Should Elders use individual giving as metric of faith?

[JBaldwin]

I implied this in my last post, but now I am going to make it a formal question since no one has really answered it.

Does tithing only equal money? Or can tithing include service to the church and material donations? And if that is the case, how can we measure a tithe of that? Though money is the standard currency in our society, I believe that all that we have, including our time, material possessions and money is the Lord's.

When it comes to NT giving, I have always believed that tithing is the minimum, but I have also leaned in the direction that it means more than just money.

 

[nicnap]

Hi:

Pastoral visitations should be the rule of a Reformed Pastor, and not the exception. Yet, I understand the Baptist model to be quite different from the Reformed.

Blessings,

-CH


sorry, can't exactly work the quote thing.

 

[moral necessity]

Should / could the Elders of a church use a family / individual giving (tithe) as a barameter of their faith? This is, of course, over an amount of time?

There are a lot of things that may go into it like someone knowing roughly how much someone makes, the frequency of giving, etc.

Rough times in someone's life is taken into consideration as well.

Basically, if someone has somehow been informed that someone makes $100,00 a year but only gives $2000 in giving for the church, should that be addressed, lovingly, by an Elder?

Or if someone gives X amount and then stops giving or gives substantially less w/o going through any harsdships ...

Is giving indicitave of someone's faith? I say yes since it has been provided by the Father but what sayeth yea?

Nearly everything for a believer is technically a measure of sanctification; but faith for salvation or justification is measured only upon the dependence that one has upon the work and promise of Christ to account for them on that great day!

Blessings!

 

[LadyFlynt]

I have nothing to add...just had to jump in with the "Go Clemson!" comment

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Hi:

Pastoral visitations should be the rule of a Reformed Pastor, and not the exception. Yet, I understand the Baptist model to be quite different from the Reformed.

Blessings,

-CH


sorry, can't exactly work the quote thing.

I don't get the joke - maybe you can fill me in?

Grace and Peace,

-CH

 

[bookslover]

As has been said, individual giving is a matter of Christian liberty, and is between the individual believer and God. Yes, the members of a congregation do have a biblical responsibility to give, but that's still between him and God.

The last thing a church needs is for the officers to go snooping around in people's personal finances. Sinners that we all are, that's not a situation that would end well. It could be ripe for all kinds of abuse.

 

[KMK]

I implied this in my last post, but now I am going to make it a formal question since no one has really answered it.

Does tithing only equal money? Or can tithing include service to the church and material donations? And if that is the case, how can we measure a tithe of that? Though money is the standard currency in our society, I believe that all that we have, including our time, material possessions and money is the Lord's.

When it comes to NT giving, I have always believed that tithing is the minimum, but I have also leaned in the direction that it means more than just money.

By definition a 'tithe' is 10 percent of your 'increase'. If God gave you an increase of 10 chickens, then you could give a chicken and it would be a tithe. However, putting a chicken in the modern day offering basket may be placing more of a burden on the elders than it is worth. That is why most people sell the chicken and give the $$$ to the church or make some awesome chicken salad and give it to the pastor or the widow or the fatherless.

I agree with Dennis that as a shepherd the Pastor may want to check on those whose giving suddenly drops off. It may be due to a financial crisis or 'controversy' or sin. In any of these cases, the Pastor may be just the person that is able to help.

I understand the appeal of a pastor being ignorant of individual giving, but is it really biblical? The Levites knew who was giving what. In fact, it would appear that the giver would want the Levite to know that he had tithed because the act avouched that he was a part of God's people. Also, Ananias brought his offering 'and laid it at the Apostles feet'.

 

[JBaldwin]

I understand the appeal of a pastor being ignorant of individual giving, but is it really biblical? The Levites knew who was giving what. In fact, it would appear that the giver would want the Levite to know that he had tithed because the act avouched that he was a part of God's people. Also, Ananias brought his offering 'and laid it at the Apostles feet'.

I completely understand your point. However, I still question why an officer in the church should have any reason to pry into the finances of an individual church member. For one thing, a simple word from a treasurer that a person's giving has dropped off, someone might want to see if they are having financial troubles, is entirely different from keeping track of what people are giving.

In the case of Ananias and his wife, Peter made it clear that they were free to do whatever they wished with their property, and that the sin they commited was that of lying about it. They wanted to appear more spiritual in the eyes of the congregation, and that is what Peter rebuked them for.

 

[Hippo]

We are also in danger here of encouraging people to give just for show and to be well thought of.

1 "Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.
2 "Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
Matt 6:1-4 (ESV)

 

[Mushroom]

Well, it appears we now have a new avenue of ministry... we can spot a spiritual or financial crisis in a brother's life today by totalling the checks we find he has placed in the offering basket! This is a wonderful thing! Imagine how hard it must have been in the olden days, when cash was the currency of the land, to have the knowledge of a man's level of giving. How could they know when a brother needed some attention? I mean, a profession of faith, attendance (we do keep attendance records, right?), involvement in the fellowship of the Church, visible behaviour, and reputation are never really enough evidence for admittance to the table, are they?

 

[JBaldwin]

Well, it appears we now have a new avenue of ministry... we can spot a spiritual or financial crisis in a brother's life today by totalling the checks we find he has placed in the offering basket! This is a wonderful thing! Imagine how hard it must have been in the olden days, when cash was the currency of the land, to have the knowledge of a man's level of giving. How could they know when a brother needed some attention? I mean, a profession of faith, attendance (we do keep attendance records, right?), involvement in the fellowship of the Church, visible behaviour, and reputation are never really enough evidence for admittance to the table, are they?

Good point. We often give cash for that very reason.

 

[Grymir]

Tithing??

That Malachi verse is sooo misued. Giving of $$ is a poor indicator. How much time is someone willing to give is far better. So many just give $$ and won't speak about Jesus to others outside of church, nor will be willing to help with the church work. Those are far more important that our offerings.

 

[LadyFlynt]

We also prefer to give in cash only. The other reason would be that I don't want to get a "statement" at the end of the year saying what I gave and presuming I will want to claim them on my taxes (something I am against doing).

 

[Zadok]

I believe that we should speak of tithes and freewill offerings.

We are all called to live sacrificial lives, and that should include money, time, energy etc. The best belongs to the Lord.

As to our financial giving being a measure of one's faith, whilst there may be an element of truth in that, we should tread with great care, because as has been indicated in previous posts we cannot determine the motivation of some in their giving. They may give generously, but for all the wrong reasons- and not because they have more faith! (Sapphira and Annanias)

I agree wholeheartedly with those who have said that it is a matter between God and the individual- the only time that office bearers need to be concerned is when there are real indications of some sin - for example someone who is quite obviously covetous etc.

 

[bookslover]

We also prefer to give in cash only. The other reason would be that I don't want to get a "statement" at the end of the year saying what I gave and presuming I will want to claim them on my taxes (something I am against doing).

May I ask why you are against that? If God is gracious and allows such an exemption on your tax forms, I don't think it would be a sin to take advantage of it. I don't think it would be a negative reflection on your giving.

 

[Pergamum]

If Ceasar lets my money stretch further than that means I can give even more. Only the deacon needs to know at the church. Plus, checks are easier to handle for the poor deacon than cash.

 

[DMcFadden]

Well, it appears we now have a new avenue of ministry... we can spot a spiritual or financial crisis in a brother's life today by totalling the checks we find he has placed in the offering basket! This is a wonderful thing! Imagine how hard it must have been in the olden days, when cash was the currency of the land, to have the knowledge of a man's level of giving. How could they know when a brother needed some attention? I mean, a profession of faith, attendance (we do keep attendance records, right?), involvement in the fellowship of the Church, visible behaviour, and reputation are never really enough evidence for admittance to the table, are they?

Good point. We often give cash for that very reason.

Brad, the sarcasm is unnecessary. As a matter of fact, some people on this forum are willing to separate and form a new denomination for reasons of fairly minor differences in belief or practice. Are you seriously telling me that not contributing financially to one's church is such a matter of privacy and indifference that it does not matter when selecting an elder or deacon?

I never framed the issue in terms of fencing the table, but did suggest that finance is as reliable a barometer of obedience as many other things. And, yes, unresolved issues of anger at someone in the church, a gambling problem, and many other sin issues do often manifest themselves in a discontinuation of giving.

Again, remember, my comment was that I would be informed (as a pastor) IFF a person quit giving or was not giving, NOT how much they gave. And, yes, I have known people who attended regularly, taught Sunday school and boasted of "freedom in the Lord" to give nothing to the church so that they could pour it into their home improvement projects.

 

[KMK]

I understand the appeal of a pastor being ignorant of individual giving, but is it really biblical? The Levites knew who was giving what. In fact, it would appear that the giver would want the Levite to know that he had tithed because the act avouched that he was a part of God's people. Also, Ananias brought his offering 'and laid it at the Apostles feet'.

I completely understand your point. However, I still question why an officer in the church should have any reason to pry into the finances of an individual church member. For one thing, a simple word from a treasurer that a person's giving has dropped off, someone might want to see if they are having financial troubles, is entirely different from keeping track of what people are giving.

In the case of Ananias and his wife, Peter made it clear that they were free to do whatever they wished with their property, and that the sin they commited was that of lying about it. They wanted to appear more spiritual in the eyes of the congregation, and that is what Peter rebuked them for.

I understand Ananias' sin, what I am refering to is the fact that it was brought to the Apostle's feet and there is no indication that the place where he brought it was inappropriate. The amount was inappropriate. The point I am trying to make is the idea of bringing tithes and offerings straight to the Levite or the Apostle has precedent in the Bible.

I am not necessarily advocating such a practice, just looking for Biblical prohibitions for doing so.

 

[govols]

So, if you have a treasurer, of sorts, and people give using checks; the treasurer has to write / put that amount in something to send back to individual at the end of January for taxes.

Okay, let's say it is Excel that they put the information in. One page has all the information (Family Name, Amount, Dates) while another page does not contain the names but just the Amount and Dates.

Would it be okay twice a year for the Elders to review the second page (no names) to at least know if anything might be wrong (not correct word) with a Family?

If you have a family giving $10,000 a year for 2 years and then over a period of 3 months the giving drops to $100 a year, can the Elders see that second page with no names and ask if they should go to care for that family.

I am a firm believer that giving is indicative of someone's spiritual health. The Lord has provided for us, it is essentially His money, and should we not give back to our Church what is already His?

If someone stops giving or drastically slows down their giving, is that not an indication that something might be wrong spiritually for them? Just a question.

I know the Elders or anyone else for that matter should not go around asking people how much money they make and then put that into the Excel spreadsheet as Money / 10. :-> Not saying that. But trends are an indicator of something are they not? Just being able to ask them if they need help. Pride can get in the way for someone to ask for help.?

 

[LadyFlynt]

We also prefer to give in cash only. The other reason would be that I don't want to get a "statement" at the end of the year saying what I gave and presuming I will want to claim them on my taxes (something I am against doing).

May I ask why you are against that? If God is gracious and allows such an exemption on your tax forms, I don't think it would be a sin to take advantage of it. I don't think it would be a negative reflection on your giving.

Something about it simply bothers me.

 

[Presbyterian Deacon]

We also prefer to give in cash only. The other reason would be that I don't want to get a "statement" at the end of the year saying what I gave and presuming I will want to claim them on my taxes (something I am against doing).

May I ask why you are against that? If God is gracious and allows such an exemption on your tax forms, I don't think it would be a sin to take advantage of it. I don't think it would be a negative reflection on your giving.

Something about it simply bothers me.

Render to Ceaser the things that are Ceaser's, and render to God the things that are God's.

But I can't find anywhere that says, Get a note from God, or the church about how much you rendered, so that Ceaser will give credit for it at the end of the year.

But I do find scripture that says to give in secret.

 

[Mushroom]

Well, it appears we now have a new avenue of ministry... we can spot a spiritual or financial crisis in a brother's life today by totalling the checks we find he has placed in the offering basket! This is a wonderful thing! Imagine how hard it must have been in the olden days, when cash was the currency of the land, to have the knowledge of a man's level of giving. How could they know when a brother needed some attention? I mean, a profession of faith, attendance (we do keep attendance records, right?), involvement in the fellowship of the Church, visible behaviour, and reputation are never really enough evidence for admittance to the table, are they?

Good point. We often give cash for that very reason.

Brad, the sarcasm is unnecessary. As a matter of fact, some people on this forum are willing to separate and form a new denomination for reasons of fairly minor differences in belief or practice. Are you seriously telling me that not contributing financially to one's church is such a matter of privacy and indifference that it does not matter when selecting an elder or deacon?

I never framed the issue in terms of fencing the table, but did suggest that finance is as reliable a barometer of obedience as many other things. And, yes, unresolved issues of anger at someone in the church, a gambling problem, and many other sin issues do often manifest themselves in a discontinuation of giving.

Again, remember, my comment was that I would be informed (as a pastor) IFF a person quit giving or was not giving, NOT how much they gave. And, yes, I have known people who attended regularly, taught Sunday school and boasted of "freedom in the Lord" to give nothing to the church so that they could pour it into their home improvement projects.

Dennis, I meant no offense, just pointing out that a record of how much a man gives was not as easy in the olden days, and yet they were able to determine the qualifications of officers or the need for ministry to individuals without it. Perhaps they simply asked the man about his giving. We would assume that a man nominated for office would at least have the quality of character to answer honestly, would we not?

I don't believe that it is necessary to 'preach' giving to the Church. Preach the Gospel, and giving will manifest itself among those who believe.

2Co 9:6 But this I say, He that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
2Co 9:7 Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

There is, it seems to me, an intimation of privacy in this passage, in that each man is to purpose in his own heart in such a way as to give ungrudgingly and not out of a burdensome sense of duty, but cheerfully. What comprises cheerful giving will certainly be different from one man to the next.

I've been in Churches where tithing was preached as a duty with regularity, and the effect seemed the opposite of that desired; folks were offended and gave less. I've been in Churches where a duty to tithe was never mentioned, and yet the level of giving was high, because the Gospel was preached and believed, and the members took responsibility for the work the body was involved in.

I've also known of Churches where some officers had the idea they needed to see members' tax returns to determine their level of giving. That's nuts. What the scriptures say is for each to give cheerfully. What Ananias did was lie about the amount. It had nothing to do with the amount itself, it was his to do with what he wanted. That event was not recorded to imply that Church officers should be monitoring income and giving levels of members. I personally would be offended if an Elder came to me concerned about my spiritual condition based on information he had gleaned from the Church treasury records. It would be a sad statement that he had to find out about problems through a bean-counter's book rather than by knowing me well enough to notice trouble, and having the courage to ask me directly, and the trust to believe my answer.

 

[Presbyterian Deacon]

Duty of Elders

2Co 9:6 But this I say, He that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
2Co 9:7 Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

There is, it seems to me, an intimation of privacy in this passage, in that each man is to purpose in his own heart in such a way as to give ungrudgingly and not out of a burdensome sense of duty, but cheerfully. What comprises cheerful giving will certainly be different from one man to the next.

I've been in Churches where tithing was preached as a duty with regularity, and the effect seemed the opposite of that desired; folks were offended and gave less. I've been in Churches where a duty to tithe was never mentioned, and yet the level of giving was high, because the Gospel was preached and believed, and the members took responsibility for the work the body was involved in.

I've also known of Churches where some officers had the idea they needed to see members' tax returns to determine their level of giving. That's nuts. What the scriptures say is for each to give cheerfully. What Ananias did was lie about the amount. It had nothing to do with the amount itself, it was his to do with what he wanted. That event was not recorded to imply that Church officers should be monitoring income and giving levels of members. I personally would be offended if an Elder came to me concerned about my spiritual condition based on information he had gleaned from the Church treasury records. It would be a sad statement that he had to find out about problems through a bean-counter's book rather than by knowing me well enough to notice trouble, and having the courage to ask me directly, and the trust to believe my answer.

Good statement.
I agree, an Elder should determine his church members' spiritual conditions based upon his familiarity with the members themselves, not his knowledge of their giving. But alas, shepherding and pastoral visits are often the exception rather than the rule in these days.

Not so in days gone by:

"It is the duty of Ruling Elders to visit the members of the church and their families--to converse with them to instruct the ignorant; to confirm the wavering; to caution the unwary; to reclaim the wandering; to encourage the timid; and to excite and animate all classes to a faithful and exemplary discharge of duty..." Samuel Miller, "The Ruling Elder" (1832).

The elder who thus fulfills his duty does not need to read your checkbook to determine your walk with the Lord.

 

[DMcFadden]

Dennis, I meant no offense, just pointing out that a record of how much a man gives was not as easy in the olden days, and yet they were able to determine the qualifications of officers or the need for ministry to individuals without it. Perhaps they simply asked the man about his giving. We would assume that a man nominated for office would at least have the quality of character to answer honestly, would we not?

 

[KMK]

Good point. We often give cash for that very reason.

Brad, the sarcasm is unnecessary. As a matter of fact, some people on this forum are willing to separate and form a new denomination for reasons of fairly minor differences in belief or practice. Are you seriously telling me that not contributing financially to one's church is such a matter of privacy and indifference that it does not matter when selecting an elder or deacon?

I never framed the issue in terms of fencing the table, but did suggest that finance is as reliable a barometer of obedience as many other things. And, yes, unresolved issues of anger at someone in the church, a gambling problem, and many other sin issues do often manifest themselves in a discontinuation of giving.

Again, remember, my comment was that I would be informed (as a pastor) IFF a person quit giving or was not giving, NOT how much they gave. And, yes, I have known people who attended regularly, taught Sunday school and boasted of "freedom in the Lord" to give nothing to the church so that they could pour it into their home improvement projects.

Dennis, I meant no offense, just pointing out that a record of how much a man gives was not as easy in the olden days, and yet they were able to determine the qualifications of officers or the need for ministry to individuals without it. Perhaps they simply asked the man about his giving. We would assume that a man nominated for office would at least have the quality of character to answer honestly, would we not?

I don't believe that it is necessary to 'preach' giving to the Church. Preach the Gospel, and giving will manifest itself among those who believe.

2Co 9:6 But this I say, He that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
2Co 9:7 Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

There is, it seems to me, an intimation of privacy in this passage, in that each man is to purpose in his own heart in such a way as to give ungrudgingly and not out of a burdensome sense of duty, but cheerfully. What comprises cheerful giving will certainly be different from one man to the next.

I've been in Churches where tithing was preached as a duty with regularity, and the effect seemed the opposite of that desired; folks were offended and gave less. I've been in Churches where a duty to tithe was never mentioned, and yet the level of giving was high, because the Gospel was preached and believed, and the members took responsibility for the work the body was involved in.

I've also known of Churches where some officers had the idea they needed to see members' tax returns to determine their level of giving. That's nuts. What the scriptures say is for each to give cheerfully. What Ananias did was lie about the amount. It had nothing to do with the amount itself, it was his to do with what he wanted. That event was not recorded to imply that Church officers should be monitoring income and giving levels of members. I personally would be offended if an Elder came to me concerned about my spiritual condition based on information he had gleaned from the Church treasury records. It would be a sad statement that he had to find out about problems through a bean-counter's book rather than by knowing me well enough to notice trouble, and having the courage to ask me directly, and the trust to believe my answer.

Thank you for these thoughts, Brad.

I agree that a preacher should not harp on tithing and giving. As a preacher I dread giving those messages. But at the same time, if I am going to preach God's Word in entirety, I am going to have to speak about it at some point. Honestly, I wish someone had taught me about tithing earlier in my life.

Here's a question for everyone. Should a pastor approach a sheep who has stopped attending church? Should a pastor approach a sheep who has stopped partaking of the bread and the cup? Why shouldn't the pastor approach a sheep whose giving has suddenly dropped off?

A pastor is a servant, not a lord. He can only serve you as much as you allow him. If you do not allow the pastor to hold you accountable with your giving then he can't. Just like if you do not allow him to hold you accountable for your attendance he can't. But he can be a valuable asset to anyone who wants to be held accountable for their spiritual duties.