These are fair questions which I answer in detail in the booklet referenced earlier. Briefly, neither Abraham's tithe in Genesis 14 nor Jacob's in Gen 28 is an annual obligation to give 10%. Both are vows to give 10% of a specific undertaking - in Abraham's case a military expedition, and in Jacob's case, his trip to Paddan Aram. In fact, if the tithe obligation existed at that time, Jacob's vow would be meaningless, since he would already be obligated to give God 10% of his produce anyway.
I have not read your booklet as I do not have a Kindle device. I have never heard of a tithe in Genesis 28 - I don't see any form of the Hebrew word מַעֲשֵׂר in that passage.
The Sabbath is not a "tithe" on our time in any other than a very loose sense: 1/7 = 14% not 10%. It is a requirement to set aside a "proportionate" amount, to be sure, but the proportion is different. And by the way, while we are on the topic, the OT obligation was precisely not 10%. It was 10% plus first fruits plus poll tax plus first dough, etc. Are we obligated, every time we make bread, to bring the first loaf to the pastor (see
Num. 15:18-21)? Does that extend to brownies?
Ture, 1/7 =/= 10%. But in my reply I stated "the
waking hours of the Sabbath = 10% of the time in a week" which I believe is also true. I believe the OT tithing obligation was precisely 10% - "tenth" is the literal meaning of the Hebrew מַעֲשֵׂר that we translate "tithe." The annual tithe was clearly established for the sustenance of the tribe of Levi (the end of Nehemiah 10 provides a concise commentary on this). The other obligations (first fruits, first born, heave offerings, etc.) were additional, not necessarily annual, and not necessarily devoted to the Levitical progeny. Christ's father, being a carpenter, would have never paid the tithe, but he would have still been obligated to give at other times. I would think this is the modern distinction we often make when we refer to "tithes and offerings" - we may not be conscience of the distinction when we use those words, but there is a reason we use both words and not one or the other. We also speak in modern times of "alms," and this, too, compares with much (gleaning, for example) in the previous and largely agrarian dispensation of the covenant of grace.
The Scribes and the Pharisees were right to tithe in Jesus' time, as they were right to bring sacrifices and eat kosher. Before Christ's death and resurrection, the OT laws were still in full force. That doesn't bind us today.
Agreed, but general equity applications do not always completely abandon direct application of all specifics of past law.
Finally, the obvious place for Paul to mention tithing, if it were still in force, is where he is instructing Christians about supporting their pastors (the closest equivalent of OT priests and Levites) in
1 Cor. 9:9 and
1 Tim 5:18; instead, in both instances, he appeals to the OT law about not muzzling an ox as it is grinding grain (
Deut. 25:4).
I would regard this, respectfully, as an argument from silence. It in some ways reminds me of the "household baptism" discussions as the silence can be reversed - nothing needed to be mentioned if it is obvious to the contemporary reader that it still existed. As for Paul's appeal to the OT law about not muzzling an ox as it is grinding grain - is this not part of the moral law? If so, then it would seem Paul is making the case that those devoted to public ministry should still be maintained financially by those they serve.
By the way, I don't think any of this lets Christians off the hook in terms of their giving. "Excelling in the grace of giving" can hardly be less than meeting our legal obligations was under the law, but it is based on a different set of questions. Instead of "What is the minimum I have to give?" (which then leads to "Is that gross or is that net?"), we are asking "What would it look like for me to be really good at giving joyfully to God's kingdom?" (which makes the "gross vs net" question look rather silly).
I entirely agree with this sentiment. The "gross vs net" question appears to be little different in spirit than the spirit Christ condemned in the Scribes and Pharisees for appearing to tithe to the letter of the law while abandoning the intent of the law. I personally find that the answer to "What would it look like for me to be really good at giving joyfully to God's kingdom?" begins with 10%. I would maintain - though I recognize that few support this - that the tithe is creational (time is more valuable than mammon and thus arguing from the greater to the lesser) though it looks different in different dispensations. For example, I believe 10% of gross income for non-agrarians is a good way to offer up the tithe and firstfruits in the current dispensation of grace, but this begets many questions such as: Should one only give once a year based on what you report to the government as income? (if so, few of us who are farmers would not be offering much - most years I do not show a profit after lawful deductions).
It is interesting that the "Old Testament" law provided many examples of ways to substituting money for some obligations, including the tithe (see for example, Leviticus 27 which contains such verses as "But if a man will redeem any of his tithe, he shall add the fifth part thereto." v.31). Was not this not given for us to draw upon later when the agrarian-based economy passes? Consider, too, that the agrarian-based economy has not passed in all parts of the world and some of our brethren in other cultures still look to the Mosaic agrarian laws regarding tithes for guidance. The laws of the previous dispensation do not bind us to the letter today, but they remain to guide us with the grace we have been given.
But if giving in a non-agrarian society today ends at 10% of gross, it is usually due to the spirit of the Scribes and Pharisee who were really only concerned with meeting the letter of the law so they could feel free to spend the 90% on themselves. It still seems to me that the agrarian-based tithing system being replaced with a tithe of money would be a progression that follows with the God-ordained unfolding of history (which includes economic evolution), just as much of early Scripture was largely written with repetitive literary devices to aid the largely illiterate world in knowing God's Word whereas much of the later Scripture is written without these devices.
.
