# Should Ministers Tithe?



## C. Matthew McMahon

I'm looking for resources that deal with the obligation scripturally for a pastor to Tithe.

I have Turretin and Calamy, but they don't deal with the question. Calamy shows the "Christian parishioners" Tithe to support the minister. Turretin does the same very scripturally.But....

Practically, here is "a" question. Say a congregation has 7 families, and they are slowly growing. They hire a pastor. They say, we want to pay you 30000 a year, but we can only afford, right now, 10000. You might think 30000 is quite low, but bear with this for the illustration. Say the pastor accepts. He has enough money saved up to live off the 10000 and his savings for whatever time period you choose to give him. A year, two, doesn't necessarily matter.

So, he gets a check for 10000 for the year (to make it mathematically easy), and he decides to give 1000 as a Tithe. The church says, wait, we need to pay you 30000, and can only pay 10000, you should keep this 1000. So they give him the 1000. The pastor then decides he needs to Tithe 10% of that. He gives a hundred. It goes around again. 10...1...10 cents, finally down to a penny.

If the pastor is obligated for his 10%, he's done the right thing even though it's a bit odd. 

But is he obligated in that way? Thoughts? 
Resources?

(Keep in mind that the pastor could come in bivocationally, but that still places him in the same position. He would be giving, with the church still needing to meet the obligation in hiring.)


----------



## Parakaleo

I'll admit to having a similar question myself, but have told myself that all men should give cheerfully of their earnings as a spiritual act of worship. Calvin taught no man should come to worship "empty handed", which I think includes the pastor.


----------



## Reepicheep

All Christians should tithe..._at least_. 

period.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

How does that work practically in the illustration?

It seems somewhat odd to me that the pastor and treasurer would meet. The pastor hands him 1000 check. He gives it back. The pastor hands him 100 check. He hands it back. Etc. It would get to the point that the pastor and treasurer would just nod to each other each Lord's Day instead of going through the motions.

As much as i like using the "period" quip, this may need a bit more than that. How would this practically work out? 

Resources? Good reads on this?


----------



## Reepicheep

Sorry if I came off dismissive...I see what you're saying for sure. When our church was small, there was a potential for this kind of thing.

I see two separate issues- 
1. What the minister receives as pay and his obligation to tithe from it.
2. What the Church receives in offerings and how the eldership decides to compensate the minister from it. 

I would caution against the minister and the treasurer being too transparent on the matter. Just my take.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Understood. I'm exaggerating the occurrence for sake of illustration. Not trying to be inappropriate.

I'm a bit conflicted on it and working out some things simply theologically. What I'm surprised on is the lack of specific or precise support from the reformers and puritans. Again, this is in regard to ministers, not support from the church by individual Christians. I'm going back to reread Turretin again and see if there are some offshoots that are applicable.

In Numbers 18:26 the Levites received a tenth from Israel. These were the helpers, guards, etc, to the minister-priests. They then gave a tenth to the minister-priests. The minister-priests and high priests lived off the tenth. But they didn't Tithe a tenth of the tenth of the tenth. What did the priests or high priest do?


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

Matthew,

Take a look at this perspective:

http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/40422


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> Matthew,
> 
> Take a look at this perspective:
> 
> http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/40422



Yes, I saw that previously. It didn't help me answer what Aaron did, or the high priest. It was a little too general.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Abraham tithed to Melchizedek a tenth of his spoils. In Abraham, Levi, and all his lineage, tithed to Melchizedek. So the minister-priests "tithed" in Abraham to Melchizedek. William Prynne has a work that explains some of this. That helps initially, but I don't see them continuing to do this through Israel's historical works in the temple as it pertains to the High Priest. But Prynne argues that the ministry is not patterned for Gospel ministers after the priesthood. Rather, that pertains to Christ.


----------



## Dachaser

All Christians should give back monies to the Lord, and in our Baptist church, all ministers have that amount deducted off payroll as part of belonging to the Baptist Great Lakes group.

Now as to how much to pay Pastors, would saythat is case by case, as I knew of a small Independent Baptist Church that took on a Pastor who worked full time for GM for his salary, and only took tithe monies from that group...


----------



## ProtestantBankie

If there is an obligation to tithe, then this must be done.

This would not have things done decently and in order.

It would mean the Pastor's pay is actually $11,111.11 and he has tithed $1,111.11.

Far better would be the notion that "When we pay you $10,000 we have deducted already the neccesary support of the church".


----------



## SolaScriptura

I think the question is silly and shows an overly scrupulous mind. But that's just my thought. 

Sigh... if the church doesn't want you to pay the tithe, who are you to keep forcing it upon them? If you feel compelled to tithe of your 10000, you can 1) give the tithe directly to missions (or some other work of the larger church) OR 2) give the tithe anonymously in cash. But I don't think God is honored by this back-and-forth scenario you mention.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Here's my dilemma - I have people I know that are in this exact situation. They are pastoring a church for little money. They can barely afford baby food, or health insurance, etc. etc. and they are _biblically required _to give 10% of their pay. That's what I'm _looking _for.


What I asked was this, "I'm looking for resources that deal with the obligation scripturally for a pastor to tithe."


So far, as silly as my question might be (no offense taken), no one in the thread has yet said: Here is not only that we do tithe, but here is biblically *WHY *we do it. Here are the implications and resources _from Scripture_. Or if you have resources to read, I'd love to know them.


If I asked, why do we believe in justification by faith - well, for all intents and purposes, no one would have any problem providing thousands of resources biblically and extra biblically.


But, we ought not simply to _*assume *_things. This is a deeper study than one would think. Why? Well, I've been looking at individual Fathers, Reformed and Puritan works. I'm finding that during the time of the Puritans, there was a controversy about taxation, estates and such, in relation to how the state would or would not enforce tithing, and whether that would be something the minister should reap from or not. In other words, the commonwealth was poking in on whether ministers should be provided for by the tithe of the people in the church. The Puritan treatise on this were few. George Carlton (1559-1628) wrote a great little work called "Tithes Examined." He was particular on Abraham's tithe, and looking at tithing before the Law, during, after in Gospel times and then in his day. But his argument surrounded the reality of tithes, and that Christians are to support the minister with their tithes, at least that. 


From this work I came away with, in my mind, I ask, how did Melchizedek tithe? How did the High Priest Tithe? How did the Apostle Paul tithe? Where do we see this, or imply it? _Where does it say Christ tithed_? 


I read William Prynne (1600-1669), and his "Gospel Plea" on tithing. Again, same information, a bit more structured and he deals a lot with the commonwealth. Still, I'm left with wondering how the application works with Melchizedek and the High Priest.


I worked through Turretin again. His "Salaries of Ministers" is good, but doesn't deal with the question. But, Turretin did say that OT laws such as tithing and firstfruits _were not binding. "_From the salaries of the sacred ministers under the salaries Old Testament (Num. 18:8-12), to whom were given of the priests of ordinarily sacrifices, tithes, firstfruits, and other similar the Old Testament. things, besides certain cities and suburban fields (Num. 35:1-8). Now although in the New Testament, _we are not bound by those laws as to the special material _from which and _the manner in which the pay was given_, still they remain as to kind and analogy, as is evident from the passage already quoted (1 Cor. 9:13). (Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology (Vol. 3). 270)


Thomas Gouge's work on, "Christian Directions" mentions tithing, but only as much as the "parson collects them." There is no word that the parson tithes from them.


Cuthbert Sydenham in his work on "Hypocrisy" mentions Luke 11:14 where the Pharisees are rebuked for their hypocrisy in tithing, "You tithe mint and cumin, etc.” (Luke 11:14). There are certain ramification on this which are not worked out yet.


Christopher Love in "The Hearer's Duty" says, "Thirdly, it willfully incurs those direful execrations which were usually pronounced against all such Church-robbers; and in some places, where tithes are unjustly withheld from the ministers, God himself does, as it were, tithe their corn, and take away at least the tenth part of it, that they see they are no gainers by this unjust course." He, as many puritans, speaks on how tithing is for the support of the minister and the work of the Gospel.


I have some other works to check out from Francis Howgill (1618-1669) "The Great Case of Tithes" and Samuel Clarke (1599-1682) on "Sundry Questions Concerning Tithes." I'll let you know what they say.


Matthew Henry said (which is very good), "IV. What was done to him: Abram gave him tithes of all, that is, of the spoils, Heb. 7:4. This may be looked upon, 1. As a gratuity presented to Melchizedek, by way of return for his tokens of respect. Note, Those that receive kindness should show kindness. Gratitude is one of nature’s laws. 2. As an offering vowed and dedicated to the most high God, and therefore put into the hands of Melchizedek his priest. Note, (1.) When we have received some signal mercy from God, it is very fit that we should express our thankfulness by some special act of pious charity. God must always have his dues out of our substance, especially when, by any particular providence, he has either preserved or increased it to us. (2.) That the tenth of our increase is a very fit proportion to be set apart for the honour of God and the service of his sanctuary. (3.) That Jesus Christ, our great Melchizedek, is to have homage done him, and to be humbly acknowledged by every one of us as our king and priest; and not only the tithe of all, but all we have, must be surrendered and given up to him. (Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible: complete and unabridged in one volume (p. 39). Peabody: Hendrickson.)


He also said, "We must do more than they, and better than they, or we shall come short of heaven. They were partial in the law, and laid most stress upon the ritual part of it; but we must be universal, and not think it enough to give the priest his tithe, but must give God our hearts." Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible: complete and unabridged in one volume (p. 1632). Peabody: Hendrickson.


Henry also directs it towards the "priests" in Jesus' statement, "Those laws which related only to the means of religion they were very exact in the observance of, as particularly those concerning the maintenance of the priests: Ye pay tithe of mint and rue, pay it in kind and to the full, and will not put off the priests with a modus decimandi or compound for it. By this they would gain reputation with the people as strict observers of the law, and would make an interest in the priests..." Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible: complete and unabridged in one volume (p. 1864). Peabody: Hendrickson.


Augustine, and all the Fathers generally speak of the tithe around the words of Jesus "Ye tithe mint..." etc. They deal only with that passage. Some go a little further, Irenaeus (A.D. 120-202) _Against Heresies_, Chapter XIII of Book IV: "And for this reason did the Lord, instead of that [commandment], Thou shalt not commit adultery, forbid even concupiscence; and instead of that which runs thus, Thou shalt not kill, He prohibited anger; and instead of the law enjoining the giving of tithes, [He told us] to share all our possessions with the poor."


John Wycliffe (1328-1384) and John Huss (1373-1415) both saw tithes as _free-will offerings. _Wycliffe insisted tithes were _not _commanded in the NT. Huss and his followers concluded that the OT law was not binding on Christians. John Smyth (1609) said Christ abolished tithes due to the change in the priesthood. He concluded that the method for supporting pastors should emphasize voluntariness. (_Perspectives on Tithing: _Four Views edited by David A. Croteau)


Calvin said: He [Jesus] therefore acknowledges that whatever God has enjoined ought to be performed, and that no part of it ought to be omitted, but maintains that zeal for the whole Law is no reason why we ought not to insist chiefly on the principal points. Hence he infers that they overturn the natural order who employ themselves in the smallest matters, when they ought rather to have begun with the principal points; for tithes were only a kind of appendage. Christ therefore affirms that he has no intention to lessen the authority even of the smallest commandments . . . . It is therefore our duty to preserve entire the whole Law . . . Hence we conclude that all the commandments are so interwoven with each other, that we have no right to detach one of them from the rest." Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, 3 vols., trans. William Pringle (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 3:92


John Owen said, "I shall take leave to say, that it is no safe plea for many to insist on, _that tithes are due and divine_, as they speak,- that is, by a binding law of God,- now under the gospel. . . . The precise law of tithing is not confirmed in the gospel . . . it is impossible any one certain rule should be prescribed unto all persons," (Works, vol. 21, pp. 324, 325).


Luther Said, "But the other commandments of Moses, which are not [implanted in all men] by nature, the Gentiles do not hold. Nor do these pertain to the Gentiles, such as the tithe and others equally fine which I wish we had too. Now this is the first thing that I ought to see in Moses, namely, the commandments to which I am not bound except insofar as they are [implanted in everyone] by nature [and written in everyone's heart]." (How Christians Should Regard Moses, April 27, 1525

So, all that to say - things are not as clear cut as "This is what we do _because _this is what we do." I'm searching for some really good exegetical work, or some commentary, on "here is why _ministers _do this..."

(To be clear, Christians should at least tithe 10% of their income to support the work of the ministry in the church. There are a whole host of very good reasons for that, which I'm not going into right now, and many of the puritans dealt quite adequately on that point.)


----------



## NaphtaliPress

Wayne Sparkman may have links to the debate in the PCUS which did not prescribe the tithe and there was a mid 19th century move multiple times to get it passed at GA.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Ok. I'll check with him. Thank you.


----------



## NaphtaliPress

Also, Matthew Winzer or other FC denomination folks can weigh in here, but historically I don't think they insisted on the tenth as law; that is why it was a debate of introducting it in the American church in the mid 19th century. Puritan ministers before the ejection had a stipend; the collection was for the poor.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Lancelot Andrewes, (1555-1626) said, “I demand therefore, (Gen. 14:20 Heb. 7:2.) who was the first that received Tithe? That great man Melchisedek, to whom Abraham gave the Tithe of all. Melchisedek received Tithe from Abraham; but were they free, or due? Voluntary, or by Law? If free and voluntary, the Argument is of no force, and the Apostle puts a trick upon the Hebrews, when he compares the Levites with him. For the reason is not alike: The Levites require their Tithe by Law, for they have a commandment to take Tithe of the people (Heb. 7:5): Melchisedek his, because Abraham would, not because he ought. Again, if this service were voluntary and free, Melchisedek were no with better then Abraham. For what hindereth but that I may debase myself, and do voluntary honor (if I please) even to my inferior? My civility indeed would be the more commended. But if, upon both these considerations, this were absurd, it follows that he paid Tithe not as a voluntier, but as they were due by Law. Concerning the Law then, I demand again; By what Law? Not of Sacrifice; for he offered none: of Blessing then, it's clear. For there is a coherence betwixt these two; Melchisedek blessed, and Abraham paid Tithe. Now I assume. Tithes are due to Melchisedek blessing. The same right remaineth under Christ. How can that be made to appear? Out of the 12[SUP]th[/SUP] verse of the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] Chapter to the Hebrews. There is no change of the Law, but by the change of the Priesthood. But there is the same Priesthood of Christ, and of Melchisedek; for which, if need be, God himself will give us his oath (Psalm 110:4). Therefore there is the same right under both. Tithes therefore are due to Christ, in whom, and from whom, and by whom we are all blessed: He himself blessed for ever. Which, it is but equal, that they should receive in the name of Christ, who bless us in the name of Christ. For even Melchisedek’s blessing was but from man, though in the person and name of Christ. Therefore the right of Tithes remaineth under Christ.…The third reason is taken from the Prophet Malachi, where the observation of this Precept is established with a solemn blessing, (3:9-10), and the violation with a severe and bitter curse. And indeed if Tithes were ceremonial, as some are very earnest to have them, the Prophets would cast them away; would never urge them so carefully; they would suffer them to wax cold; would never speak of them so highly. This is not their usual manner: but, if the ceremonies were never so carefully looked to, not to promise so great happiness; nor, if neglected, to threaten so sore judgements. And least any should think this reason to no purpose, the Fathers used no other in the Councel of Tribur (chapter 13). Tithes are to be paid, that God being appeased by this our devotion, may more plenteously bestow those things that are necessary. The Fathers in the Synod of Mentz no other (chapter 11). Tithes are to be paid; for it is to be feared, that if any take away what is due to God, God will, for his sin, take away necessaries from him.” (Lancelot Andrewes, (1555-1626), “Of the right of tithes a divinity determination.” (1647)


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Edmund Calamy, "The arguments on which the proposition undertaken is originally grounded (as I intend now to confirm it) are drawn from these places of Scripture. “Doe 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? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel,” (1 Corinthians 9:13-14). “Let him that is taught in the word, make him that taught him partaker of all his goods,” (Galatians 6:6). 

From these scriptures I deduce therefore four undeniable conclusions: 

1. That God has as carefully and firmly taken order _for the maintenance of the ministers of the Gospel_ as ever he did for the priests and Levites in time of the law. 
2. That their maintenance must arise from and out of whatsoever the people have by the blessing of God on their labors in _their_ several callings. 
3. That every man instructed must communicate to his teacher, be the instructed man’s calling what it will, and that what he communicates in this kind is not a free contribution, or voluntary bound, but a _due debt_ imposed by God. 
4. That God, having provided for the _maintenance of the minister_, every pastor performing his duty, may justly demand a portion of every man’s goods whom he instructs, and that as his proper portion appointed by God himself." (_A New Discovery of Personal Tithes_, 10).


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Henry Spelman (1564-1641) says, “What things be due unto God.
That that is to be rendered unto God for his honor, out of temporal things granted by him unto man, are by his word declared to be some particular portions of the same things.
The things granted unto man be of three sorts, viz.
First, the time measured out unto him for this life.
Secondly, the place allotted to him for his habitation.
Thirdly, the benefits and blessings assigned to him for his sustenance. Out of every of these, God must have his honorary part, as by way of reservation and retribution, in right of his seignory. Let us then see what those parts are, and how they grow due unto him.
…So that it is apparent both by the Law of God, and Nature, that God must have one portion of our Lands to build him an house on, that is, his Churches, and another portion thereof for the habitation of his Levites, that is, his Ministers.” (Henry Spelman (1564-1641), A Larger Treatise Concerning Tithes.

Spelman references John Selden’s (1586-1654) work “The history of Tithes” which is enormous.


----------



## Edward

C. Matthew McMahon said:


> and they are biblically required to give 10% of their pay



I'm not sure that I'd concede that point. Or rather all three of those points. But that may properly belong in a separate thread, or series of threads.


----------



## Scott Bushey

C. Matthew McMahon said:


> I'm looking for resources that deal with the obligation scripturally for a pastor to Tithe.
> 
> I have Turretin and Calamy, but they don't deal with the question. Calamy shows the "Christian parishioners" Tithe to support the minister. Turretin does the same very scripturally.But....
> 
> Practically, here is "a" question. Say a congregation has 7 families, and they are slowly growing. They hire a pastor. They say, we want to pay you 30000 a year, but we can only afford, right now, 10000. You might think 30000 is quite low, but bear with this for the illustration. Say the pastor accepts. He has enough money saved up to live off the 10000 and his savings for whatever time period you choose to give him. A year, two, doesn't necessarily matter.
> 
> So, he gets a check for 10000 for the year (to make it mathematically easy), and he decides to give 1000 as a Tithe. The church says, wait, we need to pay you 30000, and can only pay 10000, you should keep this 1000. So they give him the 1000. The pastor then decides he needs to Tithe 10% of that. He gives a hundred. It goes around again. 10...1...10 cents, finally down to a penny.
> 
> If the pastor is obligated for his 10%, he's done the right thing even though it's a bit odd.
> 
> But is he obligated in that way? Thoughts?
> Resources?
> 
> (Keep in mind that the pastor could come in bivocationally, but that still places him in the same position. He would be giving, with the church still needing to meet the obligation in hiring.)



Who is our tithe/offerings directed to? Is it the minister primarily or Christ. If Christ, then I believe everyone should be giving. The fact that ministers are 'paid' a portion of the offering, does not change the fact.


----------



## Scott Bushey

> They are pastoring a church for little money. They can barely afford baby food, or health insurance, etc. etc. and they are biblically required to give 10% of their pay.



Many Pastors have to be bivocational in the initial stages of church growth. Does this man have another skill-set he can use in the mean time?


----------



## Bill The Baptist

C. Matthew McMahon said:


> They are pastoring a church for little money. They can barely afford baby food, or health insurance, etc. etc. and they are biblically required to give 10% of their pay. That's what I'm looking for.



I think a more pertinent question is whether _anyone_ in such a position is biblically required to give 10% of their pay.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Bill The Baptist said:


> C. Matthew McMahon said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are pastoring a church for little money. They can barely afford baby food, or health insurance, etc. etc. and they are biblically required to give 10% of their pay. That's what I'm looking for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think a more pertinent question is whether _anyone_ in such a position is biblically required to give 10% of their pay.
Click to expand...


I haven't found anyone yet (ancient Reformed and Puritans) who disagrees with the tithing concept as applicable for the support of the church and minister. They do make a distinction between Abraham tithing to Melchizedek (before the Law), which is still applicable, and tithing as it related to the ceremonial law, which is not applicable but holds certain analogies.


----------



## Daniel M.

I've given this some thought. Several points of interest:

1.) Christ's affirmation of Abraham's character and works in John 8:39-40 (ESV):

"39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham's children, *you would be doing the works Abraham did*, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did." 

From this, we gather that Abraham was just in the offering of his firstfruits to Melchizedek from the faith given him by God. Christ, forever unchanging, would affirm the giving of firstfruits in His kingdom today as _fitting_ for His chosen; An overflow of the faith and hope given us by the Father.

2.) Christ's non-Levitical birth, earthly vocation and perfect fulfillment of the Law let us safely draw the conclusion that He Himself tithed. 
3.) Christ fulfills every duty of today's ministers and more. Evangelism, counseling, discipline, rebuke, all of it. Now, if Christ Himself fulfilled the law during the last three years of His life, wherein His vocation was solely the work of the Father, can we not assume that He, preaching in Judea as a minister, still tithed during this time?
4.) Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:1 - "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ." (ESV) Do not those of Christ do as Christ Himself does and did? Can we not then infer that Paul tithed? 
5.) If Paul, upon whom massive responsibility and suffering in ministry was bestowed, tithed, how much more for our less-burdened ministers? Can anyone's sufferings or hardships be so great as to justify exception from the example of such distinguished company?

A different train of thought takes me here: is not tithing one of the great joys of our regenerate lives? Certainly we can biblically attest to the truth that our ministers are charged with leading us in worship and the sacraments. Isn't the tithe worship? The re-submission of that to which we have no deserving claim to He who freely gives? Is it not a delight, an overflow of the charity and favor God has been pleased to bestow upon us when we have much and when we have little? Who are we to seek to exempt ministers from this joy?

EDIT: That is not to say that Dr. McMahon or anyone "sought to exempt ministers from this joy" ; I also understand that the question at hand is not necessarily of what is _fitting_, but rather what is required.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon

Daniel M. said:


> EDIT: That is not to say that Dr. McMahon or anyone "sought to exempt ministers from this joy"


----------



## Scott Bushey

> Isn't the tithe worship?



Daniel,
Could you expand a bit on this statement?


----------



## earl40

Scott Bushey said:


> Isn't the tithe worship?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel,
> Could you expand a bit on this statement?
Click to expand...


As if we are commanded to give during corporate worship today?


----------



## Daniel M.

Scott Bushey said:


> Isn't the tithe worship?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel,
> Could you expand a bit on this statement?
Click to expand...


I'm still learning my confessional theology and searching the regulative principle, but here is where I'm at currently, open to correction and improvement from brethren, of course.

My understanding of worship is as follows: it is the response of the elect individual as God makes His attributes known in his or her life through His word against the backdrop of that believer's life (Word is the first emphasis here; I say "against the backdrop" because who we think God is must come from and be confirmed thoroughly in Word in order to avoid the dangerous error of experience-based subjectivity). In this context, worship is not a response to what God has done, but rather who He is in our lives and over His creation. (A response to the acts of God falls under "praise") 

Take Abraham's (then Abram's) example. When constructing his first altar, my belief is that his worship was in response to the revelation of the One True God; the Lord "appeared to him"! Some might argue he did this in response to the promise of God; biblical context, however, shows that worship is the immediate response of God's revelation of Himself. (Moses and the burning bush, Joshua and "the commander of the Lord's Army", Jesus and the blind man in John 9, etc.) 

If this is correct, it follows that Abram's tithe to Melchizedek is of supreme significance. Recall that Abraham was under no direct mandate to tithe. Instead, filled with the faith given him by God that worked in him, he saw it as appropriate to submit the tithe. 

Think, for a moment, on Abram's state. He had no monotheistic traditions to go on. No forebearers of the faith. All he had was the majesty and holiness of God pressed into his memory. Imagine the wonder! Imagine how humbling to be promised a land beyond what your eyes can fathom and descendants as numerous as can be conceived and more. 

In its most rudimentary form, worship is an _acknowledgment_. God says "I am holy" - the believer's heart swells as God makes the seed of faith grow and confesses "Yes! Yes, You are." 

How does this link to tithing as worship? In two ways:

1.) For one, worship in general is linked intimately to "sacrifice" - though we benefit greatly from it and it may not feel like it, worship costs something. Something is given to God - tabernacle and temple worship are all about sacrifices. The modern believer sacrifices (gives is a better word here) his time that could be used for something else in order to worship God, be it privately or corporately.

2.) What is the tithe, if not an innate acknowledgment of God as Provider? What are we effectively doing when we tithe? The offering is to God, but He has no need for our money. If He delighted in it, God could build His church out of sand and rocks and sustain His ministers with manna. As a worshiper, we return or submit to God because it is an acknowledgment that He is the source of all things, the Uncreated One! Everything we have - bread, breath and belief - is from Him. Can we ignore Him in the material subjugation of that which He has ordained us to have dominion over?

Are not most of our lives concerned with consumption and vocation? Who is God in that sphere of our lives? He is Sustainer and Provider, and when we tithe, we are moved to act against our depraved greed, a symbolic act that confesses to God: "This is Your world. My life, my sustenance, You are the source; does not everything belong to You?"

I'm not sure how the tithe jives with the RPW. I will say, however, that many argue that it is indeed commanded and falls under the Law of Christ the regenerate heart is conditioned to fulfill. 

To see such a practice as merely a practical tool for the sustenance of ministers seems to reduce its significance egregiously. 

This is something the Lord delights in!


----------



## ChananBachiyr

The argument is very legitimate, it doesn't make much sense for the pastor to just give out of what he just got and will get again soon if he does. 
However, if minister is convicted to give, wouldn't giving to a missions agency, purchasing supplies for the poor/homeless, supporting another ministry, a publisher etc etc... wouldn't these be considered tithing? From a new testament prospective, of course.


----------



## Edward

ChananBachiyr said:


> However, if minister is convicted to give, wouldn't giving to a missions agency, purchasing supplies for the poor/homeless, supporting another ministry, a publisher etc etc... wouldn't these be considered tithing?



If I decided to forgo supporting my local church and instead sent a check to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, would I be tithing?

On the Presbyterian side, since the pastor (at least in some denominations) is a member of Presbytery, not the local congregation, a case might be made that the pastors donations should go to Presbytery, not the church he serves.


----------



## Daniel M.

Edward said:


> ChananBachiyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, if minister is convicted to give, wouldn't giving to a missions agency, purchasing supplies for the poor/homeless, supporting another ministry, a publisher etc etc... wouldn't these be considered tithing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I decided to forgo supporting my local church and instead sent a check to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, would I be tithing?
> 
> On the Presbyterian side, since the pastor (at least in some denominations) is a member of Presbytery, not the local congregation, a case might be made that the pastors donations should go to Presbytery, not the church he serves.
Click to expand...


I agree with Edward in the case of a Reformed or Presbyterian minister's case. 

It serves precisely the same purpose as our tithes and eliminates all shadow of redundancy.

The question is, what do you do with a church that has no oversight?


----------



## Edward

Daniel M. said:


> what do you do with a church that has no oversight?



1) Look for a better option (acknowledging that there may not be)
2) Look for the best analog available - likely a cooperative missions agency of the non-denominational denomination.


----------



## Daniel M.

This whole argument has me thinking: what are arguments against the tithe constituting worship, and where does most of the Board land on that question?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Contra_Mundum

A clear exposition of my own view:

Miscellanies of Rev. Thomas E. Peck, vol.1, pp146-157, on The Moral Obligation of the Tithe
https://archive.org/details/miscellaniesofre01peck


----------



## Daniel M.

Reverand Buchanan,

I tried accessing this on my phone, but was unable. I'll be trying on a desktop PC later today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

