tithe

[dgooder]

why should i give 10% of my income?wouldn't 1% be sufficient for Him?:scratch:

[he4rty]

why should i give 10% of my income?wouldn't 1% be sufficient for Him?:scratch:

Theres been a lot of debate over this about whether 10% tithes is OT only and not for today, so I'm not going to go there as to whether 10% is the correct amount or not, more to say that it is how you give rather than how much you give, wouldn't you rather be given a £10 from someone happy to give it rather than from someone giving it begrudgingly and so I feel it is with donations in church, God allows us to give cheerfully what we feel we can give and slowly over time we may choose to give more, If you give begrudgingly then you might end up resenting the person you are giving to and that would not be good.

[Redheadedstepchild]

My church suggests 10% as a guideline, but knows not everyone can commit to that. It's a good thing too.

My solution was to pray about it, and to trust that God will take care of my needs. I thithe around 4% now which is slightly more than double what I was doing before. It's tight for me, but this is what God has led me to do.

[he4rty]

I tithe 10% of what I have left after paying all the household bills and stuff, As the above poster its what I feel lead to give by God at the moment.

[Redheadedstepchild]

*nods* My 4% comes after taxes but before bills and stuff. I'm not disciplined enough to keep the *stuff* from eating into the thithe.

[robbymac]

My wife & I tithe 10%, but not out of legalism or duty, but rather as a spiritual discipline of giving, so that materialism (mammon) -- a prevailing stronghold in Canada -- has no grip on our hearts.

[cyberlizard]

tithing - isn't that from the mosaic law which people keep telling us we are not to keep anymore because you cannot mix faith and Torah?

just thought i would ask, besides tithing, what other parts of Torah do you all keep?

Steve

[Redheadedstepchild]

On the contrary, I tithe because I have faith that God will take care of me. I tithe because God has led me to do so. I tithe because what is mine really belongs to God anyhow.

Besides, there are needs in the church and the community which my tithe helps to pay for.

[NorrinRadd]

...

I thithe around 4% ...

Nitpick: Technically, if it's not a tenth, it's not really a "tithe."

That's not a criticism of your giving habits, just a niggle about the etymology and definition of "tithe."

[NorrinRadd]

tithing - isn't that from the mosaic law which people keep telling us we are not to keep anymore because you cannot mix faith and Torah?

just thought i would ask, besides tithing, what other parts of Torah do you all keep?

Steve
Those who advocate literal tithing usually point out that the practice began back in Genesis, with Abraham and Melchizedek. That means it predated the Mosaic Sinatic Torah.

[NorrinRadd]

why should i give 10% of my income?wouldn't 1% be sufficient for Him?:scratch:
Well heck, He's all-powerful, so why does He need us to give anything?

What if we were all commanded to obey this to the letter:

Mar 10:21 Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, "One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me."

Now THAT would be quite a line in the sand!

[lismore]

why should i give 10% of my income?wouldn't 1% be sufficient for Him?:scratch:

The tithe is to be eaten (Deuteronomy 14:23)

The tithe only involves money when you live far away from Jerusalem. In that case the money should be used to buy food and drink in Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 14:23-26).

The tithe is only to be eaten in Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 12:16-18, 2 Chron 6:6). Nowhere else is valid. And the tithe can only be eaten on the 17th Nisan, the festival of firstfruits.

Every third year the tithe is to be given to widows, orphans, poor, foreigners and levites, so that they may eat and be satisfied (Deuternomy 26:12)


Giving 10% of your income to a religious institution?

You're trying to cross tithing with King Herod's temple tax.

:scratch:

[Redheadedstepchild]

Nitpick: Technically, if it's not a tenth, it's not really a "tithe."

That's not a criticism of your giving habits, just a niggle about the etymology and definition of "tithe."

:P

[cyberlizard]

Those who advocate literal tithing usually point out that the practice began back in Genesis, with Abraham and Melchizedek. That means it predated the Mosaic Sinatic Torah.


blood sacrifice (for free-will offering as opposed to sin-offering), pre-dates the torah of sinai (though both existed)

the covenant of circumcision pre-dates sinai

the sabbath pre-dates the torah of sinai

the food laws pre-date the torah of sinai


so if saying we should tithe because it is pre-law and that makes it OK actually opens up a huge great can of worms.


Steve

[NorrinRadd]

blood sacrifice (for free-will offering as opposed to sin-offering), pre-dates the torah of sinai (though both existed)

the covenant of circumcision pre-dates sinai

the sabbath pre-dates the torah of sinai

the food laws pre-date the torah of sinai


so if saying we should tithe because it is pre-law and that makes it OK actually opens up a huge great can of worms.


Steve

But circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath observance were all overturned in the NT -- at the very least implicitly, if not explicitly. I don't recall tithing being overturned, and the reference in Hebrews to Abraham and Melchizedek.could be taken as an endorsement.

(I'm actually mulling this over, as opposed to really advocating this position.)

[cyberlizard]

on the surface the idea that these things were overturned by and at the resurrection of jesus appears superficially valid... however let's just look briefly at the sabbath.

hebrews does say that there 'remains' a sabbath.... or does it... it says there is left behind (and is still here) a sabbatismos (a seventh day off) - it does not actually say sabbath... but this is a side issue.

if Jesus overturned the Sabbath regulations by his death and resurrection, why would he tell his followers to pray that the tribulation (outlined in Matt. 24) did not occur in winter (which would make travel difficult) or on a sabbath (due to Torah travel restrictions) if the restrictions had been lifted?


Steve

as to the food laws, please can you explain where they are overturned because I cannot find them?

[Tamara224]

But circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath observance were all overturned in the NT -- at the very least implicitly, if not explicitly. I don't recall tithing being overturned, and the reference in Hebrews to Abraham and Melchizedek.could be taken as an endorsement.

(I'm actually mulling this over, as opposed to really advocating this position.)


Abraham (actually, Abram at the time) tithed to Melchizedek the spoils of war. It was a one time event. In fact, if you go read the story (Genesis 14), you'll see several things of note:

1) Abram and his men defeated an army that the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah had fled from (Abram did this to rescue Lot);
2) Melchizedek was also the king of Salem;
3) after Abram defeated Kedorloamer and the kings allied with him there was a meeting of kings... Melchizedek, the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah and Abram;
4) Abram had rescued people as well as all the goods that the attacking kings had taken;
5) at the pow-wow of the kings, Melchizedek officiated and blessed Abram;
6) Abram gave Melchizedek 1/10 of everything that he had recovered from the defeated enemies (things originally belonging to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and other places);
7) Abram then gave the rest of the recovered property back to those to whom it originally belonged.


So, if you want to use this incident as an example of how Christians should "tithe" then we should be preaching that Christians are supposed to fight wars to recover stolen property and people, give 10% of the recovery to the High Priest, and return the rest.

Also of note... You will not find any evidence in the Bible that Abram ever gave anything to Melchizedek again. It was a one time event. And, more importantly, using this incident as establishing some sort of rule for us to follow would be like saying that we should all start working on building Arks in our backyards because Noah did it.

[NorrinRadd]

on the surface the idea that these things were overturned by and at the resurrection of jesus appears superficially valid... however let's just look briefly at the sabbath.

hebrews does say that there 'remains' a sabbath.... or does it... it says there is left behind (and is still here) a sabbatismos (a seventh day off) - it does not actually say sabbath... but this is a side issue.

if Jesus overturned the Sabbath regulations by his death and resurrection, why would he tell his followers to pray that the tribulation (outlined in Matt. 24) did not occur in winter (which would make travel difficult) or on a sabbath (due to Torah travel restrictions) if the restrictions had been lifted?

He may have presumed that some Jews who became believers would continue to observe the Sabbath, as a concession to their unsaved brethren, and as a way of maintaining cultural identification.

Under the New Covenant, Sabbath-keeping is still permissible, but no longer mandatory. Rom. 14:5; Col. 2:16


as to the food laws, please can you explain where they are overturned because I cannot find them?

Mark 7:19; Acts 10:13-15; Col. 2:16 and elsewhere in Paul

[lismore]

2) Melchizedek was also the king of Salem;


i.e Jeru(Salem)! Jerusalem!

God seems to have a thing about the tithe being eaten only in Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 12:16-18).

God says 'You must not eat the tithe in your own towns........'

That sounds like a definite command.

[cyberlizard]

remember context is everything....

mark 7v19 - jesus is discussing food that is eaten with unwashed hands.

for the pharisees, eating with unwashed hands made the food unclean. Jesus took the pharisees to task by pointing out that dirty hands does not make food unclean. There is nothing in this passage that suggests that jews could then eat pork (or any other unclean meat). The entire passage is Jesus debating the oral laws, not the torah legislation.


Acts 10v13-15 - context is everything - peter has a vision with a sheet of unclean animals.... but the meaning of the vision is given by peter himself - and he explain not many verses on that the unclean animals represented 'the gentiles', so again we see that the Torah legislation regarding jews and unclean foods has not been breached.


i won't even bother with the colossians scripture as again, context is everything! This passage must be understood within its context. The best bit of this passage though is that it points out that the festivals are a shadow of what is to COME.

In celebrating the festivals, we see tomporaliy the work Yeshua has done, but in the future we shall see completely. Many people take this passage to mean the festivals are shadows and the important thing is not celebrating them, but celebrating Christ. But if we really look at what it is saying, we see that in celebrating we see, but a day is coming when the totality of the revelation of the feasts will be made complete.

the writings of Paul have been so misconstrued over the years that much of what he originally intended as been twisted to make it sound like he did away with torah based lifestyles for Jews, but this was not the case as an old friend of his wrote, 'they twist his [pauls] words to their own destruction as they do the other scriptures'.



Steve

[Andry]

Where's the eating popcorn smilies when you need one.

[jeolmstead]

tithing - isn't that from the mosaic law which people keep telling us we are not to keep anymore because you cannot mix faith and Torah?

just thought i would ask, besides tithing, what other parts of Torah do you all keep?

Steve
I don’t care if you tithe or not, just understand that the practice existed long before Moses or the law.

Gen 14
18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem [d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2014&version=31#fen-NIV-355dfen-NIV-355d)] brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, 19 and he blessed Abram, saying,
"Blessed be Abram by God Most High,
Creator [e (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2014&version=31#fen-NIV-356efen-NIV-356e)] of heaven and earth.
20 And blessed be [f (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%2014&version=31#fen-NIV-357ffen-NIV-357f)] God Most High,
who delivered your enemies into your hand."
Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything.

Consider this as well:
Luke 11:42 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=11&verse=42&version=31&context=verse)
"Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.

God does not need our money, but, we need to give. It looses the kingdom of God in our lives.
Luke 6:38 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=6&verse=38&version=31&context=verse)
Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

John O.

[Jeffwo]

I see the same old argument...."Old Testament teaching...."

Here is New Testament teaching on biblical giving. I think I will just stick to my 10%...LOL


Acts 4:31After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly. 32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

[lismore]

Acts 4:31After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly. 32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

Where do you get 10% out of this passage?

[Tamara224]

This topic is so frustrating.

Giving and Tithing are NOT the same thing!!!!

Okay? Can we all at least see the distinction here?

[jeolmstead]

This topic is so frustrating.

Giving and Tithing are NOT the same thing!!!!

Okay? Can we all at least see the distinction here?
agreed

[Jeffwo]

Where do you get 10% out of this passage?
There is no 10% in that passage.

I just find it interesting that people consider the 10%(of your increase) figure (the tithe) to be an outrageous amount to be required to give. They say that the 10% figure is OT teaching. Then they ignore the only NT teaching on what Christians gave at church.

I have just always considered the tithe to be the mark for my giving (not saying I always give it, just a mark to shoot for for peace of mind).


Actually, the Hebrew's scripture persuades me that Jesus trumped the priestly order and they even gave 10% to the priests back then, didn't they?

Hebrews &:21.......Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.'"),

22by so much more was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

[Simon Peter]

In my view the tithe did predate the law. But giving ten percent (the tithe) is also a requirement of ‘the law’. It’s referenced along with taxes in about 20 of the 613 commandments.

The tithe was an outworking of both the great laws: Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbour as yourself. So part of the fulfillment of those laws requires we support the ‘temple’, priests, and our neighbours, especially the poor.

The tithe is the absolute minimal we must give in order to meet the requirements of the tithe law; though actually much more giving than this is required. To be perfect we should sell everything we have and give to the poor.

The issue is: if we are not meeting the requirements of the law, what should our response be:

We can try to play down the law and say ‘Did God really say that’. (denial)

We can try to fulfill the law by making up our own system, like giving ten percent of our gross or net income, which we think will satisfy God. (legalism)

Or we humble ourselves before God, and say it all belongs to Him, we deserve none of it, and should give as generously to the church and the poor as we can. (Grace)

[jeolmstead]

In my view the tithe did predate the law. But giving ten percent (the tithe) is also a requirement of ‘the law’. It’s referenced along with taxes in about 20 of the 613 commandments.

The tithe was an outworking of both the great laws: Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbour as yourself. So part of the fulfillment of those laws requires we support the ‘temple’, priests, and our neighbours, especially the poor.

The tithe is the absolute minimal we must give in order to meet the requirements of the tithe law; though actually much more giving than this is required. To be perfect we should sell everything we have and give to the poor.

The issue is: if we are not meeting the requirements of the law, what should our response be:

We can try to play down the law and say ‘Did God really say that’. (denial)

We can try to fulfill the law by making up our own system, like giving ten percent of our gross or net income, which we think will satisfy God. (legalism)

Or we humble ourselves before God, and say it all belongs to Him, we deserve none of it, and should give as generously to the church and the poor as we can. (Grace)
Amen

[Tamara224]

There is no 10% in that passage.

I just find it interesting that people consider the 10%(of your increase) figure (the tithe) to be an outrageous amount to be required to give. They say that the 10% figure is OT teaching. Then they ignore the only NT teaching on what Christians gave at church.

Actually, the thing about those of us who dispute the requirement of "tithing"... We don't think 10% is an outrageous amount to be required to give. I find it very insulting that people keep throwing this argument up there. It's almost as if you want to believe you're better than we are...

I really really wish people would stop acting like if I say I don't tithe then I am also not giving.

I personally don't pay attention to how much I give. I don't let my right hand know what my left is doing. When I see a need, I give. I've never stopped to figure out what percentage of my income I'm giving. But I'm pretty sure it is more than 10%.

It doesn't matter to me what percentage of my income I'm giving. I want to be a generous person, someone who takes care of widows and orphans and the poor.

If you're satisfied with giving 10% of your income to a church that may or may not practice "true religion" then that's fine. Personally, I think there are more important and beneficial things that can be done with my money than maintenance of a building and salaries for pastors. But that's just me.


Actually, the Hebrew's scripture persuades me that Jesus trumped the priestly order and they even gave 10% to the priests back then, didn't they?

Hebrews &:21.......Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.'"),

22by so much more was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

Actually, people gave more than 10% in the OT. There were 3 tithes which Israelites were required by the Law to give. None of it was money. The first tithe was supposed to be used by the tither for celebrating Passover. The second went to the priests/levites, the third (given every third year) was for the poor, strangers, orphans and widows. It amounted to about 23% of people's income.

[lismore]

I just find it interesting that people consider the 10%(of your increase) figure (the tithe) to be an outrageous amount to be required to give. They say that the 10% figure is OT teaching. Then they ignore the only NT teaching on what Christians gave at church.


I have never heard anyone saying 10% is too much. I have heard a lot of people asking where you get the 10% of wages figure from. And I havent heard a lot of people giving a response.

:)

[Jeffwo]

Actually, the thing about those of us who dispute the requirement of "tithing"... We don't think 10% is an outrageous amount to be required to give. I find it very insulting that people keep throwing this argument up there. It's almost as if you want to believe you're better than we are...

I really really wish people would stop acting like if I say I don't tithe then I am also not giving.



Sorry....actually, I wasn't even talking to you.

:blush:

[NorrinRadd]

cyberlizard: remember context is everything....

mark 7v19 - jesus is discussing food that is eaten with unwashed hands.

for the pharisees, eating with unwashed hands made the food unclean. Jesus took the pharisees to task by pointing out that dirty hands does not make food unclean. There is nothing in this passage that suggests that jews could then eat pork (or any other unclean meat). The entire passage is Jesus debating the oral laws, not the torah legislation.

Mark used that SPECIFIC occasion to assert a GENERAL principle: Jesus declared ALL foods "clean."

So unless you want to excise Mark's parenthetical remark, Jesus DID there overturn the food laws.

Acts 10v13-15 - context is everything - peter has a vision with a sheet of unclean animals.... but the meaning of the vision is given by peter himself - and he explain not many verses on that the unclean animals represented 'the gentiles', so again we see that the Torah legislation regarding jews and unclean foods has not been breached.

Or God was using this to remind Peter of that which he already knew from that event recorded by Mark (his nephew?) -- All foods have been declared clean.

That then served as an illustration of his proper attitude toward the gentiles.

i won't even bother with the colossians scripture as again, context is everything! This passage must be understood within its context.

Well without a bit -- or a lot -- of explication, it's rather hard to see what kind of "context" would have Sabbath NOT referring to Sabbath, food and drink NOT referring to food laws, and "the record of debt... with its legal demands... He set aside, nailing it to the Cross" NOT referring to the Torah.

The best bit of this passage though is that it points out that the festivals are a shadow of what is to COME.

Right. The festivals were part of the "shadow" of Christ, no longer relevant since He arrived in "substance."

In celebrating the festivals, we see tomporaliy the work Yeshua has done, but in the future we shall see completely. Many people take this passage to mean the festivals are shadows and the important thing is not celebrating them, but celebrating Christ. But if we really look at what it is saying, we see that in celebrating we see, but a day is coming when the totality of the revelation of the feasts will be made complete.

When I "really" look at it, I don't see what you see.

the writings of Paul have been so misconstrued over the years that much of what he originally intended as been twisted to make it sound like he did away with torah based lifestyles for Jews, but this was not the case as an old friend of his wrote, 'they twist his [pauls] words to their own destruction as they do the other scriptures'.

Yeah, that would be the "old friend" that Paul had to publicly rebuke because he himself (the old friend) did not live according to Torah, except to impress the Judaizers... the same "old friend" who should have already known all foods had been declared clean.

[NorrinRadd]

Where do you get 10% out of this passage?

I think he meant he'd rather give "just" 10%, as opposed to sharing *everything* with other believers.

[lismore]

I think he meant he'd rather give "just" 10%, as opposed to sharing *everything* with other believers.

Thats what I thought too! ;)

[Tamara224]

Sorry....actually, I wasn't even talking to you.

:blush:


Well, I personalized it...but the response is still the same. What you said isn't true for anyone else in this thread either. :wave:

Maybe next time you debate this topic, you can remember that. :)

[cyberlizard]

The best bit of this passage though is that it points out that the festivals are a shadow of what is to COME.

Right. The festivals were part of the "shadow" of Christ, no longer relevant since He arrived in "substance."





but looking at the greek it is clear, the shadows are of things that are coming, i.e. the future kingdom. The greek tense is clear.

but as to food laws, the OT clearly indicates that anyone who taught in opposition to torah was consider a false teacher, having no light in them. So being as Jesus was not dead, the new covenant had not been established, so when he said this the operational laws of Moses were still in effect.

There is nothing in Marks account that suggests your parenthetical remark... unless you can spot it for me.

to assert jesus is overturning the food laws here is ludicrous. Otherwise you have him saying, the laws on oaths are OK, but the food laws are not okay. Which is dumb. Besides, had he said the mosaic law was not effective here (even if only food parts), he would have been stoned on the basis of two or three witnesses.

BUT yes jesus did declare all foods clean..... that is all foods eaten with unwashed hands were declared clean. Jesus was not concerned with Mosaic law, but with halakhah.


Steve

[lismore]

The bible spells out exactly what tithing is and what it involves e.g Deuteronomy chapters 12, 14 and 26!

I still dont know where they get this wierd 10% to a church from.

In leviticus 23:17 it gives exact specifications of what to bring:

17 From wherever you live, bring two loaves made of two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour, baked with yeast, as a wave offering of firstfruits to the LORD.

How we we get from two loaves to 10% of your wages? :scratch:

Its mad!

:scratch:

[JAS4Yeshua]

Let us look at things from a different perspective. What is the purpose of the tithe?

Churches need money to operate. Rent, heating, electricity, etc. In some cases, there are paid staff at churches. Can the Lord provide these things? Yes, and He does through the tithes of the congregation.

In the Old Testament, the tithes consisted of food, because that was used to feed the priests, and for the sacrifices. Money wasn't as much of a necessity for the temple as it is today for the church. Using the argument of food doesn't apply due to differences in culture.

The word "tithe" literally means "10%." It occurs several times in the Old Testament. God commanded a tenth of what He had given to his people (grain, produce, etc.). He even went as far as to accuse his people of stealing when they didn't tithe properly. (Malachi 3:10 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=mal+3:10&version=niv&st=1&sd=1&new=1&showtools=1))

Does tithing appear in the New Testament? Paul speaks of taking up a collection for the saints in I Corinthians 16:1-4 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+16:3&version=niv&context=1&showtools=1) that seems pretty clear as to the intent. There are mentions of gifts as well, which are different than tithes.

So, what is right? I think 10% (tithe) is a great guideline, as it was what God established from the beginning. Is it wrong to do less or more? Only a legalist might argue that. We give our tithes not out of any "legal" obligation, but out of our own love for God and walk with Him.

Also keep this in mind. Nothing you have really belongs to you. God gave you the skills and abilities to earn money. He had provided for the job that pays you. It is great hubris for us to think that anything we have done has all been on our own. If we realize that everything we have, and everything we are, is a gift from God, then giving our tithe, whatever the amount, will never be a chore, but a way of thanking God for His provision in our lives.

[lismore]

Churches need money to operate. .

Hi there:wave:

While I see where you are coming from, how can we twist scriptures to fit in with a modern tradition?

God Bless You!

:scratch:

[JAS4Yeshua]

Lis, did you read my entire post, or only take only that one part? There was no twisting of Scripture. ;)

[Andry]

Let us look at things from a different perspective. What is the purpose of the tithe?

Ok, let's look, shall we, as it seems many have it all confused in a mish-mash of improper exegesis and hermeneutics.

The purpose of the tithe was to provide the upkeep of the tabernacle (later the temple), including the Levites - the priests. Worthy to acknowledge, unlike modern day pastors or ministries, the Levites were not allowed to own any property (as none was set aside by God), nor were they allowed to do other work to generate income, such as writing books, being on TV, and other endorsements. Pastors today can actually own their own home and do other work to generate income.


Churches need money to operate. Rent, heating, electricity, etc. In some cases, there are paid staff at churches. Can the Lord provide these things? Yes, and He does through the tithes of the congregation.


What is the church? It's you and me. The building that we assemble in, or the ministry that we may be a part of, is not the church. The building that we regularly meet in, houses the church - but that is not the church. So if you are going to use the logic of the tithes going to the church, then the tithes should go to you and me!

Pastors today can own land, hold title to property, and generate other income. The Levites could not.

So how do we support the church/ministry today - for heat, lights, mortgage payments, staff, pastors salary, Sunday School programmes, church bus, church camps, etc etc et al? Through our giving. Giving and tithing are different things.

I encourage giving, and giving generously. So while I don't tithe, I do give. In fact, giving a tenth is a good place to start, and even more, if we're able and happy about it.


In the Old Testament, the tithes consisted of food, because that was used to feed the priests, and for the sacrifices. Money wasn't as much of a necessity for the temple as it is today for the church. Using the argument of food doesn't apply due to differences in culture.

Most of us as charismatics will vehemently fight to the death that the proper way (and proper meaning) to baptize is by full immersion. Sprinkling doesn't cut it, even though it may have been more convenient when Constantine demanded his soldiers to convert to Christianity but there was little water as some garrisons were in the desert. We say, no, it must be full immersion because that's what "baptizo" means.

So why don't we do the same with the Biblical tithe? It was never currency, even though currency was available. I agree it's far more practical today to use currency, but the Biblical tithe was never currency. So we can't conveniently have it both ways, as otherwise, if there's no water around, we have to accept baptism by sprinkling as being more "practical".



The word "tithe" literally means "10%." It occurs several times in the Old Testament. God commanded a tenth of what He had given to his people (grain, produce, etc.).

The word "tithe" can cause confusion, since it has a double meaning. While "tithe" simply means a tenth (ergo, when someone says, "We tithe 10% of our income" - that's redundant), the Biblical tithe was never a tenth of your money, ie. it was never currency, even though currency was around. (IOW, very, very few of us today Biblically tithe, even though many of us give a tenth of our income). The only Scripture that the tithe was converted to currency is Deut 14-22-26, but was converted back to livestock or produce, and that tithe was for the people to consume (ie. not give to the church).

To add, if we counted up all the tithes that were required of the Israelites, to actual amount of the Biblical tithe was actually around 23%. In fact, Deut 14 sets the rules about the tithe that is a very important point which many churches and many believers conveniently or ignorantly forget today.


He even went as far as to accuse his people of stealing when they didn't tithe properly. (Malachi 3:10 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=mal+3:10&version=niv&st=1&sd=1&new=1&showtools=1))

No one can categorically state that Malachi's reference to tithing is relevant for Christians, when the same book speaks, in the same terms, about the proper way to sacrifice an animal upon the altar. One cannot have it both ways. Unless one actually believes that Christians should offer animals as sacrifices, one must accept the burden of proof for claiming that tithing Malachi 3 are binding on Christians. Since pastors often quote Malachi 3 to support their beliefs on tithing, it bears mentioning that that passage is not directed at the farmers who give the tithe, but at the crooked priests, who were collecting the tithe from the farmers but taking a cut off the top before depositing it in the storehouse.

Does tithing appear in the New Testament? Paul speaks of taking up a collection for the saints in I Corinthians 16:1-4 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=1co+16:3&version=niv&context=1&showtools=1) that seems pretty clear as to the intent. There are mentions of gifts as well, which are different than tithes.

You're right, tithing is different from giving. Paul's remarks about giving have nothing to do with tithing. When he told believers to put something aside at the beginning of the week, he was talking about a discretionary amount for a one-time relief offering for the poor saints in Jerusalem. There is no allusion anywhere in his writings to the giving of a set amount, nor is there any allusion to any sort of regular giving to the local congregation. In late antiquity, synagogues and churches were built by well-to-do benefactors, who donated different parts of the building in their entirety and were usually credited for it in an inscription.

Now, for New Testament believers, the question of what the Gentile assemblies had to do was answered in Acts 15. This would have been the perfect opportunity to bind the Gentile assemblies to the tithe and in fact, clear up the whole tithing issue.

Acts 15:5
But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses." (IOW, including the law of Tithing.)

The leaders in Jerusalem wrote them a letter.

Acts 15
23They wrote this, letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings.
24Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law" - to whom we gave no such commandment - 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.[2] If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. [emphasis mine]

Now who I ask, added "and pay your tithes" to this letter? I certainly ain't gonna do it.


So, what is right? I think 10% (tithe) is a great guideline, as it was what God established from the beginning. Is it wrong to do less or more? Only a legalist might argue that. We give our tithes not out of any "legal" obligation, but out of our own love for God and walk with Him.

Also keep this in mind. Nothing you have really belongs to you. God gave you the skills and abilities to earn money. He had provided for the job that pays you. It is great hubris for us to think that anything we have done has all been on our own. If we realize that everything we have, and everything we are, is a gift from God, then giving our tithe, whatever the amount, will never be a chore, but a way of thanking God for His provision in our lives.

I too think that 10% is a good guideline. It makes for a great starting point. But we cannot bind believers to it because there is nothing to bind! We need to emphasize giving, in fact, if we're able, to give beyond 10% as God desires for us to be generous givers. As everything does belong to God, our mindset should not be, "Well, I've paid my tithe so the rest is mine to do as I please." But rather, "God, where and how much do you want me to give." - even if that means well beyond our 10%.

So I teach people to give, as the Lord leads. And if we're truly obedient to the Lord's leading, the giving is always generous, and in my experience, very often well beyond 10%.

[JAS4Yeshua]

In a way, you are still agreeing with what I was saying. ;)

Ok, let's look, shall we, as it seems many have it all confused in a mish-mash of improper exegesis and hermeneutics.
Just remember, others might say the same about what you write. Do we have all the answers? Are some things going to be wrong? Of course. If that weren't the case, then we wouldn't have all the denominations, and all the disagreements. To say something is "improper" may not always be correct.

The purpose of the tithe was to provide the upkeep of the tabernacle (later the temple), including the Levites - the priests. Worthy to acknowledge, unlike modern day pastors or ministries, the Levites were not allowed to own any property (as none was set aside by God), nor were they allowed to do other work to generate income, such as writing books, being on TV, and other endorsements. Pastors today can actually own their own home and do other work to generate income.
I agree, which is what I had written in my post as well. That is why I said the comparison that was being made would not work. Pastors can do other jobs, yes, and many do. Does that mean it is wrong for a pastor to be one full-time?

What is the church? It's you and me. The building that we assemble in, or the ministry that we may be a part of, is not the church. The building that we regularly meet in, houses the church - but that is not the church. So if you are going to use the logic of the tithes going to the church, then the tithes should go to you and me!
Semantics won't really get you very far. Yes, the church is you and I, but the church is also the building we meet in. When speaking of the church, it is clear I'm referring to the building. The logic doesn't equate to the tithe coming to you or I, although indirectly it would, as it pays for the building, the utilities, etc.

Pastors today can own land, hold title to property, and generate other income. The Levites could not.
Again, it proves my earlier point of why you can't use a comparison.

So how do we support the church/ministry today - for heat, lights, mortgage payments, staff, pastors salary, Sunday School programmes, church bus, church camps, etc etc et al? Through our giving. Giving and tithing are different things.
As I have also stated. But But giving doesn't negate tithing, unless you consider tithing an "obligation" which isn't what I'm referring to.

I encourage giving, and giving generously. So while I don't tithe, I do give. In fact, giving a tenth is a good place to start, and even more, if we're able and happy about it.
I agree.

Most of us as charismatics will vehemently fight to the death that the proper way (and proper meaning) to baptize is by full immersion. Sprinkling doesn't cut it, even though it may have been more convenient when Constantine demanded his soldiers to convert to Christianity but there was little water as some garrisons were in the desert. We say, no, it must be full immersion because that's what "baptizo" means.

So why don't we do the same with the Biblical tithe? It was never currency, even though currency was available. I agree it's far more practical today to use currency, but the Biblical tithe was never currency. So we can't conveniently have it both ways, as otherwise, if there's no water around, we have to accept baptism by sprinkling as being more "practical".
Comparing baptism and tithing is like comparing apples to oranges. The comparison doesn't work.

This isn't about practicality, it is about reality. Most people don't own farms. Most people don't raise livestock. Most people don't make their own food. Churches typically don't own their own land. Could God provide for all these things? Yes, but He has chosen to provide these things through the support of His people. In our society that equates to finances, while in OT times, that was food.

The word "tithe" can cause confusion, since it has a double meaning. While "tithe" simply means a tenth (ergo, when someone says, "We tithe 10% of our income" - that's redundant), the Biblical tithe was never a tenth of your money, ie. it was never currency, even though currency was around. IOW, very, very few of us today Biblically tithe, even though many of us give a tenth of our income). The only Scripture that the tithe was converted to currency is Deut 14-22-26, but was converted back to livestock or produce, and that tithe was for the people to consume (ie. not give to the church).

To add to add, if we counted up all the tithes that were required of the Israelites, to actual amount of the Biblical tithe was actually around 23%. In fact, Deut 14 sets the rules about the tithe that is a very important point which many churches and many believers conveniently or ignorantly forget today.
I agree with you about the Biblical tithe never being money. I have never once stated differently. The fact is, many of the rules relating to the tithe were for the Hebrew people at that time, in the culture that they lived in. It is impossible for us to follow those rules today, as culture and times have changed.

No one can categorically state that Malachi's reference to tithing is relevant for Christians, when the same book speaks, in the same terms, about the proper way to sacrifice an animal upon the altar. One cannot have it both ways. Unless one actually believes that Christians should offer animals as sacrifices, one must accept the burden of proof for claiming that tithing Malachi 3 are binding on Christians. Since pastors often quote Malachi 3 to support their beliefs on tithing, it bears mentioning that that passage is not directed at the farmers who give the tithe, but at the crooked priests, who were collecting the tithe from the farmers but taking a cut off the top before depositing it in the storehouse.
I never said it was binding on Christians. I used it as an OT reference point for the tithe, to add to other references being given. The point still remains the same.

You're right, tithing is different from giving. Paul's remarks about giving have nothing to do with tithing. When he told believers to put something aside at the beginning of the week, he was talking about a discretionary amount for a one-time relief offering for the poor saints in Jerusalem. There is no allusion anywhere in his writings to the giving of a set amount, nor is there any allusion to any sort of regular giving to the local congregation. In late antiquity, synagogues and churches were built by well-to-do benefactors, who donated different parts of the building in their entirety and were usually credited for it in an inscription.
Nor was I insinuating there was any set amount. I simply mentioned the collection of the saints that said that money was being collected, to show that there was a practice of giving in the New Testament.

Now, for New Testament believers, the question of what the Gentile assemblies had to do was answered in Acts 15. This would have been the perfect opportunity to bind the Gentile assemblies to the tithe and in fact, clear up the whole tithing issue.

Acts 15:5
But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses." (IOW, including the law of Tithing.)

The leaders in Jerusalem wrote them a letter.

Acts 15
23They wrote this, letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings.
24Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law" - to whom we gave no such commandment - 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.[2] If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. [emphasis mine]

Now who I ask, added "and pay your tithes" to this letter? I certainly ain't gonna do it.
That is legalism you are referring to, and I even said as much in my own post. This isn't about legalism, but about a guideline in which has Biblical support.

I too think that 10% is a good guideline. It makes for a great starting point. But we cannot bind believers to it because there is nothing to bind! We need to emphasize giving, in fact, if we're able, to give beyond 10% as God desires for us to be generous givers. As everything does belong to God, our mindset should not be, "Well, I've paid my tithe so the rest is mine to do as I please." But rather, "God, where and how much do you want me to give." - even if that means well beyond our 10%.

So I teach people to give, as the Lord leads. And if we're truly obedient to the Lord's leading, the giving is always generous, and in my experience, very often well beyond 10%.
I agree with you. My post was never about binding believers to anything. My post was simply refuting the fact that you could compare the tithing of OT times (which was food) to what we consider a tithe today. My post was about guidelines for giving, where the 10% comes from, not legalistic views of giving. Whether you call it a gift, an offering or a tithe, the fact is, you are giving to God. If you have in your mind that it is an obligation, then you have the wrong motivation. If you are giving whatever amount out of obedience and your love for God, then that is the right motivation.

[lismore]

Lis, did you read my entire post, or only take only that one part? There was no twisting of Scripture. ;)

I didnt accuse you of twisting scripture:wave:

I accused the people who were selling King Herod's Temple tax relabled as the biblical Tithe. They're not the same, the bible says what tithing is (Deuteronomy 12,14,26, Leviticus 23). Its not giving 10% of your income to a church building.

:)

[Tamara224]

I'm sure Andry will answer you, and sorry to butt in, but I just wanted to respond to a couple things here...

Semantics won't really get you very far. Yes, the church is you and I, but the church is also the building we meet in. When speaking of the church, it is clear I'm referring to the building. The logic doesn't equate to the tithe coming to you or I, although indirectly it would, as it pays for the building, the utilities, etc.

This is only semantics if you assume that the Church needs buildings and/or that the buildings are an indespensable part of Church.

IMO, buildings are by and large bad stewardship on the part of the Church. Yes, I realize we need places to meet. But the NT Church met in each other's homes. And it wasn't for lack of funds. True religion is taking care of widows and orphans. Do we really need multi-million dollar buildings to be the Church? Or is that a distraction and a burden that we should really eschew?

IMO, it's the latter.

So, for some people it is much much much more than semantics. It is, imo, vital that the Church realize what the Church really is.


I agree with you. My post was never about binding believers to anything. My post was simply refuting the fact that you could compare the tithing of OT times (which was food) to what we consider a tithe today.

Now who's playing semantics? ;) Just kidding.

The thing about this is that there is no NT "tithing"...but many Christians preach that we should tithe. So, if they are going to preach that, the only Scriptural source for tithing is OT. So, the comparison has to be made.

My post was about guidelines for giving, where the 10% comes from, not legalistic views of giving.

:scratch: But 10% = tithe. So, the "guideline" isn't found in Scripture. So, why have the guideline in the first place?

Whether you call it a gift, an offering or a tithe, the fact is, you are giving to God. If you have in your mind that it is an obligation, then you have the wrong motivation. If you are giving whatever amount out of obedience and your love for God, then that is the right motivation.

:thumbsup: Except... some (like myself) would argue that giving to a church to help upkeep and salaries, etc, isn't really giving to God. JMHO.

[lismore]

:thumbsup: Except... some (like myself) would argue that giving to a church to help upkeep and salaries, etc, isn't really giving to God. JMHO.

Precisely!

:thumbsup:

[Andry]

Tamara, not a problem at all. Besides, I find the cutting/pasting quotations here quite cumbersome.

I might comment later on....

[JAS4Yeshua]

I'm sure Andry will answer you, and sorry to butt in, but I just wanted to respond to a couple things here...
You're always welcome to "butt in" Tamara. ;)

This is only semantics if you assume that the Church needs buildings and/or that the buildings are an indespensable part of Church.
Not true. I don't assume that they are indespensible. I am simply speaking of the collective church as opposed to the individual. There is a difference, and there isn't another way to describe it.

IMO, buildings are by and large bad stewardship on the part of the Church. Yes, I realize we need places to meet. But the NT Church met in each other's homes. And it wasn't for lack of funds. True religion is taking care of widows and orphans. Do we really need multi-million dollar buildings to be the Church? Or is that a distraction and a burden that we should really eschew?

IMO, it's the latter.
Some congregations meet in homes, others meet in buildings. Our church has over 2,000+ active members. How is it bad stewardship to have a building for the congregation to meet in? If the church was smaller, I could see the argument you are making, but most have too many members to meet in a home.

So, for some people it is much much much more than semantics. It is, imo, vital that the Church realize what the Church really is.
I agree, it is very important to know the distinctions between the Church and the church. I agree we need to realize what the Church is, but that doesn't change the fact that we aren't talking about the Church, but about the church building, the church congregation, the church outreaches, etc.

Now who's playing semantics? ;) Just kidding.
You're a lawyer, you know the value of semantics. :P

The thing about this is that there is no NT "tithing"...but many Christians preach that we should tithe. So, if they are going to preach that, the only Scriptural source for tithing is OT. So, the comparison has to be made.
Which is what I explained in both my posts so far. Yes, there is a comparison, between OT and modern tithing, but that comparison between food/money is what is flawed, IMO. The fundamental reason for the tithe, hasn't changed. In the OT it was to support the levites and for use in sacrifices. We don't have a temple, we don't have priests, we don't have sacrifices. Most people aren't farmers or herdsmen. We do have a church to support, though, and thus the concept of the tithe.

:scratch: But 10% = tithe. So, the "guideline" isn't found in Scripture. So, why have the guideline in the first place?
Tithe literally means 10%. Mentions of the tithes referred to 10%. As Andry pointed out, often times it was higher, but it doesn't change the meaning of the word.

Why have the guideline? Simple, to have an answer. We're to give an answer to any who ask. The tithe has its origins in the OT. It isn't the same today as it was in the OT times, that much is obvious. Does it mean that it is wrong because it isn't the same? As I mentioned previously, the fundamental purpose hasn't really changed at all.

When I go out to dinner, I give a tip after the meal for the service. If the service was ok, I'd give a 15% tip. If service was better, I'd give higher, up to 20%. Where did those numbers come from? They have been passed down as guidelines to follow. If I gave less, I would be seen as cheap or even rude. Why should we not have a similar guideline to pass down so people know that a tithe is 10%. Not as a legal stranglehold, but as a suggestion for what should be given. Again, it should be done, not with a spirit of obligation, but one out wanting to give to God.

:thumbsup: Except... some (like myself) would argue that giving to a church to help upkeep and salaries, etc, isn't really giving to God. JMHO.
It isn't giving to God? I find that an interesting view, considering the purpose of the upkeep, salaries, etc, is to help the body. It helps reach out to the lost. It helps build up the Church through the teaching of the Word. It helps to reach out to the widows and the orphans.

If the church isn't doing these things, then yes, I would agree with you. But if the church is out there, actively seeking and serving God's Will, and building up the Church to do God's Will, then the money would absolutely be going to God.

[lismore]

But if the church is out there, actively seeking and serving God's Will, and building up the Church to do God's Will, then the money would absolutely be going to God.

Undoubtedly some churches might be doing that. I havent found one yet:sigh:

Only the gravy train!

Besides, according to what I have heard direct from several church leaders, the majority of the money goes on salaries, upkeeps and assorted tat. A nominal sum, often 1% of the gross income, goes to some missionary or good work to justify the charity status of the church. The literal 'purse full of holes'.

[JAS4Yeshua]

You're looking at the wrong churches then, lis. ;)

This isn't meant as a hit against churches. Churches are run by sinful people, so mistakes are made. But there are churches out there trying to do things the right way.

Often times the reason things get so off-balance is because not enough people in the church are giving. They go to church on Sundays only, and don't bother to give, either of their money nor of their time in service. The leaders of the church have to put the money where it is needed the most, in order to continue to function.

I've heard a statistic that 10% of the people do 90% of the work. I would guess that the number would also reflect those who give.

[Jeffwo]

Several years ago, the church I belong to took the scripture in Acts 1:8 (But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.) to heart and to allot a percentage(~10%) of it's finances to outside missions.

We have a food pantry for the local disadvantaged, give to U.S. inner-city missionaries and missions/missionaries in other countries.

[lismore]

Often times the reason things get so off-balance is because not enough people in the church are giving. .

Hi There:wave:

I agree with Tamarra, see below.


IMO, buildings are by and large bad stewardship on the part of the Church. Yes, I realize we need places to meet. But the NT Church met in each other's homes. And it wasn't for lack of funds.

A lot of people dont give because the money is not used for necessity and often not even used where it was collected to go. Bad stewardship.

Buildings are not 'necessary', the church could meet in homes. Buildings are often vanity and expensive vanity!

And I dont think we should invent doctrines just to support someone's vanity!

From the widow's mite onwards, how many poor people have been ground into the ground to keep these horrible edifices going? My grandmother sent herself to an early grave fulfilling all these tithes and taxes in the catholic church, to keep their flamboyant wealth and pompous buildings going. The money should go direct to the needy, not get taken from them........

Not that all buildings are bad but the building is not the church. The church is the people, the living stones. If the building is a burden to the people, to the real church then it should be discarded. It can become an idol.

It does not matter if you meet in a field, a house, a building or a boat. The church is the people and they should come before the building! But, in many institutions this is not the case!

[JAS4Yeshua]

Hi There:wave:

I agree with Tamarra, see below.



A lot of people dont give because the money is not used for necessity and often not even used where it was collected to go. Bad stewardship.

Buildings are not 'necessary', the church could meet in homes. Buildings are often vanity and expensive vanity!

And I dont think we should invent doctrines just to support someone's vanity!

From the widow's mite onwards, how many poor people have been ground into the ground to keep these horrible edifices going? My grandmother sent herself to an early grave fulfilling all these tithes and taxes in the catholic church, to keep their flamboyant wealth and pompous buildings going. The money should go direct to the needy, not get taken from them........

Not that all buildings are bad but the building is not the church. The church is the people, the living stones. If the building is a burden to the people, to the real church then it should be discarded. It can become an idol.

It does not matter if you meet in a field, a house, a building or a boat. The church is the people and they should come before the building! But, in many institutions this is not the case!

Lis, I'll requote myself for you. ;)
If the church isn't doing these things, then yes, I would agree with you. But if the church is out there, actively seeking and serving God's Will, and building up the Church to do God's Will, then the money would absolutely be going to God.
The point is, in some churches you are correct, unfortunately. There are many churches out there that are doing it correctly, just as there are many that are doing it incorrectly.

As I mentioned previously, some congregations are simply too large to meet in a house. Our church has 2,000+ people, and we have three separate Sunday morning services to accomodate. We also have home fellowships during the week. It certainly isn't vanity to have a meeting place where the entire congregation to come together to worship collectively on Sunday mornings, Wednesday nights, and other occassions. It isn't vanity to have a meeting place where we can bring those who don't know Christ, or haven't been walking with Christ, to a place where they can hear the Gospel being presented.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because some churches are off balance in the way they handle the finances. Just remember, we're all human.

[lismore]

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because some churches are off balance in the way they handle the finances. Just remember, we're all human.

OK:thumbsup:

[maelstrom]

The correct amount to give, based on the New Testament, is 100%. If you do not forsake ALL that you have, you can't be a disciple of Christ! If you give 10% of yourself to the Lord, expect 10% of yourself to make it to heaven.

The church is totally stupid when it comes to money. They go into debt to buy big steeples, and then the congregation's donations go to interest payments to the banks, not to the poor. The Bible is against debt and interest. I don't even believe Christians should do trade with heathens.

[seekthetruth909]

This is only semantics if you assume that the Church needs buildings and/or that the buildings are an indespensable part of Church.

IMO, buildings are by and large bad stewardship on the part of the Church. Yes, I realize we need places to meet. But the NT Church met in each other's homes. And it wasn't for lack of funds. True religion is taking care of widows and orphans. Do we really need multi-million dollar buildings to be the Church? Or is that a distraction and a burden that we should really eschew?

IMO, it's the latter.

So, for some people it is much much much more than semantics. It is, imo, vital that the Church realize what the Church really is.

Except... some (like myself) would argue that giving to a church to help upkeep and salaries, etc, isn't really giving to God. JMHO.

I agree giving in this manner has nothing to do with giving to God. We are just paying our share or membership dues as we would if we joined a country club. We should give a fair share if we regularly attend a church, but in a sense, we are just giving to ourselves. The church provides services and programs to our benefit which we should pay for and a small portion may be left over for God's work. So in addition to our church dues we should also give generously to charity.

Giving to God, according to the bible, is to first, give to the poor, [James 1:27,Tim 5:3, Rom 15:26, Gal 2:10 ,James 1:27 ] and secondly give to missionaries.[2 Cor 9:5]
Jesus mentions numerous times to give and He is always referring to the poor, never to an institution. [Matt 25:44,Matt 19:21,Luke 12:33,Luke 18:22,Luke 12:33, I John 3:16-18,1 John 3:17]

When apostle Paul mentions taking up a collection, it is for missionaries to spread the gospel to other parts of the world. 2 Cor 9:5
Apostle Paul even said that although he was entitled to a salary he believed that is was better to refuse this right for the glory of God. He said by giving his services freely he would not hinder the gospel of Christ. Not too many Paul's hanging around the church today.
It is ironic that the famous quote which pastors use to raise money, "It more blessed to give than to receive", is actually used by apostle Paul to emphasize church leaders such as himself, giving to the congregation. Acts 20:33

Seek

[seekthetruth909]

Those who advocate literal tithing usually point out that the practice began back in Genesis, with Abraham and Melchizedek. That means it predated the Mosaic Sinatic Torah.

Here is a bible study I did a couple of years ago addressing that issue.

THE THREE MAIN ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF TITHING.

1. Tithing was a pre- Mosaic Law because Abraham tithed.

Was Abraham commanded by God to tithe? Did Abraham tithe only one time? Did Abraham tithe his personal property or just the spoils of war?
Read Gen 14:20, Hebrews 7:3-5
If we follow all the examples of Abraham should we also practice polygamy, give burnt offerings and practice circumcision?
Did Abraham teach his children to always tithe? If Abraham taught his children to tithe why did Jacob make a proposal to God? He would tithe only if God would bless him first with good fortune. Read Gen 28:22

2. Jesus told the Pharisees to continue to tithe their spices.

Matt 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.

Jesus also told the leper he cured to offer burnt offerings as Mosaic Law commanded.

Luke 5:14 Then Jesus ordered him, "Don't tell anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing, as a testimony to them." Matthew 8:4 Then Jesus said to him, "See that you don't tell anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift Moses commanded, as a testimony to them." Exodus 10:25, 20:24

Why do no Christian churches today offer burnt offerings as sacrifices?
Why did Jesus on these two occasions recommend keeping Mosaic Law?
Was it because the leper and the Pharisees were still under Mosaic Law until the crucifixion of Christ? Galatians 4:4
Was the life of Jesus the fulfillment of The Law and his dying on the cross the abolishment of The Law? Colossians 2 16 Are we now under the new covenant of Grace? Romans 6:14 Ephesians 2:8
Galatians 4:4 "But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law"

3. Jesus came to fulfill the law not change it.

Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." [Written before the crucifixion of Christ] [Dictionary: Fulfill: 1.To measure up to; satisfy. 2.To bring to an end; complete]

If the law has not been abolished should we still practice all 613 Old Testament laws including tithing? What does the word "fulfill" imply in this context? Consider Ephesians 2:15 [written after the crucifixion of Christ] "By abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace."

Matthew 5:17 and Ephesians 2:15 seem to contradict each other so we must search more scripture for clarification. Consider the following passages:

Galatians 3:25 "Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law."

2 Corinthians 3:6 "He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant-not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

Galatians 3:23 "Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed."

Galatians 3:11 "Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." [ Heb. 2:4]

Hebrews 8:7 "For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another."

Galatians 5:18 "But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law."

Galatians 2:21 "I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

Galatians 3:2 " I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?"

Hebrews 10:8 First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them" (although the law required them to be made).

Galatians 5:3 "Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law."

Galatians 3:10 "All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written:" "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."

Romans 7:2-4 "Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another -- to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God."

What do the previous passages imply in regards to the Old Covenant laws?
If we follow one law are we then obligated to follow all the law?
Has the death and resurrection of Christ abolished all Old Testament commandments and regulations?


Additional notes
Even Jewish Rabbis who follow the old covenant today refuse to collect tithes. Why? Only direct descendants of Levites are permitted to collect tithes according to the law and the temple in Jerusalem with all the genealogy records was destroyed. Hebrews 7: 5 Deuteronomy 18:1, 26:12

Who are the new priests of Christ and where is their temple? Is every single believer is now a priest?
1 Peter 2:5 "you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." 1 Peter 2:9
1 Corinthians 6:19
19 "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;"

There are more Old Testament scriptures on tithing implying that there are three tithes resembling a taxation system, [Deut. 14 26-29] and that tithes are to be eaten, [Deut.14: 22-26]. Do any modern tithing churches eat their tithes as the bible commands?

Note: In relation to Deut14: 22-26. Some churches claim food was tithed because ancient Israel was an agricultural society and there was no money to tithe. Is this true?
Genesis 17:12
"For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring."

New Testament instructions on giving:
2 Cor 9:7-10 "Each of you must give as you have made up your mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver."

2 Cor 8:13-15 " I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it is a question of a fair balance between your present abundance and their need, so that their abundance may be for your need, in order that there may be a fair balance. As it is written, "The one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little."


1 Corinthians 16
The Collection for God's People
1 Now about the collection for God's people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. 2 On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. 3 Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem.

James 1:27 "Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world."

Galatians 5: 4 "You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love."

Note: Please read all scriptures quoted here in their complete context to have a better understanding of God’s word. A more complete study by a theologian and pastor can be found at: http://www.shouldthechurchteachtithing.com/

[lismore]

THE THREE MAIN ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF TITHING.

1. Tithing was a pre- Mosaic Law because Abraham tithed.

2. Jesus told the Pharisees to continue to tithe their spices.

3. Jesus came to fulfill the law not change it.



These are arguments in favour of biblical tithing, not in favour of the modern doctrine of giving 10% of your tithe to the building. Lets look at what the law says about tithing.

Where?

Deuteronomy 12:11-13 Then to the place the LORD your God will choose as a dwelling for his Name-there you are to bring everything I command you: your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, and all the choice possessions you have vowed to the LORD. And there rejoice before the LORD your God, you, your sons and daughters, your menservants and maidservants, and the Levites from your towns, who have no allotment or inheritance of their own. Be careful not to sacrifice your burnt offerings anywhere you please.

Where is the dwelling place for God's name?

2 Chronicles 33:4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=14&chapter=33&verse=4&version=31&context=verse)
He built altars in the temple of the LORD, of which the LORD had said, "My Name will remain in Jerusalem forever."

JERUSALEM FOREVER! The church has not replaced Israel, the church has been grafted in. Abraham gave bread and wine to the King Of Salem (Jerusalem) because it isnt valid outside of Jerusalem.

What?

Deuteronomy 14:

23 Eat the tithe of your grain, new wine and oil, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks in the presence of the LORD your God at the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name, so that you may learn to revere the LORD your God always. 24 But if that place is too distant and you have been blessed by the LORD your God and cannot carry your tithe (because the place where the LORD will choose to put his Name is so far away), 25 then exchange your tithe for silver, and take the silver with you and go to the place the LORD your God will choose. 26 Use the silver to buy whatever you like: cattle, sheep, wine or other fermented drink, or anything you wish. Then you and your household shall eat there in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice.

Eat it!

From who?

From the rich to the poor:

Deuteronomy 26

12 When you have finished setting aside a tenth of all your produce in the third year, the year of the tithe, you shall give it to the Levite, the alien, the fatherless and the widow, so that they may eat in your towns and be satisfied.


'Tithe your way out of debt' is out then! :D

Leviticus 23:
Firstfruits

9 The LORD said to Moses, 10 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'When you enter the land I am going to give you and you reap its harvest, bring to the priest a sheaf of the first grain you harvest. 11 He is to wave the sheaf before the LORD so it will be accepted on your behalf; the priest is to wave it on the day after the Sabbath. 12 On the day you wave the sheaf, you must sacrifice as a burnt offering to the LORD a lamb a year old without defect, 13 together with its grain offering of two-tenths of an ephah [a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus%2023;&version=31;#fen-NIV-3416a)] of fine flour mixed with oil—an offering made to the LORD by fire, a pleasing aroma—and its drink offering of a quarter of a hin [b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus%2023;&version=31;#fen-NIV-3416b)] of wine. 14 You must not eat any bread, or roasted or new grain, until the very day you bring this offering to your God. This is to be a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live.


Why isnt this bit followed?:

Leviticus 23:

15 " 'From the day after the Sabbath, the day you brought the sheaf of the wave offering, count off seven full weeks. 16 Count off fifty days up to the day after the seventh Sabbath, and then present an offering of new grain to the LORD. 17 From wherever you live, bring two loaves made of two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour, baked with yeast, as a wave offering of firstfruits to the LORD.


There is zero in scripture about giving 10% of your income to a denomination. Tithing in the bible bears no resemblance to that!

Its indulgences all over again:(