Tithing Or 2 Corinthians chs 8 & 9 - which is right?

[Candidus]

In Hebrews 7, it becomes clear that Melchizedec is a priest that was tithed to, and that Jesus Himself was high priest according to the order of Melchizedec. So then, his priesthood of believers, being priests according to the order of Melchizedec, can receive the tithe.

So by example, the tithe to Melchizidek was singular, and never repeated, and it was only from the spoils of war. It does not establish a perpetual obligation or blessing.

Receiving the blessing of Malachi 3:10 has nothing to do with giving by on. You give your 10% with the understanding that He will pour out for you a blessing; but you do not give because you feel that you have to: you give because you know there is a blessing in it.

The tithe in the Old Covenant was essentially what we would call an income tax. It only applied to increase received from the fruit of the earth/agriculture. The arrangement was that the Priesthood would be supported by this tax. This was no voluntary tax. They were in a drought, and the farmers were not giving what they were supposed to. The Priests were suffering or possibly starving. God promises to break the drought if the obeyed and brought in what was compulsory for them to do.

The "blessing" or "promise" was opening the windows of heaven... Rain! (And rain would water the crops and they would be blessed.)

So, unless you gain the spoils of war, or are a farmer, neither of these passages can possibly be applied to giving a tenth of your income that is acquired in any way apart from what is stated.

 

[BloodBought 1953]

Abraham tithed to Melchizedec; and this predated the law.

The new priesthood is according to the order of Melchizedec; and tithing is still a part.

If this were the case , why did Paul never mention it when he talked about giving from the heart, NOT from a sense of obligation....

 

[Candidus]

Abraham tithed to Melchizedec; and this predated the law.


Hmmm... and murder predated the Law.
Predating the Law is no argument.

But perhaps I will consider the argument if I kill a bunch of people and acquire the spoils of war.

 

[marksman]

I used to tithe. I thought it was what God wanted me to do, so I didn't give it a second thought. I may have thought that anyone who didn't tithe was ripping off God. My life was already committed to God, including my money. So I didn't think about it.
But then I was challenged to reconsider my thinking on the topic. Where does it say in the New Testament that we are to tithe? I looked into it and found an instance where Jesus told someone to tithe. But then I realized that He was talking to a Jew who was still under the Law. I believe that there is also another instance where He told another to tithe but it was the same thing.
Since Jesus had yet to be sacrificed and shed His blood, and a covenant is only in effect after blood is shed, the Old Covenant was still the only covenant. But once He was crucified, raised from the dead and the New Covenant was in place, what, if any, would be the new teaching on giving?
I believe 2 Corinthians 8 & 9 holds the answers. What do you think?

One has to understand that tithing is the main activity that ministers use to keep the dollars rolling in. They are used to cover the bills and wages of the minster/s and as long as they do that there is no need to exercise any faith regarding money.

I have done an extensive study of money in the New Testament church over the last few months and I have yet to see any reference to the word tithes. Basically, most of the NTC were poor (there were some that were not) so any money collected was usually used to help the needs of the poor
and to buy foodstuffs that enable them to cook meals for the evening meal (breaking of bread) that the believers shared together. The poor were grateful for this as without it they would not have had an evening meal.

As we know there was a famine in Jerusalem and the church suffered as a result so Paul asked the believers in other churches to contribute to a fund for the Jerusalem church which they did. Paul did not ask for a tithe, he asked for a contribution the amount of which was up to the individual Christian.

Likewise, there were times when Paul could not support himself in his travels around the churches by mending tents, so funds were asked for to send to him. Again there was no mention of tithes. It was all on the basis that you give as you are able to. Bearing in mind that the churches contained slaves their contribution was nil.

In the NTC there was no such thing as offerings for salaries or buildings or money for electricity bills. They were self-sufficient inasmuch as they met in homes; the believers contributed to the communal meals (breaking of bread); there was no such thing as take away food or food to go, and the believers cooked the food for themselves. Those who could not contribute i.e. slaves were treated no differently to anyone else.

The passage in 1 Corinthians 11 has nothing at all to do with a sip of wine and a piece of bread. Paul was telling people who were well off to not be so greedy and start eating before the slaves arrived so that by the time they did arrive there was no food for them. This communal meal was commonly known as The Lord's Table and as it was the main meal of the day for believers, it is very clear they would not have their fill if they relied on a sip of wine and a piece of bread. That would mean they would come hungry and go away hungry.

 

[Truman]

One has to understand that tithing is the main activity that ministers use to keep the dollars rolling in. They are used to cover the bills and wages of the minster/s and as long as they do that there is no need to exercise any faith regarding money.

I have done an extensive study of money in the New Testament church over the last few months and I have yet to see any reference to the word tithes. Basically, most of the NTC were poor (there were some that were not) so any money collected was usually used to help the needs of the poor
and to buy foodstuffs that enable them to cook meals for the evening meal (breaking of bread) that the believers shared together. The poor were grateful for this as without it they would not have had an evening meal.

As we know there was a famine in Jerusalem and the church suffered as a result so Paul asked the believers in other churches to contribute to a fund for the Jerusalem church which they did. Paul did not ask for a tithe, he asked for a contribution the amount of which was up to the individual Christian.

Likewise, there were times when Paul could not support himself in his travels around the churches by mending tents, so funds were asked for to send to him. Again there was no mention of tithes. It was all on the basis that you give as you are able to. Bearing in mind that the churches contained slaves their contribution was nil.

In the NTC there was no such thing as offerings for salaries or buildings or money for electricity bills. They were self-sufficient inasmuch as they met in homes; the believers contributed to the communal meals (breaking of bread); there was no such thing as take away food or food to go, and the believers cooked the food for themselves. Those who could not contribute i.e. slaves were treated no differently to anyone else.

The passage in 1 Corinthians 11 has nothing at all to do with a sip of wine and a piece of bread. Paul was telling people who were well off to not be so greedy and start eating before the slaves arrived so that by the time they did arrive there was no food for them. This communal meal was commonly known as The Lord's Table and as it was the main meal of the day for believers, it is very clear they would not have their fill if they relied on a sip of wine and a piece of bread. That would mean they would come hungry and go away hungry.

I love the way they did things. I never went to college and I can no longer do physical labor. So I have spiritual gifts to contribute. We all do well this way. I believe that everybody has something to give. Shalom.

 

[Bobby Jo]

One has to understand that tithing is the main activity that ministers use to keep the dollars rolling in. ....

I don't have a "camping trailer" or a nice "ski boat", but our local "Pastor" does. And he will be held accountable for "shearing the sheep", but we should STILL tithe 10% (unless we're in poverty, which the O.T. defines as having ~ "2 sheep or less") even if it means sending our tithes to "Operation Blessing", or "Samaritan's Purse", or "Teen Challenge", or some other worthy Christian charity.

They certainly won't waste your hard earned money like so many "Pastors". :)
Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

... So, unless you gain the spoils of war, or are a farmer, neither of these passages can possibly be applied to giving a tenth of your income that is acquired in any way apart from what is stated.

I believe you're parsing what is a Spiritual Concept. -- If we give, we will be blessed, regardless of our profession (i.e., "war" or "farmer").

Bobby Jo

 

[Candidus]

I believe you're parsing what is a Spiritual Concept. -- If we give, we will be blessed, regardless of our profession (i.e., "war" or "farmer").

Bobby Jo

It's a tax in the Old Covenant, not so much a "Spiritual Concept." It was not by free-will, but compulsory.

Giving before the Law and supporting the work of God in the example of Melchizedek, was voluntary. It was one time, never to be repeated. It was only from the spoils of war. If one is to try to derive a spiritual concept from this event, everything about it is significant and should be considered.

People interject a "spiritual concept" into this passage from outside of the passage in question. Nothing in the passage is an enduring "concept," but merely a historical fact.

Other passages concerning the compulsory giving and free-will offerings for the support of the Priesthood in the Old Testament, and free-will offerings to support Christian Workers in the New Testament, can be a "Spiritual Concept." These concepts outside of the historical event cannot be applied to the giving of spoils of war to Melchizedek to support an obligation to tithe. If it is to be found, it must come from elsewhere in Scripture.

 

[Candidus]

I believe you're parsing what is a Spiritual Concept. -- If we give, we will be blessed, regardless of our profession (i.e., "war" or "farmer").

Bobby Jo

Yes, if we give, we will be blessed. The percentage is not the issue.

 

[Bobby Jo]

It's a tax in the Old Covenant, not so much a "Spiritual Concept." It was not by free-will, but compulsory. ...

I don't believe that the "tithe" was compulsory, given the following examples:

Mark 12:41 And he sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the multitude putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. 42 And a poor widow came, and put in two copper coins, which make a penny.​

... and ...

Matt. 17:24 When they came to Caper′na-um, the collectors of the half-shekel tax went up to Peter and said, “Does not your teacher pay the tax?” 25 He said, “Yes.” And when he came home, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their sons or from others?” 26 And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. 27 However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook, and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel; take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.”​

Certainly GOD called for certain conventions, but many times they were IGNORED by the Jews -- to their detriment. And so we see here that the "multitude" apparently could have ignored the "treasury"; and Jesus could have also IGNORED the Temple "tax", but he instead recognized and obliged.


Apparently certain "religions" will show up on your door step to collect their "tithe", but I don't believe it was a Jewish practice to chase someone down.
Bobby Jo

 

[Taken]

I believe a giving to the support of a religious teacher was pretty prominate in the days the 11 of the 12 Tribes received their land.
Levi being the religeous leader and ancient internet of sorts.
It was Levi who travel among the Tribes , Preaching and carrying NEWS amongst the Tribes.
The Tribes inturn fed, sheltered, and I would presume women offered clothing and men offered fresh animals for his travels.
A tithe of sorts.

I think the intent of tithes was to offer something to the one you receive a religeous message from.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[justbyfaith]

What I find is that many here are making excuses for their disobedience.

But really, if you do not want to obey Malachi 3:10 as a principle, don't expect the promise of the verse to come to you as a principle either.

You will find on your day of judgment that you were guilty of robbing God.

I will leave you with this scripture:

Mat 25:14, For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
Mat 25:15, And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
Mat 25:16, Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
Mat 25:17, And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
Mat 25:18, But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
Mat 25:19, After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
Mat 25:20, And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
Mat 25:21, His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
Mat 25:22, He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
Mat 25:23, His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
Mat 25:24, Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
Mat 25:25, And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
Mat 25:26, His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
Mat 25:27, Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
Mat 25:28, Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
Mat 25:29, For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
Mat 25:30, And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

 

[marksman]

I don't have a "camping trailer" or a nice "ski boat", but our local "Pastor" does. And he will be held accountable for "shearing the sheep", but we should STILL tithe 10% (unless we're in poverty, which the O.T. defines as having ~ "2 sheep or less") even if it means sending our tithes to "Operation Blessing", or "Samaritan's Purse", or "Teen Challenge", or some other worthy Christian charity.

They certainly won't waste your hard earned money like so many "Pastors". :)
Bobby Jo

I will start tithing when the New Testament tells me I should. If I operate on the basis of a tithe, there would still be some Christians living on the streets in India when the Hindu's burnt down their village as I financed the building of whole houses for them.

 

[justbyfaith]

Some people are just plain blind.

 

[Bobby Jo]

I will start tithing when the New Testament tells me I should. ...

Fair enough, -- but DON'T YOU DARE play a musical instrument in CHURCH or at HOME, because THERE'S NO MENTION OF MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN THE N.T.

... don't be so silly ( -- which is a metaphor for "stupid" -- ) ...
Bobby Jo

 

[marksman]

Fair enough, -- but DON'T YOU DARE play a musical instrument in CHURCH or at HOME, because THERE'S NO MENTION OF MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN THE N.T.

... don't be so silly ( -- which is a metaphor for "stupid" -- ) ...
Bobby Jo

No danger of that as the only thing I can play is the fool.

 

[Bobby Jo]

No danger of that as the only thing I can play is the fool.

If you choose not to tithe and are stealing from GOD, -- then you could be CORRECT!

-- And MAKE SURE NOBODY ELSE PLAYS ANY MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS in Church or on the Christian Radio Stations, because they're are not mentioned in the New Testament. --


We all choose! :)
Bobby Jo

 

[marksman]

If you choose not to tithe and are stealing from GOD, -- then you could be CORRECT!

-- And MAKE SURE NOBODY ELSE PLAYS ANY MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS in Church or on the Christian Radio Stations, because they're are not mentioned in the New Testament. --

We all choose! :) Bobby Jo

Are you quite sure about that? It does say to make a joyful noise unto the Lord. With my lack of musical talent that is about all I do.

And to just put your mind to rest. I am not stealing from God because that is not possible with me. Do you know why? When I am aware of a need I ask the Lord what to give. That means I am giving what he wants me to give, not what a church tells me I should give.

I became aware of the fact that Christians from a village they lived in India were living under tarpaulins on the street because the Hindus burnt their village to the ground. The mission organization put out a call for funds to build new houses.

Did I give a tenth? No. I gave enough to finance the building of a whole house because that is what I was told to do by the Spirit. If I had not done that maybe a family would still be on the streets under a tarpaulin. It wiped out my savings but who cares.

 

[marksman]

What I find is that many here are making excuses for their disobedience.

But really, if you do not want to obey Malachi 3:10 as a principle, don't expect the promise of the verse to come to you as a principle either.

You will find on your day of judgment that you were guilty of robbing God.

I will leave you with this scripture:

And what I find here is that many are choosing obedience to God, not a denomination so they don't need to make excuses for their obedience.

I would like to know where it says in the New Testament that we are required to obey Malachi 3:10? From what I read you have committed the unpardonable exegetical sin of basing a doctrine on one verse of scripture which you have been brainwashed to believe by denominational leaders who are required to produce the goods by their overlords.

And as I am not a Jew, the verse does not apply to me so I am not looking to reap the outcomes of it.

T|he only thing I hope that I am not guilty of is being duped by people that set themselves up as some sort of authority in taking scripture out of context and making them say what they do not say. My theological education to date means that so far, I am not falling for that sort of thing.

 

[marksman]

It's a tax in the Old Covenant, not so much a "Spiritual Concept." It was not by free-will, but compulsory.

Giving before the Law and supporting the work of God in the example of Melchizedek, was voluntary. It was one time, never to be repeated. It was only from the spoils of war. If one is to try to derive a spiritual concept from this event, everything about it is significant and should be considered.

People interject a "spiritual concept" into this passage from outside of the passage in question. Nothing in the passage is an enduring "concept," but merely a historical fact.

Other passages concerning the compulsory giving and free-will offerings for the support of the Priesthood in the Old Testament, and free-will offerings to support Christian Workers in the New Testament, can be a "Spiritual Concept." These concepts outside of the historical event cannot be applied to the giving of spoils of war to Melchizedek to support an obligation to tithe. If it is to be found, it must come from elsewhere in Scripture.

So good to read from someone who does not blithely follow the dictates of denominational theory and can think for themselves.

I have just read about 10 books about life under Judaism at the time of Jesus. The Sanhedrin were blood-sucking parasites that got everything they could out of the average jew. As a result, they lived in luxury whilst the ordinary Jew lived in poverty. They duded the average Jew into believing if they didn't give what was demanded of them, they were stealing from God. Now, where have I heard that before?