# Tithing Question



## cyberev (Feb 5, 2011)

During my undergrad. years, I had an Econ. prof. who believed if you had debt, you should not tithe until all of your debt was paid. His reasoning was your money belongs to the debtor and is not really yours to tithe. I have disagreed with this belief, because I have debt and still tithe.

Anybody have any thoughts?


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 5, 2011)

Dave Ramsey (who is obviously not a theological guru) advocates paying off debt prior to tithing as well.


----------



## Edward (Feb 5, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> Dave Ramsey (who is obviously not a theological guru) advocates paying off debt prior to tithing as well.



Do you have a reference for that? Because it doesn't seem consistent with what he has posted here Real Debt Help - Get out of debt with Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover Plan - daveramsey.com and here Dave's Advice on Tithing and Giving - Church - daveramsey.com


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 5, 2011)

Edward said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> > Dave Ramsey (who is obviously not a theological guru) advocates paying off debt prior to tithing as well.
> ...


 
On his website for Baby Step 7 it states: 



> •Commit to give regularly to your local church and/or favorite charity.



Real Debt Help - Get out of debt with Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover Plan - daveramsey.com

This is what I was going off of. I was unaware of the pages you posted.


----------



## Scott1 (Feb 5, 2011)

The general principle is carried over from Old Testament (civil law given Israel) tithes, such as on income, on increases, on the fruit of your land, fruit of your animals, etc. So, one would still tithe something, even if on a smaller amount.


----------



## Whitefield (Feb 5, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> (who is obviously not a theological guru)


 
Why the swipe at D.R.?


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 5, 2011)

cyberev said:


> your money belongs to the debtor



This is where the error is. I owe the government something on the order of $9000 in student loans. That does not mean all my money and possessions belong to the government. When I borrowed the money, we agreed to a payment plan. As long as I keep to my end of the agreement (paying the agreed-upon amounts at the proper times), the rest of my money is mine, and a portion of that will go to my church.


----------



## Edward (Feb 5, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> This is what I was going off of.



Thanks. I can see how you can get that conclusion from those pages. But if that is what he is intending, it would also appear to call for funding your retirement and childrens' college before giving. And that doesn't seem consistent with his other statements. 

And I realize that I haven't responded to the original point before going off on this tangent. 



cyberev said:


> His reasoning was your money belongs to the debtor and is not really yours to tithe.



That's certainly not a correct legal conclusion. And I don't believe that it is a correct moral conclusion, either. Since many churches have debt, I wonder if he would also say that a church with debt should not engage in diaconal ministry until the obligation is retired.

He may have been keying off of that bankruptcy case of 20 or 25 years ago where the trustee sued to recover a large contribution made to a church just prior to the bankruptcy filing. But even there, there was a legislative fix, and 12 USC Sec. 548(a) was amended: 

(2) A transfer of a charitable contribution to a qualified religious or charitable entity or organization shall not be considered to be a transfer covered under paragraph (1)(B) in any case in which—
(A) the amount of that contribution does not exceed 15 percent of the gross annual income of the debtor for the year in which the transfer of the contribution is made; or
(B) the contribution made by a debtor exceeded the percentage amount of gross annual income specified in subparagraph (A), if the transfer was consistent with the practices of the debtor in making charitable contributions.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 5, 2011)

Whitefield said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> > (who is obviously not a theological guru)
> ...



I like Dave. I was just pointing out that he does not carry the same theological weight as a Horton or Sproul. That is all.


----------



## baron (Feb 5, 2011)

This was in our news paper today. 

In a recent column on tithing, you advised someone that “if you only have enough money to pay your debt or tithe, pay the debt first. God can wait.” This implies that God isn’t that important and we don’t need to trust him to supply our needs. I’m confused. 

As to your other questions, what I believe is that God wants us to pay our debts and not hide behind some ritual law to cheat people. By being honest with others, we honor the part of them made in the image of God, and in so doing, we honor God. 

Rabbi Marc Gellman is happy to try to answer your religious, personal or ethical questions. Send questions only to The God Squad, c/o Tribune Media Services, 2225 Kenmore Ave., Suite 114, Buffalo, NY 14207, or e-mail them to [email protected].

So I guess this Rabbi agrees with your Econ. prof.


----------



## cyberev (Feb 6, 2011)

Edward said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> > This is what I was going off of.
> ...


 


Edward said:


> That's certainly not a correct legal conclusion. And I don't believe that it is a correct moral conclusion, either. Since many churches have debt, I wonder if he would also say that a church with debt should not engage in diaconal ministry until the obligation is retired.



Hard to say what this guy was thinking. In fact, he told his wife he would not marry her until she was debt free.

---------- Post added at 09:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 PM ----------

Leave it to a Rabbi!


----------



## Edward (Feb 6, 2011)

cyberev said:


> In fact, he told his wife he would not marry her until she was debt free.



I can see some merit there. But I would think attitude toward money would be more important than whether there is a car payment.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Feb 6, 2011)

I read the link:

Real Debt Help - Get out of debt with Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover Plan - daveramsey.com

and he doesn't say not to tithe. He says you should continue to tithe.





> Dear Dave,
> My husband and I are on Baby Step 2 of your plan, and we're working hard to pay off all of our debt. We're Christians, but would it be a good idea to decrease our traditional 10 to 15 percent tithe while we work through the debt snowball?
> Janelle
> 
> ...


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 7, 2011)

If we can't tithe until all debt is paid, no one with a mortgage can tithe, correct? So I'm off the hook for the forseeable future?


----------



## Scott1 (Feb 7, 2011)

I think we need to clarify what we mean by "debt."

If someone has a $10,000 car loan, and payments are $300 per month, the person is not contractually obligated beyond the monthly payment. 

The several tithes under the civil law given Israel are not strictly applicable to us now. But the principle of giving, and giving first fruits, based on all in our possession applies.

So one would first look to tithe, 10% is the least amount God asked in the Old Testament, though there is now strict rule for that now of gross income, limited, of course by pre-existing debt commitments.

E.g. If one has $3,000 after tax income, and one has $1,500 in monthly debt payments, one would still be looking toward giving off the $3,000 amount.

Also, capital appreciation gains (e.g. house value rising), might be a separate category, flowing from Old Testament principle.


----------



## Andres (Feb 7, 2011)

I think using debt to rationalize not giving to church is an excuse, and a poor one at that.


----------



## Scott1 (Feb 7, 2011)

Andres said:


> I think using debt to rationalize not giving to church is an excuse, and a poor one at that.


 
Yes,

For what it's worth, I see a parallel with not trying to keep the sabbath- as fallen sinners, we rationalize that God really does not have a claim on "our" money or "our" time. (BUT he does, on ALL of it, preeminently).


----------



## satz (Feb 7, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> Also, capital appreciation gains (e.g. house value rising), might be a separate category, flowing from Old Testament principle.


 
Don't want to derail the thread, but I thought this was quite an interesting comment. Could you elaborate on the principles you are thinking of and how they would apply to us today?


----------



## JumpingUpandDown (Feb 7, 2011)

Back to the Dave Ramsey comment, he has tithing added in with every baby step, not just 7. At baby step 7, he's talking about "offerings" meaning anything over and above the 10% tithe.


----------



## Scott1 (Feb 9, 2011)

satz said:


> Scott1 said:
> 
> 
> > Also, capital appreciation gains (e.g. house value rising), might be a separate category, flowing from Old Testament principle.
> ...



Reformed theology helps us here.

The ceremonial law, being fulfilled in Christ, its end, is abrogated.

The civil law given Israel expired with the nation except that equitable principles contained in them may continue.

Moral law (e.g. The Ten Commandments) is perpetual, binding on all men in all generations.

(cf. Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter XIX, "_Of the Law of God_" for a summary of the doctrine of Scripture on the kinds of "law" in Scripture)

Part of the civil law given Israel established various tithes. Remember, that the Levites got their support from the tithe because they were not given "land grants" like the other tribes.

There were tithes on income, the fruit of one's land, the fruit of one's animals, and on increases from year-to-year.

One example:




> Deuteronomy 26
> 
> 12When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year, which is the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat within thy gates, and be filled;


 
(see also Deuteronomy 14 generally)

The principle being that a capital increase, a real value increase from year-to-year is also a basis for the tithe.

Remember, the tithe, the ten percent, of each of these kinds is NOT strictly binding on us today, as it was on the Old Testament theocracy of Israel. 

That nation was constituted by God, uniquely, with 11 of 12 tribes receiving land grants and the 12th, Levites receiving their support through tithes because they could not own land.

That's only one aspect of how the Old Testament theocracy of Israel was different than any other nation.

But, there are principles that apply:

1) God gets a "first portion"
2) on everything we possess (including increased value)
3) 10% was the least amount He ever asked for in the Old Testament


----------



## satz (Feb 9, 2011)

Thanks, Scott.


----------

