# Tithing? Friendly thoughts and questions



## TomVols (Dec 30, 2014)

I have wrestled with tithing for a long time. As I see it, there are pro and con arguments (yeah, I realize this is not the best way to describe it) for the teaching that Christians must give 10% of their income:

PRO:
Jesus praised it; It predates the church and was practiced by Abraham, etc.; It is nowhere rescinded; it provides a means of ministry finance
CON:
It is NOT commanded in the NT, rather, give whatever you purpose freely and out of grace; the tithe was part of a tax system; it is not commanded in NT; it is regressive/oppressive to the poor.

Setting aside the weak regressive/oppressive argument, I see the strengths of the pro and con arguments. That leads me to observe and ask the following:

It seems the 1 Cor 16 passage was talking about a special offering and not a means of regular ministry finance. Thoughts?

The idea of "Just give as the Lord leads" brings a whopper of a subjectivistic problem. Thus, the $500k a year lawyer who gives $1k a year to his church is fine because he feels he is being generous, and no one can call him on it. After all, who are we to say what he thinks is generous? Thoughts?

However, the tithe crowd is forced to say the 100k a year banker is sinning if he gives $9,999 and not $10,000. So one buck deficit is a sin?
And those who argue that tithing is abrogated still seem to find their way back to saying 10% is a good standard. That just seems totally arbitrary and a _de facto_ command.

Again, looking for thoughts and discussion. Light and not heat. Fire away, but let the flame be on low


----------



## Peairtach (Dec 30, 2014)

Tithing is a general equity principle or rule of thumb from the Patriarchal era and Mosaic ceremonial law.

The fact that even when tithing was a legal obligation alongside freewill offerings, not everyone in the OT Church was required to tithe and of those who were required to tithe, not all were required to give the full tithe, shows that it would be going beyond even the OT data to say that all Christians must tithe at all times in their lives.

Those who were to tithe under the Mosaic law, were those who had crops, orchards and/or livestock. People like fishermen or tentmakers didn't tithe.

Of those who had animals, those who had less than ten or a number of animals that did not constitute a multiple of ten gave less than a full tithe to the temple.

Lots of people can tithe and should tithe, and some could easily give more, but going by the biblical data, it is a helpful principle by which to think about giving, rather than a moral obligation.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Dec 30, 2014)

Peairtach said:


> alongside freewill offerings


Richard, you wrote previously that unscriptural views of the Regulative Principle of Worship can lead one away from true worship into worldliness. Likewise you should not mention 'freewill offerings'. This could lead someone away from Calvinism into a Free will theology.


----------



## Peairtach (Dec 30, 2014)

Very dry wit  Our own Confession has a whole chapter on Free Will which is worth perusing.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## TomVols (Dec 31, 2014)

Peairtach thank you for your reply. I do have a couple of questions:



> People like fishermen or tentmakers didn't tithe.


how do you know this?



> those who had animals, those who had less than ten or a number of animals that did not constitute a multiple of ten gave less than a full tithe to the temple.


scripture?


> Lots of people can tithe and should tithe, and some could easily give more, but going by the biblical data, it is a helpful principle by which to think about giving, rather than a moral obligation


 Who are the "lots of people who should tithe" ? Where is the biblical evidence suggesting this? This entire sentence seems contradictory. I mean this with all gentleness and friendliness. As I stated in the op those who argue that tithing is not required but argue that it still should be practiced in some way by some or all do so without much Biblical proof _prima facia_. To argue it is a principle still requires something that is lacking in evidence. One could say that one can sacrifice a dove to show their sorrow for their sins of the past week as a principle though not necessary. 

Thank you my friend


----------



## Logan (Dec 31, 2014)

TomVols said:


> > those who had animals, those who had less than ten or a number of animals that did not constitute a multiple of ten gave less than a full tithe to the temple.
> 
> 
> 
> scripture?



I think that one is just logic since you can't give decimal values of sheep. A person who owns 7 sheep wouldn't tithe 0.7

Now whether that person rounds up or down, I don't think Scripture speaks to.


----------



## jambo (Dec 31, 2014)

It is a personal thing but you should give generously and also according to your means. Jesus commended the widow for her 2 coins which was a lot less than what others have out of their wealth yet the 2 coins were of greater value to Jesus as they were given sacrificially.

I would give what you feel is right before the Lord and not Concern yourself with what others do.


----------



## Jack K (Dec 31, 2014)

Allow a few comments from a guy who hasn't studied the particular issue enough to comment directly on the requirement to tithe...

- As Stuart pointed out, the issue of how much _others_ ought to give is an interesting academic one but not the main way believers ought to be thinking. We dwell on the log in our own eye.

- When considering what we should give, or how we should live any part of the Christian life for that matter, any attempt to determine the minimum requirement and aim for that is bound to be too-small thinking.

- Christians are not to be overly-careful accountants. Although tithing may be a good practice, it will carry dangers: The tither may consider his tithe and feel superior to others, or be tempted to boast, or move toward self-righteousness. That's no excuse to be lax about giving, but it's a good reason not to overthink the math. It's important to be habitually generous and "not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing."

- The vast majority of us who live in the prosperous West can afford to give far more than 10% of our incomes to the Lord's work and to the relief of suffering of our brothers and sisters elsewhere in the world. Why are we not eager to do so? This should be a far more consuming question for us.


----------



## chuckd (Dec 31, 2014)

10% is a good guide to support ministers. Some may require more or less. Though it's clear all of the money God has given us should be used faithfully.


----------



## KMK (Dec 31, 2014)

Peairtach said:


> Tithing is a general equity principle or rule of thumb from the Patriarchal era and Mosaic ceremonial law.



Exactly. The most important part of the general equity of the tithe is that giving should be regular and systematic. Use the 10% as a guide to establish a regular pattern of giving. How can a church pay its regular and systematic obligations without regular and systematic revenue?


----------



## TomVols (Dec 31, 2014)

Mild point: I think Logan's point illustrates that logic is often more prevalent here than Scripture. However, it is not mere semantics. Since the Bible is inspired, the OT commands about certain tithes are just that. We can argue accounting about less than pure percentages, but the Bible leaves that as unhelpful. So either the tithe means "tenth" or it does not. I don't know of anyone who argues it means something else. 

To those who reiterate the "Just give whatever you want" argument, I'd ask: doesn't this lead to subjectivism in terms of personal definitions of what is sacrificial and what is not? No one has yet to address the hypotheticals I proposed.


----------



## TomVols (Dec 31, 2014)

Jack, this is nowhere about comparison....just a defining of a principle/precept. As much as we like to claim giving is an individual thing, that never ends up being the case and I can illustrate this in a few minutes. 




> When considering what we should give, or how we should live any part of the Christian life for that matter, any attempt to determine the minimum requirement and aim for that is bound to be too-small thinking.


This is not the question on the floor, so to speak, but rather the breadth of the issue. I think even the most ardent pro-tithers would say that the person who wants to avoid 10.1% and use 10 as a way to curry favor with God has missed the mark.




Jack K said:


> - Christians are not to be overly-careful accountants. Although tithing may be a good practice, it will carry dangers: The tither may consider his tithe and feel superior to others, or be tempted to boast, or move toward self-righteousness. That's no excuse to be lax about giving, but it's a good reason not to overthink the math. It's important to be habitually generous and "not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing."


In a day where stewardship is slipshot, I'd disagree with a truncated first sentence. However, in context I don't disagree with you. That said, take out tithing from your second sentence and replace it with evangelism, witness, worship, etc., and you have the same "dangers." 


Jack K said:


> - The vast majority of us who live in the prosperous West can afford to give far more than 10% of our incomes to the Lord's work and to the relief of suffering of our brothers and sisters elsewhere in the world. Why are we not eager to do so? This should be a far more consuming question for us.


I don't disagree. That said, when God inspired holy Scripture, I think we might agree He had a plan of ministry finance in mind. That's what I'm macro-investigating with our discussion. Everyone seems to come back around to a tithe being praiseworthy even if not commanded with no Scriptural support for it. If that support is not there, then the mandate is not. but it seems no one, is willing to jettison a mandate for Westerners, rich, etc., despite having little else than logic as support. Again, I appreciate your input and hope there's more


----------



## TomVols (Dec 31, 2014)

ChuckD/KMD, both of you praise a 10% as a guide. Why? What Biblical evidence is there to do so? This is one of my fundamental discovery attempts: the Biblical reason to use the tithe by those who claim it is no longer necessary. As I stated earlier, that opens the door to other things _prima facia_ that are no longer binding. 

Let me reiterate: I'm seeking answers to questions that seem to go unanswered, not to belittle or debate. Thanks everyone for your contributions and I hope to see more.


----------



## Peairtach (Dec 31, 2014)

TomVols said:


> Peairtach thank you for your reply. I do have a couple of questions:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Leviticus 27:30-34 teaches about what is to be tithed and how livestock were to be tithed.

Sacrifice of animals is forbidden in the NT now that Christ has come, whereas, but we are still to give to the work of God's kingdom like our OT brothers, and we may need some guidance respecting that from God's Word.

I Corinthians 16:2 teaches that our giving is ordinarily to be in proportion to our income, although examples like the widow's mites, will remind that there may be times when we want to give everything we have for that week.

Unless we want to be in a place of total subjectivity with regard to what ordinarily the sort of proportion or proportions we are to give, as well as the fact we already know that ordinary weekly giving to Christ's cause and kingdom is related to ability to give, we have to refer to the practices of Abraham, Jacob, and OT brethren to give us further insight.

II Timothy 3:16.

"Perspectives on Tithing: Four Views" Editor David A. Croteau (B&H Academic, 2011) may be a helpful resource.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## TomVols (Dec 31, 2014)

Some have argued that Lev 27 is not the only teaching regarding the tithe but I don't see where fishermen are prohibited from tithing from this. 

I agree that animal sacrifice is no longer necesssary. However, some mandate that the tithe is abrogated on similar grounds, albeit not identical. 

Re: 1 Cor 16:2, some argue that this is not a directive for the ordinary financial support for the church, but a temporal teaching on how to collect for relief efforts in Jerusalem/Judean churches. A special offering if you will. Is it your belief that this is principle should be garnered from this, or that this is in fact the normative early practice of tithes/offerings? 

I do think you and I have the same fear of subjectivity here. Which is why I'm asking for answers to questions that are rarely ever given, or at least asking for the rationale behind such answers. So, while there are some questions I've asked that have yet to be answered, I'll pose yet another one: are you saying that the tithe is not required but still should be practiced? In one sense I'm asking a rather black and white question. It has been, in former times, posited as a bit of a bifurcation. Either tithe or don't tithe. However, it seems many say the tithe is not binding/obligatory* (*but still try to give 10% or more just because)  This is still being put forth. I'm just looking for the why. You are making an appreciated attempt at the why. I'm just looking for more clarification. Thank you my friend. 

So my question still stands: if the tithe is not obligatory, why observe it at all? What about the believer who decides on 2%? 5%?

Thanks for the book recommendation. Though B&H is a little flaky, I'll give it a read


----------



## Edm (Dec 31, 2014)

I personally chose to give 10% of earnings as a base. I often give more. I don't judge what others do. I will say...and I don't say this to sound kooky ...but when I give more, just because..I find that God blesses me tenfold what I gave.


----------



## Peairtach (Dec 31, 2014)

The law of tithing has fallen, Tom. It was part of the Mosaic ceremonial law. But it was also practiced in the Patriarchal era, and just because the law of tithing has fallen it doesn't mean we can't learn anything from it in a discursive general equity way, when we still are commanded to give to the work of God's Kingdom.

After someone has tithed they are not to shut their fist against the poor, the widow, the fatherless, the sick, the brother in need. The symbolism in the tenth is that we are saying that not only the tenth belongs to God, but the other nine tenths, too.


Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## KMK (Jan 1, 2015)

TomVols said:


> ChuckD/KMD, both of you praise a 10% as a guide. Why? What Biblical evidence is there to do so? This is one of my fundamental discovery attempts: the Biblical reason to use the tithe by those who claim it is no longer necessary. As I stated earlier, that opens the door to other things _prima facia_ that are no longer binding.
> 
> Let me reiterate: I'm seeking answers to questions that seem to go unanswered, not to belittle or debate. Thanks everyone for your contributions and I hope to see more.





> 1 Cor 9:11-14 1 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? *12If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. *13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? *14Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.



In the Old Economy, one tribe out of 12 (Levi) was not given an inheritance but was given the tithe of the other 11. The Levites were then to tithe to the High Priest. This meant that the Levites, who were charged with the ministry, earned 100% of the average of everyone in their community. They were not the least nor the greatest, but average. Paul says 'even so' has the Lord ordained that Gospel ministers make their living as well. 

It is not a perfect simile but it is one of the reasons I look at the tithe as a guide.


----------



## ProtestantBankie (Jan 1, 2015)

The Lord has given me a small amount of money to look after - I am greatly relieved that since I am so weak and inadequate for the great task of Christian stewardship that least 10% of it is something I can account for very well!

It's what I do with the other 90% that concerns me.

I remember a preacher pointing out that the Sabbath although it is one day in seven, yet it may be considered a tenth. For there are 168 hours in a week - and on the Sabbath we are awake for around 16 or 17 of them. (Based on 7-8 hours of sleep). But we have worship and piety the rest of the week too - as much as we can give, and confess we cannot give what we ought!


----------



## chuckd (Jan 2, 2015)

TomVols said:


> ChuckD/KMD, both of you praise a 10% as a guide. Why? What Biblical evidence is there to do so? This is one of my fundamental discovery attempts: the Biblical reason to use the tithe by those who claim it is no longer necessary. As I stated earlier, that opens the door to other things _prima facia_ that are no longer binding.
> 
> Let me reiterate: I'm seeking answers to questions that seem to go unanswered, not to belittle or debate. Thanks everyone for your contributions and I hope to see more.



I praise 10% because it seems to support my minister and church well so he is not required to seek supplemental income.


----------



## Peairtach (Jan 2, 2015)

We learn from these OT administrative moral-positive laws in a different way to the moral law. 

It takes a while to "get your head round" learning general and basic principles from laws that were more diectly addressed to the OT Israelites.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## TomVols (Jan 3, 2015)

Peairtach......thank you for discussing. Again, you and agree macroscopically to an extent. KMK also is making sound attempts to engage. However, questions of application are being missed. So let me pose it again for all:

The lawyer who earns $500k per year. He gives $5k per year to his church and another 5k to para church ministries. 2% of his income. 10k to kingdom work. Is he following biblical teaching on giving?

Now, what if he makes 200k? He's now giving 5%. Is he following biblical teaching now? 

Thanks for humoring me


----------



## Peairtach (Jan 3, 2015)

If you are a member in full communion with Christ's Church, you presumably believe that Christ's cause and kingdom is the most important thing in the world.

Giving nothing on a regular basis, or a token gesure on a regular basis is not consonant with this. But it's between him and God based on the general equity of God's Word.

It's a freewill offering informed by all that Scripture has to say about giving to God's kingdom.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## TomVols (Jan 3, 2015)

So the two scenarios are token gestures and this not biblically practiced? Or are both biblical because they've presumably arrived at this level based on self examination and conviction?


----------



## TomVols (Jan 3, 2015)

Oh.....read that book last night. Tell you more a bit later. It leaves a lot of the same questions unanswered as these threads often do


----------



## Peairtach (Jan 3, 2015)

Well there's all you need in God's Word to teach you how to give and how much to give:



> All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (II Timothy 3:16)


----------



## TomVols (Jan 3, 2015)

I agree. Now as to application of 2 Tim 3.16, I'd appreciate your answer to my question please. Thank you my friend


----------



## whirlingmerc (Jan 3, 2015)

Abraham tithed and that was before the law. Abraham's tithing is reported but not allot of explanation why he did it or how it applies
except that tithing precedes Moses law somehow

There would be a number of issues of tithing in addition to Abraham's tithing and I tend to leave them to individual conscience.
But I agree a tithe is a good rule of thumb

Two more issues are 10% of what and given to who... some insist gross, some not so sure... I'm not willing to insist on that and leave it to conscience
Some insist it all goes tot he local church... probably a wise decision for planning, but I leave it as a matter of conscience how a person divides their giving

Also Not all monetary blessings are gross, 
assets increases in value... assets decrease in value... taxes vary.... bills vary...
one might have assets that they no longer need or have unexpected needs...
generosity may be subjective but it's a good rule


----------



## KMK (Jan 3, 2015)

TomVols said:


> The lawyer who earns $500k per year. He gives $5k per year to his church and another 5k to para church ministries.



I think there is more biblical support for tithing than there is for parachurch ministries. You accept the one and not the other. Why?


----------



## TomVols (Jan 3, 2015)

KMK said:


> TomVols said:
> 
> 
> > The lawyer who earns $500k per year. He gives $5k per year to his church and another 5k to para church ministries.
> ...


Where did I say that? I'm not asking about what the storehouse is etc. I'm speaking of giving macroscopically. What is or is not the "storehouse" (cf Mal 3) is not what I've addressed heretofore. I only brought up that figure just for illustrative sake. If you like, take it out and say $10k to church. But look at my prior posts. I just say "give" w/o reference to where. 

Im happy to talk about the "storehouse" concept separately.


----------



## KMK (Jan 3, 2015)

TomVols said:


> Now, what if he makes 200k? He's now giving 5%. Is he following biblical teaching now?



I am not sure what the question is. What do you mean by 'biblical teaching'? 

The bottom line is this: the Bible teaches us to give generously, regularly, and systematically. By definition that means some kind of generous percentage of revenue. There is more biblical support for 10% than there is for any other percentage.


----------



## TomVols (Jan 3, 2015)

KMK said:


> TomVols said:
> 
> 
> > Now, what if he makes 200k? He's now giving 5%. Is he following biblical teaching now?
> ...


So anything other than 10% is __________?

Biblical teaching=guidance of the Bible re: what a Christian _should_ practice. Principles, commands, etc. 

Thank you for your reply. I look forward to your response. (For what it's worth I'm not disagreeing with your assertion. Just looking for rationale etc. as I have stated previously, we often leave out a lot when this subject is discussed across the board.)


----------



## Ryan J. Ross (Jan 4, 2015)

The application of 1 Corinthians 9:14 seems to frame the question better than the obligation and general equity thereof a mosaic and OT practice.

Personally, I read many of the NT texts "dealing with tithing" to be situation specific, excepting "worthy of double honor," "muzzling an ox," and "sharing with him who teaches."


----------



## Peairtach (Jan 4, 2015)

TomVols said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > TomVols said:
> ...



You seem to be having difficulty "getting your head round" the idea of learning by general equity from the administrative laws of the OT. 

The tithe predates Moses, and that is important. We still give to God, like Abraham and the OT Israelites, and that's important. We still give in proportion to how God has blessed us (I Corinthians 16:2) and that's important. Also Abraham volunteered the tithe to Melchisedec and Jacob to God. Their pattern of behaviour is something we can learn from.

We need to know what kind of proportion of our weekly wages we ordinarily should give.

Those who don't tithe may ask - in their present circumstances - whether they could be giving more. But some on low incomes and in certain financial straits cannot afford it. Even under Moses, when tithing was a law, not all were required to tithe, or to give the full tithe. We wouldn't/shouldn't say "you are sinning because you are not tithing". They have to decide before God, using sanctified common sense and the principle of tithing.

Some who are tithing could afford to give more to Christ's cause and kingdom, and as some people's salaries increase dramatically. they should be aware that they maybe should be giving 11/2 tithes or 2 tithes. But we wouldn't/shouldn't say to the wealthy, " you are sinning because you are not giving more than a tithe". They have to decide before God using sanctified common sense and the principle of tithing.

Our giving to Christ's cause and kingdom via the orthodox Visible Church, does not exempt us from other charitable giving e.g. Matthew 6:3-4.

We want biblical denominations and congregations to be come rich, strong and powerful in this world, although they must always be dependent not on their bank balance, but on the Lord.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## whirlingmerc (Jan 4, 2015)

One other point about Abraham's giving... there is exactly one case cited of tithing to Melchidedek who gave the army bread and wine, 10% of the booty in return for Melchizedek's blessing and provision...with no indication if tithing was a habitual regular practice of Abraham, just that in one case he did it and it appeared voluntary not compulsory or an obligation but that's not clear either...

In contrast, the sacrifice of Isaac is emphasized more by God's reaction and that is not a tithe, that is more like giving all

I'm sticking with leaving it to individual conscience
Give generously, not under compulsion, give sacrificially
also give to cultivate a heart felt treasure in heavenly priorities
Tithing is a fine rule of thumb. Give most to the local church, the money will go farther than if given haphazardly to random organizations but that's only my recommendation


----------



## KMK (Jan 4, 2015)

TomVols said:


> So anything other than 10% is __________?



I am not sure I understand the question. Anything other than 10% is not a 'tithe'? Because the word 'tithe' means one tenth or 10%?

In your OP, you made this statement:



TomVols said:


> However, the tithe crowd is forced to say the 100k a year banker is sinning if he gives $9,999 and not $10,000.



Who is the 'tithe crowd'? Have you ever actually met anyone who fits this description? I think you might be be confused by a false dichotomy. The Reformed who follow the general equity of the OT law of tithing would never say such a thing. Maybe the Latter Day Saints or Adventists?


----------



## chuckd (Jan 5, 2015)

TomVols said:


> The lawyer who earns $500k per year. He gives $5k per year to his church and another 5k to para church ministries. 2% of his income. 10k to kingdom work. Is he following biblical teaching on giving?



$500k should go to "kingdom work." _So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God._

If this person gave $450k of his income to his church and spent the rest frivolously, he would still not be following the Biblical teaching on being a good steward of his money.

It is common sense (and Biblical) to support our ministers. We do this for school teachers, police, firefighters, and politicians. Much more should we do for those called to minister to men's souls. 10% is a good guide. If he needs more, the congregation should give more. If he needs less, I would still give 10% so he can both feel secure and/or have the ability to distribute the funds to other churches & ministers in need.

In the end though, I don't see the other 90% as "mine." It is given to me by God as an allowance and I seek to be a good steward of it.


----------



## Toasty (Jan 5, 2015)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> > alongside freewill offerings
> ...



Aren't people determined to give freewill offerings?


----------



## TomVols (Jan 8, 2015)

Richard (if I may call you that) wrote:


Peairtach said:


> You seem to be having difficulty "getting your head round" the idea of learning by general equity from the administrative laws of the OT


I'm not sure why you say that. I understand the concept of general equity (cf WCF 19.4; LBCF 19.4). While this is another can of corn, it appears that you are using the word administrative interchangably with civil in the depiction of the equity principle therein. I'm even understanding that, if this is not your case, you are using "general equity" in terms of hermeneutical resonance and dissonance for application purposes when approaching the overarching tithe theme from the OT. 

It seems as if you aren't quite wanting to answer my questions directly for some reason. Not sure why. At any rate, I'm appreciative of this post. To wit:




Peairtach said:


> The tithe predates Moses, and that is important. We still give to God, like Abraham and the OT Israelites, and that's important. We still give in proportion to how God has blessed us (I Corinthians 16:2) and that's important. Also Abraham volunteered the tithe to Melchisedec and Jacob to God. Their pattern of behaviour is something we can learn from.
> We need to know what kind of proportion of our weekly wages we ordinarily should give.


Agreed.




Peairtach said:


> Those who don't tithe may ask - in their present circumstances - whether they could be giving more. But some on low incomes and in certain financial straits cannot afford it. Even under Moses, when tithing was a law, not all were required to tithe, or to give the full tithe. We wouldn't/shouldn't say "you are sinning because you are not tithing". They have to decide before God, using sanctified common sense and the principle of tithing.
> Some who are tithing could afford to give more to Christ's cause and kingdom, and as some people's salaries increase dramatically. they should be aware that they maybe should be giving 11/2 tithes or 2 tithes. But we wouldn't/shouldn't say to the wealthy, " you are sinning because you are not giving more than a tithe". They have to decide before God using sanctified common sense and the principle of tithing.


When I read this at face value I cannot help but think that one must be quite careful with this to avoid double-speak. At face value I find little to disagree with. However, it appears that you are asserting that the tithe still is minimally implicit as a continuing command based on general equity, yet want to avoid hammering the "rich" for not giving more than 10% or smacking the "poor" for not giving 10%. While the "principle of tithing" is yet to be defined despite my repeated requests, it is proffered as the standard - again, based on general equity. So, we're getting somewhere....slowly. I'd like to hear you elaborate on this section and address the issues therein, particularly the principle of the tithe and how it is defined. So I hope you'll continue to move forward. Thank you!


----------



## TomVols (Jan 8, 2015)

whirlingmerc said:


> Tithing is a fine rule of thumb.


Michael,
Thank you for your post. It is straightforward and helpful. I think I would ask this of the part I cited. The problem, as I humbly see it, is if we use tithing as a "rule of thumb," we are left to define what exactly we mean. If we mean it is a goal, then that seems to be limiting. If we mean it shoud be a goal to seek as a minimum, then we run into sundry problems because now we've essentially made tithing a _de facto_ command and perhaps going beyond what the Scriptures teach. However, there are those who do in fact make it such, and believe they have rationale to do so. It is for this cause this thread exists because that is often a question that goes unanswered. Read the book Richard recommended and you'll see it come to fruition even there. In short, optional commands seem antithetical. So without solid rationale, I wonder if they're helpful. Just me thinking aloud.


----------



## TomVols (Jan 8, 2015)

chuckd said:


> If this person gave $450k of his income to his church and spent the rest frivolously, he would still not be following the Biblical teaching on being a good steward of his money.


Quite true.


----------



## TomVols (Jan 8, 2015)

KMK said:


> I am not sure I understand the question.


Let me take another whack at it. You seem to argue that not giving at least 10% is a failure/sin/shortcoming/shortfall. True or false? Thank you!




KMK said:


> Have you ever actually met anyone who fits this description?


Oh, absolutely. Grew up in that tradition. (Not in it now, now that I'm in the Reformed end of the pool)  And see the work RIchard recommended. 


KMK said:


> The Reformed who follow the general equity of the OT law of tithing would never say such a thing.


Interesting. Now we are getting to crux of the matter. Why would they not say such? if tithing is what is required, and 10% is a tithe, how is anything other than 10% not a missing of the mark? Thank you!


----------



## Peairtach (Jan 9, 2015)

When the law of mandatory tithing was in force not everyone tithed and those who did tithe didn't always pay the full tithe depending on how many animals they had. 

Tithing was a positive law under the Mosaic administration. To the extent that it was commanded it was morally obligatory for the Jews to obey God regarding tithing. It was also volunteered by Abraham and Jacob before the Mosaic administration.

It is not a positive law for us, but a principle of general equity. Maybe you find it difficult to understand the difference between a moral law - like Thou shalt not killl - and a principle of general equity which gives us guidance on how to behave.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## TomVols (Jan 12, 2015)

No, I don't find it difficult at all. Perhaps you aren't understanding that which is queried in the posts. This may help explain why questions are not addressed which arise. At any rate, I appreciate your attempts, my friend!


----------



## Peairtach (Jan 12, 2015)

TomVols said:


> No, I don't find it difficult at all. Perhaps you aren't understanding that which is queried in the posts. This may help explain why questions are not addressed which arise. At any rate, I appreciate your attempts, my friend!



It, being a principle of general equity, people aren't sinning if they give 9% instead of 10%. It's not a moral law. It wasn't a moral law under Moses, although since God commanded it, it was morally binding.

For us it is a guide to help us to understand the kind of range of the proportion we should ordinarily give. It's quite difficult to think of that without some general guidance, which we have laid down in God's Word from our patrirachal fathers in the faith, Abraham and Jacob, and our OT brothers.


----------



## aadebayo (Jan 13, 2015)

Our Lord said in Matthew 23:23 that "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone." This woe is one of the woes spoken to the Pharisees from our Lord. He calls them hypocrites because in paying their tithes, they have omitted to what we may refer to as the primary duties. He refers to them as weightier matters of the law. He however ends this wore with this phrase "and not to leave the other undone." Meaning that the tithe is still a means of sanctification of dedicating a portion of our income to the gospel. Our obedience to tithing can also be taken from Matthew chapter 5:18 where Christ said that not one jot or tittle shall pass from the law till all be fulfilled.


----------



## TomVols (Jan 19, 2015)

Peairtach said:


> TomVols said:
> 
> 
> > No, I don't find it difficult at all. Perhaps you aren't understanding that which is queried in the posts. This may help explain why questions are not addressed which arise. At any rate, I appreciate your attempts, my friend!
> ...



Thank you. There are ancillary matters we may discuss in another thread or perhaps by pm. Thanks for your efforts my friend!


----------

