Tithing - "How to" not "whether"

[Axehead]

I agree, which is why for the most part Mormon churches are paid for when they open for use. To bad Christians weren't as motivated.

[SIZE=11pt]Is that what the problem is? Motivation? I am sure many poor believers have come under condemnation when the Pastor they looked up to chastised them for not being motivated. Boy, that will motivate them every time to give from their heart and not out of compulsion. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Moving on... We know what Jesus said about tithing. When Jesus referred to tithing, the Law was still in effect. It did not end until Jesus died on the the cross. Jesus was living during the Law and speaking to people who were under the law. [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]When Jesus brought up tithing to those living under the law, what was his point? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Luke_11:42 But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Yes, under the law, the Pharisees should have tithed because that is what the law commands. But, and most important, they neglected the love of God. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Jesus wasn't saying anything about tithing to those who are no longer under the law because at that time, all were still under the law and remember, his audience was a Pharisee, a Jew. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Now, that we see what Jesus said, let's see what the Apostles said.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Two believers, husband and wife, sold a parcel of land and gave a portion of the proceeds to the church. But they lied about how much of the proceeds they were giving. When confronted with their lies, on separate occasions, each of them fell to the ground dead.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]People have used the story of Ananias and Sapphira to point out many things, but we are going to talk about what Peter said to this couple and what he DID NOT SAY.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Before we start let's take a moment and imagine what would be said to a husband and wife in most churches today if they sold some property and wanted to give some of the proceeds to their church. I have heard personally and would suggest that based on today's tithing laws and practices in the church that most pastors would say something like this.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]"Andy and Sue, the first thing that the Lord wants you to do with the money that you have received from the sale of your property is to pay your tithe. As you know God requires that you pay 10 percent of ALL your income as your tithe. Then after you have paid your tithe, you may want to give an OFFERING above that amount. Anything above 10 percent is a "freewill offering" to the Lord."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt](You can buy books in Bible stores that teach this as part of the concept of "New Testament Tithing".[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Let's see what Peter said to them about the money they received from the sale of their property. For the purposes of this illustration, we are not concerned about the fact that Ananias and Sapphira lied, but WHAT PETER SAID TO THEM.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Act 5:2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Act 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Act 5:4 Whiles it remained, [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]was it not thine own[/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]? [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]and after it was sold, [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]was it not in thine own power[/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]? [/SIZE][SIZE=11pt]why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]First, it is important to note that Peter did not mention tithing at all. In fact, he said that after the land was sold the money was still in their control, just as it was before they sold it. That is quite different than telling them that they were required by the Lord to pay 10 percent but the 90 percent that remained was in their control. Now that their asset had been converted to cash, they were required to pay 10%.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]If Peter had the concept of tithing, which most pastors have today (which is nothing similar to the Old Testament concept of Tithes and Offerings), Peter would have said something like this:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]"Ananias, why have you lied about how much of the proceeds you are giving? After all, God only requires you to give ten percent. Anything above ten percent is a "freewill offering" to the Lord."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]But again, any reference to tithing is obviously missing. Again, the NT is silent about tithing. This would have been a perfect spot to teach that Christians are under obligation to pay the tithe. But it isn't here. In fact, it isn't anywhere![/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Don't you think that if the Law of Tithing under the Dispensation of Grace (now that's an oxymoron if I ever heard one), would be mentioned at least one time, one little time in the New Testament??? Let's be serious about this, the "Law of Tithing" is a doctrine in the majority of churches, today. Where are the many witnesses of NT scripture and the witness of the Early Church for this doctrine? The fact is, that TITHING IS NEVER TAUGHT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Paul does not even mention tithing in his extended reference to Christian giving in II Corinthians 8 and 9. For good reason! The ten percent tithe so often advocated is not a new covenant, New Testament, concept. In the old covenant tithes were levied to support the priesthood, but in the new covenant every Christian is a priest, "priests to God" (Revelation 1:6) in a "royal priesthood" (I Peter 2:9). Christians are not under the compulsory obligation of Old Testament tithes![/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Tithing was instituted as a law in the second year after the Exodus. ...it was intended to provide the Levites with sustenance and payment for their services. The only ones ever authorized to receive tithes were the Levites. Ever since the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., it has been impossible to keep the tithing law. This is the reason Orthodox Jews, who still believe in the validity of the old covenant over their lives, do not tithe! No one is qualified to receive tithes now that the priesthood and temple have gone. It is absolutely impossible for anyone today to truly obey the...law of tithing.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Christian giving is not a matter of compulsory mandated percentages! What often happens when the ten percent tithe is regarded as "Christian giving," is that people think that the ten percent belongs to God and the ninety percent is mine to use as I please. But, on the contrary, it all belongs to God as owner and giver. All things are one hundred percent His, and we are to discern how He wants to utilize all one hundred percent of it.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]So, now we see what the Apostles did not have to say about tithing. I will review the Council at Jerusalem and 1 Timothy next to see what the Apostles did or did not say about tithing. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Axehead[/SIZE]

 

[StanJ]

Another onerous post that doesn't answer the issue of TITHING nor where it is vacated in the NT, whatsoever.

Did you grow up poor? Why bring up poor people all the time when it is usually those that are well off that whine about money and how their stewardship should be met.
My point was and still is that Christians should not be exceeded in their duty as nonbelievers do.

All things have always been God's Axehead, so what exactly has changed in the NT that makes you think new rules of stewardship are now in play even though you can't show them?

 

[Axehead]

Another onerous post that doesn't answer the issue of TITHING nor where it is vacated in the NT, whatsoever.

Did you grow up poor? Why bring up poor people all the time when it is usually those that are well off that whine about money and how their stewardship should be met.
My point was and still is that Christians should not be exceeded in their duty as nonbelievers do.

All things have always been God's Axehead, so what exactly has changed in the NT that makes you think new rules of stewardship are now in play even though you can't show them?

Stan,

We have been waiting for you to lay out the doctrine of NT tithing. The fact that you cannot do it has not gone unnoticed to the readers.

You have not provided a biblical teaching of NT tithing and it is not surprising as the teaching does not exist. Your attitude towards believers comes through loud and clear as smug and condescending, as you describe them as whiners and unmotivated. Your remedy for them is to climb out onto the same limb that you are occupying and embrace your assumptions and then they will be as motivated as you presumably are.

Please layout your teaching in one post (or take several posts) if you are confident enough to have it compared to God's Word.

Axehead

 

[StanJ]

Stan,

We have been waiting for you to lay out the doctrine of NT tithing. The fact that you cannot do it has not gone unnoticed to the readers.

You have not provided a biblical teaching of NT tithing and it is not surprising as the teaching does not exist. Your attitude towards believers comes through loud and clear as smug and condescending, as you describe them as whiners and unmotivated. Your remedy for them is to climb out onto the same limb that you are occupying and embrace your assumptions and then they will be as motivated as you presumably are.

Please layout your teaching in one post (or take several posts) if you are confident enough to have it compared to God's Word.

Axehead

Who is we? I'm not teaching a doctrine Axehead, I'm expressing my understanding of Biblical principles. I suggest you read all my posts in this thread. Doctrines are taught by denoms, and are usually accepted in a non thinking/analytical manner.

This of course is your predisposed opinion, NOT fact. The Bible teaches whatever you allow the Holy Spirit to show you. Maybe that's how you perceive me because of your vehement apposition to the immutable laws of God, but that is not my attitude towards believers. Admittedly I do not have a lot of fuzzy feelings towards those that dismiss God's laws out of hand just because they misinterpret and then misrepresent the NC. The light of scripture always offends those in darkness.
Our motivation should be obedience to the spirit of truth, not laissez faire attitudes to God's rule in our lives. You have no problem with accepting the 10 commandments but seem to think ALL other Biblical principles from the OT are now null and void, and you would be WRONG.

 

[Axehead]

Who is we? I'm not teaching a doctrine Axehead, I'm expressing my understanding of Biblical principles. I suggest you read all my posts in this thread. Doctrines are taught by denoms, and are usually accepted in a non thinking/analytical manner.

This of course is your predisposed opinion, NOT fact. The Bible teaches whatever you allow the Holy Spirit to show you. Maybe that's how you perceive me because of your vehement apposition to the immutable laws of God, but that is not my attitude towards believers. Admittedly I do not have a lot of fuzzy feelings towards those that dismiss God's laws out of hand just because they misinterpret and then misrepresent the NC. The light of scripture always offends those in darkness.
Our motivation should be obedience to the spirit of truth, not laissez faire attitudes to God's rule in our lives. You have no problem with accepting the 10 commandments but seem to think ALL other Biblical principles from the OT are now null and void, and you would be WRONG.

Doctrines are only taught by demons, eh? I don't know anyone that will agree with you there.

Pro_4:2 For I give you good doctrine, forsake ye not my law.

John_7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

We see from Isaiah 28:9 that the verse is explaining what doctrine is. It is teachings, knowledge from God (or of God) or it could be knowledge from demons.

Isa_28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

You were either mistaken or actually ignorant about what doctrine means in the Bible, thinking that "doctrine" only belongs to the domain of demons. Since demons are not creative and can only counterfeit, I would submit that they counterfeit what already exists, God's teachings/doctrine. They counterfeit the knowledge of God.

Therefore, there is doctrine from God and the counterfeit doctrine of devils.

1Ti_6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

Since doctrine is teaching, you are teaching what does not exist in the NT. You are espousing a doctrine that is foreign to the NT and considered "mixture".

The first doctrine of demons was Satan adding his lies (mixture) to what God said. And that is what you are doing, too. Mixture is doctrine of demons because it is changing God's Word. It doesn't matter how you dress up and phrase what you are teaching you are still teaching knowledge which is the same as doctrine. They are synonymous according to the word. You don't get off that easy, by saying, "expressing my understanding of Biblical principles". Give me a break!

So, when we say that particular "doctrine" is not in the NT, we are saying that "teaching" is not in the NT.

I have read your posts, and like the Hebrew Roots folks you are adding mixture (OT hybrid laws) to the NT which is nothing more than legalism.

Let me ask you if the "light of Scripture" offends you or are you going to keep twisting/wresting it?

Here are two scriptures you should seriously consider and pray about.


1Ti_4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
1Ti_4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

2Pe_3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction

Do you know what "wrest" means?

1. To twist or extort by violence; to pull or force from by violent wringing or twisting; as, to wrest an instrument from another's hands.

2. To take or force from by violence.

3. To distort; to turn from truth or twist from its natural meaning by violence; to pervert.

 

[StanJ]

Doctrines are only taught by demons, eh? I don't know anyone that will agree with you there.

I wrote "denoms", short for denominations. I use it all the time. Apparently you have a problem reading? This may explain a few things?

You were either mistaken or actually ignorant about what doctrine means in the Bible, thinking that "doctrine" only belongs to the domain of demons.

and as the rest of your post here is based on how you misread one item in my post, I won't bother addressing the rest of it.

 

[Axehead]

I wrote "denoms", short for denominations. I use it all the time. Apparently you have a problem reading? This may explain a few things?

and as the rest of your post here is based on how you misread one item in my post, I won't bother addressing the rest of it.

I saw the word "denoms" and just thought you misspelled demons because the word says doctrines are taught by demons not denominations. But, I momentarily forgot you don't often quote the word, after all, it really doesn't agree with your assumptions. And yes, denominations do teach doctrines of demons (in many respects), but they are merely the conduits not the originators.

Regardless, you are wrong again, Stan. Jesus and the Apostles teach doctrine, too and they weren't part of any "denoms".

But, this is not really about you or me, is it? It's about what the Word of God says, so let's return to it. I find it interesting and deliberately planned no doubt by the Holy Spirit that tithing is not taught in the Book of Acts.

And, speaking of the Book of Acts, let's see what happened at the Council of Jerusalem.

If tithing was meant to be an important part of a Christian's life, there would be numerous references to it in the New Testament.

In fact, if tithing was to be mentioned anywhere at all in the NT, you would think it would be mentioned in at least 3 passages that are pretty important when speaking of church life. But you will see that tithing was not even part of their thinking. It was not even a "frame of reference", (like it is today) because they never made reference to it. The fact that the practice of tithing was not mentioned in these three passages is strong evidence that tithing was left behind with circumcision and every other part of the Law of Moses.

The three passages of scriptures are these:

1. ACTS 15 This passage records the "Council at Jerusalem" as they discussed the all important topic: "What part of the Law of Moses (the Old Testament Law) should be required of the Gentiles who were becoming Christians?"

2. ACTS 5 This passage records an incident of two Christians who sold some property and gave some of the proceeds to the church. What Peter said to them is very different from what most church leaders say today.

3. 1 TIMOTHY 3 This passage gives a list of attributes that must be met for one to qualify for the offices of overseer (pastor), deacon, and deaconess. Tithing is not on the list.

Tithing was the backbone of support for the Levitical Priesthood and if tithing were to be the "backbone" of financial support for the local church it surely would have been mentioned in this passage.

Without a doubt the No. 1 issue among the first Christians (who were Jews under the Old Covenant) was the issue of circumcision. Because from the beginning circumcision was THE SIGN of the Old Covenant.

Gen 17:9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
Gen 17:10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. Gen 17:11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

Because circumcision was "the sign" of God's covenant with Abraham, it is not surprising that this became the number one issue with Jewish Christians when Gentiles started joining their new movement and were proclaiming that they, too, were Christians.

When Gentiles began to accept Jesus as their Savior, it was natural for the Jewish Christians to ask themselves, "If they are receiving Jesus as their Savior, should they not also receive all of the Jewish faith (the Old Covenant), since Jesus is the Messiah promised in the Old Covenant?

It must have been quite a transition from seeing Jesus as strictly the Messiah to the Jews, to seeing the Messiah as one who would extend a "new covenant" to all people of every nation. In Jeremiah 31:31, God had said:

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Many books could be written and have been written about the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. Suffice it to say that Jesus brought into being a new and better covenant that extends to every person of every nation to the end of time.

Since circumcision was "the sign" of the Old Covenant, it readily became the symbol which represented the Old Covenant. And that is how Paul stated it in Galatians 5:3.

"For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law."

Back to the Council at Jerusalem. This was a major event in the life of the Early Church. It was now becoming clear to most Jews who had believed in Jesus as their promised Messiah, that He was the Savior of the World, not just for the Jews. But it was still uncertain to what degree these Gentile believers should embrace the Law of Moses. And this is what the Council at Jerusalem was all about.

The Apostle Paul, who was the Apostle to the Gentiles along with some who were close to him were to meet with Peter and James and the other leaders of the church at Jerusalem to discuss that very issue. Should these Gentiles who had become Christians be required to receive circumcision -- the sign of God's original covenant with Abraham and the nation of Israel? And what requirements of the Law should they become subject to? These were major questions that had to be answered.

If you want to read the major statements of the Council, turn to Acts 15, verses 1 - 28.

It is obvious to any reader that it was the unanimous decision of the Council at Jerusalem that those who became Christians among the Gentiles were not to be put under the Law of Moses. They were not even to be required to be circumcised, which was the sign of the Old Covenant. And, if they were not required to be circumcised, they were not required to carry out any of the requirements of the Old Covenant Law -- including tithing.

If the Council of Jerusalem were being held today, and the leaders of the church in the United States were present, there would be a lot of debate over tithing. Forget circumcision, but there would be an uproar demanding that "tithing" be brought forward into the New Covenant as a requirement. But that was not the case in the 1st century. And how could it have been?

Just think about it. Almost every denomination preaches tithing today and yet they have nothing in scripture to back it up except Old Testament tithing verses which actually have nothing to do with what is being preached today. We have learned that tithing in the OT requires the Levitical Priesthood, animal sacrifices and rituals of Temple worship, etc.

If tithing, in any form or fashion, were to be a requirement of New Testament Christians, it certainly would have been discussed at the Council at Jerusalem, agreed upon, and included in the letter which they wrote, giving a summary of the "essential" things that the Gentile Believers were instructed to follow. Gentiles knew nothing about tithing as taught in the OT, so why weren't they taught about it?

It is very hard to believe that many Preachers today do not know this. I know everyone would like to believe that they are just sincerely wrong while others say they are blinded by the doctrines of man, however, since the Word of God is so plain and does not even allude to a grace-based payment system (is that an oxymoron, or what?) in the NT, do you really believe that all Preachers are innocently, ignorant?

Paul did not believe it, either. In fact, he went further in condemnation of them. Let’s just say the Holy Spirit went further in HIS condemnation of them. Because, Paul was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For the Holy Spirit says the following, indicating that not all are ignorantly “troubling” you, by telling us of their true motives.

Gal 6:12 As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.

Gal 6:13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.

Notice if you will in Acts 15:1-28, what was missing as a requirement for the Gentile Believers. Most everything from the Mosaic Law and anything in the Old Testament, except the following:

Act 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

Act 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

Here is the Word of the Lord from the WORD to you.
Act 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

I think Paul had a great and positive influence at the Council of Jerusalem because he used the same word (trouble) in Galatians.

Gal 5:12 I would they were even cut off which trouble you.

So, Brethren, don't let people trouble you with the burdens of the “Law”. Some are ignorantly religious while others are not. It does not matter which. It is the religious spirit behind them that seeks to trouble you.

Many say they are blessed by it and make comments to you about “paganism”, implying that you are practicing paganism. I say, if they are blessed by a certain practice then be blessed. As long as they are not trusting in it for their standing with God what concern of it is mine if they choose to observe “seasons”, or “special” days or whatever. When someone is blessed by something, it is natural that they want to share it, but when they tell you that it is a commandment of God and imply that you are in disobedience, then it has become more than a blessing to them as they first told you, it has become a Law to them and they actually wish to bring you under their law.

Rom 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

I already talked about Ananias and Sapphira so I will skip that one. You can look back at this link to read about them. 1 Tim 3:1-13, is the only other passage in the New Testament where you would expect Tithing to be discussed but we'll save that one for later.

Axehead

 

[StanJ]

What you're basically doing is using your own rational and inferring that because the NT doesn't use the wording you want it to, you will make it say what you want it to, and that is eisegesis.
Feel free to give the way you want, but we ALL will have to give an accounting of our stewardship one day so you won't be able to say, "The words were not in the NT." Just because the Levitical priesthood disappeared in 70 AD, doesn't mean God's principle of tithing did. It existed long before the priesthood and still exists long afterwards.
As you refuse to state how you support the Trinity without the wording and can't supply any relevant scripture to deny tithing IS relevant, I see no use to continue saying the same things to you.

 

[Axehead]

What you're basically doing is using your own rational and inferring that because the NT doesn't use the wording you want it to, you will make it say what you want it to, and that is eisegesis.
Feel free to give the way you want, but we ALL will have to give an accounting of our stewardship one day so you won't be able to say, "The words were not in the NT." Just because the Levitical priesthood disappeared in 70 AD, doesn't mean God's principle of tithing did. It existed long before the priesthood and still exists long afterwards.
As you refuse to state how you support the Trinity without the wording and can't supply any relevant scripture to deny tithing IS relevant, I see no use to continue saying the same things to you.

Stan, the limb you are on is about to break. What other teachings are not in the NT that NT Gentiles in the Early Church were expected to know about? There is no teaching by the Apostles or Jesus regarding NT Tithing. NT Tithing is drastically different than OT Tithing. This is a critical and very significant change and you would expect some teaching on this but the NT is completely silent on the subject. I am not using my own rationale, I am looking for evidence in the NT of the teaching of your tithing law for NT Believers. How do you expect people to follow what they don't see? They will be beholden to men if men start saying that there are many things you have to do that are not in the NT. Just listen to us. You just want them to trust you and climb up on the same limb as you? Show us the NT scriptural basis for people to be under a law of tithing and where is the teaching that the law of tithing changed and we are not supposed to observe it in the OT way but rather in a new way? Where is this teaching? You can't point to it and you keep running away from the Word and even your own words. To be sure, the practice of tithing does exist today, but it doesn't exist in the NT. You are displaying a complete disregard for the Scriptures and you constantly try to change the subject. You justify that if you don't see something else in scripture then it is ok if NT tithing doesn't exist and you can still preach and teach it as "thus saith the Lord" and tell Believers that they are disobedient if they don't obey the invisible "tithing law." My question to you is what other things do you teach with such preciseness that are no where to be found in Scripture?

I also have never read where the Apostles characterize the people of God as whiners and unmotivated if they don't tithe.

I was once in a church where a Pastor preached that if you wanted to be an elder you had to set an example of one that definitely pays at least 10% of your earnings to the church and even give more (this is called "Freewill offerings" in religious circles). But, that qualification is not known in the NT, is it?

One of the facts that speak so loudly about the doctrine of tithing is the absolute silence of the New Testament.

We must be honest with ourselves and those we teach. When it comes to the topic of tithing, the New Testament is completely silent!

Throughout the NT there are many references to money and to giving, but not one reference to tithing is ever made in the context of those subjects. This is very significant!!! If the New Testament required Christians to practice the Old Testament Law of Tithes and Offerings, it would surely be mentioned within the passages of scripture that discuss money and giving. BUT IT NEVER IS!!!

The NT is NOT SILENT about money.
The NT is NOT SILENT about giving to support the local church.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting those who teach God's Word.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting spiritual leaders.
The NT is NOT SILENT about helping the poor.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting missionary endeavors.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting widows.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting parents.

THE NT IS TOTALLY SILENT ABOUT TITHING.

Also, since the New Covenant did away with the office of the "Priest" and because the New Covenant did away with the practice of sacrifices and offerings, it would be impossible for the the Old Testament law of "tithes and offerings" -- as they were commonly understood -- to be a part of the the practice of NT Christians. Therefore any law of "tithing" would have to be redefined and explained. The practice of "Tithes and Offerings", required the active ministry of the Levitical priesthood, the sacrifices of animals on the altar and many other aspects of Temple worship.

Another key passage - which is representative of many others - when you would expect the practice of tithing to be mentioned is I Timothy 3:1-13. In this passage we are given a list of qualities and attributes that are used to measure and judge a person's qualifications to be among the spiritual leaders of the church. We do not see tithing mentioned. It is absent from this passage just as it is absent from every passage in the New Testament that discusses money, giving, supporting the local church, supporting missionary endeavors,giving to the poor, giving to parents, etc. This is just another reminder that the entire New Testament is silent about tithing.

In contrast, if you ask most church leaders today what should be the qualifications of a pastor or deacon, or any other position of church and/or denominational leadership, almost every one of them would insist that the practice of tithing be on the list of qualifications.

Let's take a look at I Tim 3:1-13 to see what it records as being qualities and attributes that a spiritual leader should possess:

1Ti 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
1Ti 3:4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 1Ti 3:5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
1Ti 3:6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
1Ti 3:7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
1Ti 3:8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
1Ti 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
1Ti 3:10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.
1Ti 3:11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
1Ti 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
1Ti 3:13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

The only two statements made about money are "not greedy of filthy lucre" (verse 3 and 8). This was spoken of twice as if for emphasis. Unlike the sermons you hear today, this passage does not require that a church leader be one who practices tithing.

Some might argue that nothing at all is said about "giving" and that the writer took for granted that those in leadership would be those who practiced tithing. And that argument might have some merit were it not for two considerations:

1. Not only is tithing not mentioned here, it is never mentioned in the entire NT. If we adopt the opinion that the entire NT is silent about tithing because the writers of the NT (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) assumed that everyone would somehow know that tithing is a practice that would be taken for granted -- we would then have to ask ourselves, "What other practices does God expect from Christians that were "assumed" and not mentioned anywhere in the New Testament? That would create a situation of uncertainty and confusion where we would have nothing more to go on than the personal opinions of men and their ability to persuade people to follow them. How are we to know that God expects us to practice something in the New Covenant that is never mentioned in that new covenant? The only basis would be the opinions of men.

2. It would be impossible for all the writers of the New Testament to assume that every person who was coming to faith in Christ would automatically know that they were expected to practice "tithes and offerings" for two reasons:

A. There were many more converts coming from among the gentile nations than from among the Jews. Many of those Gentile would have little or no understanding of the Hebrew practice of "tithes and offerings". And a large portion of the New Testament was written specifically to the gentile converts because the writers knew that they had very little background and understanding of the Old Testament Hebrew practices. And because a large portion of the New Testament was purposely directed to those who had little background of the Hebrew's faith and practices, it would have been a part of the new covenant -- would definitely have been taught and explained.

B. The writers of the NT knew that it would be impossible for Christians to practice "tithes and offerings" because the new covenant was setting aside the Levitical Priesthood, animal sacrifices, religious ceremonies performed at the altars, rituals of Temple worship, etc. -- all of which were integral parts of the practices of "tithes and offerings". It is impossible to practice Biblical tithing without the system of Temple worship led by the Levitical Priesthood. "Tithes and Offerings", by the very definition of the term cannot be practiced without altars, animal sacrifices and many rituals that took many pages of Old Testament scriptures to describe and explain.

"Tithing" as it was understood and practiced by Jews under the old covenant was totally different from what "Tithes and Offerings" are taught to be today. If there were to be this new definition of "Tithing", it certainly would have been taught and explained. Places in the New Testament where you would expect to see the teaching of tithing, take on a greater significance by the absolute silence regarding this teaching (or lack of it). If the definition of tithing had changed, it would have required a great deal of explanation, but no explanation is ever given.

We can come to no other conclusion than this: "Tithes and Offerings" was a part of the old covenant, just like circumcision. And "Tithes and Offerings", just like circumcision, has no place in the New Covenant.


Let me say that again: We can come to no other conclusion than this: "Tithes and Offerings" was a part of the old covenant, just like circumcision. And "Tithes and Offerings", just like circumcision, has no place in the New Covenant.

Axehead

Feel free to give the way you want, but we ALL will have to give an accounting of our stewardship one day so you won't be able to say, "The words were not in the NT." Just because the Levitical priesthood disappeared in 70 AD, doesn't mean God's principle of tithing did. It existed long before the priesthood and still exists long afterwards.

Gotta love that "Fear Preaching".

Where is the transition teaching? You know what I mean. How were early church Gentiles supposed to know that the OT Tithing is not practiced anymore but a new kind of tithing is practiced. Where is this teaching? When did it first appear? How were Believers automatically supposed to know about it?

 

[StanJ]

Stan, the limb you are on is about to break. What other teachings are not in the NT that NT Gentiles in the Early Church were expected to know about? There is no teaching by the Apostles or Jesus regarding NT Tithing. NT Tithing is drastically different than OT Tithing. This is a critical and very significant change and you would expect some teaching on this but the NT is completely silent on the subject. I am not using my own rationale, I am looking for evidence in the NT of the teaching of your tithing law for NT Believers. How do you expect people to follow what they don't see? They will be beholden to men if men start saying that there are many things you have to do that are not in the NT. Just listen to us. You just want them to trust you and climb up on the same limb as you? Show us the NT scriptural basis for people to be under a law of tithing and where is the teaching that the law of tithing changed and we are not supposed to observe it in the OT way but rather in a new way? Where is this teaching? You can't point to it and you keep running away from the Word and even your own words. To be sure, the practice of tithing does exist today, but it doesn't exist in the NT. You are displaying a complete disregard for the Scriptures and you constantly try to change the subject. You justify that if you don't see something else in scripture then it is ok if NT tithing doesn't exist and you can still preach and teach it as "thus saith the Lord" and tell Believers that they are disobedient if they don't obey the invisible "tithing law." My question to you is what other things do you teach with such preciseness that are no where to be found in Scripture?

Axehead I'm rooted in the vine not sitting on a limb.

Nobody in the NT time used ONLY the NT, that is only common today. Jesus and the apostles mostly quoted correctly from the OT. The difference is the OC vs the NC.
Equivocating about who the NT church was doesn't really help the issue does it?
Of course tithing is different today because we are not an agronomic society like they were in Israel. Again you avoid the issue that I bring up about the trinity and continue to deflect the issue. What you expect to prove you wrong is also not the issue. Either God's pre Mosaic law about tithing should have continued or it shouldn't. Either way the same facts hold true. Jesus supported it, and nothing forbids or cancels it. If you don't get all I have stated in my posts by now, you won't get it, plain and simple, but by your very own rational you can't show anything that cancels it out. Apparently it was NOT as big an issue in the early NT church as it is with some these days. I'm not here to elicit trust from others, I'm here to voice my opinions and how I see scripture. It won't exist if you won't see it or even be open to it. But by the same token you can't show it doesn't despite all the onerous rhetoric you post here. I've never said "thus saith the lord". NT tithing does indeed exist despite those who do it wrong.
Are you ever going to address the issue of the NT application of the10 commandments or the Trinity with the same fervor?

I also have never read where the Apostles characterize the people of God as whiners and unmotivated if they don't tithe.

I was once in a church where a Pastor preached that if you wanted to be an elder you had to set an example of one that definitely pays at least 10% of your earnings to the church and even give more (this is called "Freewill offerings" in religious circles). But, that qualification is not known in the NT, is it?

One of the facts that speak so loudly about the doctrine of tithing is the absolute silence of the New Testament.

The point is there is NOT absolute silence, just small things you choose to ignore. As you're the only one who actually used the words "whiners and unmotivated" why can't you now find it? Maybe it's the guilt you're feeling for opposing this idea?

I don't care WHO does it wrong Axehead and neither should you if you do it right. I am in NO way a fan of mega churches with mega building programs, but that is NOT the issue. I guess if you were in the Sanhedrin back then, you would have complained about all the money that was spent on the temple? There was no need to qualify something that was clearly understood at that time.

We must be honest with ourselves and those we teach. When it comes to the topic of tithing, the New Testament is completely silent!

Throughout the NT there are many references to money and to giving, but not one reference to tithing is ever made in the context of those subjects. This is very significant!!! If the New Testament required Christians to practice the Old Testament Law of Tithes and Offerings, it would surely be mentioned within the passages of scripture that discuss money and giving. BUT IT NEVER IS!!!

The NT is NOT SILENT about money.
The NT is NOT SILENT about giving to support the local church.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting those who teach God's Word.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting spiritual leaders.
The NT is NOT SILENT about helping the poor.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting missionary endeavors.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting widows.
The NT is NOT SILENT about supporting parents.

THE NT IS TOTALLY SILENT ABOUT TITHING.

Well, if you are going to be completely honest, then you wouldn't use these absolute words.

You say many, but don't show any, and this is very significant. That you expect EVRYTHING in your walk to be spelled out in black and white in print is rather short sighted and limited. How can the Holy Spirit show you anything if you refuse to see anything outside of the printed words? Especially when it does NOT violate or contradict those printed words?

The point is that the NT is not silent about many things but it is clear on what is important. Heb 12:18-24 shows what that is, and also relates to what Elijah discovered in
1 Kings 19:12. The Holy Spirit is our still small voice, IF we can be still and listen.

Again it is NOT totally silent, despite your alliterations.

Also, since the New Covenant did away with the office of the "Priest" and because the New Covenant did away with the practice of sacrifices and offerings, it would be impossible for the the Old Testament law of "tithes and offerings" -- as they were commonly understood -- to be a part of the the practice of NT Christians. Therefore any law of "tithing" would have to be redefined and explained. The practice of "Tithes and Offerings", required the active ministry of the Levitical priesthood, the sacrifices of animals on the altar and many other aspects of Temple worship.

Another key passage - which is representative of many others - when you would expect the practice of tithing to be mentioned is I Timothy 3:1-13. In this passage we are given a list of qualities and attributes that are used to measure and judge a person's qualifications to be among the spiritual leaders of the church. We do not see tithing mentioned. It is absent from this passage just as it is absent from every passage in the New Testament that discusses money, giving, supporting the local church, supporting missionary endeavors,giving to the poor, giving to parents, etc. This is just another reminder that the entire New Testament is silent about tithing.

In contrast, if you ask most church leaders today what should be the qualifications of a pastor or deacon, or any other position of church and/or denominational leadership, almost every one of them would insist that the practice of tithing be on the list of qualifications.

Yes but show where it did away with tithes or offerings? Again try not to equivocate about the issue here, which is NOT the Levitical or Mosaic written laws on tithing, but the God initiated spiritual law of tithing, which exited far before those written laws.

Why would Paul deal with tithing when he is dealing with overseers and deacons in 1 Tim 3? Having said that, how do you know that a "good reputation" in v7 didn't include tithing? We also don't see obeying the 1o commandments mentioned here....should they be ignored by overseers and deacons?

Your reasoning doesn't hold Axehead and as you have still not shown any corroboration to negate tithing, I wouldn't see it as a problem in and of itself, but then again I'm not the one with a problem on this issue.

Let's take a look at I Tim 3:1-13 to see what it records as being qualities and attributes that a spiritual leader should possess:
1Ti 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
1Ti 3:8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
The only two statements made about money are "not greedy of filthy lucre" (verse 3 and 8). This was spoken of twice as if for emphasis. Unlike the sermons you hear today, this passage does not require that a church leader be one who practices tithing.

OK, let's.

v3 and 8 address the "love of money". IMO not wanting to be accountable for what proper stewardship should be, would demonstrate a LOVE of money.
It was spoken of twice because it was two positions. Some of the qualifications are duplicated in this language. What does this prove?

No, because it was commonly understood it wasn't an issue for this type of leader, not because it wasn't important. If the qualification does include not being a lover of money, it would be redundant to tell them they had to tithe.

You really think it's valid to have a doctrine that is based on some verses being silent on this issue?

1. Not only is tithing not mentioned here, it is never mentioned in the entire NT. If we adopt the opinion that the entire NT is silent about tithing because the writers of the NT (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) assumed that everyone would somehow know that tithing is a practice that would be taken for granted -- we would then have to ask ourselves, "What other practices does God expect from Christians that were "assumed" and not mentioned anywhere in the New Testament? That would create a situation of uncertainty and confusion where we would have nothing more to go on than the personal opinions of men and their ability to persuade people to follow them. How are we to know that God expects us to practice something in the New Covenant that is never mentioned in that new covenant? The only basis would be the opinions of men.
2. It would be impossible for all the writers of the New Testament to assume that every person who was coming to faith in Christ would automatically know that they were expected to practice "tithes and offerings" for two reasons:
A. There were many more converts coming from among the gentile nations than from among the Jews. Many of those Gentile would have little or no understanding of the Hebrew practice of "tithes and offerings". And a large portion of the New Testament was written specifically to the gentile converts because the writers knew that they had very little background and understanding of the Old Testament Hebrew practices. And because a large portion of the New Testament was purposely directed to those who had little background of the Hebrew's faith and practices, it would have been a part of the new covenant -- would definitely have been taught and explained.
B. The writers of the NT knew that it would be impossible for Christians to practice "tithes and offerings" because the new covenant was setting aside the Levitical Priesthood, animal sacrifices, religious ceremonies performed at the altars, rituals of Temple worship, etc. -- all of which were integral parts of the practices of "tithes and offerings". It is impossible to practice Biblical tithing without the system of Temple worship led by the Levitical Priesthood. "Tithes and Offerings", by the very definition of the term cannot be practiced without altars, animal sacrifices and many rituals that took many pages of Old Testament scriptures to describe and explain.

That is not correct Axehead, and you know it. Jesus brought it up and He did not say ANYTHING about it being phased out in the NC.

Prevaricating about what some MAY think is also not valid for the very same reason you state, it is NOT discounted anywhere.

You mean it's OK for you to assume the intent of the NT writers but not others who don't hold the same OPINION that you do? That's awfully convenient.

That may be so, but the leadership were all Jews familiar with God's unwritten laws so that reasoning doesn't hold much water.

Again speaking as if you are or were intimately involved with what the NT writers wrote or knew is pretty incredulous to say the least.

So you're saying that we can't worship God because we can't worship the way they did in the OT or in the Temple? Really?

It took many pages for the written laws because of men's unbelief and legalism, not because God wanted it. The children of Israel didn't want God to speak to them so Moses prevailed on God to give them written laws. Exodus 20 shows this.

"Tithing" as it was understood and practiced by Jews under the old covenant was totally different from what "Tithes and Offerings" are taught to be today. If there were to be this new definition of "Tithing", it certainly would have been taught and explained. Places in the New Testament where you would expect to see the teaching of tithing, take on a greater significance by the absolute silence regarding this teaching (or lack of it). If the definition of tithing had changed, it would have required a great deal of explanation, but no explanation is ever given.
We can come to no other conclusion than this: "Tithes and Offerings" was a part of the old covenant, just like circumcision. And "Tithes and Offerings", just like circumcision, has no place in the New Covenant.
Let me say that again: We can come to no other conclusion than this: "Tithes and Offerings" was a part of the old covenant, just like circumcision. And "Tithes and Offerings", just like circumcision, has no place in the New Covenant.

Yes, and so was worshipping God and many others things. NEW is just that, NEW. It is still God's covenant and God didn't change, His way of reconciling people did.
The laws are on our hearts, not on paper.

Let me draw your attention to Acts 15 and how some practises were maintained. Was James wrong? Tithes and offerings existed BEFORE the OT Covenant.

Gotta love that "Fear Preaching".

Where is the transition teaching? You know what I mean. How were early church Gentiles supposed to know that the OT Tithing is not practiced anymore but a new kind of tithing is practiced. Where is this teaching? When did it first appear? How were Believers automatically supposed to know about it?

I suggest you read Prov 1:7

They knew because ALL the leadership were Jews and it was an ancient practise BEFORE the OC.

 

[Axehead]

Is that all you have, Stan? In summary then, you are showing the readers that you have no scriptural evidence at all that the Apostles taught the law of tithing and you have no real understanding of the Scriptures. Not only did they not teach it as it is applied today, but they did not teach it, period and they certainly did not change the OT law of tithes and offerings into the hybrid that we see, today!! Your theology on Tithing is based entirely on faulty logic and assumptions and your confusion/deception is obvious. You display a complete disregard for God's word, treating it like your personal playground and have no understanding concerning the Spirit of Grace.

When you do a serious study of what the New Testament teaches about money, supporting the local church, underwriting missionary efforts, supporting the poor, etc. -- and contrast your findings with the teaching of the Old Testament -- you can summarize your findings with two words: PAY and GIVE

The Old Testament requirement of tithing is definitely a "paying" situation, not a "giving" one. Even the "Offerings" were required. They were not "offerings" in the sense of a spontaneous desire and decision to impart some of your assets to someone else. The OT Offerings were specific requirements of the people that had to be fulfilled according to very specific, detailed rituals carried out by the Levitical Priesthood in the context of Temple worship.

Everyone agrees that you pay something that you owe. It is a responsibility and a requirement. It is not a gift. On the other hand, it is equally true that a gift is not a requirement. A gift is something that you give that you didn't have to give. It is not given because you must. It is not given out of necessity. It is not given under compulsion. Otherwise, it would not be a gift. It would be a payment.

Let's look at II Corinthians 8 and 9:

Chapter 8

2Cor 8:1 Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia;
2Cor 8:2 How that in a great trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality.
2Cor 8:3 For to their power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power they were willing of themselves;
2Cor 8:4 Praying us with much intreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the fellowship of the ministering to the saints.
2Cor 8:5 And this they did, not as we hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God.
2Cor 8:6 Insomuch that we desired Titus, that as he had begun, so he would also finish in you the same grace also.
2Cor 8:7 Therefore, as ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all diligence, and in your love to us, see that ye abound in this grace also.
2Cor 8:8 I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity of your love.
2Cor 8:9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.
...
2Cor 8:19 And not that only, but who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us with this grace, which is administered by us to the glory of the same Lord, and declaration of your ready mind:

Chapter 9

2Cor 9:6 But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
2Cor 9:7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
2Cor 9:8 And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:
2Cor 9:9 (As it is written, He hath dispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his righteousness remaineth for ever.
2Cor 9:10 Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness
2Cor 9:11 Being enriched in every thing to all bountifulness, which causeth through us thanksgiving to God.
2Cor 9:12 For the administration of this service not only supplieth the want of the saints, but is abundant also by many thanksgivings unto God;
2Cor 9:13 Whiles by the experiment of this ministration they glorify God for your professed subjection unto the gospel of Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all men;
2Co 9:14 And by their prayer for you, which long after you for the exceeding grace of God in you.
2Cor 9:15 Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.

These passages of scripture are a perfect illustration of the fact that the new covenant is a covenant of grace, not a covenant of law. The Apostle Paul, in writing this passage, reveals that giving is a work of God's grace in a person's heart. And it is clear that what God is wanting is for His people to give of their own accord. He does not want them to give in obedience to a command. That would be LAW! He wants His people to allow His grace to work in their hearts, and give freely.

Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, drives a nail in the coffin of tithing. It is buried forever along with circumcision and every other aspect of Old Testament Law.

2Cor 9:7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

God no longer wants His children to pay under compulsion, but to give cheerfully. It is impossible for the requirement of paying the tithe to remain if God says that our giving is not under compulsion. If you owe it, you are under compulsion to pay it. The very act of paying tithes creates an act of "necessity" and 2 Cor 9:7, says "not grudgingly, or of necessity".

You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say out of one side of your mouth that you are not to act out of necessity, or under compulsion -- and then out of the other side of your mouth say that God requires you to pay tithes.

Paul does "urge" the church several times to be "liberal" (generous) in their giving. But generosity is a foreign concept to the law of tithing. A tithe is 10 percent, no more and no less. You cannot be generous and be under the law of tithes, (whether one of the three OT laws of tithing or all 3 of them). But, today's preachers say that is where "offerings" come in. But that is not right. Not in a Biblical sense, anyway. The offerings of the Bible in the OT consisted of detailed rituals that were just as much a requirement as was tithing.

God wants us to forget the requirements of the Law. He wants us to live in response to the working of His grace in our hearts.

"But shouldn't tithing be the starting place? Shouldn't it be the minimum?"

That would be like saying, "Shouldn't circumcision be the starting place?" "Shouldn't circumcision be the minimum?"

I think if this were true, the New Testament would have stated it, somewhere, just once.

The requirement of tithing has kept God's people in slavery to the Law and has kept them from growing in God's grace.

Also, the offering that Paul and his associates collected was a ministry of the churches. This was part of the ministry of the local churches. This was not some non-church organization. This was not some activity that was outside the ministry of the local churches. It was a vital part of the ministry of these churches.

I point this out because there would be some who would say, "The reason Paul did not appeal to the use of tithes was because this was a special project that was outside the scope of the local church." But, as you can see, that argument does not hold water!

The reason that Paul did not appeal to the use of tithes in this passage -- and in every other passage that he wrote -- is that tithing has no place in the life of a Christian. It is a part of the Old Covenant that has been replaced with something better, in the New Covenant.

The New Testament teaches that we are to be led by the Holy Spirit in every area of our lives. That includes the area of giving. The Holy Spirit is "the Spirit of grace", (Heb 10:29).

Tithing is a form of Legalism that must be opposed because it opens the door to other teachings of legalism in the Church.

Axehead I'm rooted in the vine not sitting on a limb.


I suggest you read Prov 1:7

They knew because ALL the leadership were Jews and it was an ancient practise BEFORE the OC.

Where is the evidence, and the trail of this new knowledge of tithing? When did it originate? NT is silent about it and the NT is what the Apostles taught the early church.

 

[StanJ]

Axehead, all you're doing is repeating yourself and ignoring what I post so there is no reason whatsoever for me to address your growingly onerous submissions any further. No matter what I say you have deluded yourself into believing your perceived freedom in Christ allows you to ignore whatever laws of God you choose to. So be it.

 

[Axehead]

Axehead, all you're doing is repeating yourself and ignoring what I post so there is no reason whatsoever for me to address your growingly onerous submissions any further. No matter what I say you have deluded yourself into believing your perceived freedom in Christ allows you to ignore whatever laws of God you choose to. So be it.

Everyone ignores the law of tithes and offerings in the OT, even you. I have never met anyone that kept them, not even the Jews, today keep them. They cannot, there is no temple. So, what law are you talking about and where might I find it? Show me the NT law that Christ and the Apostles want us all to obey and I will obey it. The problem is that you have failed repeatedly to show anything. You just talk into the air.

Pretend I am a new Believer. Now, teach me the NT law of tithe and offerings. Surely, you have taught this before because you keep saying it exists. But where?

Where is the transition teaching from the Lord regarding the change in keeping the OT Law of Tithes and Offerings to the way we are to keep it, today? If the Lord gave the original teaching, then where is His teaching giving us a modified law? Because, according to you it has been modifed. But, I don't find this teaching anywhere in the ENTIRE Bible.

I keep repeating myself hoping something will eventually sink in and you will realize that you really cannot point me to this teaching/law that you talk about. No where in the Bible can you point me to the modified Law of Tithes and Offerings.

I do want to thank you for being part of this debate because as the antagonist you have played a really important part in this debate and have allowed me to bring up some very important truths.

Axehead

 

[StanJ]

Like I said Axehead, you don't get it. You keep asking the same questions that I have already answered in this thread. You didn't accept them, if you even read them, so there is no use in repeating myself. The sad reality is that new believers would be much more receptive to this issue than some older believers.
You actually didn't bring up ANY truths, important or otherwise. You just repeatedly asked the same questions and wouldn't accept the answers to them. For that I am not responsible. Hopefully I did make you think about this issue but this response makes me doubt it had any impact whatsoever on your POV.

 

[Axehead]

When a teaching (How to Tithe) is built upon a false teaching (NT Law of Tithe and Offerings), you end up with another false teaching. The NT Law of Tithe and Offerings cannot be supported by anything in the Scriptures and consequently, "How to Tithe", cannot be supported. They are both false teachings of men that bring believers into bondage to men. As a new believer I recognized this simply from reading the scriptures and the witness of the Holy Spirit. Many recognize it is an invention of men instituted to meet monthly budgets and provide for buildings and salaries, but they can't admit it. The religious establishment tries to "Christianize" it and tell you it is from God as if to put some authority behind it. The problem with that is they then make it a law and tie it to obedience which leads them to engage in "Fear Preaching", Intimidation and ultimately criticism of the Saints.

Since Melchizedek was brought up, I would like to touch upon him a little bit and set the record straight. Mel is abused all the time by the religious establishment so let's see what really going on.

Part of this error comes from not considering when the Old Covenant ended and when the New Covenant began. When Jesus referred to tithing, the Law was still in effect. It didn't end until he died on the cross. Jesus was living during the Law and speaking to people who were under the Law.

Actually, Hebrews 7 has nothing to do with tithing in the New Covenant. Tithing is only mentioned as part of a comparison between the Melchizedek and the Levitical priesthood to show us how far superior a priest Jesus is.

The book of Hebrews proclaims the superiority of the New Covenant. It says we have a better hope (7:19), better covenant (7:22)(8:6), better promises (8:6), better sacrifices (9:23), better substance (10:34), better country (11:16), better resurrection (11:35), and better outcome of our faith (11:40).

It shows that Jesus has a better name (1:4) and better blood (12:24), and that we now have a better cleansing of sin, a better conscience (9:14), and a better relationship with God, entering the true holy place in the heavenly realm.

This is what Hebrews 7 is all about! Showing us by tying into all the other "better" verses, that we do indeed have a far better (superior) Priest in Jesus Christ.
The verses above, are all from Hebrews.

Hebrews chapter 7 is showing us that Jesus is a greater priest than any priest in the Old Covenant. The Holy Spirit proves to us first that Melchizedek was a greater priest than any priest in the Old Covenant.

Let's look at Abraham and the tithe that he gave. What are some characteristics of this tithe and was it habitual.

1. First of all, there is no scriptural evidence that God told him to give it. (very important)

2. God's original promise and eventual covenant with Abraham was based on faith, alone. Nothing to do with tithing.

3. No where in Scripture did God instruct Abraham to give a tenth of the spoils to Melchizedek.

4. No where in Scripture did God ever instruct Abraham to give any tithe.

5. Abraham was already incredibly rich and he was not made rich by giving a tithe to Melchizedek.

6. When Abraham gave a tithe to Melchizedek, it was the only time that he ever gave a tithe.

7. The scriptures do not mention anywhere that Abraham ever gave another tithe the rest of his life. (we see no evidence of this law of 10%)

8. The tithe that Abraham gave cost him nothing. It was on the spoils of the battle. It was not part of his personal possessions or the increase of his flocks and herds.

9. God's fulfillment to Abraham did not include a condition of tithing. God made Abraham rich in fulfillment of his promise alone, without any kind of tithing or giving.

10. Christian's have said that Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek is God's pattern for Christians in the New Covenant. There is no where in Scripture where this is stated.

11. Tithing had absolutely nothing to do with God fulfilling his promise to Abraham to make him a great nation, bless him, make his name great and that through him all the nations of the earth would be blessed. It was never mentioned except with Melchizedek and Abraham chose to do that only out of his spoils.

Abraham believed what God said and acted on it. There were no works involved.

12. God made Abraham rich on the basis of faith alone. Tithing was not the reason for Abraham's prosperity.

Folks, from Genesis to Revelation, God has never been in debt to man and He never will. Our relationship with Him is based on faith alone. We approach Him and love Him, on faith alone. And He rewards us and blesses us on Faith alone. He causes our soul to be fat (prosperous). His grace is far beyond any natural comprehension we can attain.

When you read the Bible you realize that information about the most important things in God's economy are not held back from us. They are revealed. Anything as important as an eternal, universal law of tithing would have been clearly communicated and not left to us to fumble about and figure out. However, the opposite is true. It is not plainly laid out as a NT ordinance of God.

Tithers argue that Jesus is both king and priest and is therefore due a tithe. Jesus is certainly worthy of a tithe and much more, but his kingdom and priesthood are not based on the tithe. The tithe has no place in it. Everything about tithing is inferior to New Covenant life in Christ.

Jesus' call to us is not a 10% commitment. His call is absolute abandonment and commitment of all things to Him.

Jesus requires us to forsake all, to give all, and to use all for the accomplishment of his purposes.

Interestingly, He gives (entrusts) all things to us, and to jointly work with Him in His service and the Holy Spirit is now the leader in all matters and not the tithe, or any law or rules that come from man.

And if the Holy Spirit is the leader in all matters, where does that leave the modern "clergy" Think about this: They are inextricably linked to the tithe.

Well, that's another story.

All the best,
Axehead

 

[StanJ]

Like I said Axehead, you are well indoctrinated about what you believe, but just not learned about Biblical principles. Feel free to exercise your perceived freedom as you see fit, to pick and choose what OT teachings/laws you decide you want to follow.
I will believe what I see the Bible teaching.

 

[Axehead]

Since Stan challenged me to go back through all the posts to see all the teaching on the Law of Tithing for NT believers, I did just that. I went back through all the posts to see if anyone actually tried to teach all of us "Tithing" 10% off the top of your income is a requirement of the law. I did not find anyone that actually tried to teach it or demonstrate where in scripture it was found. I also did not find anyone that attempted to show us where the transition teaching took place that educated the church on how the OT Tithe was no longer in affect, but a hybrid tithe based on the OT tithe is now in effect. I did find someone who at least tried to show where this teaching originated and that can be found here. Interesting results:

TJM starts us off and thinks there are 3 options to tithing.

Liz starts off by encouraging TJM to give as the Holy Spirit leads and especially in agreement with your spouse. She also gently tells TJM that God's Word encourages giving but nothing to do with tithing and that the 10% mentality does not lend itself to "giving from ones heart". That we should not be compelled to give as that would not be from the heart. Bravo Liz! You understand the scriptures, correctly. It there is a law, then one cannot purpose within his own heart how much to give.

Son of Man, says that God's portion is His People and does not go on to further elaborate.

Trekson agrees with Liz and says the church should give generously and the law of tithing is not meant for the church.

Son of Man follows up with some verses regarding the "Lord's portion is His people".

Axehead weighs in and agrees with Liz and Trekson that there is no such thing as a compulsory religious tax of 10% spoken of within the OT or NT. That people should give willingly and cheerfully as they decide to do and not as someone else decides for them.

kepha31 says tithing should never be required. That 10% is a guideline that comes from Mosaic law that we are not bound to.

zebrahug says that we should be giving because it is in our heart and that our giving should be instigated by a desire in our heart to give to God, and it doesn't really matter how much we give.

soupy gives generously and with a cheerful heart and does not believe tithing is for today.

Son of Man weighs in again and says the tithing that pleases God is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and might.

Spirit Covenant says that God owns all that I am and do.

Stan says the principle is to give a 10th off the top but gives no references. He links tithing to the priesthood and says offerings are like giving food to the hungry.

rjp34652 agrees with Liz (no tithing law) and says Tithing is not mentioned at all in the NT for a very good reason. We are not bound to 10%. He gets a bit upset at the fallen away church and how it takes advantage of the sheep. (it is very upsetting). He has some very good things to say about the presumed law of NT tithing.

John_8:32 believes that when Jesus chastised the Pharisees he was establishing the tithe for the NT church. However, they tithed anise and cummin and Jesus did not provide any transition teaching on how Tithing should be different in the NT.

ByGrace agrees there is no such thing as the NT Tithe. He offers a personal testimony how he believe in the tithe for years until the Lord gave Him a revelation of the truth.
For years and years we used to tithe, and we thought that we were 'the spiritual ones'
Then later on, we got the revelation that just as the ten commandments were hidden within The One New Commandment.
Just so the 10% was swallowed up in the 100%!!

Stan weighs in that "it appears that most of us agree here", but Stan is mistaken as at least 10 out of 11 do not agree with Stan, so far. There is still more to come that will give their position.

Whitestone says the full meaning of tithing is giving Jesus all of who you are and have (my paraphrase, but sure this is what he meant).

afaithfulone4u agrees with Stan and says that Paul gave the churches orders to give their "tithes" to someone that you trust. However, we see in Romans this was a one time collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem and still no detailed teaching of NT tithes and offerings is given.

BiggAndyy thinks the tithes should go to priests today as it was given to priests in the OT and that priests today are the religious leaders. But, all believers are of the "royal priesthood". BiggAndyy is in agreement with Stan and John_8:32.

Rocky Wiley is using Paul's example to imply that even religious elders should have a job and work with their own hands.

SilenceInMotion offers a Catholic point of view. Not sure who he agrees with.

Rocky Wiley comes back to voice agreement with Axehead and says Axehead forgot about the religious church using Malachi 3:8 verse about robbing God. Axehead dealt with the misuse of Mal 3:8, here.

theophilus indicates that you do not have to give the whole tithe to your local church that you should ask God where He wants you to give it.

rjp34652 weighs in again and talks about how the church has turned into a business always talking about money. (my paraphrase).

7angels tells us that word says we are to tithe but just gives us his words and does not give us any references from the Bible. Says offerings are part of the tithe and if you don't give them you are robbing God's storehouse.

7angels and Axehead go back and forth for awhile trying to hammer out what the scripture says about Christians not being under law but under grace. 7angels says, "grace compliments the law". 7angels says Jesus came to make the law stricter and Axehead says you can't get any stricter than death and that Paul says in Romans 7:6, we are "delivered from the law".

Raeneske believes in tithing and would be in the same camp as Stan and John_8:32 along with afaithfulone4u, Raeneske and BiggAndyy

Trumpeter says it is literally impossible to tithe as instructed in Scriptures and provides a teaching to explain why.

Dodo_David does not agree with the Tithe and offers some very good info. One of his statements is this: Regarding the correct answer to the above question, there is no universal consensus. Plenty of pastors say that tithing is mandatory, but, as one pastor has stated, the New Testament does not explicitly command the tithe.

Hammerstone does not really weigh in for the tithe and looks like he weighs in against a rigid law of tithing (not really sure). Says it is not about hitting a 10% magic mark. The main point he is trying to get across is that we should be responsible stewards and put our money where our mouth is.

JimParker has some great things to share and says "there is no New Testament teaching that Christians are required to tithe." Lot of good posts and actual teaching from Scriptures by Jim.

Then it is basically Stan, JimParker and Axehead from here on.

I count about 24 people (more or less) and 4 or 5 people that agree that Tithing is a law that Christians are instructed to follow. Out of this entire thread, virtually no teaching is offered for this major doctrine. I say major, because those who support the tithing law for NT believers, support it as being mandatory.

I think this little summary puts things in a better perspective. Lot of opinions for tithing, but virtually no teaching.

Axehead

 

[StanJ]

Too bad you couldn't do this without all the equivocal paraphrasing.

As we don't really know what God writes on peoples hearts, all we can do is see what His word says and as His word does NOT dismiss or cancel ANY of His laws outside of the Mosaic OC, then as I said many times, it's about whether you can see it and accept it or not.
The perspective I get is that SOME will go to great lengths to try and force their opinion on others for something that should be between God and the tither, as Jesus clearly taught in Matthew 6:2-4

 

[Axehead]

Too bad you couldn't do this without all the equivocal paraphrasing.

As we don't really know what God writes on peoples hearts, all we can do is see what His word says and as His word does NOT dismiss or cancel ANY of His laws outside of the Mosaic OC, then as I said many times, it's about whether you can see it and accept it or not.
The perspective I get is that SOME will go to great lengths to try and force their opinion on others for something that should be between God and the tither, as Jesus clearly taught in Matthew 6:2-4

It's really too bad you could not explain your view, period. And you keep changing your tune and running from your own words. And if God did not cancel His Tithe and Offerings Law then why doesn't the church keep it as He instituted it rather than keeping a perverted version of it? Where did they get the authority to change the Law as God instituted it since as you say, God did not cancel ANY of His laws outside of the Mosaic OC? And once again you do not have a proper understanding of Scripture, Tithing was made a law under the Mosaic covenant not outside of it. Scriptures are very clear about that. And Christians are not obligated to keep the Law of Moses and that includes Tithe and Offerings and Physical Circumcision. And if you are going to keep part of the law, you are obligated to keep it all.

Even church historians are in agreement when they say the tithing was not practiced by the early believers.

The tithe as taught by most Christian denominations as being 10 per cent of gross or net income is not contained on the pages of the Bible!

Most Pastors today have stopped preaching the tithe as it turns people away and they cannot support it from Scripture. As you can see from our informal poll in post 97 most posters in this thread do not see 10% of gross income any where in the pages of the Bible.

 

[StanJ]

It's really too bad you could not explain your view, period. And you keep changing your tune and running from your own words. And if God did not cancel His Tithe and Offerings Law then why doesn't the church keep it as He instituted it rather than keeping a perverted version of it? Where did they get the authority to change the Law as God instituted it since as you say, God did not cancel ANY of His laws outside of the Mosaic OC? And once again you do not have a proper understanding of Scripture, Tithing was made a law under the Mosaic covenant not outside of it. Scriptures are very clear about that. And Christians are not obligated to keep the Law of Moses and that includes Tithe and Offerings and Physical Circumcision. And if you are going to keep part of the law, you are obligated to keep it all.

Even church historians are in agreement when they say the tithing was not practiced by the early believers.

The tithe as taught by most Christian denominations as being 10 per cent of gross or net income is not contained on the pages of the Bible!

Most Pastors today have stopped preaching the tithe as it turns people away and they cannot support it from Scripture. As you can see from our informal poll in post 97 most posters in this thread do not see 10% of gross income any where in the pages of the Bible.

I have explained myself MANY times and only two members here disagree, but that is not the point. What you perceive to be wrong with some pastors may well be, but again THAT is not the issue.
You don't believe God cancelled or made obsolete the Mosaic/Levitical written law?

Well then maybe you should quote or cite THEM so we can all see this?

Of course it is IF you are willing to see it. What Jesus said was also in the OT, but many refused to accept what He taught and to see it, especially the teachers of the law and Pharisees.

It's not properly teaching tithing that turns people away, it what those who abuse church finances do that turns people away from BIG churches.