II. TITHING IS TEN PERCENT
How much should the Christian give to his Lord? Fortunately, God has not left us in the dark. If no fixed
proportion were prescribed in the Scriptures, we might be constantly wondering, “Have I given enough?”
But the tithe takes all the guesswork out of giving. It is liberating. We know exactly what is required of us.
We can render our ten percent to God and go on with a clear conscience.19 Without this objective standard,
we are vulnerable to guilt manipulation.20
However, there are some complications. In the history of the church there has been some debate over how
many tithes the OT law demanded.21 Some think there was an extra tithe every third year, to be given to the
poor (Deut. 14:28-29). Rushdoony and Powell claim there were actually three tithes, the Social (or Levitical)
tithe (Lev. 27:30-33; Num. 18:20-24), the Rejoicing tithe (Ex. 23:16; Lev. 23:33-44; Deut. 12:5-25; 14:22-27;
16:13-15) and the Poor tithe (Deut. 14:28-29). Powell explains these three tithes cannot be “lumped”
together. “These tithes can be seen as distinct from one another because they were administered at different
locales,”22 and because they went towards different functions.23 According to Powell, the Social tithe was
given to the Levites at the sanctuary in Jerusalem or at local synagogues and provided for various cultic and
cultural services performed by the priests, such as sacrifices, education, music, advising political officials,
etc.24 The Rejoicing tithe was used at Jerusalem25 by the tither to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles (or
Booths or Ingathering), remembering God’s deliverance of the people out of slavery (Lev. 21:43). Thus the
money for this tithe was to be spent “for whatever your heart desires” (Deut. 14:26). Apparently, the people
were to share with the Levites and the poor during these seven days of rejoicing (Deut. 14:27; 16:14; Lev.
23:33-44). The Poor tithe was collected locally every third year and used to assist those in need (Deut. 14:28,
29).26
If we follow Powell’s scheme, the financial burden on the tither becomes quite heavy. The Israelite
calendar followed a seven year cycle, with every seventh year being a Sabbatical year in which there would
be no increase, and thus no tithe. During the first, second, fourth, and fifth years, each man would tithe
20% (the Social and Rejoicing tithes). During the third and sixth years, the tither would owe 30% (the Poor
tithe would be added to the first two tithes).27 If we factor in the sabbatical years, the average given per
year is 20%; without the Sabbatical year it is 23.33%. While Powell makes a compelling case for three
tithes, there are several problems with this view. While the issue is complex, and there is a lot of biblical
data to deal with, it seems that in actuality there is only one tithe, with several functions.
Why just one tithe? First of all, this is in keeping with the pattern already established in the Pentateuch. As
far as the Scripture record shows, Abraham and Jacob paid one tithe to the Lord, rather than multiple tithes.
While the Lord certainly could increase the tax burden upon His people, it seems unlikely. After all, we
have already seen that the Melchizedekal priesthood is greater than the Levitical priesthood. If this is the
case, how could the Levites have a claim to a greater proportion of income than Melchizedek? Secondly,
the various functions of the tithe simply do not necessitate multiple tithes. Surely 10% from eleven tribes
was adequate to care for the Levites and the poor, as well as paying for the Feast of Tabernacles. Portions
of the tithe could be set aside for each of these uses. Powell himself is even forced to admit that what he
calls the Rejoicing tithe also supported the Levites and the poor (Deut. 14:27; 16:14).28 Thus the tithes are not
nearly as distinct as he claims. Thirdly, the so-called Social tithe and Rejoicing tithe did not overlap. The
Social tithe (Lev. 27:30, 32) was a tithe on seed, fruit, and animals. The Rejoicing tithe (Deut. 12:17; 14:23)
was on grain, new wine, and oil. As Jordan points out, “Together, they do not constitute 20% of the whole
[.10(a+b)+.10(c+d) = .10(a+b+c+d)]. Thus the total tithe remains at 10%.”29 Even if these were somehow
two separate tithes, they did not really constitute a full 10% of one’s increase unless combined.
What conclusions can be drawn from this? Scripture designates that the single tithe be used in several
different ways: to provide salaries for pastors, pay worship expenses, assist the worthy poor, fund
education30and music, etc. It is up to NC Levites (the church’s elders), not the tithers themselves, to decide
how the tithe money is to be allocated.31 There are not many tithes, each serving an independent function,
but one tithe covering all the expenses of the institutional church.32 I conclude the tithe God requires is
10%
Footnotes
20For example, in the book Life in the Father’s House by Wayne Mack and David Swavely (p. 110), our
authors tell us that we should, “decide upon a percentage of our gross income as a regular minimum gift to
the local church.” But in the very next paragraph they turn around and tell us we must give sacrificially
and, “That proportional amount we give regularly to the church should be one that strains our budgets.”
21In addition to laws about the tithe, the OT contains laws concerning firstfruits and the firstborn. The
firstfruits of the harvest and the firstborn male belonged to God. These laws reminded the people that God
is the Creator and Owner of all. The firstborn offering was not, strictly speaking, a tithe, because only the
firstborn male was offered (Ex. 13:1-2, 11-12; Num. 3:13; 8:17). Most likely the firstborn offering was in
addition to the tithe. The firstfruits were also apparently distinct from the tithe and were given as a kind
free-will offering with no set amount specified (Ex. 23:16-19; 34:26; Num. 18:12-13; Lev. 23:9-14; Deut.
12:5-7; 8:3-4; 14:23, 28; 26:1-15; Neh. 10:37; 12:44; Prov. 3:9-10). Possibly no amount was stated
explicitly because the proportion of a tithe was simply assumed. Either way, both these laws seem to have
been typological in character and have found their fulfillment in Christ, the firstfruits of the resurrection (1
Cor. 15:20 ) and the firstborn over all creation (Col. 1:15, 17; Rom. 8:29). In Him we are a kind of
“firstfruits of His creatures” (Jas. 1:18) because we have “the firstfruits of the Spirit’ (Rom. 8:23). We are
the “church of the firstborn” (Heb. 12:23). The ransom price laid upon the firstborn (Ex. 13:13; 34:20;
Num. 3:5-13; 18:15-16) need no longer be paid because Christ is our ransom (Mk. 10:45; 1 Pt. 1:18). See
Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law, p. 51.
22Tithing and Dominion, p. 99.
23Ibid., p. 100.
24Note that the Levites themselves also took a tithe of the tithe they had received to Jerusalem, where it was
given apparently to the High Priest (Num. 18; Neh. 10:38).
25An exception to this was granted to Jews who lived outside the original boundaries of Israel, too far away
to make the trip to Jerusalem (Deut. 12:17-28). This provision probably points to the promised expansion of
Israel, which becomes a reality in the New Covenant.
26Powell points out that the Poor tithe should not be confused with Poor loans or gleaning, which were
additional forms of charity. See p. 121-133. While much that Powell says about helping the poor is very
helpful, there is a significant flaw in his understanding of the Poor tithe itself. Tithe money was not given
directly to the poor by the tither. Rather whatever was leftover after the Feast of Tabernacles went to the
elders of the gate (who would correspond to elders of a local congregation in the NC). They in turn decided
how the resources were to be used, dividing it between the poor and the Levites. What is distinct about the
third year tithe is not simply that it was given to the poor, but that it was used locally rather than centrally at
Jerusalem.
27These figures would vary slightly because Powell allows for the firstfruits and firstborn offerings to be
deducted. See p. 87. On p. 58, he estimates the total tithe to be about 25%.
28 p. 112. The third year tithe specifically mentions the poor as recipients, but this is not unique.
Comparing other passages that deal with the yearly tithe show it too was used to support the poor (Deut.
14:27; 16:11, 12; 26:11-13). Additionally, the third year tithe did not fund the poor exclusively. Thus, it is
misnomer to call the third year tithe a “Poor Tithe.”
29 p. 210.
30It is somewhat difficult to tell if the educational services provided by the Levites were comprehensive
(i.e., a Christian school) or narrowly in biblical studies (i.e., a seminary). If the instruction provided by the
Levites was holistic, this does not mean a person may substitute tuition at a Christian school for tithing to
the local church. Rather it means that the function of the local church could include the establishment of a
covenant school and elders could use some of the church’s budget to fund it.
31For proof of this, see my arguments under thesis six.
32In the NC there is an added expense for the church not explicitly mentioned in the OC, namely
support for missionaries.
