaders have claimed all these years.
Bob said: Ellen also endorsed the IJ. She never refuted it and she is responsible for the belief as it exists today.
Tom said: Bob, you are not paying attention. What you have been taught about Ellen White is full of myth and manipulation. The church has not been honest about how she views, tithe, wine, the law and the Gospel, the Judgment, hermeneutics, and eschatology, etc.
Take the IJ for example. Ellen White never said, claimed, or wrote that the IJ is the Judgment Pillar in Rev 14: 7. Although this is what TA teaches, and what the White Estate still claims Ellen White taught, it is not true.
Not one 19th century SDA ever taught the IJ in the same manner as the 20th century White Estate. Not one of them claimed the IJ to be pillar in the Three Angels Messages.
The “hour of his judgment has come” was only a reference to the Second Coming, and that is still the correct prophetic interpretation today. Thus Glacier View was a farce. It upheld the manipulated views of the White Estate and made myth and error official doctrine.
If alive, Ellen White would have protested and repudiated Glacier View. Just like she did its 19th century echo, the 1888 General Conference.
Bob said: Any attempt to play her role down is futile to those of us that have studied her writings on the subjects.
Tom said: The public’s understanding of Ellen White is based on the dishonest information and spin from the White Estate. Because the White Estate has been caught hiding so much history, and deliberately manipulating their records to support TA, no one is safe to assume anything about Ellen White or her views.
I am not trying to downplay her role, but to explain her role honestly and truthfully. Something that the White Estate has never done.
James White was far more involved with tithe than was his wife. Which is why Canright, who worked under James White, received the assignment about tithe in the first place.
All must beware of anything that the White Estate has published or said about church history, doctrine, or Ellen White. Most of what they have said is dishonest, misleading, and wrong.
Bob said: Tom, you throw the "so what’s" around like my statements are of no value. You, for some reason, will not face the facts. I believe you have been brainwashed concerning Ellen.
Tom said: The fact that Ellen White was mortal and made doctrinal errors should not be news. It is an irrelevant point. That is what I am trying to say with the “so what” remark.
Many think that for her to have been a “true prophet” she cannot make doctrinal errors and such. But this idea, from the White Estate, is nonsense, even as their view of her as a prophet is also wrong. Their “test of a prophet” is silly and wrong and all must ignore it.
Ellen White can have spiritual gifts and still be wrong about doctrine. They are not mutually exclusive as the White Estate claims.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ite-10.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … rophet.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … hite-3.htm
Don said: There should be no doubt that Ellen G. White's writings carry strong influence within Adventism even in 2009. But, there are many other Christian denominations, whose Gospel integrity does not come under scrutiny as Adventism does, who also practice tithing as a Scriptural mandate.
Tom said: First, Tithe was the brainchild of James White, and the work product of Dudley Canright. Ellen White was not the driving force as many have been incorrectly led to believe by the White Estate.
Second. Although the apostolic church NEVER practiced Tithe, it was first practiced by the RCC in the late 500’s, and then it eventually became an official doctrine of the church.
The RC church invented new ways to tithe, even charging a tithe on those that did not join in the crusades. It was called a Saladin tithe.
Tithe has been used in many countries, even as the Protestants later picked it up. Today, it is practiced to some degree, by many churches. But not to the extent that the SDA’s have done.
No church in the world gives such an important and “sacred” role to tithe in the church as the SDA’s. They have taken the error of NC tithe and raised it to a level unknown in the history of the church. They have made a great error in doing so.
History of Tithe in the Church:
The earliest positive legislation on the subject seems to be contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the canons of the Council of Maçon in 585.
In course of time, we find the payment of tithes made obligatory by ecclesiastical enactments in all the countries of christendom. The Church looked on this payment as of divine law, since tithes were instituted not by man but by the Lord Himself;C. 14, X de decim. III, 30. As regards the civil power, the Christian Roman emperors granted the right to churches of retaining a portion of the produce of certain lands, but the earliest instance of the enforcement of the payment of ecclesiastical tithes by civil law is to be found in the capitularies of Charlemagne, at the end of the eighth century.
English law very early recognized the tithe, as in the reigns of Athelstan, Edgar, and Canute before the Norman Conquest. In English statute law proper, however, the first mention of tithes is to be found in the Statute of Westminister of 1285.
Tithes are of three kinds: predial, or that derived from the annual crops; mixed, or what arises from things nourished by the land, as cattle, milk, cheese, wool; and personal or the result of industry or occupation. Predial tithes were generally called great tithes, and mixed and personal tithes, small tithes. Natural substances having no annual increase are not tithable, nor are wild animals. When property is inherited or donated, it is not subject to the law of tithes, but its natural increase is. There are many exempted from the paying of tithes: spiritual corporations, the owners of uncultivated lands, those who have acquired lawful prescription, or have obtained a legal renunciation, or received a privilege from the pope.
At first, the tithe was payable to the bishop, but later the right passed by common law to parish priests. Abuses soon crept in. The right to receive tithes was granted to princes and nobles, even hereditarily, by ecclesiastics in return for protection or eminent services, and this species of impropriation became so intolerable that the Third Council of Lateran & decreed that no alienation of tithes to laymen was permissible without the consent of the pope.
In the time of Gregory VIII, a so-called Saladin tithe was instituted, which was payable by all who did not take part personally in the crusade to recover the Holy Land. At the present time, in most countries where some species of tithes still exist, as in England for the Established Church, in Austria, and Germany, the payment has been changed into a rent-charge.
In English-speaking countries generally, as far as Catholics are concerned, the clergy receive no tithes. As a consequence, other means have had to be adopted to support the clergy and maintain the ecclesiastical institutions, see CHURCH MAINTENANCE, and to substitute other equivalent payments in lieu of tithes. Soglia Institut, Canon, II, 12; "The law of tithes can never be abrogated by prescription or custom, if the ministers of the Church have no suitable and sufficient provision from other sources; because then the natural and divine law, which can neither be abrogated not antiquate, commands that the tithe be paid."
In some parts of Canada, the tithe is still recognized by civil law, and the Fourth Council of Quebec declared that its payment is binding in conscience of the faithful.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14741b.htm
So it is clear that the SDA’s were not the first to invent the doctrine of tithe. It was the RCC. This is where the history of tithe starts in the church.
Tithe did not start in the apostolic church as the SDA’s claim. No! They were off by over 500 years! Tithe in the church started in the late 500’s, not in the 1st century.
Don said: To put the Adventist defense of tithing mainly on the shoulders of Ellen White is to ignore tithing history and doctrinal formation.
Tom said: Many people think tithe is a valid doctrine. So too did the SDA’s. Which is why James White, the CEO, was so concerned about trying to fix up a workable tithe doctrine for the church. He was focused on money for the pastors and tithe seemed like a good doctrine for such a situation.
James White was behind the push for a better tithe doctrine, not Ellen White.
Bob said: What Babylon does should never be a reason or excuse for the remnant to follow suite.
Tom said: As you can see, the history of tithe in the church started with the RC’s. They are the ones that first practiced this OC doctrine. Thus the SDA’s are really following the RC’s in this matter, not the NT.
Cadge said: Tom, do not think that throwing that spaghetti out there is going to confuse and fog Ellen White's clear stance on the issue? It won't!
Tom said: The facts are what they are, not what SDA’s think they are. I think you need to deal with all the facts, even as you start removing the many myths that you have been taught by the White Estate.
The fact of the matter is that Ellen White, at the end of her life, got into a big fight about tithe with the leaders. While she did not fully repudiate tithe, she did repudiate how the SDA’s were required to practice it. Thus she did not follow the rules and she never repented of taking such liberties, which she claimed was fully justified by the ongoing circumstances. She did this for years.
At this point, at the end of her life, she still believed tithe to be a true doctrine, although obviously not one as rigid and detailed as the leaders interpreted.
Cadge said: So, it is true that there is no biblical directive for tithing for the New Covenant Church, but it is not true that Ellen white disagreed with it.
Tom said: Correct. There is no doctrine of tithe in the apostolic church. The RCC brought it into the church, and many others have followed, including the SDA’s.
Moreover, Ellen White was wrong about tithe. I never said otherwise.
In fact, Ellen White is guilty of many errors and wrong positions, some of which she corrected before she died, like the start and stop time of the Sabbath, and the law in Galatians, while some, like tithe, she only revised. Had she lived longer, she would have continued to move away from tithe.
Ellen White did not understand the Gospel until the 1888 debates erupted. She was a legalist up until that time. So I have never tried to say that Ellen White is fully correct about much of anything. Or that she did not embrace false doctrine. Of course she did, even though she also had some spiritual gifts. The two are not mutually exclusive as the White Estate claims.
Cadge said: She did agree with tithe, the only thing that she did disagree with was whether it was mandatory that it be sent to the big house, scuze me, G.C. storehouse.
Tom said: Ha! In the SDA system, if the tithe does not come under the control of the church, for them to allocate and spend, one has breeched the doctrine. Tithe must come into the church storehouse. That is an important and necessary part of the doctrinal definition.
But Ellen White refused. She was so angry about how the church was being mis-managed that she took her tithe and used it as she saw fit. This is hardly “agreeing” with tithe as you claim.
In fact, if any pastor or church worker then or today followed Ellen White’s practice of tithe, they would be fired within the week. No pastor would be allowed to stand in the pulpit if he told his church that they were free to allocate and spend their tithe as they saw fit.
You are very wrong to pretend that “Ellen White agreed with tithe.” This is not a correct summary of the facts.
If she agreed, then why did the leaders get so angry with her about the Watson letter and try to declare it a fraud? They became angry because Ellen White REFUSED to denounce the Watson letter and refused to fully support the doctrine of tithe. Which means she did not agree with the leaders about tithe. SO ELLEN WHITE DID NOT AGREE.
It is correct to say that Ellen White DISAGREED with how the church used and allocated and tithe and she REFUSED to give her tithe to the church, as the SDA doctrine requires.
This makes Ellen White a tithe rebel. Not someone who fully agrees with the SDA view of tithe. This is very different from EW being the pro-tithe zealot that the White Estate would have us believe.
It is a historical fact that Ellen White did not, not, not, agree with the leaders about tithe, nor would she ever follow this doctrine as the church taught.
Why was she so stubbornly set against tithe?
Ellen White had spiritual gifts. As a teenager she was very sensitive to her impressions from the Spirit, and she remained so for the rest of her life.
What did the Spirit impress her about tithe? This is the real question that all SDA’s should ask about Ellen White.
Aside from her anger at the incompetence of the GC, for their poor allocation of the tithe, Ellen White claimed that for many years the Spirit was moving her AWAY from the SDA doctrine of tithe. This is why she refused to agree that what she had done was wrong. And why she would continue to ignore how the church wanted her to tithe.
Wow! Who knew that Ellen White had serious doubts and reservations about tithe? Who knew that the Spirit was leading her AWAY from this doctrine?
This is just one more example of how the White Estate is a den if inequity and fraud. The place needs to be shut down until it can be cleaned up and the record corrected. Most everything that they teach is false and misleading. It is a wretched place.
The White Estate has fooled many. The real Ellen White had very different views about tithe, and most everything else, from what we have been led to believe.
We have all be misled and deceived by the White Estate and it is time to tell the truth and correct the record.
Cadge said: She decided she could send it where it would best be used, and she did just that.
Tom said: Stop right there. Anyone who “decides” to send his or her tithe anywhere, by-passing the church, is not following the SDA doctrine of tithe.
Thus Ellen White was not following the official church doctrine about tithe. You need to admit this fact of history, and so too does everyone else.
Ellen White did not fully support the SDA doctrine of tithe "for many years," and she refused to do so at the end of her life when asked by the leaders. More than that, she informed them that the Spirit had been leading her AWAY from tithe for years.
Wow! When did any SDA ever hear this historical fact about tithe and Ellen White? Never when they are making a call for tithe on Sabbath.
The real Ellen White is not to be confused with the fraud that Arthur White developed in the White Estate. They are very different.
Cadge said: But she never made any inference that the New Covenant Church was in error in proclaiming that tithing was mandatory.
Tom said: Ellen White inferred that the SDA’s were wrong about tithe. That is why she took the liberty to ignore the rules and do it a different way. She was following the Spirit over the teachings of the church.
There was never any debate or investigation about tithe in the SDA church after 1888. Nor was she a scholar who had the skills to write out a detailed analysis of tithe. So we should not expect a full repudiation of tithe like we see about the law in Galatians. She did not live long enough to participate in such a future debate.
Now that it is here, there should be no doubt that Ellen White would choose the side that had the most evidence, and that is the no-tithe, and no -hierarchy positions.
This is where the Spirit was leading her and where the Gospel facts will lead every honest seeker for truth. Tithe is a false doctrine in the church. Period. And so too is any hierarchy that promotes it.
Cadge said: She wholeheartedly supported tithe.
Tom said: It is the White Estate that claims Ellen White “wholeheartedly supported tithe.” However the facts show that she only supported it about 50%. Wholehearted would be 100%.
Furthermore, she also admitted that the Spirit had been leading her away from tithe—for years. Such a warning prevented her from “wholeheartedly supporting tithe,” and in fact led her to repudiate the SDA doctrine and take matters into her own hands.
Such action is anything but “wholehearted.” Some of the leaders thought it was wrong and treasonous, and they wanted Ellen White to disavow the Watson letter. But she refused and admitted that it was true.
Ellen White did not, and does not, fully and completely support the SDA doctrine of tithe. At the end of her life, she was moving away from it, and now we know why.
What a pity that the White Estate has so massively deceived the church about Ellen White. They have misled the Adventist Community on just about every point possible, and tithe is just one of many.
It is time for the Advent Movement to know the truth about tithe and Ellen White. It is time for them to understand that there is no such doctrine as tithe in the church, nor can there be a hierarchy.
Tom said: Here is a different view of Malachi 3:5. I have not studied to see if it is true. Who wants to dive in and figure it out?
Tithe in the OT
Notice that one of the things God is angry about is that laborers are defrauded of their wages. Owing that Malachi and Nehemiah were written at about the same time, I believe the fraud & robbery spoken of in Malachi 3, is described in detail in Nehemiah 13:4-13. In this text we see how that robbery was taking place.
What I gather from the scripture, is that it was NOT that the Israelite's were withholding the tithe from God, but rather Eliashib the priest opened the temple store rooms to Tobiah and the portions of food assigned to the Levites were not given to them. Tobiah was an Ammonite who worshipped the pagan-god Molech according to Ezra 2:59-60 and Nehemiah 2:10.
In fact, Nehemiah 13:12 says ALL JUDAH brought the tithe to the storerooms, and once TRUSTWORTHY priests were put in charge of the storerooms, the Levite priests once again received their portion verse 13.
The robbing of God wasn't taking place with the bringing of the tithe, it was taking place with the distribution of the tithe to the priests. The wicked priest Eliashib and Tobiah the Ammonite pagan were apparently raiding the storerooms of the temple for themselves. What God considered robbery fraud was withholding the tithe from His priests, who abandoned their service to God when they weren't fed.
http://www.abbalovesus.com/Tithe2.html
In conclusion, it is clear that the apostolic church did not tithe as the SDA’s claim. They set up a more equal system of sharing to sustain the Church.
Today, we know that Tithing in the church is false doctrine and sin. It is blasphemy for anyone to speak in the name of God and declare that tithing is the duty of all Christians. It is not the duty of anyone in the church, nor is any Christian authorized by the apostles to practice this Old Covenant doctrine.
The SDA’s must repudiate tithe and repent. They must reform and re-organize.
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Last edited by tom_norris (03-20-10 12:39 pm)
Offline
Here is some commentary on the Watson Letter. It was actually brought forth to show the inaccurate statements made by the false prophet Ernie Knoll on the subject, but as you will see, it will suffice just as well for us.
http://www.notaprophet.org/articles/fal … etter.html
Excerpt From Chris Lewis,M.D.s research on the subject:
# Spirit of prophecy: Situation: If any tithes are being misappropriated. Action to take: do pay your tithes to the conference but do whatever can be done to correct the misappropriation.
# Ellen White is not our example, Jesus is. In fact, regarding her sending of tithe funds to the workers in the south, rather than endorsing the practice of sending the tithes to other than the conference, she said, 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 other words, this was not to be an example for the members of our church, but was, in her words, a special case, emphasis added. Reading on, we learn that it was a special case of people not trusting her counsel enough to give their tithes to the conference but to also correct the misappropriation of tithes.
# Sister White made multiple statements within the Watson Letter specifically stating that this work was not to be publicized because it was not to be the practice of non-prophets to give their tithe to just anyone they felt like giving it to. For example:
1. 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 Lords 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.
2. If this matter is given publicity, it will create a 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.
3. 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.
# Sister White clearly stated in the Watson Letter that the best thing is not for people to withhold their tithes from the conference and send them wherever they felt was best. However, because there were people whose faith was too weak to listen to the prophet and instead wanted to live by sight, tithe monies had been sent to Sister White. These people withheld their tithes from the conference and sent it instead to Sister White with the statement that either she send it where she knew it would be well used or else they would. God works with people where they are, and so Sister White sent it to the southern workers, but this is not what is best. Note her specific instruction:
I send this matter to you so that you shall not make a mistake. Circumstances alter cases. I would not advise that anyone 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 ministers they could find. I have taken the money, given a receipt for it, and told them how it was appropriated.
# The principle which can be derived from this is: No one should make a general statement to instruct others to send their tithes wherever they feel like sending them. Sister White never did, and she instructed others not to as well. Gods people should send their tithes to the conference and support other of Gods workers with their offerings.
In appropriating the tithes sent in to her, Sister White was acting the part of the church in accordance with what God specifically showed her. Ellen White was not diverting tithe funds from the conference because of misappropriation. She sent tithes to the southern workers because they were insufficiently funded.
Similarly, rather than the statement about the Watson Letter endorsing the idea that whoever we believe is the treasury must be the treasury, Ellen White was not withholding money from the Lords treasury because she was sending the money to Seventh-day Adventist ministers, church workers who were not receiving sufficient funds to do the work they were called to do and to support their families. Does this mean that there is no place for giving of money to self-supporting, supportive ministries? Far from it. This is what offerings are for:
Let the work no longer be hedged up because the tithe has been diverted into various channels other than the one to which the Lord has said it should go. Provision is to be made for these other lines of work. They are to be sustained, but not from the tithe 9T:250
Ellen Whites statement is given in its entirety on the same site, and just below, where Dr Lewis's commentary is at:
http://www.notaprophet.org/articles/fal … etter.html
Now how could she, the prophet, be wrong? Dr. Lewis claims that this is what the prophet, Ellen White said. It was her special privilege to redirect her tithe to the Southern workers and that the same method does not apply to the non-prophets, us.
Somehow it doesn't agree with your view Tom.
Cadge
Offline
Thanks Cadge! Good work on that post. The more people dig into these issues the better.
Let me point out some major differences in what Chris Lewis is saying and what Tom Norris is saying. Lewis is writing from a pro-tithe point of view and I am not. So he is overlooking the real point of our discussion.
Lewis says: Some may bring up the Watson Letter; Letter 267, 2MR:99-100 in support of diverting tithes from the conference treasury to other ministries, as a person may see fit, but is that what God instructed us to do in the writings of Sister White? How do the instructions of the angel in Ernie Knoll's dream compare with divinely inspired writings? Let us read on to answer these questions.
Tom Norris replies: First, I did not bring up the Watson letter to support the idea of withholding tithe from the conference. This letter was brought up to show that Ellen White, through the Spirit did not fully support the SDA doctrine of tithe as the White Estate has dishonestly taught all SDA’s.
Second: Tom Norris is making the point, from the NT and church history that tithe is a false doctrine, and that for anyone to pay tithe to the Conference or to any church is wrong. Tithe is false doctrine in the church. Period.
Third, I have never called Ellen White’s writings “divinely inspired” and it is wrong to give them this description. Ellen White has no doctrinal authority about tithe or anything else. It is only the apostles that can determine if tithe is a true NC doctrine.
Ellen White is not divine, and neither are any of her words or writings. This is a great error of the modern SDA’s to pretend that EW has any doctrinal authority. She had zero in Battle Creek, but in Takoma Park, the White Estate turned her into an apostle or a prophet like Joseph Smith.
Lewis said: Ellen White is not our example, Jesus is.
Tom said: First off, Jesus never paid tithe. So if Jesus is our example for tithe paying, he is not a very good one, because he never paid tithe. Consequently, no one should pay tithe if they follow Jesus or the apostles.
Second, the NT teaches that the apostles, Peter and Paul, are our examples. Not only is this true, but neither Peter nor Paul ever paid tithe to the church. Nor did they in any way promote tithe, accept tithe, or store tithe.
There was no such doctrine as tithe in the church until 500 years after the cross. Tithe in the church is a false doctrine, like Sunday, and was introduced into the church by the RC’s.
Lewis said: In fact, regarding her sending of tithe funds to the workers in the south, rather than endorsing the practice of sending the tithes to other than the conference, she said, "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 other words, this was not to be an example for the members of our church, but was, in her words, a "special case" emphasis added.
Tom said: Ellen White was not trying to cause confusion or rebellion about tithe. She did not want the church members to follow her aberrant view of tithe, but there were two problems she faced.
The first was how badly the church allocated tithe. She knew that certain needs were not being met. IN addition, she also knew that the Spirit was warning her away from the SDA doctrine of tithe.
It is the latter point that needs to be underscored. The Spirit is not just for Ellen White, but also for the church. The Spirit was leading her away from tithe. Which means the same Spirit today will be doing the same thing. It took a practical problem to expose a doctrinal weakness, and there is no sense for the church today to try and spin the Watson letter this way or that. The Spirit would not let Ellen White fully endorse the SDA doctrine of tithe. She would not do it. All Adventists need to pay attention to the Spirit in this and all other matters.
Lewis said: Sister White made multiple statements within the Watson Letter specifically stating that this work was not to be publicized because it was not to be the practice of non-prophets to give their tithe to just anyone they felt like giving it to.
Tom said: This is a misleading analysis. Ellen White was not trying to hurt the church and start another schism. But neither did she want to come out and endorse tithe as strongly as the leaders wanted. So she threatened the leaders with publicity about her doubts about tithe paying if they kept trying to change her mind about her position. She threatened them, because if word got out about her practice, many would no doubt follow.
But she never repented or said she was sorry or wrong, even as she confessed that the Spirit would not let her fully endorse tithe.
Lewis also thinks that Ellen White is special and those those who are not prophets live under a different set of rules in the church. But that is absurd and clearly against the NT.
Ellen White is not a prophet in the way that Lewis and TA’s imagine. She has no more right to not pay tithe according to church doctrine, than does anyone else, if tithe were a true doctrine that is.
Lewis said: The principle which can be derived from this is: No one should make a general statement to instruct others to send their tithes wherever they feel like sending them. Sister White never did, and she instructed others not to as well. God's people should send their tithes to the conference and support other of God's workers with their offerings.
Tom said: Here is the real principle under discussion. There is no such doctrine as tithe in the church. This is why the Spirit warned Ellen White away from tithe. It was wrong, even dangerous.
Thus, when confronted with her unauthorized revisions to the tithe doctrine, which were dramatic, she refused to repent and claimed that the Spirit had led her in this direction.
Now we know why. Tithe, in Toto, it wrong. There is no such doctrine in the church. Ellen White was headed in the correct direction. It is time for the Advent Movement to follow. Away with tithe and away with the hierarchy.
Cadge said: Now how could she, the prophet, be wrong? Dr. Lewis claims that this is what the "prophet" Ellen White said.
Tom said: Ellen White was wrong about many doctrines. So what? So too was Peter. So what? One can have spiritual gifts and still be wrong about doctrine. Peter is an excellent example. For many years he did not believe that any Gentiles could become Christians. And all during that time, he had spiritual gifts. Case closed.
All SDA’s need to dismiss most of what they have been taught about Ellen White and what she believes. They need to get rid of the propaganda that has filled their minds all these years and embrace only the historical facts. When this is done, another Ellen White will emerge for all to see. And so too another view of SDA theology.
Moreover, Lewis is trying to defend tithe. That is the point of his article. I am not. Tithe is wrong no matter what Ellen White did or said about it. But he does not know this as yet, so he overlooks what the Spirit is really saying, as well as what it means for us today.
I find it instructive to know that Ellen White was being directed away from tithe for years. So should all SDA’s. Tithe is a false and dangerous doctrine. Ellen White sensed this and thus refused to retract or destroy the Watson letter. Now it is up to us to learn the real meaning of this matter.
Cadge said: It was her special privilege to redirect her tithe to the Southern workers and that the same method does not apply to the non-prophets, us.
Tom said: Ha! This is too funny. Where does the NT give such unequal privileges? There is no such passage any more than there is tithe in the church. Only those with a hierarchical mindset think that Ellen White is above all others in a special category. But this is impossible. <
First off, Ellen White is not a prophet the way the SDA’s teach. She has no special status or privileges, much less any doctrinal authority.
Second, there is not a special class of Christians that gets to avoid their Gospel obligations. If tithe is required on one, it must be required on all.
But tithe is required by no one in the church. Those that think otherwise do not understand the Gospel or church history correctly.
In conclusion, Ellen White in not a prophet as the White Estate teaches. But she did have genuine spiritual gifts as the NT teaches. And those gifts warned her away from tithe, even as the Spirit would not let her embrace this doctrine as the church leaders demanded and taught.
Today we know why.
There is no such doctrine as tithe in the church.
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for AR
Last edited by tom_norris (03-20-10 12:27 pm)
Offline
Subject: Tithing & The Lord's Supper
Question:
Hello Mr. Norris,
Q: My husband and I have been reading so much of the information listed here and are truly interested in much you have to say regarding the SDA Church.
A: Here is a list of additional sites where Adventist Reform is discussed and promoted:
http://www.atomorrow.net/forum/
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … opics.html
http://www.adventistreform.com/
http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com … orris.html
Q: We are both SDA members, but have been seriously struggling with how this system operates.
A: The Advent Movement has much truth for the church. But the SDA’s have gone astray, especially since Glacier View in 1980. Today they are very confused about their history, mission, and theology. They are not honest, nor are they searching for truth.
Although the Advent Movement is Protestant in nature and pedigree, the SDA’s have misunderstood the Gospel, as well as the Sabbath and eschatology. They have embraced the Old Covenant, instead of the New, and this is why they practice Tithe and Old Covenant Sabbath keeping.
The SDA’s need to repent and embrace the NC Sabbath, and stop pretending that the pastors are a special group, like the Levites, deserving of tithe. All are priests in the NC, and thus there cannot be any such divisions, nor any form of tithing like the SDA’s have developed.
Although they claim to be Protestant, their organizational structure is like that of the Roman Catholic Church. Such a hierarchical model, which features a separate priestly caste, is very wrong because in the NC, all are priests, even as Jesus is the high priest in heaven.
The SDA’s have made a great error to allow themselves to follow the Roman Catholics, who were themselves modeled on the Old Covenant Temple system of the Jews. That is why the RCC has a separate Priestly caste, with a high Priest, the Pope, sitting a large Temple. This is not how the church is supposed to be organized.
Luther would be disgusted at how the SDA’s are organized. He would demand that they embrace the Gospel correctly, stop tithing, and re-organize themselves in a Protestant, Gospel manner.
Q: Our own pastor is so prideful, boastful and arrogant that many are turning away. He doesn't even see this happening or his own role in it!!
A. The religious leaders in Christ’s’ day acted the same way. They were Old Covenant minded legalists that abused the people for their own gain. This is how false Sheppard’s act.
Matt. 23:13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.
Do not expect wolves to act like sheep. Nor those that are blind to the Gospel to be honest, kind, and true. If the SDA pastors understood the Gospel, it would be obvious by their preaching, teaching, and behavior.
But they don’t know the Gospel, nor do they have the Spirit. They are all very arrogant, dishonest, and full of cultic double-talk. It is shameful how they act.
Q: I have been praying for him and for the entire board earnestly in hopes that things will change, but alas things are only getting worse. I don't really want to leave the church, but as you said how can I support such a church after learning all of this?
A. While there are some pastors worse than others, the real problem within Adventism is the false doctrines that every SDA pastor is forced to promote. None of them are free to deal honestly with any doctrinal issues, much less to promote Gospel reform or try to correct any errors of theology in the church. All such things are forbidden.
So it takes a dishonorable, delusional, or incompetent man to Pastor an SDA church. While many SDA pastors have quit over doctrinal issues in the past 30 years, most of the remaining ones know that the church has many false doctrines, but they play along for their paycheck and benefits.
Who knows if your pastor is dishonest or just incompetent, or perhaps both? Many are control freaks and egomaniacs that love to hear themselves pontificate. But no SDA pastor understands the Gospel correctly. If they did, they would not promote the IJ or tithe, much less the Old Covenant Sabbath of the Pharisees that Jesus clearly repudiated in all four Gospels.
The time is going to come very shortly, whereby new boards and new churches will emerge from Adventism, leaving behind the corrupt organization that refuses to repent or reform.
Q: Where will we go?
A. Where did the first Christians go when they realized that their leaders hated the Gospel and were corrupt?
They met as a church, in their homes. Thus the “House Church” is how the 1st century church developed.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … abbath.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … n-Home.htm
Those that seek Gospel truth will come together and set up their own congregations, without all the Old Covenant baggage of the SDA’s. And without this great sin of tithing, which robs the local church of the necessary resources that allow them to function properly and grow.
The Advent Movement is not going to die because the SDA’s have crashed and burned. No. Adventism will go forward with or without the confused and dishonest SDA’s. The Three Angels Messages will move on without them.
Q: I do, however have a dilemma with one of the statements you made which is:
"The NT does not allow Grape Juice to be substitute for naturally fermented wine. Nor can the Lord's Supper be observed with fruit juice."
Therefore, are you suggesting that we are to drink fermented wine? The Bible speaks so clearly of staying away from "strong drink". How then are we to take even a little of this substance?
A: Neither the Jews nor the church considered that drinking wine was sinful. This teaching about abstinence, (which is actually from the Koran), came into the church in the 19th century, after the invention of unfermented grape juice.
The Jews used real wine for Passover, and so too did the church for the Lord’s Supper. So the SDA’s are very wrong to teach that wine in the Bible is grape juice, and even more wrong to refuse to drink it as commanded by Christ.
Here is a link to a discussion that explains the history and origins of this popular error.
The SDA Scandal of Abstinence:
http://www.atomorrow.net/forum/viewtopic.php?id=238
Q: Also, in regards to tithing and the SDA system of tithing. I thought because it is all pooled together and all the pastors are paid the same it is a better system than all the "Mega-Churches" who bank millions upon millions. How are SDA wrong with this as well?
A. The SDA’s teach that the apostolic church tithed. But this is totally false and impossible. The church banished the Levites, even as every Christian was now a priest. Thus there was no basis for tithe, nor did the early church ever practice this Old Covenant doctrine, much less declare themselves to be the “Storehouse” for tithe.
Anyone that embraces the doctrine of tithe paying in the church, does NOT understand the Gospel or the teachings of the apostles. It is so wrong, and so against the teaching of Jesus and the practice of the apostolic church, that it boggles the mind that the SDA’s have developed this error into such an obsession. It is one of their favorite doctrines.
Here is a link to discussion about The Fraud of Tithing in the Church.
http://www.atomorrow.net/forum/viewtopic.php?id=239
Q: How then do we pay tithe as children of God? My husband and I try to just give directly to those in need when we can, but I do NOT want to be responsible for stealing from God, you know?
A: The SDA’s have shamed millions into feeling guilty if they did not return their tithes, (to the SDA’s) as directed in the Old Testament. But the Adventists need to repent for this great error. They are very wrong.
Paul teaches that our giving to the local church is based on whatever amount we choose, - which is the opposite of tithe, which is based on 10%. There is no doctrine of tithe in the church, much less to a distant, corrupt hierarchy.
2Cor. 9:6 Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.
2Cor. 9:7 Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
When you read the tithe discussion, you will discover that Ellen White had serious problems with the SDA doctrine of tithe. In fact, she refused to follow the doctrine and told the leaders that the Spirit was leading her away from this practice.
Of course the White Estate covered this up and pretended that Ellen White fully and completely endorsed tithing when that was not the case at all.
In fact, one of the last things that Ellen White did before she died, was question tithe and warn the leaders to beware of this doctrine, which she refused to follow.
Such information is almost unknown to SDA’s because they do not allow any discussion or debate about tithe or anything else. The leaders know it is wrong, but they don’t care. This false doctrine brings in BILLIONS of dollars into the mythical SDA “Storehouse”, so they like it.
Thus the people are misled and deceived about almost everything, especially about Ellen White. They have been very dishonest about her and her views, which is why the White Estate was caught hiding her materials and misrepresenting her views.
So it is stunning for any SDA to find out that Ellen White had serious doubts about tithe, and that she refused to practice it as the church taught.
Almost everywhere one looks in SDA history, the leaders have covered up the facts and replaced them with myths and half-truths.
Another stunning example of this is the fact that Ellen White drank wine for medicinal purposes. While it was a published fact for those living in Battle Creek, the Takoma Park SDA’s covered this up and pretended that Ellen White would never do such a thing. But the facts have come out once again; proving to all that Traditional Adventism is based upon myth and deception.
Beware the SDA’s. They do not know how to tell the truth right now. They are great deceivers and no one should support so much false doctrine and historical deception. They are following a false Christ with a distorted and worthless Gospel.
Q: I have continuously asked God for His Truth and only His and for everything else to fall away. I continue to be enlightened, but I have mistakenly been misled as well and now I find out all of these things with SDA.
A: We have all been “misled” by our religious leaders. This is normative. This is what happened to the Jews and it also happened with the Gentile Church. It is the pattern of history and the nature of man.
However, those that seek truth find it. This is what Jesus teaches, and it has come true for you. Look at all the information you have found?
Luke 11:9 “So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
Understand that the last church is the worst church. And that the present fallen state of the Laodicean church has been predicted by prophecy. Thus the real Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church is not the IJ, but the Laodicean Message.
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1154462379
So don’t think it is just the SDA’s that have gone bad. No. It is every church and denomination in the land. They are all condemned as being blind to the Gospel and full of false doctrine. And so they are.
This is why they all must repent and reform. Including the SDA’s. This is the only way the church can go forward, through repentance.
Q: I do not want to be misled and I knew that this church wasn't perfect, but what you are saying labels them as blasphemers just like the Anti-Christ system they teach against.
A: The SDA’s are enemies of the Gospel. They are playing the role of the Pharisees and Judaizers. They have systematically moved away from the Protestant Principles that defined and empowered them, even as they have repudiated their founders and misrepresented them. They are a cult.
I wish it were not so, but the facts are what they are. Only if they repent of their many false doctrines and errors, including Glacier View, can they ever recover. But the more they are challenged with the facts, the less they care for truth.
So there may be no hope left for them. Pity. But truth will go on without them. The Advent Movement is much larger than just the SDA’s.
Q: What hope is there for anyone if there is nowhere to go to fellowship?
A: Those Adventists that want to embrace Gospel Reform will find like- minded people and start up their own fellowships.
Moreover, because of the Internet, there are additional ways to fellowship and study the Bible that were not available a few years ago. Today, one can just turn on their computer and find those to discuss the Gospel.
Q: Are we just to stay in our own homes and read the Bible alone? I thought we were to come together and reason together?
A: There is a 7th day, Gospel Sabbath for the church. It is not on Sunday, nor is it the Old Covenant, non-working Sabbath of the SDA’s. This day is designed for Gospel fellowship, as well as all manner of activity and good works.
Q: My husband and I would like to meet you one day to really get out all of our questions and pick your brain. You really have been through so much with the SDA’s, I feel that what you are doing will indeed help with the reform that is sought.
A: I would be happy to meet you both some day. However, I am often Online, so you are free to ask any questions and join in the conversations about Adventist Reform at:
http://www.atomorrow.net/forum/index.php
At some point, those interested in Gospel Reform, will become organized and start their own Gospel fellowships.
I hope this information is useful.
Tom Norris for All Experts.com & Adventist Reform
Offline
Tom, the Adventist church relative to your Reformed Sabbath:
1. Has always taught it is well to do "good" on the Sabbath. See how their doctors and nurses have been scheduled.
2. Jesus, under the Jewish law, never taught things like "delivering mail" was OK, and that that is what the example of Christ is for "a Reformed Sabbath".
The real story, missed even by Tom, the self proclaimed Reformer, is that Jesus is the Christian's Rest and Peace as proclaimed not by man but by scripture in:
Eph 2:14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
Col 2: 16Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
The real exciting truth that even Tom has missed are words that Tom can not explain away, which are Covenantal Truths.
Heb 8:13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
Jesus, while on earth showed how the leaders of the Jewish church had corrupted the OC Sabbath. He called for men to rest upon him, but the truth of Him being the True Rest was not revealed until the NC was put in place and Paul was shown this as shown above.
It was not until Jesus died that the NC showed that the barrier in the OC, circumcision and the Sabbath, had created a barrier that prevented Gentiles from receiving the Gospel. Christ destroyed this barrier with the NC.
Last edited by bob_2 (04-03-10 8:29 pm)
Offline
Bob 2, the anti Sabbatarian, anti-nomian, said:
Tom, the Adventist church relative to your Reformed Sabbath:
1. Has always taught it is well to do "good" on the Sabbath. See how their doctors and nurses have been scheduled.
Tom said: Bob, save your myths and confusion for others. The SDA’s have never promoted an active, working Sabbath that we are discussing.
The SDA’s have taught that it is a sin to work on the Sabbath, except if you were a pastor or a health care worker. All others were not given any permission to work on the Sabbath. In fact, the SDA’s would encourage their members to fight rather than work on the Sabbath.
The church even helped people file lawsuits against their employers. They called it “religious liberty” but it was nothing more than Old Covenant legalism.
(Also, this thread is about tithe. It is not the proper place to attack the Reformed Sabbath. There are other threads for this.)
Bob 2 said: 2. Jesus, under the Jewish law, never taught things like "delivering mail" was OK, and that that is what the example of Christ is for "a Reformed Sabbath".
Tom said: While Jesus was “under the OC law” of Judaism, he also taught and lived the NEW Covenant. His Gospel teachings are meant for the Church.
Moreover, the church in every age has a duty to apply the teachings of Jesus to their lives and culture. This is what Paul and the other apostles were doing.
So we can test your theory about how the “mailman” should deal with the teaching of Jesus as they relate to the Reformed Sabbath. What would Paul say about the Roman mailman or Roman soldier, or even a slave?
Were they supposed to quit their jobs after they became Christians? Claiming that they could no longer work on the Sabbath? How could a slave even quit? They could not, and neither could the Roman soldier.
So how did Paul deal with this issue?
We know that if the SDA’s were in charge, they would teach that everyone would have to make a pledge to not work on the Sabbath, even if they had to quit their jobs and suffer persecution as a result.
But is this what Paul teaches? We know that Paul is not teaching that either the Sabbath or the Moral law has been abolished, because he comes out and says how important God’s law is. So how were the Gentiles to deal with the NC Sabbath?
1Cor. 7:17 Only, as the Lord has assigned to each one, as God has called each, in this manner let him walk. And so I direct in call the churches.
1Cor. 7:18 Was any man called when he was already circumcised? He is not to become uncircumcised. Has anyone been called in uncircumcision? He is not to be circumcised.
1Cor. 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God.
1Cor. 7:20 Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called.
1Cor. 7:21 Were you called while a slave? Do not worry about it; but if you are able also to become free, rather do that.
1Cor. 7:22 For he who was called in the Lord while a slave, is the Lord’s freedman; likewise he who was called while free, is Christ’s slave.
1Cor. 7:23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.
1Cor. 7:24 Brethren, each one is to remain with God in that condition in which he was called.
Thus if one is mailman, fireman, or soldier, they are not to change their occupation or status. Much less in order to observe the OC Sabbath of the Jews.
Even the Christian slaves were to work on the Sabbath as their masters demanded, -but in doing so there was no sin. Why? Because the Gospel Sabbath is very different from the OC Sabbath.
Now that the NC Sabbath was active, it was no longer a sin to work on the Sabbath. This is what Jesus taught in the Gospels and what Paul is also supporting.
Bob 2 said: The real story, missed even by Tom, the self proclaimed Reformer, is that Jesus is the Christian's Rest and Peace as proclaimed not by man but by scripture in Eph 2:14.
Tom said: The real story is that every church in the world has a false Gospel and a false doctrine of the Sabbath. Not only is the Sunday Sabbath a total fraud, so too is the SDA, OC Sabbath.
The Gospel Sabbath is a paradigm changing doctrine that the SDA’s SHOULD have discovered. But they misunderstood the Gospel and consequently embraced the WRONG, OC Sabbath of the Pharisees. This is why they also practice tithe. They are under the fatal curse of the OC. They do not embrace the Gospel or the NC Sabbath.
Bob 2 said: Jesus, while on earth showed how the leaders of the Jewish church had corrupted the OC Sabbath. He called for men to rest upon him, but the truth of Him being the True Rest was not revealed until the NC was put in place and Paul was shown this as shown above.
Tom said: Jesus articulated and very different Sabbath that was based on the Priesthood of all believers. He did not remove the Sabbath or claim that he was its fulfillment. Rather, he gave a very different, surprising, and unique Sabbath to the Church that has yet to be fully understood.
Bob 2 said: It was not until Jesus died that the NC showed that the barrier in the OC, circumcision and the Sabbath, had created a barrier that prevented Gentiles from receiving the Gospel. Christ destroyed this barrier with the NC.
Tom said: The Gospel Sabbath was designed for the church, both Jews and the Gentiles. It was such a brilliant and remarkable doctrine that it allowed the Gentiles to come into the church without causing them a problem. Which is why Paul can teach everyone to “remain with God in that condition in which he was called.”
When the Gospel is correctly understood, so too will the Gospel Sabbath. Those that fight against the NC Sabbath are fighting against the very teachings of Christ, as well as his apostles.
Those that submit to the OC doctrine of tithing, and the OC Sabbath and the OC food laws, have fallen from grace. They do not understand the Gospel, nor are they saved.
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for the Gospel Sabbath
Offline
Oh, and Tom, neither am I antinomian. I believe their are always standards of behavior, even in the NC era. Paul taught of the Law of Christ, which was not the Decalogue. So save you false accusations for others that will take it. What you need to guard against is requiring people to do things that Christ does not require for salvation. Dangerous place to be.
You know you remind me of the one man show that use to picket outside my hometown church. I think he was Shepard's Rod, but he wore a uniform claiming to be a member of the army of that will total 144,000. Sort of come out of her my people message from a one man, self appointed "prophet". Oh, well each to his own.
Last edited by bob_2 (04-04-10 4:39 pm)
Offline
