# The tithe



## Me Died Blue (May 30, 2004)

I've never really studied the theology behind tithing before, largely because it didn't apply to me on a very broad scale. But I just received a fair sum of money for my graduation, and I thus want to make the biblical action at this point, which means I need to study the doctrine and its basis. What are all the Scripture passages that are typically used as the basis for the doctrine? How is the doctrine any different than all of the Mosaic ceremonial laws? Is there typically one majority view on this within the Reformed community, or is it usually more of a diversely viewed issue, like eschatology? Any Scripture, opinions, or references would be much appreciated.

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## Me Died Blue (May 31, 2004)

Paul, I checked out that site, and it says, &quot;The position taken in this short paper presupposes that it is both the Christian's spiritual privilege and moral obligation to tithe on his income to the Lord.&quot; However, that presupposition is exactly the position I'm trying to investigate. But thanks for the reference anyway.

Also, on what do some people base their claim that the tithe can biblically only go to your local church? And what makes the tithe any different than the rest of the OT ceremonial laws?

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## Ianterrell (May 31, 2004)

The tithe isn't a ceremonial law it was practiced by both Abraham and Jacob at least which suggests it is a moral law for covenanters.


----------



## Me Died Blue (May 31, 2004)

Do you agree with the popular belief that it is only properly given to one's local church?


----------



## Ianterrell (May 31, 2004)

I agree with Pau. Part of being a member of the church is to contribute to the local assembly.


----------



## Me Died Blue (May 31, 2004)

[quote:5f3a89567d][i:5f3a89567d]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:5f3a89567d]
[quote:5f3a89567d][i:5f3a89567d]Originally posted by Me Died Blue[/i:5f3a89567d]
Paul, I checked out that site, and it says, &quot;The position taken in this short paper presupposes that it is both the Christian's spiritual privilege and moral obligation to tithe on his income to the Lord.&quot; However, that presupposition is exactly the position I'm trying to investigate. But thanks for the reference anyway.

Also, on what do some people base their claim that the tithe can biblically only go to your local church? And what makes the tithe any different than the rest of the OT ceremonial laws?

In Christ,

Chris [/quote:5f3a89567d]

I know, but I said that you could find SOME useful info. I mean, you can't get better than this: Chris, that graduation money is God's money![/quote:5f3a89567d]

I [i:5f3a89567d]completely[/i:5f3a89567d] agree with that statement; but that fact alone still doesn't necessarily mean that it is to be God's money [i:5f3a89567d]through the means of tithing[/i:5f3a89567d]. Passages like 2 Corinthians 8:1-8 and 2 Corinthians 9:6-7 seem to imply that a general, perpetual spirit of sacrificial generosity and charity is the guiding principle of financial giving under the New Covenant, as opposed to the specific act of the tithe. But then again, maybe I'm being Dispensational by viewing those verses in that way. What do you think about them?

[quote:5f3a89567d][i:5f3a89567d]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:5f3a89567d]
I would say that you should give 10% (at least) to your church. Then you can designate other &quot;tithe&quot; funds to other organizations. But you are a part of that Church. Your responsibility is to your local congregation. it is not to be the rambo Christian and do things flight of fancy.[/quote:5f3a89567d]

I agree that the local church in general is God's primary chosen means of grace, and thus that it is the individual believer's first responsibility. However, do you think that principle could vary depending on the situation? I ask because I still belong to an Assemblies of God church, and will until I go to college in late August. For now, it seems to me that giving to a Reformed organization (such as APM, for example) would be a truer fulfillment of giving my money &quot;to God&quot; than would giving it to an A/G church.

I know that God can sovereignly and providentially use the money however he wishes regardless, but we still have the task of trying to be as responsible as we can with the means He gives us. And to illustrate the principle, let me stretch the example: What if someone was Reformed in thought, but still belonged to the church pastored by Kenneth Copeland, but they were also associated with an organization like APM. Do you think the principle of always giving to your local church applies in all cases, and thus even in that case?

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## fredtgreco (May 31, 2004)

First, Paul we are up from 92.4% to 93.1% on this one.

Second, Chris, even if we were to assume that the tithe was an OT ceremonial law that was replaced by the NT principle of giving and offerings (which I don't) it would stand to reason based on all OT/NT hermeneutical principles that God would be entitled to MORE of the money than 10%. Why would God [b:f8e87d5222]lessen[/b:f8e87d5222] the obligation of giving in the NT? If a different NT principle is involved other than the tithe, it is to encourage the Christian to be [b:f8e87d5222]more[/b:f8e87d5222] generous with his money.

Third, you can run a search on the board for my comments on this topic elsewhere (I think), but I am a firm believer that the Christian's main giving (tithe) is to be to the local church. That is the means that God has ordained for the carrying out of the Kingdom (I will build my Church) and for me it is more a matter of submission to the elders than of stewardship.

Having said that, I believe that is would be permissible for you in light of your impending (and long planned) departure from your church to another for doctrinal reasons to wait until you have a local church (assuming that it is not too long) to tithe the money.


----------



## Me Died Blue (May 31, 2004)

[quote:c493df778a][i:c493df778a]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:c493df778a]
What are you asking?

Are you obliagetd to tithe?

Yes, it was commanded in the old. Furthermore, Jesus repeates it in the new:

Matthew 23

23&quot;Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. [b:c493df778a]You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. [/b:c493df778a] 

Luke 11

42&quot;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.[b:c493df778a] You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone[/b:c493df778a]. 

The biblical model is that you give a tenth of your net income.

As far as your other obligations. Yes you should care for the poor as well. But the tithe was never revoked. In fact, Jesus said he came not to abolish the law. Moreover, we saw, above, that he told people that they should continue what they were doing. He did not retract.[/quote:c493df778a]

Yeah, I already understood how Christ came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. But because of the nature of redemption, that did abolish the practice (although not the meaning, of course) of the OT ceremonial laws. And what I wasn't sure about is whether or not the tithe was an institution of that nature. But Christ's affirmation in the verses you cited clarified that it was not simply part of the OT ceremonial laws. Thanks.

[quote:c493df778a][i:c493df778a]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:c493df778a]
Second, Chris, even if we were to assume that the tithe was an OT ceremonial law that was replaced by the NT principle of giving and offerings (which I don't) it would stand to reason based on all OT/NT hermeneutical principles that God would be entitled to MORE of the money than 10%. Why would God [b:c493df778a]lessen[/b:c493df778a] the obligation of giving in the NT? If a different NT principle is involved other than the tithe, it is to encourage the Christian to be [b:c493df778a]more[/b:c493df778a] generous with his money.[/quote:c493df778a]

Agreed. I never did intend to actually give less than 10%, for that reason. My question of the tithe under the New Covenant was more an issue of principle than pragmatism that I was wondering about. The pragmatic side of my concerns was the A/G issue.

[quote:c493df778a][i:c493df778a]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:c493df778a]
Third, you can run a search on the board for my comments on this topic elsewhere (I think), but I am a firm believer that the Christian's main giving (tithe) is to be to the local church. That is the means that God has ordained for the carrying out of the Kingdom (I will build my Church) and for me it is more a matter of submission to the elders than of stewardship.[/quote:c493df778a]

Agreed.

[quote:c493df778a][i:c493df778a]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:c493df778a]
Having said that, I believe that is would be permissible for you in light of your impending (and long planned) departure from your church to another for doctrinal reasons to wait until you have a local church (assuming that it is not too long) to tithe the money. [/quote:c493df778a]

Thanks for your advice regarding that issue. That makes sense, since I'd still be giving it to my local church, just at a different time in light of the lack of a local Reformed church at this point.

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 1, 2004)

*Recommended*

Beside previous threads on the topic,
[u:a3dc2b488e]Writings of Thomas E. Peck[/u:a3dc2b488e], 3 vols, Banner of Truth, 1999
Vol. 1, pp 146-157, &quot;The Moral Obligation of the Tithe&quot;

Peck's argument is narrowly addressed to the specific question, &quot;whether the precise proportion of the [i:a3dc2b488e]tenth[/i:a3dc2b488e] is the divinely-ordained proportion--that proportion alone (or at least, the smallest) which God will accept as a rental, or as an expression of our dependence, our gratitude, our devotion to him.&quot; 

Peck, who was an old school 19th century Southern Presbyterian, by his argument persuaded me against advocating the legal tithe, which position I formerly held.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 1, 2004)

[quote:f5b1cf972c][i:f5b1cf972c]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:f5b1cf972c]
The biblical model is that you give a tenth of your net income.

[/quote:f5b1cf972c]

Paul,

What definition are you using for &quot;net income&quot;? How did you arrive at this definition biblically?


----------



## FrozenChosen (Jun 1, 2004)

I think a lot of evangelicaldom decides to use the &quot;give cheerfully&quot; as an excuse to say &quot;I'm not cheerful so I won't give.&quot;


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 1, 2004)

[quote:686097f2a3][i:686097f2a3]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:686097f2a3]

from Bahnsen's paper I linked to above. [/quote:686097f2a3]

Thanks.

I see what Bahnsen is saying. And I follow his argument to a point. 

Why is income tax non-discretionary and real estate tax discretionary? Is it because we can choose to not own real estate, and thus not pay any real estate taxes? But is this true? If I decide to rent rather than own a home, is not a portion of my rental payments in fact going to pay (someone else's) real estate taxes? So a direct non-discretionary tax simply becomes an indirect non-discretionary tax.

And are all income taxes really non-discretionary? If I pay personal income tax in Pennsylvania, could I not choose to move to Delaware and avoid personal income tax? If I pay federal income tax, could I not choose to find a job offshore that provides income tax free? Granted, there are burdens involved. But ultimately are not income taxes completely under the individual's control?

And I still do not follow how paying taxes is analogous to the &quot;cost of doing business&quot;, i.e., purchasing supplies or inventory, or paying utilities. If we use the cost of doing business model, should not everything the goverment allows me to deduct on my federal income tax fall into the net income adjustments?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jul 3, 2004)

*It look as if the Jew thinks the tithe is food*

T'rumah, Tithes and Taxes 
That an uncircumcised person shall not shall not eat of the t'rumah (heave offering), and the same applies to other holy things. This rule is inferred from the law of the Paschal offering, by similarity of phrase (Ex. 12:44-45 and Lev. 22:10) but it is not explicitly set forth in the Torah. Traditionally, it has been learnt that the rule that the uncircumcised must not eat holy things is an essential principle of the Torah and not an enactment of the Scribes (negative). See Brit Milah: Circumcision 
Not to alter the order of separating the t'rumah and the tithes; the separation be in the order first-fruits at the beginning, then the t'rumah, then the first tithe, and last the second tithe (Ex. 22:28) (negative) (CCI19). 
To give half a shekel every year (to the Sanctuary for provision of the public sacrifices) (Ex. 30:13) (affirmative). 
That a kohein who is unclean shall not eat of the t'rumah (Lev. 22:3-4) (negative). See Kohein. 
That a person who is not a kohein or the wife or unmarried daughter of a kohein shall not eat of the t'rumah (Lev. 22:10) (negative). See Kohein. 
That a sojourner with a kohein or his hired servant shall not eat of the t'rumah (Lev. 22:10) (negative). See Kohein. 
Not to eat tevel (something from which the t'rumah and tithe have not yet been separated) (Lev. 22:15) (negative) (CCI18). 
To set apart the tithe of the produce (one tenth of the produce after taking out t'rumah) for the Levites (Lev. 27:30; Num. 18:24) (affirmative) (CCI12). See Levi. 
To tithe cattle (Lev. 27:32) (affirmative). 
Not to sell the tithe of the heard (Lev. 27:32-33) (negative). 
That the Levites shall set apart a tenth of the tithes, which they had received from the Israelites, and give it to the kohanim (called the t'rumah of the tithe) (Num. 18:26) (affirmative) (CCI13). See Kohein, Levi. 
Not to eat the second tithe of cereals outside Jerusalem (Deut. 12:17) (negative). 
Not to consume the second tithe of the vintage outside of Jerusalem (Deut. 12:17) (negative). 
Not to consume the second tithe of the oil outside of Jerusalem (Deut. 12:17) (negative). 
Not to forsake the Levites (Deut. 12:19); but their gifts (dues) should be given to them, so that they might rejoice therewith on each and every festival (negative). See Levi. 
To set apart the second tithe in the first, second, fourth and fifth years of the sabbatical cycle to be eaten by its owner in Jerusalem (Deut. 14:22) (affirmative) (CCI14) (today, it is set aside but not eaten in Jerusalem). 
To set apart the second tithe in the third and sixth year of the sabbatical cycle for the poor (Deut. 14:28-29) (affirmative) (CCI15) (today, it must be separated out but need not be given to the poor). 
To give the kohein the due portions of the carcass of cattle (Deut. 18:3) (according to the Talmud, this is not mandatory in the present outside of Israel, but it is permissible, and some observant people do so) (CCA51). See Kohein. 
To give the first of the fleece to the kohein (Deut. 18:4) (according to the Talmud, this is not mandatory in the present outside of Israel, but it is permissible, and some observant people do so) (CCA52). See Kohein. 
To set apart t'rumah g'dolah (the great heave-offering, that is, a small portion of the grain, wine and oil) for the kohein (Deut. 18:4) (affirmative) (CCI11). See Kohein. 
Not to expend the proceeds of the second tithe on anything but food and drink (Deut. 26:14) Anything outside of things necessary for sustenance comes within the class in the phrase &quot;Given for the dead&quot; (negative). 
Not to eat the Second Tithe, even in Jerusalem, in a state of uncleanness, until the tithe had been redeemed (Deut. 26:14) (negative). 
Not to eat the Second Tithe, when mourning (Deut. 26:14) (negative). 
To make the declaration, when bringing the second tithe to the Sanctuary (Deut. 26:13) (affirmative) (CCI17).

Link:http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm


----------

