Tithing and the Christian Churches

don · 11-08-09 2:56 pm

Tithing and the Christian Churches This thread intends to examine tithing within Christendom: Who practices; who doesn't? .

don · 11-08-09 3:05 pm

Sermons to Baptist Churches - Davis W. Huckabee CHAPTER 22 TITHING: ESTABLISHED BY LAW<blockquote>"And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all." Gen. 14:18-20 "And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all." (Gen. 14:18-20). This text gives the first record of tithing, and it was some four hundred years before the giving of the Law of Moses, for Abraham lived over four hundred years before Moses, (Gal. 3:16-17). However, nothing is said in the Genesis text to show that this was a new thing even in Abraham’s day. What is suggested, is that inasmuch as Abraham is the "father of all that believe," (Rom. 4:11), and Melchizedek was an outstanding type of Christ, (Heb. 7:1ff), therefore Abraham’s paying of tithes is an example to believers today, who are to tithe to the representative of Christ, the local assembly. We must remember that Bible examples are equally as authoritative as commands where there are no commands to the contrary. Many Christians reject tithing, but their rejection of it must be for one of two reasons: (1) Ignorance of the duty. Or (2) Rebellion against that duty because of selfishness. Sometimes it is objected that "I earned what I have by my own labor, and it’s mine to do with as I please." But this is to ignore the teaching of Deuteronomy 8:17-18: "And thou say in thine heart, My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth. But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: for IT IS HE THAT GIVETH THEE POWER TO GET WEALTH, that he may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers, as it is this day." Tithing—the paying of ten percent of our income to the Lord—is an acknowledgement of God’s ownership of all things, and that we are but stewards of what He has committed to our hands. Tithing is not just based upon a need, for every believer has the duty of tithing regardless of the condition of the church treasury. Tithing is an established duty; and it is established by law, but not just by the Law of Moses, for it is not a mere legal duty, to be forgotten when one becomes a Christian. Tithing is not legalism any more than any other duty, such as repentance, faith, baptism or consecration, is, for they are all the commands of the Lord to His children, and it is but an attempt to becloud the issue to call it legalism. I. IT IS ESTABLISHED BY THE LAW OF THE LORD. The proof-text for this is Leviticus 27:30: "And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s: it is holy unto the Lord." All the tithe of all produce was holy, and not to be used for selfish purposes except, in some cases when one wished to keep some especially good grain for seed, by adding 20 per cent to it, (v. 31). But when the animals were run under the rod to count them, there could be no changing of the tenth for the ninth or eleventh, as one might be tempted to do, if the tenth appeared to be a superior breeding animal (vv. 32-33). These things are here couched in pastoral terms for the Israelites were a pastoral people. But of course, the immediate objection that is lodged by non-tithers is: "O but that was before Christ came. That was in the Old Testament." May we be permitted to ask: "What difference can that possibly make? Do we serve a different God than Israel did?" Before we assume that ANYTHING in the Old Testament has been abrogated, we must see a specific command revoking it. Such a revocation of the law of tithing does not appear in the New Testament. But a specific statement is made in the New Testament which does bear upon the very issue at hand. Matthew 5:17-18: "Think not that I am come to DESTROY THE LAW, or the prophets: I AM NOT COME TO DESTROY, BUT TO FULFILL. But verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Our Lord declares that He did not come to disannul or abrogate the law. Who dares to argue with this? Let him be ready to answer for his rebellion against the revealed will of God if he does. But even more specific in this matter is the inspired comment of Paul on this issue in 1 Corinthians 9:13-14: "Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? EVEN SO HATH THE LORD ORDAINED THAT THEY WHICH PREACH THE GOSPEL SHOULD LIVE OF THE GOSPEL." The reference in verse 13 is to the support of the ministry of the Tabernacle and Temple by TITHES AND OFFERINGS. The Lord has "ordained" that the ministry of the church is to be supported "even so", or "in this manner" as the word is also rendered. This ought to be clear enough, shouldn’t it? What then will you do about this duty? II. IT IS ESTABLISHED BY THE LAW OF LOVE. Our Lord Himself said in John 14:15: "If ye love me, keep my commandments," and the law of tithing is as much a commandment from Jesus Christ as it is from the Father. In proof of this, we have but to recall 1 Corinthians 9:14; the Lord Jesus has "ordained" the tithes for the support of His churches and the ministry of the Word. The word rendered "ordained" appears sixteen times in the New Testament, and is rendered "commanded" seven times: "appointed" four times; "ordained" three times; "set in order" once; and "give order" once. Clearly, the word is used in the sense of an authoritative command. Who dares to disobey this commandment? Who can claim to love the Lord while disobeying Him. Such is a strange kind of love. When we eat in a restaurant, we tip the waitress, yet it is an unwritten law that the tip shall be at least a minimum of ten percent of the check. Does the Christian love that often unknown waitress more than he loves the Lord who died for him? Shame on him if his love is no deeper than this! Who can claim to love the Lord while robbing Him of that portion of his material possessions that He claims as His own? Malachi 3:8-9 says: "Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation." Tithing has always been a test of the Lord’s people. (1) It tests their love: do they love Him more than Mammon—the god of riches, (Luke 16:10-13). (2) It tests their faith: do they believe God’s promises, (Matthew 6:24-25, 33-34). (3) It tests their concern for the souls of men: do they love souls enough to give to get the gospel preached, (1 Cor. 9:14). Tithing is intimately associated with the gospel, both in the church and on the mission field. This law of love also is concerned with those who preach the gospel, for those who hear are to share their material possessions with those who do the preaching. Galatians 6:6: "Let him that is taught in the Word COMMUNICATE unto [share with] him that teacheth in all good things." Interestingly, this same word is used of giving for the preaching of the Word on foreign fields in Philippians 4:15: "Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church COMMUNICATED with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only." Love for the Lord and love for the souls of men will compel the believer to tithe every time, for Christian love (that highest of all kinds of loves as signified by the Greek word AGAPE) is always a GIVING type of love, not a selfish kind of love, (John 3:16; 1 Cor. 13:5). III. IT IS ESTABLISHED BY THE LAW OF LOGIC. One of the objections lodged against tithing is that the New Testament says so little about it. But it is unnecessary to say much about that which is already established. What the New Testament does say, strengthens rather than takes away from its authority. Hebrews 7:5-8: "And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises. And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better. And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth." This is in reference to the text in Genesis 14, and notice the contrast that is drawn in verse 8: "Here" refers to the Levitical priesthood (under the Law) which had just been dealt with, while "there" refers to the Melchizedecan priesthood which typified Christ’s priesthood under the New Testament dispensation. The conclusion is irresistible: tithes are to be received in the New Testament dispensation as well as under the old dispensation. This is the only logical meaning of this text. Some argue that the reference to tithing in Matthew 23:23, which says: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for YE PAY TITHE of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: THESE OUGHT YE TO HAVE DONE, and not to leave the other undone," had only to do with "a self-righteous Pharisee", and so could have no bearing on Christians. It is true that it was addressed to the Jewish leaders, many of whom were self-righteous hypocrites, but is it logical that we who have received so much more under grace would be required to do less than they? Does love obligate us to less or more than mere law does? Find a person who really loves the Lord, and he will give at least a tithe every time. This is the logic of love. We knew a godly deacon once who expressed his doubts about tithing being the duty of believers in this age, but when pressed about his own practice, he admitted that he personally gave a double tithe. His love for the Lord overpowered his mental reservations against tithing. And it will ever be, but until the heart-strings are strongly attached to the Lord Jesus, and there is a compelling love for the Lord, the purse-strings will be tightly shut and the idol Mammon will continue to reign in the heart. Logically, no church can survive unless it has many, many non-tithers putting in their pitiful one dollar per week, but on the other hand, a small church that is made up mostly of tithers can be very successful in missionary and evangelistic work. Ten family heads who are tithers can support a pastor adequately. The writer was called some years ago to pastor a small church whose attendance only ran thirty to fifty, but he was told by the church treasurer that all the adult members were tithers, and the result was that the church was able to pay the pastor an adequate salary, support numerous mission works, plus purchase a nice parsonage, yet without any financial problems whatsoever. But it is illogical to expect a church to fulfill its work when no one is willing to give to pay its expenses. The church is the Body of Christ, and He never meant for His Body to be a beggar. He has decreed, not only the correct means to do His work, but also the correct way to support that work, and NOTHING ELSE WORKS JUST AS WELL. Notice how Paul was inspired to establish tithing logically in the context of 1 Corinthians 9:13-14. In verses 7-10 he shows that: (1) Soldiers are not expected to supply their own support, but they are decreed a daily ration, (v. 7). (2) The keeper of the vineyard is permitted to eat of the fruit, (v. 7). (3) The shepherd eats of the flock, (v. 7). The law decreed this. (4) Thus, even the ox that treads out the grain was permitted to take bites of it, (v. 9), and this fact is intended as an instructive example to Christians, (vv. 9-10). (5) The farmer likewise labors in the assurance that he will partake of the fruits of his labors. Then (6) he shows that on the basis of these facts, it is but logical that the same principle holds true in spiritual things as well, (v. 11). And (7) he declares that this was the practice of other preachers of his day, though he personally had not asked for this support, (v. 12). All of which leads up to the declaration that just as the ministers in the Tabernacle and Temple were supported by the tithes and offerings, so those who labor in the gospel ministry likewise are commanded by the Lord to be so supported. Logically it may not seem that one can get by and prosper easier on the nine-tenths left after tithing than on the whole ten-tenths, but this is only because we often forget God, the sometimes UNSEEN FACTOR in all things. If we but take into account the threat against non-tithers and the promise to tithers in Malachi 3:9-11, immediately the logic changes in favor of the tither. Every tither has seen how that God sometimes seemed to miraculously make the nine-tenths go further in paying the bills than even the ten-tenths would. And every non-tither, though he may not have considered this, has had unexpected bills come from every direction because God’s curse was on the work of his hands. CONCLUSION It is both foolish and sinful for church people to expect outsiders to support their church through sales, suppers, subscriptions, etc., if the members themselves are unwilling to support the church. In so doing, they give their own estimation of their church; i.e., that it is unworthy of support. Someone once well said of Christ that "He is either worth everything, or He is worth nothing". We believe that since every true church is a Body of Christ, the same thing may be said of it. Tithing is the only equal means of support for the Lord’s work, wherein everyone from the poverty-stricken widow to the millionaire has the same responsibility—duty according to ability. Someone has well said that every Christian is a tither, but from many God must go and collect the tithes, and He is a good collector, and He often charges an additional collection fee when His children refuse to respond to their duty. Tithing is established upon three strong pillars—the LAW OF THE LORD, the LAW OF LOVE and the LAW OF LOGIC. Nothing can or will raise its voice against tithing except one of two things: Ignorance or Greed, and neither of these is a Christian virtue. Are you a faithful tither? If not, why not begin today to honor the Lord with the firstfruits of all thine increase, (Prov. 3:9-10)? It will be a blessing to you, your church, your minister and your missionaries. <a href="http://www.pbministries.org/Theology/Davis%20Huckabee/Sermons%20To%20Baptist%20Churches/ch22_tithing_established_by_law.htm" target=_top>http://www.pbministries.org/Theology/Davis%20Hucka bee/Sermons%20To%20Baptist%20Churches/ch22_tithing _established_by_law.htm</a> </blockquote>

don · 11-08-09 4:46 pm

Luther Church - Missouri Synod<blockquote>Tithing Q. What is the LCMS position concerning tithing? Is it required? Is there anything wrong with teaching the concept of tithing? A. Tithing (meaning giving 10 percent of one's income) is a term used in the Scriptures, especially throughout the Old Testament. In most of those cases the "tithe" was a "legislated" matter to support the levitical priesthood and provide other benefits. Freewill offerings were made in addition to the tithe. In the New Testament, tithing is not mentioned nearly as much, but such expressions as cheerful, firstfruit, and proportionate are used repeatedly. This leads us to conclude that while tithing may be a good spiritual discipline and a good starting point for a mature Christian, it may not be the best way to present biblical giving since it can easily become a legalistic requirement of the law rather than a cheerful offering motivated by the love of God shown toward us in Christ. Therefore, in the second of the eight Biblical Stewardship Principles, we maintain that God's stewards are managers, not owners. This means that God's stewards have been entrusted with life and life's resources and given the privilege of responsibly and joyfully managing them for Him. Thus, as children of God through faith in Jesus Christ, and with the Holy Spirit's help, we will encourage cheerful, firstfruit, proportionate (including but not limited to tithing) living and giving in all areas of life by Christian stewards. Another way of thinking about this issue is to remember that all things, including money, belong to God and the real question is how much of what belongs to Him are we going to keep for ourselves and how much are we going to use to fulfill His purposes? King David said it very well in 1 Chronicles 29:14: "But who am I, and who are my people, that we should be able to give as generously as this? Everything comes from you, and we have given you only what comes from your hand." <a href="http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3938" target=_top>http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3938</a> </blockquote> __________________________________ II. GOD'S STEWARDS ARE MANAGERS, NOT OWNERS.<blockquote>What does this mean? God's stewards have been entrusted with life and life's resources and given the privilege of responsibly and joyfully managing them for Him. What does God's Word say about this? Gen. 2:15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. Ps. 24:1 The earth is the LORD'S, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it. (cf. Ps. 89:11) 1 Chron. 29:14 But whom am I, and who are my people, that we should be able to give as generously as this? Everything comes from you, and we have given you only what comes from your hand. (cf. 29:1-20) 2 Cor. 8:5 And they [Macedonian Christians] did not do as we expected, but they gave themselves first to the Lord and then to us in keeping with God's will. (cf. 8:1-7) Luke 12:48b From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. (cf. 12:41-48) 1 Tim. 6:17-19 Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life. How is this done? As children of God through faith in Jesus Christ, and with the Holy Spirit's help, we will: • Encourage proper management of all of life and life's resources for God's purposes; • Promote materials and approaches to stewards that are firmly grounded in the Owner/manager understanding of stewardship; • Encourage cheerful, firstfruit, proportionate (including but not limited to tithing) living and giving in all areas of life by Christian stewards; and, • Receive and use God's gifts with thanksgiving. As children of God through faith in Jesus Christ, and with the Holy Spirit's help, we will not: • Approach the steward as if he or she is the Owner; • Neglect to remind the steward of Who the Owner is; • Forget the Owner for the sake of the interests of the entity being represented; or, • Fail to remind Christian stewards that greater blessings call for greater responsibility to manage them according to God's purposes. <a href="http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/DCS/BSP-EngFulltextEd.doc" target=_top>http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/DCS/BSP- EngFulltextEd.doc</a></blockquote>

don · 11-08-09 4:50 pm

Don Comments I find the Luther Church Missouri Synod's statement to be quite reasonable and carefully stated. I could easily live within their framework on Stewardship. .

don · 11-08-09 5:54 pm

Two Sides to Tithing <table border=1><tr><td></TD><TD></TD><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD>.</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>. </TD></TR><TR><TD>I want to give the Lord my tenth</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>God save us from these raiding priests </TD></TR><TR><TD>For ev’ry time I do</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>Who seize our crops and steal our beasts </TD></TR><TR><TD>It makes me think of all the gifts</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>Who pray, “Give us our daily bread” </TD></TR><TR><TD>He gives to me and you.</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>But take it from our mouths instead. </TD></TR><TR><TD>He gives us life, this lovely world,</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>. </TD></TR><TR><TD>And though my tenth seems small,</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>. </TD></TR><TR><TD>It shows my faith and gratitude</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>. </TD></TR><TR><TD>To him, the Lord of All.</TD><TD>.</TD><TD>. </TD></TR><TR><TD></td></tr></table> Source: <a href="http://www.incharacter.org/article.php?article=67" target="_blank">http://www.incharacter.org/article.php?article=67</a> (Message edited by Don on November 08, 2009)

don · 11-08-09 6:50 pm

Tithe War, 1918-1939: The countryside in revolt - A Book Report <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Tithe-War-1918-1939-Countryside-Revolt/dp/0952149923/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257719361&sr=1-7" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/120/2210.jpg" alt=""></a> Click on picture for source Book title: Tithe War, 1918-1939: The countryside in revolt Author: Carol Twinch (2001) Publisher: Media Associates (GLF Books, P. O. Box 36, Saxmundham, Suffolk IP17 2PS) Church Times Bookshop £n/a<blockquote>DURING the foot-and-mouth crisis, Church and countryside celebrated their ancient relationship. How many people then recalled the war between Church and farmers over tithe, 70 years earlier? The tithe war isn’t in the standard church histories. This new book therefore fills a gap. The Church comes out of the story very badly. People were alienated from it over tithes, and their bitterness has been passed down. Carol Twinch has excellently illustrated her story with photographs and cartoons. Her appendices include newspaper references, a chronological history of tithes, and a glossary. Several of the resistance leaders represented that once powerful alliance of Liberalism and Nonconformity. She belongs by conviction and descent to that tradition. This is, therefore, history seen through the eyes of those who regarded themselves as innocent victims of a war conducted by an uncaring, wealthy Church and other élitist groups, such as Oxford and Cambridge colleges (which depended on tithes). After 1918, as estates were broken up, tenants bought farms. Many did not realise that tithes were payable on them. When agriculture slumped, some of these farmers were unable to pay. Others refused to pay for institutions that they detested. In one village where tithe protests were particularly violent, the incumbent lived in a Georgian mansion and was paid ten times as much as a farm labourer. When a farmer did not pay, a bailiff was sent in to distrain goods, often to an amount greatly in excess of the debt. Effigies of Archbishop Lang were regularly burnt, while people sang to the tune of the Old Hundredth: “God save us from these raiding priests, Who seize our crops and steal our beasts, Who pray ‘Give us our daily bread,’ And take it from our mouths instead.” Village memorials recalled some of the battles. Oswald Mosley exploited the conflict. His blackshirts dug trenches and erected barricades. Newspapers and newsreels gave extensive coverage to the tithe war. In 1932 alone, there were 16,000 cases of non-payment. The Tithe Act in 1936 modified the system, and promised an end to tithe in 1996. But distraints and fines continued. Agricultural tithe ended in 1977, but injustices remain. In 1994, a landowner received a demand for £95,000 for chancel repairs. Radio and television programmes, the biography of a leading campaigner, a play last year and now this book keep alive the story of how a complacent Church did immense pastoral damage by clinging on to a method of financing itself which should have been abandoned in the early 19th century. Canon Wilkinson is a Visiting Lecturer at Portsmouth University and a Fellow of the George Bell Institute. <a href="http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=35269" target=_top>http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=35269</a> </blockquote>_________________________________ Another Book Report<blockquote>Farmers' revolt 03 December 2005 Author Carol Twinch looks at the local protests caused by farmers' anger at being forced to pay taxes to the church in the 1930-40s and how, in desperation, one farmer even put his children up for sale... In the 1930s and 40s, farmers in the Ruthin and Wrexham areas again became embroiled in the ancient war against tithe, the hated one-tenth traditionally paid to the State Church. After the ferocious tithe riots of the 1880s the matter was apparently solved by the Welsh Church Acts of 1914 and 1919 but as farming fortunes dipped dramatically in the 1920s the hatred of the tax flared up again. One farm in particular typified the resentment at having to pay tithe. In 1933, Gwersyllt Old Hall Farm, occupied by Richard Edwards, saw the first tithe distraint sale held in North Wales for 45 years. On a blackboard outside the cattle shed a verse (see previous post) condemning tithes was chalked and sung by hundreds of Welsh farmers. Richard Edwards once put his children up for sale to pay the tithe but the day was won by 500 booing Welsh farmers who made it impossible for the auctioneer, Mr Aston of Wrexham, to conduct the sale. Other farmers, including Mervyn Davies, fought through the Welsh Committee of the National Farmers Union that (in 1955) became the Farmers Union of Wales. More details: The story of the 20th century tithe war is told in Tithe War 1918-1939: The Countryside in Revolt by Carol Twinch (ISBN 0952149923). <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/northeast/sites/history/pages/tithe.shtml" target=_top>http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/northeast/sites/history/pages/tithe.shtml</a></blockquote>

elaine · 11-08-09 7:13 pm

Don, do you know for certain when Genesis was written? The story of Melchezidek was probably not written before 1000 B.C., and tithing had long before been established for the Israelites. As in many parts of the Torah, it is very evident that the anachronistic details do not conform to reality. It would be questionable to state that Abraham paid a tithe when it was never mentioned previously. Presuming all the Bible is in chronological sequence causes much confusion.

bob · 11-09-09 12:54 am

So, when I go to war and conquer my enemy I will give a tenth of the spoils to Melchezidek. When I buy a farm I will run my cattle under a rod and give every tenth one to the Levites. Don has cited two church bodies that agree with his analysis so that makes it kosher. Of course both groups do not believe in Sabbath keeping nor do they believe in soul sleep. Ellen White would call them Babylon, but that is OK in this instance because they believe in the Old Covenant modified tithing system. That settles the whole question. Sounds good to me.

don · 11-09-09 7:43 am

do you know for certain when Genesis was written? And then, Elaine, you go on to speak as though you do. <IMG SRC="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/sad.gif" ALT=":-(" BORDER=0> Don has cited two church bodies that agree with his analysis so that makes it kosher I do find it interesting that others uphold the tithing practice, certainly not just Adventists. Do I consider my case stronger? No. Except if they explain the Bible better than I have. There are many times when Adventists have found common ground with those who differ on major points. James White's rapproachment with the Seventh-day Baptists in the 1860's and 70's is a good example. Surprising as it is to some, EGW did not lead the way in regarding other churches as Babylon. In her later years, she seemed quite benign to all. Once we realize that EGW should not be placed on an inerrant doctrinal pedastal, then our discussion can proceed based on what the Bible says. . .

elaine · 11-09-09 5:52 pm

There is almost a united consensus among Bible scholars, especially Hebrew scholars, who believe that none of the Hebrew Bible was written before the eighth century. Karen Armstrong, an eminent religious historian says: "There is no sign of extensive literacy in either Israel or Judah until the eighth century. This was about the time that Homer wrote his great epics which, like other orally transmitted epic traditions were written. All these ancient epics had changed and developed over the centuries, but one they were written down, they were set for all time. "In Israel, the seventh century was a watershed that saw the beginning of the religion of Judaism. Before that time, there had been very little reading or writing of religious texts in either Israel or Judah. There was no early tradition that Yahweh's teachings had been written down. Moses had passed on Yahweh's commands by word of mouth. Neither J nor E mentioned the Ten Commandments; originally the stone tables--'written with the finger of God'--probably contained the divinely revealed plans for the tabernacle. It was only later than the Deuteronomist writers added to the JE narrative. "The Deuteronomists claimed to be conservatives, who were returning to the original faith of Isarel. In fact, they were radically innovative. They outlawed symbols such as sacred pole and the 'standing stones' that had always been perfectly acceptable. They introduced some startling new legislation. Fist, the worship of Israel was stringently centralized: sacrifice could be offered only one shrine, the place where 'Yahweh had set his name'"

don · 11-09-09 7:46 pm

An interesting theory written as though it were known facts. I am opposed to this kind of "scholarship". It is far too speculative for my liking. These people do the same thing that many believers do. They accept certain assumptions, for whatever "good" reasons, and then go on as though they know. .

don · 11-09-09 8:15 pm

The People's Baptist Church of Kelowna, B.C.<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:ARTICLE XVII: OF THE GRACE OF GIVING We believe God’s method of financing His Church and of spreading the Gospel is by the tithes and offerings of His people; that the place to tithe is the local New Testament Church; that the tithe is upon the first day of the week; that everyone is accountable to the Lord for one tenth of his increase; and that any additional amount (above the tithe) given to the church, or towards other Christian works of like faith and practice, and where those finances are directed is left as an individual matter between each believer and God. We also teach tithing was instituted prior the Law, continued during the Law, and these principles practiced by the New Testament Church. Mt.23:23; 1Cor.16:1,2; 2Cor.9:6-15; Mal.3:7-10; Lev.27:28-34; Lk.6:38; Gen.14:17-20;28:22; Dt.12:11-14; Eze.44:30; 2Cor.8:1-8; 1Cor.9:8-14. <a href="http://peoplesbaptist.ca/home/?page_id=16" target=_top>http://peoplesbaptist.ca/home/?page_id=16</a><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

don · 11-09-09 8:21 pm

The Apostolic Church of Australia<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:The privilege and responsibility of bringing tithes and offerings to the Lord This statement reflects the conviction that tithing is a perpetual principle as evidenced by the biblical record which shows that tithing was acknowledged prior to the Law (Genesis 14:20, 28:22), taught during the Law (Numbers 18:21–24), endorsed by Christ (Matthew 23:23), and supported by other New Testament Scriptures (1 Corinthians 9:13–14, Hebrews 7:1–10). Further, this statement reflects the distinction between tithes and offerings. <a href="http://www.melvillecitychurch.org.au/IMAGES/DetailedStatement.pdf" target=_top>http://www.melvillecitychurch.org.au/IMAGES/Detail edStatement.pdf</a><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

don · 11-09-09 8:25 pm

Open Door Bible College - A Ministry of the Church of the Open Door 550 Baltimore Boulevard · Westminster, MD 21157 · (410) 876-3838<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:(X) Giving. We believe that every Christian, as a steward of that portion of God’s wealth entrusted to him, is obligated to support his local church financially. We believe that God has established the tithe as a basis for giving, but that every Christian should also give other offerings sacrificially and cheerfully to the support of the church, the relief of those in need, and the spread of the Gospel. We believe that a Christian relinquishes all rights to direct the use of the tithe or offering once the gift has been made. (Gen. 14:20; Prov. 3:9-10; Acts 4:34-37; 1 Cor. 16:2; 2 Cor. 9:6-7; Gal. 6:6; Eph. 4:28; 1 Tim. 5:17-18; 1 John 3:17) <a href="http://www.opendoorcollege.org/doctrinal-statement" target=_top>http://www.opendoorcollege.org/doctrinal-statement</a> <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

don · 11-09-09 8:32 pm

Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada - PAOC<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:5.8.4 TITHING Tithing was divinely instituted by God under the old covenant and was compulsory upon the people who worshiped God.85 Under the new covenant we are not bound by arbitrary laws; but the principles of right and wrong, as expressed by the law, are fulfilled in the believer's life through grace. Grace should produce as much as or more than law demanded. Regular systematic giving is clearly taught in the New Testament. It is known as the grace of giving.86 The gauge or rule of this systematic giving is defined in the Old Testament, known as the law of tithing. All Christians should conscientiously and systematically tithe their income to God. <a href="http://www.paoc.org/upload/files2/docs/What%20We%20Believe/STATEMENT%20OF%20FUNDAMENTAL%20TRUTHS%202006.pdf" target=_top>http://www.paoc.org/upload/files2/docs/What%20We%2 0Believe/STATEMENT%20OF%20FUNDAMENTAL%20TRUTHS%202 006.pdf</a><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

elaine · 11-09-09 8:59 pm

Don, you asked the question about the date (approximate) when Genesis was written. When I gave you the approximate date, a consensus by all major Bible historians, you simply write: An interesting theory written as though it were known facts. I am opposed to this kind of "scholarship." Your being "opposed" neither adds anything to the conversation, only that you disagree, without offering any possible alternative. How is that different from someone who refuses to listen to a teacher's instruction and simply says: "I am opposed--it's only a theory." Is an "opinion" of something worth a decent answer or simply to declare, in effect: "I don't like the historians' evaluation. What is your counter-argument? It is a "cop-out" to simply disagree with scholars unless you can offer a substantive argument. Would you allow your students' to dismiss your teaching in a similar fashion? Or, would you dismiss them as being "unruly"?

don · 11-09-09 11:15 pm

It is a "cop-out" to simply disagree with scholars unless you can offer a substantive argument. Here is what I wrote: It is far too speculative for my liking. These people do the same thing that many believers do. They accept certain assumptions, for whatever "good" reasons, and then go on as though they know. The statements made in your quote cannot be substantiated to the extent they are asserted. I am opposed to any scholar stating dogmatically what is a matter of theory and conjecture. Would you allow your students' to dismiss your teaching in a similar fashion? If a student felt I was too dogmatic on an issue, I would ask them to explain what they meant. In the case at hand, who can reach back in history and say dogmatically that such and such is the case. I am speaking from a historical/scientific perspective rather than a confessional one. The problem, as I see it, is that some historians establish their assumptions and then they speak in a "confessional" manner. They just don't know for sure to the level they claim to know for sure. Nobody does; historically/scientifically speaking. You may recall some time back John presented a link to an OT lecture series by Christine Hayes. <a href="http://www.academicearth.org/lectures/bible-parts-of-the-whole" target=_top>http://www.academicearth.org/lectures/bible-parts- of-the-whole</a> You mentioned having watched the first of the series. I watched the same one, I think. I listened carefully to what she claimed to be the case and she very carefully refrained from making dogmatic statements such as the author you quoted more recently. So far, Christine Hayes' scholarship is impressive; unlike the other "scholar" you have quoted. Your author, Karen Armstrong, is not a trained historian. She is a well-known author, but not a degreed scholar. Her life experiences seem to be deep and rich but that doesn't make a person a peer-reviewed scholar. She is not careful enough. .

elaine · 11-09-09 11:22 pm

Whatever your personal opinion of Christine Hayes (I've never heard of her, tell me more), Karen is recognized to the extent that she has been asked to be a speaker on many television programs, has written more than dozen books, her bibliographies are voluminous, so I am amazed that you find her insignificant because she lacks "degrees." Surely, you do not find degrees as the summum bonum for every person who has manage to be recognized around the world?

elaine · 11-09-09 11:38 pm

Don, I have frequently quoted James L. Kugel, Starr Professor of Hebrew at Harvard, who agrees with Karen on the dates for the Hebrew Bible. What does Christine give for dates? Can you quote a reputable scholar who gives totally different dates? Also, Bart Ehrman,chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the U. of North Carolina and a lecturerer for several series for The Teaching Company. Do you agree with either of these "degreed" writers? Or, are there other reasons for you choices? I checked her on Google and did not find books I could check on.

don · 11-09-09 11:55 pm

All I am saying is that dogmatic statements about ancient history don't get my respect; not from a historical/scientific perspective. The scholars I respect are those who examine the issues, acknowledge the various views, and then give their studied opinion. Karen Armstrong's lack of training shows, IMO. She is a self-made historian. There is much to be said for that. But, most self-made individuals do not play the role of scholar very well. (Message edited by Don on November 09, 2009)

don · 11-10-09 12:12 am

(I've never heard of her, tell me more), Maybe you have: <a href="http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=1768&post=7634#POST7634" target=_top>http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?t pc=1768&post=7634#POST7634</a> .

don · 11-10-09 4:02 am

Karen Armstrong - <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Karen Armstrong was born November 14, 1944 in Wildmoor, Worcestershire. She is a British author of numerous works on comparative religion. She analyzes the similarities and differences of themes, myths, rituals and concepts among the Religions of the world. She first rose to prominence with her highly successful, A History of God. It details the history of the three great monotheistic traditions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. A former Catholic nun who asserts that "All the great traditions are saying the same thing in much the same way, despite their surface differences." They each have in common, she says, an emphasis upon the overriding importance of compassion, as expressed by way of the Golden Rule. She has returned to belief in God after a time as an atheist. Her academic career came to a halt when her doctoral thesis was rejected. She has also had a life-long struggle with epilepsy. She has authored several books on the Muslim tradition, and since the September 11, 2001 attacks, has become much in demand on the US lecture circuit. To say that she is a famous writer seems to be an understatement. In America, she is a highly regarded authority on religion. Adapted from: <a href="http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Karen_Armstrong" target=_top>http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Karen_Arms trong</a><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>As I have looked over information about, accolades for, criticism of, and books authored by Karen Armstrong, I have reached the conclusion that she is a gifted reporter of what historians say about the subject she addresses. Rather than examining the primary sources as a peer-reviewed historian does, she thoroughly studies her subject by reading the literature available. She has a gift for explaining things. Critics complain that she is too simplistic and revisionist in her works of history. The volume of her written work is impressive: Journal articles<ol><li>"Ambiguity and Remembrance: Individual and Collective Memory in Finland" (2000) <LI>"The Holiness of Jerusalem: Asset or Burden?" (1998) <LI>"Women, Tourism, Politics" (1977) </li></ol>Books<ol><li>The Bible: A Biography (2007) <LI>The Great Transformation: The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions (2006) <LI>Muhammad: A Prophet For Our Time (2006) <LI>A Short History of Myth (2005) <LI>The Spiral Staircase (2004) <LI>Faith After September 11 (2002) <LI>The Battle for God: Fundamentalism in Judaism, Christianity and Islam (2000) <LI>Buddha (2000) <LI>Islam: A Short History (2000) <LI>In the Beginning: A New Interpretation of Genesis (1996) <LI>Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths (1996) <LI>A History of God: The 4000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam (1993) <LI>The End of Silence: Women and the Priesthood (1993) <LI>The English Mystics of the Fourteenth Century' ' (1991) <LI>Muhammad: a Biography of the Prophet (1991) <LI>Holy War: The Crusades and their Impact on Today's World (1988) <LI>The Gospel According to Woman: Christianity's Creation of the Sex War in the West (1986) <LI>Tongues of Fire: An Anthology of Religious and Poetic Experience (1985) <LI>Beginning the World (1983) <LI>The First Christian: Saint Paul's Impact on Christianity (1983) <LI>Through the Narrow Gate (1982) </li></ol> (Message edited by Don on November 10, 2009)

bob · 11-10-09 12:24 pm

Dr. Kelly did not mince words in the following article. SHOULD THE CHURCH TEACH TITHING? A Theologian's Conclusions about a Taboo Doctrine Russell Earl Kelly, Ph. D For An In-depth look at this subject, See Tithing Also The Prosperity Doctrine Lifestyles of the Tele-Evangelists. And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need. Act 2:44-45 Tithing is Not a New Covenant Doctrine The following essay is a summary of my book, Should the Church Teach Tithing? A Theologianï¿½s Conclusions about a Taboo Doctrine. The book itself is a greatly expanded version of my PH. D. thesis. I challenge Bible educators to be bold, to open up their seminary level research and to promote studies on this subject in the Masters, Doctorate and PH. D. levels. This doctrine is simply too important to ignore. The doctrine of tithing, in many churches today, has reached the level of a modern scandal. While on the one hand, most seminary-level textbooks and church theologians omit tithing, on the other hand, the practice is quickly becoming a requirement for church membership in the very denominations who insist on solid Bible-based doctrines. There is also increasing evidence that lay persons who question the legitimacy of New Covenant tithing are usually criticized as being troublemakers or weak Christians. Modern Tithing is Based on Many False Assumptions One denominationï¿½s statement on stewardship is typical of what many others teach about tithing. It says that "tithing is the minimum biblical standard and the beginning point which God has established that must not be replaced or compromised by any other standard." Let me repeat this false statement: "tithing is the minimum biblical standard and the beginning point which God has established that must not be replaced or compromised by any other standard." They add that the tithe is from gross income which is due to the church before taxes. The following points of this essay contrast the false teachings used to support tithing with what Godï¿½s Word actually says. Point #1. In Godï¿½s Word, the Tithe is Always Only Food and Never Money! The false teaching is that biblical tithes include ALL sources of income. This is the Webster Dictionary definition and it is not the biblical definition! Settle this question once and for all! Open a complete Bible concordance and you will soon discover that the false definition is wrong. This is very important. **True biblical tithes were always only food from the farms and herds of only Israelites who only lived inside Godï¿½s Holy Land, the national boundary of Israel.** There are 15 verses from 11 chapters and 8 books from Leviticus 27 to Luke 11which describe the contents of the tithe. And those contents never, I repeat, never included money, silver, gold or anything other than food! Yet the incorrect definition of "tithe" is the greatest lie being preached about tithing today! (Lev. 27:30, 32; Numb. 18:27, 28; Deu. 12:17; 14:22, 23; 26 12; 2 Chron. 31:5, 6; Neh. 10:37; 13:5; Mal. 3:10; Matt. 23:23; Luke 11: 42). Point #2. Abrahamï¿½s Tithe to Melchizedek is Not an Example for Christians. The false teaching is that Abraham freely gave tithes because it was Godï¿½s will. However, for the following reasons, Genesis 14:20 cannot be used as an example for Christians to tithe. (1) The Bible does not say that Abraham "freely" gave this tithe. (2) Abrahamï¿½s tithe was NOT a holy tithe from Godï¿½s holy land produced by Godï¿½s holy people. (3) Abrahamï¿½s tithe was only from spoils of war common to many nations. (4) In Numbers 31, God only required 1% of spoils of war. (5) Abrahamï¿½s tithe to Melchizedek was a one-time recorded event and Abraham moved often. (6) Abrahamï¿½s tithe was not from his own personal property. (7) Abraham kept nothing for himself; he gave everything back. (8) Abrahamï¿½s tithe is not quoted anywhere in the Bible to endorse tithing. (9) Genesis 14, verse 21, is the key text. Since most commentaries explain verse 21 as an example of pagan Arab tradition, it is contradictory to explain the 90% of verse 21 as pagan, while insisting that the 10% of verse 20 was Godï¿½s will. (10) If Abraham is an example for Christians to give 10% to God, then he should also be an example for Christians to give the other 90% to Satan, or to the king of Sodom! (11) Since neither Abraham nor Jacob had a Levitical priesthood to support, they had no place to bring tithes during their many moves. Point #3. The First-Tithes Were Not Received by Priests. The false teaching is that Old Testament priests received the first tithe. The truth is that the "whole" tithe, the first tithe, did not go to the priests at all. Instead, according to Numbers 18:21-24 and Nehemiah 10:37, it went to the servants of the priests, the Levites. Next, according to Numbers 18:25, 26 and Nehemiah 10:38, the Levites gave the best tenth of this tithe which they received to the priests who ministered the sin sacrifices and served inside in the holy places. Priests personally did not tithe at all. It is also important to know that, in exchange for receiving these tithes, both Levites and priests forfeited all rights to permanent land inheritance inside Israel (Numb. 18:20-26; Deu. 12:12; 14:27, 29; 18:1, 2; Josh. 13:14, 33; 14:3; 18:7; Ezek. 44:28). Also, the Levites, who received the first tithe, were prohibited from ministering blood sacrifices under penalty of death (Numb. 18:3). There is no continuation to the New Covenant here. Point #4. The Phrase, "It is Holy to the LORD," Does Not Make Tithing an Eternal Moral Principle. The false teaching is that Leviticus 27:30-32 proves that the tithe is an "eternal moral principle" because "it is holy to the LORD." However, these false teachers must ignore the stronger phrase, "it is MOST holy to the LORD," in the immediate preceding verses 28 and 29. This is because verses 28 and 29 are definitely not eternal moral principles in the Church. In its context, the phrases "it is holy to the LORD" and "it is MOST holy to the LORD" cannot possibly be interpreted "eternal moral principles." Why? Because almost every other use of these phrases in Leviticus has long ago been discarded by Christians. Similar phrases are also used to describe all of the festivals, the sacrificial offerings, the clean food distinctions, the old covenant priests and the old covenant sanctuary. Point #5. There are Four Different Tithes Found in the Bible. The false teaching ignores all other tithes and focuses on part of the first religious tithe. In reality, the first religious tithe, called the "Levitical tithe," had two parts: again, the whole first tithe was given to the Levites who were only servants to the priests (Numb. 18:21-24; Neh. 10:37); the Levites, in turn, gave one tenth of the whole tithe to the priests (Numb. 18:25, 26; Neh. 10:38). According to Deuteronomy 12 and 14, the second religious tithe, called the "festival tithe," was eaten by worshipers in the streets of Jerusalem during the three yearly festivals (Deu. 12:1-19; 14:22-26). And, according to Deuteronomy 14 and 26, a third tithe, called the "poor tithe," stayed in the homes every third year and was used to feed the poor (Deu. 14:28, 29; 26:12-13). Also, according to First Samuel, chapter 8, the King collected the first and best ten per cent for political use. During Jesusï¿½ time Rome collected the first ten per cent (10%) of most food and twenty per cent (20%) of fruit crops as its spoils of war. One wonders what "churches" are trying to hide when they only single out the one religious tithe which best suits their purposes and ignore the other three tithes. Point #6. Jesus, Peter, Paul and the Poor Could Not Tithe! The false teaching is that everybody in the Old Testament was required to begin their giving to God at the ten per cent level. In reality, the poor were not required to tithe at all! Craftsmen did not tithe. Fishermen did not tithe. Only farmers and herdsmen possessed what was defined as tithe increase. Jesus was a carpenter; Paul was a tentmaker, and Peter was a fisherman. None of these occupations qualified as tithe-payers because they did not farm or herd animals for a living. It is, therefore, wrong to teach that everybody paid a required minimum of a tithe, and, therefore, New Covenant Christians should be required to, at least, begin at the same minimum as Old Covenant Israelites. This common false assumption is very often repeated and completely ignores the very plain definition of tithe as food from farm increase or herd increase. It is also wrong to teach that the poor in Israel were required to pay tithes. In fact, they actually received tithes! Much of the second festival tithe and all of a special third-year tithe went to the poor. In fact, many laws protected the poor from abuse and expensive sacrifices which they could not afford (see also Lev. 14:21; 25:6, 25-28, 35, 36; 27:8; Deu. 12:1-19; 14:23, 28, 29; 15:7, 8, 11; 24:12, 14, 15, 19, 20; 26:11-13; Mal. 3:5; Matt. 12:1, 2; Mark 2:23, 24; Luke 2:22-24; 6:1, 2; 2 Cor. 8:12-14; 1 Tim. 5:8; Jas. 1:27). Point #7. Tithes Were Often Used as Political Taxes. The false teaching is that tithes are never comparable to taxes, or taxation. However, in the Hebrew economy, the tithe was used in a totally different manner than it is preached today. Once again, those Levites who received the whole tithe were not even ministers or priests -- they were only servants to the priests. Numbers, chapter 3, describes the Levites as carpenters, metal workers, leather-craftsmen and artists who maintained the small sanctuary. And, according to First Chronicles, chapters 23-27, during the time of King David and King Solomon, the Levites were still skilled craftsmen who inspected and approved all work in the Temple: 24, 000 worked in the Temple as builders and supervisors; 6,000 were officials and judges; 4,000 were guards and 4,000 were musicians. As political representatives of the king, Levites used their tithe income to serve as officials, judges, tax collectors, treasurers, temple guards, musicians, bakers, singers and professional soldiers (1 Chron. 12:23, 26; 27:5). It is obvious why these examples of using biblical tithe-income are never used as examples in the Church today. When it came to mission work, Old Covenant tithes were never used for evangelism of non-Israelites. Tithing failed! In other words, tithes never stimulated Old Covenant Levites or priests to establish a single mission outreach or encourage a single Gentile to become an Israelite! Old Covenant tithing was motivated and mandated by Law, not love. In fact, during most of Israelï¿½s history the prophets were Godï¿½s primary spokesmen ï¿½ and not the tithe-receiving Levites and priests. Point #8. Levitical Tithes Were Normally Taken to the Levitical Cities. False teachers want us to think that tithes were formerly all taken to the Temple and should now be taken to the "churchï¿½s" building. In reality, the overwhelming majority of Levitical tithes never went to the Temple. Those who teach otherwise ignore the Levitical cities and the 24 courses of the Levites and priests. According to Numbers 35, Joshua 20, 21 and First Chronicles 6, Levites and priests lived on borrowed land in the Levitical cities where they farmed and raised animals. And it is clear from Numbers 18, Second Chronicles 31:15-19 and Nehemiah 10:37 that the ordinary people were expected to bring their tithes to the Levitical cities. Why? Because that is where most of the Levites and priests lived with their families most of the time. See also Nehemiah 13:9. Point #9. Malachi 3 is the Most Abused Tithing Text in the Bible. The false teaching about tithes from Malachi 3 ignores several important Bible facts. (1) Malachi is Old Covenant context and is never quoted in the New Covenant for the church. (2) In 1:6; 2:1 and 3:1-5, Malachi is addressed to dishonest priests who are cursed because they have stolen the best offerings from God. (3) The Levitical cities must be considered and Jerusalem was not a Levitical city. It makes no sense to teach that 100% of the tithe was brought to the Temple when most Levites and priests did not live in Jerusalem. (4) The 24 courses of Levites and priests must also be considered. Beginning with King David and King Solomon, they were divided into 24 families. These divisions were also put into place in Malachiï¿½s time by Ezra and Nehemiah. Since normally only one family served in the Temple for only one week at a time, there was absolutely no reason to send ALL of the tithe to the Temple when 98% of those it was designed to feed were still in the Levitical cities (1 Chron. 24-26; 28:13, 21; 2 Chron. 8:14; 23:8; 31:2, 15-19; 35:4, 5, 10; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 11:19, 30; 12:24; 13:9, 10; Luke 1:5). Therefore, when the context of the Levitical cities, the 24 families of priests, under-age children, wives, Numbers 18, Second Chronicles 31, Nehemiah 10-13, and all of Malachi are all evaluated, only about 2% of the total tithe was normally required at the Temple in Jerusalem. Point #10. Tithing is Not Taught in the New Testament. The false teaching is that Jesus taught tithing in Matthew 23:23 which, they say, is clearly in the New Testament. The problem here is the arbitrary division of our Bible. The New Covenant did not begin at the birth of Jesus, but at his death. Tithing is not taught to the church after Calvary! When Jesus discussed tithing in Matthew 23:23, he was only commanding obedience to the Old Covenant Law which he endorsed and supported until Calvary. In Matthew 23:2, 3 Jesus told his followers to obey the scribes and Pharisees "because they sit in Mosesï¿½ seat." There is not a single New Testament Bible text which teaches tithing after Calvary ï¿½ period! Point #11. Old Covenant Priests Were Replaced by Believer-Priests. The false teaching is that New Covenant preachers are simply taking up where the Old Covenant priests left off and are due the tithe. Compare Exodus 19:5, 6 with Second Peter 2: 9, 10. Before the incident of the golden calves, God had intended for every Israelite to become a priest. Like other ordinances of the Law, tithing was only a temporary shadow until Christ. In the New Covenant every believer is a priest who offers spiritual sacrifices to God. OT priests did not tithe!!! Old Covenant priests were replaced by the priesthood of every believer. Therefore, every ordinance which had applied to the old priesthood was blotted out at Calvary. Therefore, the original temporary purpose of tithing no longer exists. (Compare Numb. 3:12, 13; Heb. 4:16; 10:19-22; 13:15, 16 and Rev. 1:6 with Gal. 3:19; Heb. 7:12-19; Eph. 2:14-16; Col. 2:13-17). Point #12. The New Covenant Church is Neither a Building Nor a Storehouse. The false teaching is that Christian buildings, called "churches," "tabernacles" or "temples" replaced the OT Temple as Godï¿½s dwelling places. Godï¿½s Word never calls New Covenant "churches," "tabernacles" and "temples" "buildings" in which God dwells! Godï¿½s church, Godï¿½s dwelling place, is within the believers. Believers do not "go to church" -- believers go "to meet the church." Also, since OT priests did not pay tithes, then tithing cannot logically continue. Therefore it is wrong to call a building "Godï¿½s storehouse" for tithes. (1 Cor. 3:16, 17; 6:19, 20; 12:12-14; Eph. 1:22, 23; 2:21; 4:12-16; Rev. 3:12). For "storehouse" compare First Corinthians 16:2 with 2 Corinthians 12:14 and Acts 20:17, 32-35. Point #13. The Church Grows By Using Better New Covenant Principles. The false teaching implies that principles of grace giving are not as good as principles of law-giving. Which church obeys Leviticus 25:4-7 which forbids collecting tithes every seventh year? (1) According to Galatians 5:16-23, there is no physical law which controls the fruits of the Holy Spirit. (2) Second Corinthians 3:10 says that the Old Covenant has "no glory" when compared to the "surpassing" glory and liberty of the Holy Spirit. (3) Hebrews 7 is the only post-Calvary mention of tithing and it is an explanation of why the Levitical priesthood must be replaced by Christï¿½s priesthood because it was weak and unprofitable. I encourage the study Hebrews 7 and follow the progression from verse 5 to verse 12 to verse 18. (4) The manner in which tithing is taught today reflects a failure of the church to believe and act on the far better principles of love, grace and faith. Mandatory giving principles never can, never have and never will, prosper the church more than principles guided by love for Christ and lost souls. Point #14. N. T. Giving Principles in 2nd Corinthians 8 and 9 Do Not Include Tithing. The false teaching is that tithing is an assumed doctrine. Yet the early church thrived through the witness of women, slaves and soldiers who had nothing to tithe. The following New Covenant principles are found in Second Corinthians, chapters 8 and 9: (1) Giving is a "grace. Second Corinthians, chapters 8, uses the word, "grace," eight times in reference to helping poor saints. (2) Give yourself to God first (8:5). (3) Give yourself to knowing Godï¿½s will (8:5). (4) Give in response to Christï¿½s gift (8:9; 9:15). (5) Give out of a sincere desire (8:8, 10, 12; 9:7). (6) Do not give because of any commandment to give (8:8, 10; 9:7). (7) Give even beyond your ability (8:3, 11, 12). (8) Give equally. This means that those who have more should give more in order to make up for the inability of those who cannot afford to give as much (8:12-14). (9) Give joyfully (8:2). (10) Give because you are growing spiritually (8:3, 4, 7). (11) Give because you want to continue growing spiritually (9:8, 10, 11). (12) Give because you are hearing the gospel preached (9:13). Point #15. The Apostle Paul Preferred That Church Leaders Be Self-Supporting. The false teaching is that Paul taught and practiced tithing. Yet, nothing could be farther from the truth. As a Jewish rabbi, Paul was among those who insisted on working to support himself (Acts 18:3; 1 Thess. 2:9, 10; 2 Thess. 3:8-14). While Paul does not condemn those who manage to receive full-time support, neither does he teach that full-time support is the normal will of God for advancing the gospel (1 Cor. 9:12). In fact, twice, in Acts 20:29-35 and also in Second Corinthians 12:14, Paul actually encouraged church elders to work to support needy believers inside the church. For Paul, "living of the gospel" meant "living by gospel principles of faith, love and grace" (1 Cor. 9:14). While Paul realized that he had a "right" to some support, he concluded that his "liberty," or freedom to preach unhindered was more important in order to fulfill his calling from God (1 Cor. 9:15; 11:7-13; 12:13, 14;1 Thess. 2:5, 6). While working as a tent-maker, Paul accepted limited support but boasted that his pay, or salary, was that he could preach the gospel for free, without being a burden to others (1 Cor. 9:16-19). Point #16. Tithing Did Not Become a Law in the Church Until A. D. 777. The false teaching is that the historical church has always taught tithing. However, even in Acts 21:20-26, several decades after Calvary, the early Jewish-Christians in Jerusalem were still carefully following the Old Covenant law and were still worshiping in and supporting the Jewish Temple. As obedient Jews, logic forces us to conclude that they must have still been sending any tithes they had to the Temple. While disagreeing with their own theologians, most Church historians write that tithing did not become an accepted doctrine in the church for over 700 years after Calvary. In fact, the early church leaders practiced asceticism. This meant that being poor was the best way to serve God. They patterned their worship after that of the Jewish synagogues which had rabbis who were self-supporting and usually refused to receive money for teaching Godï¿½s Word. According to the very best historians and encyclopedias, it took over 500 years before the local church Council of Macon, in the year 585, tried unsuccessfully to enforce tithing on its members and it was not until the year 777 that Emperor Charlemagne legally allowed the church to collect tithes. Conclusion: The false teaching of tithing is driving thousands of sincere Christians out of our churches today. People are not stupid! They can read the Bible for themselves, as they should. Almost every day I receive e-mails from all around the world thanking me for speaking up for the truth of Godï¿½s Word. Tithing is not part of New Covenant doctrine for Christï¿½s church. May God richly bless your dedicated and prayerful study of His Holy Word. Thank you. My web site is: <a href="http://www.shouldthechurchteachtithing.com" target=_top>www.shouldthechurchteachtithing.com</a>. BARF TIME: WHY BOOKS LIKE THIS ARE NEEDED. WCFcourier .comï¿½ Waterloo, Iowa; The Cedar Valleyï¿½s Home Page Friday, August 5, 2005 Support payments The Living Word Tabernacle in Waverly, Ohio, terminated the membership of Loretta Davis recently, according to a July report by WCMH-TV in Columbus, because she had stopped paying her tithe. Davis' contributions ended in January after she was hospitalized the first of 15 times this year for congestive heart failure. The church's founder said non-member Davis could still attend, but Davis' daughter said, "In the time of (her) need, (the church) should be caring, supporting, asking what she needs, help her if she needed help." When healthier, Davis was donating $60 a month out of her $592 Social Security check. }

elaine · 11-10-09 1:21 pm

There are at least half-a-dozen Bible scholars who agree that Genesis could not have been written prior to 1000 B.C., and most defer to a later date, as literacy was almost non-existent before that time. Richard Elliott Friedman, professor of Hebrew and comparative literature at the U.C., San Diego, doctorate from Harvard and visiting scholar at Oxford and Cambridge, states in his book Who Wrote the Bible : "There is hardly a biblical scholar in the world actively working on the problem who would claim that the Five Books of Moses were written by Moses--or by any one person....Moses was further from the language of much of the Five Books than Shakespeare was from modern English." Harold Bloom, in Jesus and Yahweh, writes: "Christians have saved their Old Testament, to borrow an emphasis from Jaroslav Pelikan...The New Testament frequently is a strong misreading of the Hebrew Bible, and certainly it has persuaded multitudes....The New Testament usurpation of the HEbrew Bible constituted a kind of trauma that prevails among Jewry." Robert Alter, Professor of Hebrew and Comparitive Literature at U.C., Berkeley, writes" "Since well back into the nineteenth century, it has been the consensus of biblical scholarship that Genesis, together with the next three books of the Pentateuch, is woven together from three distinct literary sources....[and that they] could be as late as the sixth of fith century B.C." While there will always be controversy on the dates, there must be documented refutation in order to displace the prevailing scholarly opinions. Wouldn't you expect that of your students?

elaine · 11-10-09 5:13 pm

Don, because of your expressed interest in Christine Hayes, I just listened to her entire class on Genesis. Amazing! There was nothing to disagree on. Everything she said: 1. The the ancient Israleites worshiped many gods until the Babylonian Exile. 2. The Israelites adopted monotheism in approximately 6oo B.C., and the earliest writings (Genesis) reflects back into the writings, beginning in Genesis. 3. Genesis 1-11 draws on many near eastern myths: Gilgamesh, the Sumerian Flood story and they merely adapted them, using their god as the instigator. The common myths she declared as false: 1. The Bible is not a book, but an anthology with multiple genres. 2. It is not a pious tale. 3. It is not for children. She said that her children, 11 and 8, were not allowed to read the Bible, it is for adults. 4. It is not a book on theology. 5. There is not one author, but many. In recommending her, I expected to find disagreement on my statements, but found none. Nor could I find anything she said that disagreed with the various teachers and authors I have given.

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#1 11-08-09 2:56 pm

Tithing and the Christian Churches

#2 11-08-09 3:05 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#3 11-08-09 4:46 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#4 11-08-09 4:50 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#5 11-08-09 5:54 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#6 11-08-09 6:50 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#7 11-08-09 7:13 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#8 11-09-09 12:54 am

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#9 11-09-09 7:43 am

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#10 11-09-09 5:52 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#11 11-09-09 7:46 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#12 11-09-09 8:15 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#13 11-09-09 8:21 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#14 11-09-09 8:25 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#15 11-09-09 8:32 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#16 11-09-09 8:59 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#17 11-09-09 11:15 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#18 11-09-09 11:22 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#19 11-09-09 11:38 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#20 11-09-09 11:55 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#21 11-10-09 12:12 am

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#22 11-10-09 4:02 am

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#23 11-10-09 12:24 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#24 11-10-09 1:21 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

#25 11-10-09 5:13 pm

Re: Tithing and the Christian Churches

Board footer