I don’t typically respond to other people’s articles, and I try to stay out of controversy. Hopefully I do not regret responding here, but Les Puryear seems to be a reasonable man and if there were any discussion I think it would be cordial.
Puryear recently posted an article on what is wrong with the SBC. Number two on the list (in no particular order) was “preachers and Seminary professors who teach that the biblical principle of storehouse tithing is not valid today.” He followed up that article with one this morning accusing those that “eliminate the tithe” as “jumping through hermeneutical hoops to dismiss biblical teaching”.
Here I am not so much going to respond to the discussion of tithing specifically but what I believe is a faulty hermeneutic that drives Puryear’s conclusions.
In his recent article there is one particular statement that stuck out to me:
I do not agree that we should ignore the Old Testament and obey only New Testament commands. If so, then we would be throwing out more than half of the Bible!
He follows that up with citing 2 Timothy 3:16-17, Psalm 119:105, and Matthew 5:18 to show the danger of ignoring the OT commands.
If the purpose of the Old Testament is to give us a rule book of commands then I would be more apt to agree with Puryear’s conclusions. But if the purpose of the Old Testament is to point to Christ (in all of its shadows, sacrifices, etc.) then the Old Testament is not thrown out simply because we no longer adhere to certain laws within the Old Testament.
In this article three things are listed that are no longer valid: “dietary laws, the ceremonial law, and the sacrificial system”. Certainly Puryear would not argue that we are “throwing out” most of the Torah just because we see it fulfilled in Jesus.
As Tom Schreiner has aptly pointed out in his work on Christians and Biblical Law, “the tithe is irretrievably tied to the old covenant, which is no longer in force”. We do not pay regular tithes to the Levites and to the priests. All believers are now priests. Do we then pay tithes to one another? To truly follow the tithe we must live in the Old Covenant; and that is Schreiner’s point.
But What About Jesus in Matthew 23?
One of Puryear’s points is that Jesus DOES teach tithing in the New Testament. In Matthew 23 he tells the Pharisees that they should have tithed. Their problem is that they were neglecting other matters like justice, mercy, and faith. But the tithing part they got correct. Jesus does not rebuke them for tithing in fact he affirms them for it.
But it is worth noting, again as Schreiner does, that “his positive words about tithing were directed to Pharisees who lived under the old covenant”. Schreiner then goes on to point out that Jesus also “commended offering sacrifices in the temple (Matthew 5:23-24), but no one today thinks such would be advisable if the temple were rebuilt.”
Tithing and Missions
Count me then as one of those that is a problem within the SBC. I know that many fear that if this teaching would progress…where we no longer required a tithe in our churches…then an already strapped financial church would be buried. Furthermore, God would not be please because we would be “robbing God” as it says in Malachi.
I must admit that does cause me to suggest these things with trepidation. But might I suggest that it may be possible (hear my trepidation) that mandating the tithe is actually hurting our churches. Inspired by a question from David Platt’s book, Radical, I asked myself the hard question: what would be different if rather than asking how much can I spare I start asking how much will it take? (Read that article: here)
Is it possible that many people give their minimum 10% (and we know statistically we often fail to do this) when the cause of missions combined with the way that God has financially blessed us would actually necessitate a much larger sacrifice? Again what would happen if we did not have a fixed 10% that is the expected amount—but instead we began asking “how much will it take”?
My contention is that we do not “throw out half the Bible” by not mandating a storehouse tithe. Rather we magnify the beauty of Christ in saying that He has fulfilled the Old covenant and has now set in its place a blood-soaked new covenant that comes with a non-negotiable call to love one another. Such a call actually necessitates that we live MORE sacrificially than a tithe and not less**.
**I am not here accusing Puryear of teaching something akin to only giving a minimum and not giving over and above the tithe.
Those who oppose the teaching on tithing do so without grasping the basic principle. The 10% is consistent in all of scripture as the beginning point. It was never the magic number or rate of contentment.
Your comment about asking “…what will it take” is a great statement.
Those who teaching tithing should NEVER simply hang out at the 10% threshold. Yet those who do not teach tithing miss the clear Biblical starting point that is seen before even the law was implemented.
Odd also that Muslims begin at 40% while we Christians look for ways to reduce ours. Muslims look for ways to increase their’s.
Muslims are required to give 1/40th, which is 2.5%, not 40%.
Brothers Tim & Josh,
Not that it is entirely relevant to this discussion, but the amount that Muslim people give has been different during different time periods throughout Islamic history. It has been up to 20% under one of the empires if memory serves. However the general ruling is that a minimum of 2.5% is required. But the 2.5% is not from the total income, but from totals assets with some exclusions.
In some ways I suppose it is relevant to this discussion in that the Islamic requirement has its roots in the concept of a religious community that is united with the governmental system (quite similar to what we see in Hebraic Law).
God’s peace be with you both,
From the Middle East
I agree with Tim G. Scripture never says don’t tithe. The passages on giving after Matthew 23 in no way conflict with tithing, rather than suppliment what has been said about tithing.
Tithing is not meant to be the maximum of our giving, but the minimum, the starting point.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
Isn’t it inconsistent for a dispensationalist to believe in mandatory tithing, especially since major dispensationalist theologians such as Lewis Sperry Chafer, Charles Ryrie, and John Walvoord opposed mandatory tithing? Isn’t the dispensational hermeneutic like this: nothing from the OT is binding on the NT believer unless it is repeated in the NT?
Why are dispensationalists in the SBC so incapable of displaying any hermeneutical consistency?
That would generally be the old-line dispensational hermeneutic, though dispensationalists are far from monolithic.
David,
Agreed. And that’s what I said. 🙂
Les
My point is that the “starting point” that you reference is no longer the starting point but rather “a blood-soaked new covenant that comes with a non-negotiable call to love one another. Such a call actually necessitates that we live MORE sacrificially than a tithe and not less.”
No one is saying a person can’t tithe, just that it is not a law for Christians.
Jeff,
I am a premillennialist. People mean different things by dispensationalism. And there are a number of different varieties of premillennialists.
I believe the Bible teaches tithing. I am also a premillenialist. I see no conflict in that; maybe you do. I see no reason, being a premillennialist, to therefore have some rigid method of biblical interpretation.
To those who are premillennialists and oppose tithing – they are right on premillennialism, and wrong on tithing :-).
David R. Brumbelow
David,
Do you believe in a pre-tribulation rapture of the church before a 7 year tribulation period? Do you believe that OT promises to Israel will be fulfilled literally in a future millennium with a rebuilt temple? A historical premillennialist does not believe these things, but a dispensationalists does. If you believe these things, you are a dispensationalist, and it is inconsistent for a dispensationalist to believe in tithing. A dispensationalist believes that the church is in a different dispensation than OT Israel and therefore does not live under the same law as OT Israel.
Another dispensational authority on tithing:
The New Scofield Reference Bible: “In contrast with the law, which imposed giving as a divine requirement, Christian giving is voluntary, and a test of sincerity and love.”
I am actually a new covenant theology guy, not a dispensationalists, but I am stunned by the hermeneutical inconsistency of dispensationalists who advocate mandatory tithing.
Jeff,
Sorry you are stunned. But I bet you’ll get over it.
Through the years I’ve known numerous premillennialists who believe in tithing. Frankly, I don’t see much that tithing has to do with premillennialism. But obviously you do.
I like and use the NKJV New Scofield Bible. But I feel perfectly free to disagree with it from time to time.
By the way, the premillennial Criswell Study Bible (aka Believer’s Study Bible; Baptist Study Edition) does affirm tithing.
David R. Brumbelow
David,
You should really use the phrase “dispensational premillennialism”, since that is obviously what you believe. Historical premillennialism is a much different system of thought, with much different presuppositions and conclusions.
“Frankly, I don’t see much that tithing has to do with premillennialism.”
This is one of the most hermeneutically naive things I have heard in a long time. We are talking about an issue of continuity between the OT and NT, and dispensationalism has some very specific beliefs about such continuity: dispensationalism is a system of discontinuity between OT and NT.
1. The dispensational hermeneutic is that nothing from the OT is binding on the NT Christian unless it is repeated in the NT. Tithing is never repeated in the NT. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus is talking to Pharisees who were still under the old covenant.
2. Dispensationalism says that the dispensation of “Law” went from Moses to Christ, and now we are in the dispensation of “Grace” – where OT law does not apply.
” . . . what would be different if rather than asking how much can I spare I start asking how much will it take?. . . ”
if you can ‘spare it’, is it REALLY ‘an offering’ ?
I had a very reformed person tell me recently that he was unaware that Jesus had declared all foods clean. He is a Theonomist (I think I have that right), and believes that the OT law not only applies to Christians, but that secular law should follow the legal prescriptions laid out in the OT.
Relating to the OT on this topic is difficult for Christians. Jesus revises some of the commands, does away with others, and doesn’t address others.
I don’t believe there is any cook book formula that we can follow. There are tough calls.
On general moral commands, I believe the OT applies. On things related to the Nation of Israel, how it is set up, divided etc., it obviously doesn’t apply.
On ceremonial issues, customs etc. I don’t believe it applies. Are tattoos, piercings etc. not permissible? Are there mandatory ways to handle and bury dead bodies? What’s the difference between a moral command and a custom? It’s pretty tough, really.
I’m probably a little biased, but I found Dr. Schreiner’s book 40 Questions on Christians and Biblical Law a pretty helpful intro to some of these questions.
Jeff,
I find it amusing that a non-premillennialist is dictating what a premillennialist must believe.
If you don’t believe in tithing that’s fine with me. But I hope you have a good evening.
David R. Brumbelow
I am actually a historical premillennialist – but it is rather typical of dispensational premillennialists to think that they are only premillennialists, as if they have a monopoly on the term.
Jeff, you are right that a strict dispensationalist would normally not advocate strict tithing. But you are wrong to think that all dispensationalists fit easily in a box.
You are especially off-base to try to force David to fit into your monolithic dispensationalist formula. It just doesn’t work that way.
Might be more in keeping with the concept of ‘offering’ to have a ‘graduated amount’ expected . . . ten percent is a whole lot less for the very wealthy than it is for a poor family with children,
so you can be ‘legalistic’ and hold to the ten-percent concept, or you can get real and understand the ‘unfairness’ of the rote, set amount and see the wisdom of ‘noblesse oblige’ . . . to whom much has been given, much should be expected
For those who argue for the strict 10% (I understand that’s a minimum), how do you biblically argue from the OT Tithing Texts where exactly that money is to go? I have heard pastors say the tithe is required to be an undesignated gift to the local church, but is there a logical argument from the OT tithing passages or is this perhaps an overzealous enforcement of the tithing?
*I’m trying to better understand why this is taught, not trying to trap anyone. 🙂
It is telling that this question from Josh hasnt been answered….
Schreiner’s work in “40 Questions on Christians and Biblical Law” really destroys any argument promoting a minimum 10% tithe….
Yet, people with that view wont read or- as this thread has shown they arent even trying to hear the other sides argument.
I would also highly recommend Schreiner’s book.
Andreas Kostenberger and David Croteau have made the same argument as Schreiner. In short form:
http://www.biblicalfoundations.org/the-church/to-tithe-or-not-to-tithe-with-david-croteau/comment-page-1
And longer form:
http://www.biblicalfoundations.org/pdf/pdfarticles/bbrtithing1.pdf
http://www.biblicalfoundations.org/pdf/pdfarticles/bbrtithing2.pdf
Occasionally I seek a clarifying question to better understand views I disagree with on these posts.
I rarely get an answer. People are too busy reliving other battles and calling names to actually discuss the topic at hand.
To Les Puryear I am a liberal, which label I readily accept: I am liberal in giving and love. Shoot, I even think it’s just fine to go beyond the tithe.
But you cannot put Les Puryear in the same sentence as “tithing” without noting that his zeal for tithing led him to try to impose his view on denominational employees by going behind their backs to their boss and questioning their continued employment on the basis that they do not agree with him.
Teach it, preach it, shout it, spread it Les, but I trust you are no longer attempting to make your views a condition of SBC employment.
Back story here: http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2010/02/mission-accomplished.html
William:
I am also a liberal according to Les. I like you remember when Les tried to get the two mentioned in the link fired. Attempting to make his views on tithing a condition of employment just because it does not agree with his and the way he went about it seemed very unChrist like.
Tom and William,
I’m glad you agree with me that you are liberal. Thus, your views must be taken in the context of the liberal Christian.
Les
William,
I didn’t ask anyone to be fired. Wade got it completely wrong as usual.
BTW, I don’t have the power to get anyone fired even if I wanted to. Nice try though.
Les
We’ll never know for sure Les, the email on your blog has mysteriously disappeared.
Les:
Les, oh Les., you can’t blame this one on Wade. Your email said the following:
“My concern is the influence which Dr. Kostenberger may have upon future pastors who may teach this unbiblical position.
I am completely shocked and surprised that a Southern Baptist seminary in the years following the Conservative Resurgence would employ a professor who teaches that tithing is not necessary.
Do you agree with Dr. Kostenberger’s position of tithing? If not, do you think it is helpful to the SBC to keep this professor on the faculty of SEBTS?”
How were you not trying to get this man fired?
But nice try, trying to blame Wade Burleson another conservative who is a liberal according to you.
Yeah, Don Quixote can put a good spin on things. Of course, you neglected to put up both Bart and Les’ rebuttal.
BTW, in the spirit of Don Quixote in Enid, someone is going to roll your yard tomorrow night. With cheap toilet paper. The kind that gets torn to pieces and is hard to clean up. If it happens, you heard about it here first. If it doesn’t happen, it’s because I exposed their fiendish plot here. Either way, I’m a hero.
Tell your buddies Steven Fox and Bruce Gorley over at Baptist Life Forums I said “Hi”.
Joe: Old statement that you have made 100 times before. It’s no truer then than it is now.
What one does with what one believes is relevant. I merely point this out. Folks are welcome to evaluate Les’ words or my words in that context and draw their own conclusions.
I don’t see the people who preach storehouse tithing because OT laws are still in force worshipping on Saturday. The 7th day is the Sabbath, non Sunday. Nothing in the NT indicates a change of the Sabbath day.
Bill,
Got to disagree with you. The church began meeting on the Lord’s Day in the NT as a remembrance of the resurrection. Paul also said it doesn’t matter on which day you observe a Sabbath rest.
Les
Bill used a bad example, but his point still stands… People who use the hermeneutic that teaches storehouse tithing are very inconsistent as they simply pick and choose what still does and doesnt apply.
Matt,
Just teaching what the Bible says in context.
I wonder why no one has commented on my statement about 2 Cor. 9:7? This verse is used in almost every argument I have read to support eliminating tithing and yet, it addresses a special offering, not normal giving practices. Talk about taking a verse out of context!
Les
I think it is an interesting theory, Les, that this verse is only applicable to a special offering, but you haven’t exactly proved that point.
A dispensational hermeneutic on one issue (Sabbath/Lord’s Day) and a covenantal hermeneutic on the other (tithing)!
As a matter of fact, Paul says it doesn’t matter if you don’t want to keep a Sabbath at all.
In terms of using the evidence of OT Law on this, how does the Acts 15 passage come to bear? In Acts 15:5 you have those who state Gentiles should be directed to follow the Law of Moses, but Acts 15:10 shows the response that it was wrong to put on the Gentiles a yoke that the Jews could not bear. The following decision in Acts 15:20 instructs that the parts of the Law to be commanded were about fornication, idols, blood, and strangled animals.
Nothing about tithing or giving is commanded. And, no, neither are they commanded to not commit murder, but the two aren’t parallel. One is not only obvious correct morality, but is commanded all the way back to Noah and definitely brought out with Cain and Abel. The other is not.
That being said: I grew up tithing, I learned to figure percentages in 10% groups, and continue to practice giving at least 10% for the work of the local church. So, I do one thing, but it works like this for me: I know that it’s certainly not unBiblical to tithe, so why not start there? And yes: it’s a starting point. Since I read it, I’ve liked C.S. Lewis’ statement: there ought to be things we want to do but cannot afford to do because we’ve given too much. Otherwise, it’s not a sacrifice, is it?
In all, I’d hesitate to state that tithing is a command for the Gentile Believer. But I wouldn’t hesitate to do it, to teach someone to do it, and to preach that all of our stuff belongs to God, so we should give very generously. Which means considering how little we can keep rather than how little we have to give.
Look what you started, William. Everyone had their say. Topic over. Move on. Discuss the blogpost please.
People who keep making a point with the same thinking of “the Bible doesnt say don’t tithe” is simply proving that they are not even trying to hear out the other side of the argument… This is what makes “discussion” frustrating. You arent even trying to listen to the other side!
Matt,
I’ve heard the other side and it is wrong in my humble opinion. I must teach what I believe to be true biblical principles. To do any other is to diminish my call.
Les
Les,
You say you have heard the other side. Had you read Schreiner’s words on tithing prior to this article? Ever read his entire argument on the Law and its function in the New Covenant? Or any other Reformed or Dispensational SCHOLAR on the Law? Have you ever read John MacArthur’s book, Whose Money is it Anyway?? (MacArthur is one of the major Evangelical scholars to question tithe and probably the most popular to ever write an entire book on the subject.)
How about David A. Croteau’s book You Mean I Don’t Have to Tithe: A Deconstruction of Tithing and a Reconstruction of Post-Tithe Giving?
What about John R. Rice’s (former uber-Fundamentalist editor of the Sword of the Lord) writings about storehouse tithing?
I often find that when people say they’ve heard the other side, they’ve focused on a few arguments they read on a website and hardly any have read a full monograph.
The whole point is that the Bible from beginning to end is not about the Law that not even Israel could fulfill. It’s not about what we do or don’t do, but what Christ has done. It’s about Christ and Christ alone from Genesis to Revelation.
And does that give you license to do anything you want to do?
Les
Les: Yes it does. And since I have the Holy Spirit in me, as well as I am a new creation in Christ, I want to give. I don’t do it because I have to or for a blessing. I don’t care if I’m blessed extra or not. I am blessed anyway because I am a child of the King.
Les: Paul said in 1 Corinthians 16:1
1 Now about the collection for the Lord’s people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. 2 On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with your income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. 3 Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem. 4 If it seems advisable for me to go also, they will accompany me.
1 And now, brothers and sisters, we want you to know about the grace that God has given the Macedonian churches. 2 In the midst of a very severe trial, their overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity. 3 For I testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability. Entirely on their own, 4 they urgently pleaded with us for the privilege of sharing in this service to the Lord’s people. 5 And they exceeded our expectations: They gave themselves first of all to the Lord, and then by the will of God also to us. 2 Corinthians 8:1-5
Questions for advocates of storehouse tithing:
(1) Many passages in the NT seem to teach that Christians no longer live under the Mosaic covenant (Luke 16:16, Romans 6:14, Romans 10:4, 1 Corinthians 9:20-21, 2 Corinthians 3:4-16, Galatians 3:15-25, Ephesians 2:15, Hebrews 7:1-10:18). On what basis do advocates of storehouse tithing conclude that we are still under the Mosaic covenant (besides just assuming one particular interpretation of Matthew 5:17 and ignoring all these other passages)?
(2) Storehouse tithing depends on a tripartite division of the law into moral, civil, and ceremonial. (a) Where is this found in Scripture? (b) Even if this tripartite division is true, why do advocates of storehouse tithing assume that tithing is part of the moral law, when tithing in the OT was for the support of priests? Doesn’t it seem more likely that tithing is part of the ceremonial law and thus abrogated according to the logic of the tripartite division of the law?
(3) In the Pentateuch, there is not one tithe, but three tithes (Numbers 18:21 and Lev 27:30–33, Deuteronomy 14:22–27,Deuteronomy 14:28–29). These three tithes total 23.3%. Why do advocates of tithing say that contemporary Christians owe only 10% instead of 23.3%?
(4) In Matthew 23:23, isn’t Jesus talking to Pharisees who still lived under the old covenant? By what basis do advocates of tithing conclude that this passage applies to new covenant Christians?
(5) Are advocates of tithing aware that they have basically adopted the hermeneutic of Calvinistic Covenant Theology? This hermeneutic says that nothing from the OT is abrogated unless it is specifically repealed by the NT.
In the OT, Tithes are also required of more than just money. Who do I give my extra zucchini to?
Just curious what everyone else thinks, but I see tithing predating the Law given to Moses. Abraham tithed to Melchizedek in Genesis 14. And if that’s the case couldn’t it be argued that tithing is a principle seen throughout Scripture, not just a requirement under the Law?
Justin: I think you’ve hit it. The distinction is tithing as principal and tithing as law. As so often happens in discussions like these, I suspect most of the people who are arguing that tithing is not a Christian law do in fact give a tithe or more. We just don’t think it is a binding law upon Christians. Just as in alcohol discussion, many if not most who argue that the bible does not command abstention from alcohol are in fact teetotalers.
Thanks Bill!
Dave M, can I request that if this thread becomes about alcohol that it get deleted. Unless it’s on Bill’s connection here.
To me that is one of the most persuasive arguments for tithing. I’m not fully persuaded…but I’m also typing on my iPad so won’t try to respond in full until tomorrow. Unless of course others respond, in which case my response would probably become unnecessary.
First, we only have one record of Abraham tithing. From all we know, this was a one-time voluntary tithe in which Abraham was expressing thanks to God and gratitude to Melchizedek. Abraham was never commanded to give a tenth on a regular basis, and there is no evidence that Abraham ever tithed again.
Second, the offering in Gen 14:20 was made to Melchizedek, the priest. If Abraham was tithing consistently, who received the other tithes? Did Melchizedek engage in an itinerant
ministry and collect tithes on behalf of God?
The OT taught tithing…Jesus said in Matthew 5, “17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For 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. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. ”
So, Jesus didnt come to change, but to fulfill. A tithe should just be a starting point in our giving. But, the NT raises the teachings of the OT to a whole new, higher level. The NT teaches giving, not just tithing. We should just start with a tithe. But, we should learn to give!
I would agree that we dont live by OT law. We live by the NT commands and teachings. But, the OT is not null and void….it was just raised to a new level of understanding in the NT. We can still learn much about God and His nature and character in the OT. We can still learn much about faith, by looking at the OT Saints. Much of the OT illustrates what’s taught in the NT. But, of course, we are not Israel. Thus, we dont live by the OT. We should live by the elevated teachings of Jesus…we should live by a higher level, with the more light that we have been given….in the NT.
David
David: If a man puts 9% of his weekly pay in the offering plate on Sunday, has he sinned? In other words, is 10% a good principle for giving, or is it a Christian Law?
Should a consistent 8-9 % giver be brought under church discipline? If less than 10% is a sin (and you haven’t said it is, yet) then someone who does not tithe at least is guilty of persistent, unrepentant sin.
Bill Mac,
I believe it’s more of a principle. As I said, I believe the NT teaches giving. Every Believer should strive to give at least a tenth….that should be the minimum they give to their church. And, I have often counseled people in debt, who say they cant give that much and still pay thier bills….to work towards that goal….to give at least 5% now…then, work up year by year… until they’re giving at least 10%.
I have given at least 10% of my income my entire life. It was the way I was raised. I have given over 10% for a lot of my life…even if it was just a dollar over. Because, I believe the NT teaches giving. I believe God has blessed me for this. He has honored this. Thus, I would encourage everyone to not just tithe, but to give.
David
But, let me add…as the book of Malachi proclaims…should we give God the second best? Should we give God our leftovers? Should we give to God what we wouldnt dare give to our govt.? because they wouldnt be pleased with how we didnt pay our taxes? And, should we spend more on a meal, than what we give God? Should we tip a waitress more than we’d give to God?
I’m afraid that many do. They have no problem throwing a little bit in the offering plate…thinking they’ve done their deed…when, in reality, they’ve offended God. They spent more on a round of golf the past week. They’ll spend more at Starbucks that afternoon, than what they gave God. This is offensive to God. God will not accept such non chalant, lackadaisical giving…such careless, worshipless giving. Dont throw a little bit of money at God, and expect Him to be pleased with your offering.
We should start off with a tithe….and work up from there. God is worth it.
David
According to the passage I gave David, God wants us. God doesn’t want what we have, he wants us.
David: I agree. In fact, I think this is what Jesus consistently did throughout his teaching ministry. He said “here is the law concerning ___________)” and then “here is the principle underlying that law”. So in a very real sense we are not even under the Mosaic command not to kill, because the principal of “do not hate” is greater. When we abide by the principle of “do not lust” then the Law of “do not commit adultery” has no power over us.
When we raise our children, we often give rules to our children because they are not able to understand the “why” behind them. But when they grow up, they understand the why behind the rules, and are able to (if they wish) be guided by the principle rather than the rule.
The Mosaic Law was good, but was, in a sense, for children. We can continue in that, living by rules and laws, or we can grow up and understand the reason for them, and then they become greater, not less. That is part of what Jesus did when He was here, helped us to grow up.
I do disagree with this and I don’t know it may be a matter of semantics. The law was never meant to be permanent. I disagree that it was given to children. Christ didn’t help us to grow up, he freed us from something that was impossible to keep.
Debbie: Think of it this way. As believers in Christ, we have more responsibility than the Israelites under the Law, not less. We are given more and therefore more is required of us. We are not bound by rules and regulations because by God’s indwelling Spirit we are able to know and understand what God wishes of us, including much of the “why” of the Mosaic Law. We have grown up. We teach our children to share, not to hit or bite, not to steal, etc. At first they are not able to understand why, but as they grow up, they (we hope) do. So when our children are 22, we don’t have to tell them to share, not to hit or bite, not to steal, etc. They have moved beyond our rules and now understand why we taught them these things, and the greater principles behind them. The Law was for a season, while God’s people (as a whole) were young. Christ in fulfilling the Law and giving us the Holy Spirit, has helped us to grow up. Yes, freeing us from the Law, but also helping us to understand and follow the greater truths behind the Law.
The greater truth behind the Law of the tithe is the principal of sacrificial giving, of supporting those who minister to us, of sharing, of trusting God to give the increase. It is no longer about percentages, but about the heart of the giver. That is being grown up.
Hey, I think we’ve just been called false prophets.
http://lesliepuryear.blogspot.com/2011/08/bottom-line-obey-gods-word.html
Is that the same as being lost? Are we being called unsaved?
And with that he says:
So if you don’t believe in the tithe, etc. then you are a false prophet.
I guess since the title of his post is: “Obey God’s Word” and Deuteronomy 13:5 says false prophets are to be put to death, he believes that many of us here need to be put to death.**
**No, I don’t actually think Les thinks that (I hope), but it just furthers the silliness of this whole thing.
Mike Bergman:
You said:”I guess since the title of his post is: “Obey God’s Word” and Deuteronomy 13:5 says false prophets are to be put to death, he believes that many of us here need to be put to death.**
I would like to hear Les’s comment on the above. Is he wanting harm for those of us who do not interpret the Bible as he?
Why would he dignify that with a response? Further, Mike has said he doesn’t believe that is what Les thinks. BTW, I happen to be one who isn’t sure if he agrees with Les or not so I probably fall under the catagory of false prophet.
Last time I checked Mike is not Les. But you are free to give your input.
I think it says something when the Bible is used as a book of threats. I am not disagreeing with the Bible, I am disagreeing with Les and his interpretation. I would love to see people free from this type of teaching. Christ paid for any curse at the cross. He took the curse for us.
Bill Mac:
Yea. Those that do not believe the way Les does are on our way to Hell!! Somebody help me what is up with Les? I’m really not trying to be ugly but something is wrong with Les.
If you dont agree with Tom=something wrong with you.
David
Les is fine. He’s a good and godly man.
David
Do you believe it’s good and godly to call people “false prophets” who don’t believe in the tithe, who don’t have a problem w/ alcohol (so long as it doesn’t lead to drunkeness), and who believe in the tenants of “calvinism”?
David:
You said to me. “If you dont agree with Tom=something wrong with you.” I’ve never said that and you do not speak for me.
Am I to take it that as Les said you believe–“Anyone, and I mean anyone, who tells you that the Bible does not say what it plainly says, is a false prophet and is not to be believed. Do not be misled by those who teach you to disobey God’s word. They are teachers who teach to itching ears, who will turn you away from the truth. ” :””Evil men and imposters will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” 2 Timothy 3:13-15″
Boy there must be a lot of false prophets in the SBC according to Les.
What an outrageous misuse of the Holy Scriptures.
David: On this, I would agree. If someone doesn’t agree with me on this particular subject, I would say something is wrong with them, but not in the way you mean. It’s that they are under an unnecessary bondage. It’s living in a way that negates the freedom we now have in Christ. This bothers me. I used to live under bondage and it was a miserable Christian life.
I don’t get into dispensationalism (and all its nuances and consequences) for the same reasons I don’t get into millennialism: I am a panmillennialist. That is because God has not put me on the Planning Committee for any of the events in question. I am on the Welcoming Committee, at least if it happens while I am still in this world, but I am not the Planning Committee. Consequently, my take on this whole situation is going to be somewhat different from many of yours, and some, having read this much, are probably already screaming “Liberal!” But I hope you will give it a fair read anyway.
My perspective is that the progression of events in the Bible, from an historical perspective, by and large represent the maturation process of God’s people. It represents the growth process, the maturation process, and thus is linked to progressive revelation. (God has revealed things as His people were able to comprehend them; hence, there is no mention of an afterlife in the Books of Moses/the Law because His people were not mature enough to comprehend it.) I think the whole concept of tithing/giving is likewise a maturity issue. In the earliest parts of the Old Testament where it is mentioned, the tithe is a requirement. That is akin to us telling a toddler what they must do, because they are not sufficiently mature to understand the “whys,” but only the necessity or requirement of something. Then, later, with the minor prophets (Malachi), the concept of tithing as bringing rewards come. We may just tell a toddler, “No,” but dealing with a six or seven or eight year old, etc., is different. They have matured enough to comprehend the concepts of rewards. People who have matured somewhat (whether as individuals or as a group, i.e., God’s people) can begin to understand that the things they do have consequences, and a consequence of tithing is a reward God will give, which is what closes out the Old Testament. With the New Testament, however, there is greater growth represented, so God can reveal the ultimate reason for tithing: because it is joy! I base this mostly on 2 Corinthians 7:9, which (I believe) teaches giving, not as requirement or for hope of return, but simply because it is joy, it is hilarity, it is delight. A babe in Christ cannot comprehend this–I could not as a new Christian. An immature child in Christ cannot comprehend it, or at least thinks the “rewards” system is much better because he/she still has a child-like greed. Could it be that this is why Paul described the Law as our “schoolmaster,” actually a “paidagogos,” who was the slave charged with beating the student if he failed to learn his lessons? But the mature and maturing can grasp the concept of giving as joy, which would seem to be why the Church Fathers (I forget which ones) said that the tithe was unnecessary for Christians because it would hold back their giving.
Maybe I’m wrong, but i fail to see how this is a “liberal” concept.
John
Panmillennialist: one who believes that God is going to “pan” it all out.
John
Justin Owens,
You are right. The principle of the tithe predates the law. Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:20).
Jesus commended the tithe in Matthew 23. The tithe is never negated in the New Testament.
David R. Brumbelow
David: Is giving less than 10% a sin?
“The principle of the tithe predates the law. Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:20).”
What evidence do we have that this was anything more than a one-time voluntary tithe? Furthermore, how does paying a tithe once to a priest who didn’t even live where Abraham did establish the principle of a tithe to a local church.
“Jesus commended the tithe in Matthew 23.”
Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees who were still under the old covenant, and His main point was that they focused too much on tithing to the neglect of what was more important. How do the words of Jesus apply to new covenant Christians.
“The tithe is never negated in the New Testament.”
Once again, you are relying on the hermeneutic of covenant theology (which you do not believe) rather than the hermeneutic of dispensationalism (which you do believe). Instead of consistently applying your own hermeneutic, you are living as a parasite upon somebody else’s hermeneutic. Dave Miller can scold me for this if he wants to, but nobody has adequately explained the hermeneutical reasoning by which a dispensationalist can believe in tithing. I am convinced that I am dealing with a parochial traditionalism that has no interest in theological consistency.
What about where Hebrews 7 even points out the significance of Abraham tithing to Melchizidek? It was obviously an important event, and even if the Bible only mentions this isolated insident where Abraham tithed does that mean that there isn’t a principle behind it?
Would that be like saying we only read of Jesus doing something once, so it’s not a big deal because it’s only mentioned one time?
Tithing is not the point of the passage in Hebrews. His point is to argue for the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over that of Levi. The author of Hebrews is not trying to argue for the continuation. The significance of Abraham’s tithe is that an ancestor of Levi paid a tithe to a priest who was a type of Christ. Hebrews 7 has nothing to say about whether we should tithe now or not.
“Instead of consistently applying your own hermeneutic, you are living as a parasite upon somebody else’s hermeneutic.”
My My My. Perhaps turning the light on and looking in a mirror might be a good exercise before posting… I think “theological consistency” might also be applied in our comments which is a LOT more clear than the topic you are discussing.
Grateful to be in His Grip
><>
I don’t remember when I turned from the idea of tithing to the idea that the Lord’s sacrifice demands, requires, provokes the giving of love, the whole self, the whole nine years, 100%. What gets me is how far short I come of this standard. Since Jesus gave His fall for us, we owe Him nothing less than our all. God’s people are not always expecting to give all, but there are times when nothing less is required. There have been times in my life, when I gave way beyond the tithe. And there have been times, when I gave less…due to the overwhelming nature of medical expenses. No one ever done it with greater reluctance. My desire and happiness is to give more than a tithe, to give whatever is needed. I remember reading in a sermon by Dr. George W. Truett where he was raising money for a church in one the East Coast states. An elderly couple who had worked all their lives at hard labor and had paid off their home gave that home to pay off the church debt. That was 100% type giving. We need that attitude. We are now facing what will, perhaps, be one of the greatest crisis in the life of Baptists. Are people are becoming virtually unemployable (in this state their employment involved textiles, furniture, and tobacco), because their jobs had either moved overseas or simply become socially unacceptable. We are also suffering from a problem that will only grow greater, namely, from automation, computerization, and robotics which make the masses virtually umeployable and therefore superficial to the ongoing of mankind (in the opinion of some who want to eliminate the excess population).
I have been praying for man’s inventiveness to be increased, for who new venues of occupations to be developed, for developments in society that have greater respect for every human being as a person of value and with something to contribute. Also I have been praying for the conversion of the whole earth (are there already enough souls in Hell?), beginning with this generation, and continuing for a 1000 generations, and, if mankind spreads to the stars (have we already gone?), for the conversion of thousands of worlds….after all, if the number of the redeemed is to be such that no one can number them, then we really need multitudes like we never imagined….And there are prophecies and promises which have been made that offer this hope to those who plead them. You folks ought to read Jonathan Edwards’ Humble Attempt and see the promises which William Carey and others pleaded in the launching of the great missionary movement. And brother Puryear, you really shouldn’t be taking our professors to task over not teaching tithing. After all, they might be teaching a greater giving than a mere 10%. Try a 100%. Try giving your all. Then you will find how hard it really is and you won’t think God owes you a blessing just for tithing….You also won’t defend it so vigorously. Why that 10 per cent stuff is just a blip on the road to giving your all like your Lord and Savior did for you.
I hit my submit button too quick. Line three of the preceding post should read, “Since Jesus gave His all for us…”
Bill Mac:
You said:”It is no longer about percentages, but about the heart of the giver. That is being grown up.”
I agree, so how does the 10% required tithe by some fit into what you are saying.
It doesn’t fit. 10% is a fine principle but it is not required as a Christian law.
Bill Mac:
Then why is it that Les and 007 are saying the scriptures require this 10% and that anyone who would teach otherwise is a false prophet at least according to Les.
I don’t think Vol is saying it is required. Les is.
Bill Mac:
I really thought that he agreed with Les. David, do you agree with Les’s view on tithing, etc.
Well according to Les many of you are evil men, imposters and deceivers. The following is from his blog.
http://lesliepuryear.blogspot.com/
“There are a few topics that you can write about that you can be sure will generate a lot of discussion and readership in the blogs: tithing, women pastors, alcohol, and Calvinism. There are those who will try to persuade you that the Bible doesn’t require you to tithe, that women pastors are acceptable to God, that it’s okay to play with the dynamite of alcohol, and that you have no choice about your salvation. Don’t believe them.
Anyone, and I mean anyone, who tells you that the Bible does not say what it plainly says, is a false prophet and is not to be believed. Do not be misled by those who teach you to disobey God’s word. They are teachers who teach to itching ears, who will turn you away from the truth.
Here’s the bottom line: obey God’s Word.
“Evil men and imposters will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” 2 Timothy 3:13-15″
So much of this discussion is based on one’s presuppositions about the Law and the Old Covenant and how they interact with the New Covenant. This is clearly evidenced in David Worley’s quote of Jesus in Matthew 5 and his particular interpretation of that text.
Others interpret this text vastly differently, especially in light of Galatians 3 and Paul’s explanations for why the Law was given. One’s intrepretation of such texts and their consequential viewpoint on the Old Covenant v. New Covenant living does make a difference here.
Unfortunately, what many like Les have done is essentially make this a test of Orthopraxy rather than a basis for discussion on a much more important topic; namely, how does the Old Testament Law apply to our lives as New Covenant believers? Our answer to this question is really the framework from which we can either accept or reject “storehouse tithing” as a New Testament principle.
One of the ironies in this discussion among Southern Baptists is that some dispensationalists (advocates of the system that affirms the greatest amount of discontinuity between OT and NT) openly despise New Covenant Theology adherents (who advocate a system that affirms a lot of discontinuity between OT and NT, but not as much as dispensationalism) for not believing in enough continuity between OT and NT. Furthermore, these dispensationalists seem to be shocked that anybody would accuse them of inconsistency.
I suspect most of the vitriol aimed at NCT is because of Calvinism.
I am utterly amazed at the inability of several people to:
1) Engage in reasoned discussion of a biblical issue.
2) To blame someone else for their lack of self-control.
Stop it. There are about 3 of you who are 1 comment from going on moderation where I will have to approve every comment you make before it appears.
Honestly, grow up.
As always, davemillerisajerk@hotmail.com is the place to complain. I don’t carry on these kinds of conversations in public.
Mike,
But if the purpose of the Old Testament is to point to Christ (in all of its shadows, sacrifices, etc.) then the Old Testament is not thrown out…
I agree brother.
And one’s view of the entire O.T. will come to bear on how one interprets specific passages. Different views would be:
1. Principle-centered
2. Israel-centered
3. Law-centered
4. Christ-centered
Accordingly, I think one’s view will not necessarily come out in what one claims to believe, but in what is emphasized in preaching from the O.T. (for example).
Does the drum beat tend to be “principles by which to live by” or “what the future of the nation of Israel is” or “holiness according to Mosaic commands” or “the foreshadowing of Christ”?
What is really “driving” one’s OT. interpretations, if you will?
Chad Breeson (who can be heard doing interviews on Baptist 21) recently spoke in favor of a Christ-centered view.
This can be watched on the internet here (Session 7):
http://graceinthetriad.blogspot.com/2011/07/nct-thinktank-2011-conference-videos.html
If anyone would like to skip his theological survey, you can go to 28:00 and start there.
The fact that the discussion continues to occur is a pretty good indication that the Bible isn’t prescriptive regarding the subject of tithing especially in the New Covenant. Is there a POTENTIAL spiritual benefit to giving? Absolutely. If you can do it with your whole heart.
If you do it for any other reason, you’re worse than the Pharisees. Any…other…reason.
Les Puryear has his blog and his voice and is not afraid to vocalize his opinion. Sometimes, I agree with him and sometimes I don’t agree with the stance he has taken.
However, in this case, over on his blog he has labeled those who have taken opposing views on the issues of Female Pastors, tithing, alcohol, and apparently Calvinism (I honestly don’t know enough to chime in which is why I’m largely silent on that issue) as false prophets. While I would agree with him on a couple of these viewpoints, I am not prepared to label the opposing side as false prophets or heretics.
Apparently he has no problem with it and that is his opinion.
Bill:
It just seems like a less than charitable view of others who do not agree with him.
Tom,
It’s not hard to surmise that there are those who feel just as strongly about Les Puryear. However, the crux is that many are attacking his opinion rather than his stance on any given issue.
Take Dave’s advice and stick to the topics and present your case.
Bill:
Sorry but I do not know what you are trying to say to me.
When Les calls people a false prophet for holding differing views from his there is not much that can be said to refute him.
I really am not trying to make it personal about Les. I’m quite confident he believes in his opinions just as I do.
Then just leave it alone.
Tithing is the central point of this post. Present your stance on tithing and why or why not you support the concept of tithing, storehouse or otherwise.
Leave whether or not people think you are a false prophet out of the equation…
Just present your case and present it as thoroughly as possible because people will take it apart (and that’s a good thing), dissect it, and present their counter-arguments.
I think that is good advice. Les can vent his opinions as he wishes. I’d just as soon that people had to go to his website to read and discuss the sort of thing he said in his last post.
Let’s focus on discussing the post by Mike.
I can agree that everyone has probably come to their own personal views on tithing honestly.
My understanding of the tithe has more to do with maintaining a THEOCRACY rather than taking care of the Priests. We know that only certain professions were required to tithe ‘on their increase’. Carpenters and Tent-makers were not included. In effect, it was more about a TAX to maintain the status quo. If you combine all three tithes, then it amounted to about 23% +. Compare that to what middle-class Americans pay in taxes. We’d be overjoyed to only have to contend with three. Then of course, some of what we formerly called taxes have been hidden in what we now call ‘fees’.
If the legalists want to hold to what was paid in the OT, then they shall have to live with the consequences. I’m a school-teacher. I’m supposed to be the beneficiary of what others pay in their tithes. Or I can become a farmer and pay the tithe.
In no case will I listen to some of the big names in the SBC. I’m not driving a stolen car or living in a stolen house. I am not robbing God and I’m very sure that I’m not a false prophet. The best news is that I don’t have to worry about someone contacting my employer to question my loyalty to the Risen King or that I am a false prophet simply because I’m a Calvinist. Did anyone forget that John MacArthur is a staunch Calvinist?
Last, I don’t give 10% to my church ‘undesignated’. I’ve seen much of what some churches use the money for. No, instead I give to those Christian organizations that are focused on the Great Commission. I support my church and my Pastor because I recognize that this is a legitimate need. I just don’t give the entire offering to them. Money can buy great Cathedrals with all the trappings, but those Cathedrals cannot come close to bringing the word of God to the lost and they won’t feed the hungry or the spiritually dead.
The tithing doctrine is much like the horse that has already left the barn. As Sister Debbie says, we are Christians and shouldn’t allow others to ‘guilt us’ into doing something we feel is not from scripture. A gift is never truly a gift if it is given out of manipulation, or name calling.
There is an understanding that people who don’t teach “give 10% undesignated to your local church operating budget” (or ‘tithing’ as it is popularly designated) DO teach generous giving for the sake of the Gospel, right?
I get the feeling that many assume that because some of us don’t hold to a strict “undesignated 10%” principle (based on careful study of Scripture) that we don’t believe in giving at all. and that we turn into ogres at night and eat babies.
Bill:
You said :”Leave whether or not people think you are a false prophet out of the equation…”
How can I when Les says:”There are a few topics that you can write about that you can be sure will generate a lot of discussion and readership in the blogs: tithing, women pastors, alcohol, and Calvinism. There are those who will try to persuade you that the Bible doesn’t require you to tithe, that women pastors are acceptable to God, that it’s okay to play with the dynamite of alcohol, and that you have no choice about your salvation. Don’t believe them. ”
He also says :”Anyone, and I mean anyone, who tells you that the Bible does not say what it plainly says, is a false prophet and is not to be believed. Do not be misled by those who teach you to disobey God’s word. They are teachers who teach to itching ears, who will turn you away from the truth.”
So it is not just tithing.
Easy.
All you can do is state your case as to why you believe why you do. In doing so, you present your source material which supports your arguments and be prepared for people to come back with their material which supports their position.
Don’t address the person, address the material.
Bill:
Thanks for the good advice and I mean that sincerely.
In looking at the NT, there is NO instruction given regarding giving for the NT Christian, with the exception of God loving a “cheerful giver.” Most of the criticism that I see with the 10% test, (not necessarily here0 is made by people who do not see a need to give that much. I guess I could agree that I might be more “cheerful” giving 5% than 10% or whatever… just like getting my year end tax statement; if the tax amount comes in less than what I am expecting, I can be “cheerful.” One might conclude the reason that there is NO teaching in the NT on tithing may well be that the principle was commonly expected, there was no need to spend time on it.
I believe the real test is to see how much we can give as opposed to how little we can get by giving… so in some respects this whole discussion may be poorly presented in the first place. I teach to start out where you believe you can… and then increase your giving… and you will find out that God will indeed bless the attitude of your heart and your faith in Him to provide… I also believe your attitude about giving your money says more about your confidence in God than it does anything else… I do like the question, if you cannot trust God with 10% of what HE has given to you in the first place, how do you know you can trust Him with your eternity. It is at the least, a thought provoking question.
Lot of arguments and different angles… when we are looking for ways to give less, I am convinced we are looking down the wrong road.
It is correct to say that the NT does NOT demand or even teach giving 10% to the church. It is also fair to say, that the church does deserve support from its members and from those that come to find support from the ministry of the church. While I know of a few who are “over-blessed” financially from their ministries, the majority of pastors laboring on church fields are grossly underpaid and under appreciated and not prayed for and not supported as they ought to be supported. I am convinced that if we did a better job in all these areas, this discussion “to tithe or not to tithe” probably would not even be a discussion.
Grateful to be in His Grip,
><>
It would be interesting to know how many here who don’t believe in tithing are giving less than 10%, rather than 10% or more to their church. It would also be interesting to know how much less.
David R. Brumbelow
Great question, David B. I wonder the same. Is all of this an arguement to try to justify measly giving?
Also, I’d be interested to know how manypeople, who believe in tithing are giving more than 10%. I’d bet’cha that those who believe that tithing is mandated by Scripture, or else that it is a principle to just start by, give more than 10% to their church, and to other ministries. I’d bet that they give at least 10% to their church, and then give more to the special offerings… like Annie, Lottie, Childrens Homes, etc.
David
Statistics are not on your side on this one. A belief in tithing is certainly the majority view. And isn’t giving only somewhere around 4%?
Mike I think I read the other day that the average is only 2.5%, but I don’t know how reliable that number is.
David: I think Jesus made it pretty clear that it is best that our giving be in secret and that people not know what other people give. With the best of intentions, advertising how much or little we give is a path to pride. Everyone knows that the employees must be paid and the physical assets maintained, and the work of ministry and missions supported.
I dont advertise what I give. But, I would happily tell people that I give at least 10% to my church, if that would encourage others to give, too. I happily tell people that I’ve given at least 10% all of my life….it was the way I was raised….and that God has always provided for me on the 90%. I happily tell people… not to brag….but to encourage others…that even in the many times which I could not afford(in my mind) to give at least 10%, God has always worked it out..
NOw, I havent always been able to buy a new car, or go on expensive vacations, etc. BUT, the Lord has taken care of me and my family.
David
It’s always been my conviction to never let anyone know how much I give. I don’t write checks or put a name on an offering envelope. I’m not saying it’s wrong to do that. I’m saying that’s my personal conviction.
While it is certainly not beyond human nature to erect a doctrine to support our sin, I’m not sure that your question would really get at the heart of the matter. It seems to me that when it comes to giving the Lord is more concerned with the heart than empty obedience to law. (not saying that those who tithe are doing this).
Actually what I believe the New Testament teaches about giving actually asks questions of our heart that are MORE difficult to escape.
David,
I personally don’t believe the N.T. believer is under the tithe, but I give more than 10%. I believe that all offerings in the N.T. are free will offerings. Anyhow, just wanted to share that.
after Christ came, didn’t we learn a NEW standard of ‘giving’ ?
for goodness sake, people, think about what He asks of us, each one of us and ‘us’ as a people of God
Some of the most moving testimonies I’ve ever heard have been from those who learned about tithing and starting practicing it.
David R. Brumbelow
David R. B.,
What do you mean by “moving testimonies” from people who “starting practicing” tithing? I’m not sure I clearly understand.
Well, as I think has been stated time after time in this thread, no one objects to people tithing. It is a fine principle. What people object to is the doctrine that Christians must tithe; that it is a Christian Law. In other words, giving 10% is fine but giving 9% is sin. 10% may in fact be stingy for some people and 9% may be sacrificial for some people. Are they in sin? Vol has made it clear that he thinks people should tithe and more, but has stopped short of calling less than a tithe a sin. How about you?
I think it is unwise to assign (or speculate) about motives regarding tithe doctrine. You are slyly judging people’s hearts about their giving based on what they believe the bible to teach. Not everyone who thinks tithing is not a Christian law is giving less than a tithe. Perhaps not even most. You don’t know, and you can’t know. But you imply that they are stingy. That isn’t right and you know it.
I remember a story about George Mueller that always stuck with me. A man wanted to give an offering to Mueller for his orphanage work. Mueller knew this man was behind on his debts to various tradespeople (butcher, baker, candlestick maker, etc) and refused to take his money, telling the man instead to honor his promises to those he was indebted to.
Bill Mac,
Yes, I believe the Bible teaches the tithe, therefore it is a sin not to tithe. I believe many are robbing God in not tithing.
And those who tithe, even when it is a sacrifice, will be incredibly blessed by God.
David R. Brumbelow
David: Fair enough. I still would caution you, however, on assigning impure motives to those who interpret the bible differently.
So, are the arguments in favor of tithing being mandatory these?:
1. The Genesis account before the Law (which is descriptive, not prescriptive)
2. Tithing in the Old Covenant Law itself (presupposing the rightness of the 3-fold division of the Mosiac Law…and that the “unchanging” moral law within that Law includes the Sabbath which changed from Saturday to Sunday).
3. The Scripture in Malachi (which is tied to the Old Covenant Law…a Covenant which has passed away according to Hebrews).
4. The [supposed] bad motive of people looking for a way to give less than 10 percent.
Concerning #4, let me say this:
I remember talking with a fellow pastor who shepherds an NCT church which has a member who believes that he is free to work on the Lord’s day, but who chooses to rest on that day since he has been in a routine of doing that…and likes it that way.
Accordingly, I don’t think the “well, you just believe in NCT because you don’t want to obey the ‘Sabbath'” is going to work with a feller like that.
Now, for you folk(s) who have resorted to the “bad motive” argument, I have this question:
Do you really think everyone who disagrees with you is giving less than ten percent?
Let me ask one more:
Do you think it might even be possible that there are folks who disagree with you who are giving “more” [however much or little] than ten percent?
God Bless,
Benji