Tithing is not a Old Testament Law !

Hi All,I’m not sure if I posted this in the right place or not, but this is in reply to whither or not tithing is a New Testament commandment or not?I have been reading in the posts and was shocked to see so many believe that the issue of tithing was an O.T. Commandment, and that it’s not for us today.Let’s get the record straight. :-)First when did we first read about this tithing business?Genesis 14:17-20 Then after his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley). [18] And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High. [19] He blessed him and said, "Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; [20] And blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand?" He gave him a tenth of all. We can see plainly that Abraham was the first to give God 10% or the tithes. For Tithes the word means "tenth, or 10 %”So this practice was way before you see it in the O.T. Covenant. For this took place over 400 years early. Remember that Israel didn’t come into existence until they were free from the Egyptians. And for all you bible students out there, you also will know that Melchizedek was a type of Christ. Let us establish this tithing issue even further. :-)Let’s take a look at what the Apostle Paul teaches.Hebrews 7:1-2 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, [2] to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all the spoils, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace. Hebrews 7:4-6 Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the choicest spoils. [5] And those indeed of the sons of Levi who receive the priest's office have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brethren, although these are descended from Abraham. [6] But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed the one who had the promises. Now what Paul is saying is this, That even the Father of our faith Abraham paid Tithes to Melchizedek, Also note that he said “sons of Levi who receive the priest's office have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brethren, although these are descended from Abraham." In other words, that those who were in Abraham also paid the tithes to God. Now I would say this, yes we are not under the Old Covenant anymore very true. But we are the seeds of Abraham, According to:Galatians 3:6-7 Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. [7] Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. If we believe God, then we are the sons of Abraham. Alto we are Sons by Faith and Not sons of Natural seed. The Sons by Faith carry a greater importance than those of the natural seed. Even Jesus says the same thing in John 8:39-44 They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you are Abraham's children, do the deeds of Abraham. [40] "But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do. [41] "You are doing the deeds of your father." They said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father: God." [42] Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. [43] "Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. [44] "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Jesus said to the natural seed of Abraham that their father was the devil. In other words, that ONLY those who have the faith of Abraham were considered the sons of Abraham.So it is very clear that the seeds of Abraham should believe as Abraham. And as for paying tithes it is a Big YES. Abraham paid the tithes in respect and Love, the Jews were forced to pay, and it was a law because they were a disobedient people. Almost in everything they were always being disobedient to God. Jeremiah 17:23 But they obeyed not, neither inclined their ear, but made their neck stiff, that they might not hear, nor receive instruction. He had to write the LAW because of there iniquities. Galatians 3:19 Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made. Who do you want to be like, Abraham, or the Jews?Thanks for reading thisDarylwww.dfcm.org

In another thread on the subject, one of the moderators posted this link:http://www.acts17-11.com/dialogs_tithe.htmlHow do you respond to the argument therein?2 Corinthians 9:7As every man purposeth in his heart, so let him give, not grudgingly or out of compulsion; for God loveth the cheerful giver. Personally, I agree with a quote from D.L. Moody (posted by another moderator, actually) that: "the Old Testament rule for giving was 10% but the New Testament rule is 100%"

Tithing was viewed in the Old Testament as a sacrifice. Christ has done away with all those sacrifices.

Hi Keith,As I clearly stated in my post, Tithing was before the Old Covenant was even created. As for the link you sent me. Yes what he is saying is true, as long as you keep it in context to the old testament. AS for the verse Deutron. if you finish reading it. it states that "if you were to far a way to bring your tithes to where the lord choses, then you shall sell it for money and buy your hearts deisre, oxen, etc... and spend it ...." The purpose of this is to communion with their Covenant God.but i will say again. Tithing is not an Old Testament Law. It was in play before the old testament. Also to the Authors note in the book of Acts, about people selling their goods. Note when one cheats the Lord, they are put to death for lieing about the amount of money the land was sold for. If it was what he claims in his statement. Then it really wouldnt matter what they sold it for huh?God Bless

Hi Preaching,Thanks for the Post, How many times are we told in the N.T. to be a Abraham? That is the main focus of Pauls teaching. As I have clearly shown that tithing was way before the Old Covenant was even made. It did not end when the old testament ended. If im not mistaken, you will see in 1 Cor. that Paul himself tell them to lay up there wages weekly for he will come and get them. 1 Cor. 16:1-2 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. [2] Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. I now its hard to believe, but tithing is a major part of our Covenant with God in this New Testament. For we reap what we sow.God Bless

Thanks for the Post, How many times are we told in the N.T. to be a Abraham? That is the main focus of Pauls teaching. Then according to your logic, we should still be keeping circumcision.As I have clearly shown that tithing was way before the Old Covenant was even made.So? They offered animal sacrifices as well. Also remember, Noah was able to disceriminate from clean and unclean animals, prior to the giving of the law. And there were various dietary laws as well. So, why don't you keep these things as well?

If im not mistaken, you will see in 1 Cor. that Paul himself tell them to lay up there wages weekly for he will come and get them.1 Cor. 16:1-2Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. [2] Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.Hmm... according to how tithing is taught today, the "collection" would have been for the leadership of that local Corinthian church, not Paul and the other churches he wanted to distribute it to, and it would've stayed in that house. This is hardly Paul teaching tithing. It's simply a gift for helping others in need.

Hi Preaching,lol, No, you missed the part in the bible where it says that He was concered Rightounes when he believed God, not the circumcision. here ill post it for you.Romans 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." Galatians 3:6 Even so Abraham believed God, and it WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. So see circumcision was only a sign, infact is was only a sign of the Covenant with God. It never counted for salvation.And as for Noah, Yes he did bring the offerings, but if you read your bible correcty, you will clearly see Noah was making a covenant with God. Thats why those animals were offered. Also with your way of thinking, Noah was not circumcised either, and we was counted as rightouness. :-)God Bless

hum, how do you take " I have given Order to the Chruch of Glatatia, even so do Ye" ?Now don't get me wrong, I believe that the people of God should give 10% to their local church where they attend. I am totally against all this begging and crying that is going on to get money. And i totally agree with the scripture quotes that talks about making a profit from the ministry, but to say tithing is not an issue today, is against the word of God.looks its plain from your posts that you are totaly against this tithing thing.Thats fine you want to believe this view. but to post it so other can be influenced by it is another thing. God Bless

Thats fine you want to believe this view. but to post it so other can be influenced by it is another thing. That statement has implications you may not at first realize.First, if he shouldn't post his view so others can be influenced by it, you shouldn't either.Second, this kind of argument is dangerously close to a common response made by relativistic atheists, who say that there is no absolute truth: "By keeping the words 'under God' in the pledge of allegiance*, you are imposing your morality and truth on others, and you are wrong to do so."The response is the same. Logically, you have to enforce a viewpoint on the issue. Something can be either white or black, or even a shade of grey, but it must still be some pigment. Using your logic, the thing must be able to cease to exist, if you follow me. A statement must either be true or false, and can even be half-true, but can never be neither partially true nor partially false. If I said that the sky was grey, that would be a half-truth because the sky is sometimes grey; but you cannot make a statement about the sky that is neither partially true nor partially false. This logic violates the law of the excluded middle.*or whatever they're arguing, this is merely an example.

I am in agreement with DFCM in terms of the practice of tithing. As he so clearly pointed out that Melchizedec was given a tenth by Abraham, and we are of the same faith as Abraham, thus this precept is before us. Do we obey or not is the question. In the other thread, I had read what Mike had posted. Concerning Deuteronomy 14:22-29 and webpage article, I was momentarily swayed without giving much thought to the matter. My deceitful heart wanted to be swayed by these thoughts. I had just left the fellowship and stopped tithing. But thanks to DFMC, I went back to Scripture. The love of the truth will show you the condition of your heart. In Deut 14, the faithful are required to give a tenth. The interesting part is for what purpose. First, it is to be a time of worshiping and thanking the Lord for His provisions. Secondly, it is to take care of the fatherless, widows, and the Levite. So how does it pretain to today. It still causes one to look at his own heart condition. In this past week I found my heart to be deceitful. Secondly, there are abuses by the Levites of today. Where are their hearts. Again I would like to post a comment on this issue written by Art Katz:The Lord’s Coming Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation’ (2 Peter 3:3-4). The Lord’s coming is a critical doctrine, and one that must not stand in isolation from other doctrines. To mock, or scoff, at His coming is to scoff at everything . It is to mock the faith and the word of God itself. Mocking is a contemptuous, contemptible attitude, and we can be mockers and not even know it. We can mock by something in our spirit that is not expressed in our words, but just by the way we carry or bear ourselves. For example, making careful and meticulous provision for our retirement, or looking forward to a long life, is in effect scoffing against the known doctrine of the coming of the Lord. Another example would be church groups in the perpetuating of their own institutions, which are scoffing against the coming of the Lord by making every kind of provision for His not coming. By the same token, the erecting of multi-million dollar church buildings is not the statement of a people who are looking toward a soon-coming end ?a Lord who is ‘at the door’ and who is coming with Last Days’ devastation and judgment. We will not be able to enjoy our concrete or glass palaces then. Our building programs are a statement that we are not “looking for His appearing,” but if one were to suggest to the authorities of that fellowship that that is scoffing, they would be aghast, because they subscribe to the doctrine of the Lord’s coming— but only as a doctrine . There is a difference between holding a doctrine and existential expectation. It is not the mere holding of doctrines that distinguishes us as the Church, but rather, do we have an actual apocalyptic expectation of an end? Is it such a pulsating reality for us that our plans for our retirement and for the future are radically affected? The use of our money and time is directly related to what we believe with regard to a soon-coming end, and if our conduct in our use of time and money contradict the doctrine of the Lord’s coming, then we are, in effect, for the most part scoffing .In the early Church, those who had houses and land sold them and laid the proceeds at the feet of the apostles. They thought, “I do not need this. The Lord is at the door. The end is near. Why am I clutching my possessions? I will make my goods available now so that there might not be any who has need.” They believed that the end was near. They had an apocalyptic expectancy and lived in that expectancy as being the logic of the faith. ...in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts...(v.3) Our theological positions are more regulated by and related to the gratification of our bodily lusts than they are to our intellect ?though we are not likely conscious of it. If we were to examine the moral condition of our lives, we would find out why it is we have so little faith. Lust has an enormous power to dull the mind and spirit to the truths of God, even so much as to shut out the issue of eternity. A lust is by nature a desire, and there is a world of difference between a legitimate desire, an earthly need, and a desire that God looks upon as a lust that will affect our theological and doctrinal expectations. In these verses, Peter is speaking about believers in the Last Days who will mock and scoff, and the reason for their scoffing is that they do not expect His coming. Their view of the faith and their expectation of His coming have been corrupted by their lust and by desires that are not legitimate. This is critical for us because the world has become very expert in its power to tempt us to indulge in desires of every kind. In times past, there were things hardly considered to be valid as needs. But today, many desires are looked upon as needs, and people will sacrifice whatever it takes to get these “needs” met. But they are really lusts that have been legitimized by the world of commerce. It is a powerful force, and we need to careful to identify the difference. The difference between a legitimate desire and a lust is its origin. Does it come from below or above? The fact that it is permissible to drink Coca-Cola all you want, even before breakfast, does not make it godly. Just because it is freely available does not legitimize that desire. Do we submit our desires before the Lord? Is He the Lord of those things that we think small and insignificant, particularly in this merchandising world? There is a whole realm of things pertaining to lifestyle that have been made legitimate in our minds because of their availability but for which there are spiritual consequences for our lifestyle. Our faith is profoundly affected by our lifestyle, and we need to be free from the lifestyle that the world would impose upon us, convincing us that it is legitimate and normal. Our lifestyle and the issue of self-denial are contrary in every point to the spirit of the age, which is characterized by self-gratification, not self-denial. The mere availability of something does not make that thing right. Though it may seem innocent in itself, the indulgence in it opens the way for other things, and the full and final effect is to dull our hearts toward the things of God."Tithing is a heart issue. Jesus says something to the effect of; you can not serve two masters. We must look to God's ways of discerning the conditions of our hearts.In ChristJeff

Hi Jeff,Thanks for your thoughts. Funny, I think we are in agreement in the bottom line here. That it is a heart issue. I still think there is a misunderstanding of how this is applied today.I am still grappling with this and went back and read again the earliest references to tithing and onward into the passages in Deut (actually ver 12 as well as through 14).Part of the confusion as I see it through these weak eyes is that as a 'law' or how it was to be appropriated in the Old Testament cannot logically be carried over into the New Testament as a stand alone part away from the whole. We no longer stone those who worship idols nor do we kill bulls on our front lawns (to borrow from the article).The biggest problem I see is how it is being bandied about in Christendom today, neglecting all that has been said before in scriptures to it's purpose and function and extracting the parts that are likable to form an incomplete doctrine, such as the now famous passage from Malachi.By bringing these issues to the forefront, the instant reaction seems to be one of drawing a line in the sand and propositioning a "for or against" mentality.Again, I do not have a full and complete understanding of this and stand ready to be corrected. It just seems that in it's present form as taught by many, it is sloppy and careless at best and often abused to lay guilt upon people. I have a book around here from someone that spoke at my old church that went pretty in depth about much of this and I was following right along until he started scripture jumping and in effect pronounced a curse on those who do not give to God. It may not always go to that extreme but the insinuations are there.But for all that, I hearken back to Mr. Hannagraff who said something to the effect of tithing being "a good starting point".I have 'tithed' over the years and never had a problem with it nor do I now as it pertains to giving, I am not boasting, I love to give, I love to do it in secret (well, there goes that one) 10%, I don't see that as being some kind of requirement, I see it as 'that's all?' Why would I want to be 'held' to some kind of prescription.It seems that when the believers laid all of their possessions at the feet of the apostles it was pretty spontaneous, don't recall anyone prompting them to do so, seems it was just a natural reaction to the joy of being saved from their sin, and outflow of what was in their hearts.As I mentioned before, what is going on in believers hearts? Why wouldn't you want to give?Why all this teaching, all this going backward?My hunch is that at the root of a lot of these problems is the poor way the gospel is being presented these days. In a lot of ways, because of my ignorance I fell victim to a lot of 'easy believeism' and had to unlearn quite a bit and why I found it so refreshing to find here the hard truths, the ones that nobody wants to preach anymore. Not because they are condemning as some would like to think but because the gospel has become so compromised as to have little effect on the hearts of the unconverted.Being that Jesus came to fulfill the law, if anything more is required than a 'tithe' and if our hearts are truly changed it is not a requirement at all. How can we not give back more out of gratitude for the love He has shown us?I turn over the soap box to you all.In loveMike

Mike, I sure am glad stoning is not around. I would have never made it to the age of 40 and to Jesus. I agree with the idea that man teaching his brother that he must tithe is questionable, especially when the money's are used to promote man and his carnal ways. I also believe the precept of the tithe is given to all who are faithful. The outcome of giving a tithe, I believe is what God wants to teach us about. The importance is not place on the sacrifice, but on the fruit of the work. The fruit of the giving is meant to focus our attention on the aspects of His kingdom. We men pollute His Holy law with our ways of self-exaultation. As you ended, In love may we find His will for our lives.In ChristJeff

Hi Darylyou write We can see plainly that Abraham was the first to give God 10% or the tithes. For Tithes the word means "tenth, or 10 %”This is true, but did you notice that tithing was never commanded before the Law. Both Abraham and later Jacob offered tithes, but in each case it was a voluntary offering and not the result of a commandment. They were not obliged but chose to do so.A Christian may choose to imitate Abraham and Jacob but we are certainly under no such obligation.

I sure am glad stoning is not around. I would have never made it to the age of 40 and to Jesus.He got me before 20, but I still wouldn't have made it.Again, I'm not against it being the Christian's responsiblity to give 10% of his income (indeed, his responsibility might be more like 90-95% depending on his income and justifiable expenses), nor do I have any problem with calling a failure to fulfill this (or any other God-given) responsibility "sin."I was reading John Wesley's sermon on dress yesterday, it had some very good points on financial responsibility: http://wesley.nnu.edu/JohnWesley/sermons/088.htmMy questions are:1) Is it still theologically correct to call it "tithing," i.e. is it really the old practice literally carried over?2) Is it expected of someone who makes so little that they can't even afford food for themselves? My point is that the Church would have to give money to them to cover their needs, is there a point to taking money from them beforehand? And yes, I'll grant this is a very rare and marginal case in a country like America, and no justification whatsoever for people not in such a situation.3) Does the giving have to be to the "priesthood" (though we protestants don't call them priests, in some movements it's barely even a nominal distinction) or "clergy?" Or can it be to the needy and those doing God's work (i.e. evangelism and mission work, Christian service, etc)?I don't mind people preaching mandatory tithing, my disagreements with them are more or less hair-splitting. I was listening to a friend of mine preach on revival one night, and while going through sins that needed to be uprooted he hit upon non-tithing, and he made the statement (loudly) "10% or you go to hell!" (don't worry, it was a conservative Holiness church, they're used to it). I had no problem with the statement, as he wasn't seeking his own gain (being a visiting preacher from another state, he wasn't likely to get much extra even if the congregation took it to heart) and the principle of it is essentially correct.

Hi Ron,You wrote:"This is true, but did you notice that tithing was never commanded before the Law. Both Abraham and later Jacob offered tithes, but in each case it was a voluntary offering and not the result of a commandment. They were not obliged but chose to do so.A Christian may choose to imitate Abraham and Jacob but we are certainly under no such obligation."I believe you clearly summarized the issue before us. Abraham and Jacob chose to tithe, they were under no obligation. I believe God had moved their hearts to give. That is the difference between obeying the Law given on Mount Sinai and the Law of Faith. The Old Covenant and the New Covenant. Each of us must do what the Lord tells us. In ChristJeff

Yes Jeff I heartly agree.As Ron simplified it for us:A Christian may choose to imitate Abraham and Jacob but we are certainly under no such obligation."And it was probably what I wanted to say if I wasn't so long winded...

This was just too good to pass up :) http://holyobserver.com/issues/v01i11/images/v01i11_church_sign.jpg

hey preach I hope you think this is funny!!!!!

Very interesting topic and one strongly debated since many have been called outside the camp. I believe that DFCM pointed out the Scriptures very clearly and only those with eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear would miss it. The reason many cannot see truth as it is presented, is due to the fact that they already think they have the truth, therefore they are blind. Not accusing anyone, but clearly stating that we cannot be closed hearted to truth if we are truly truth seekers. Our heart truly is deceitful above all else and desperately wicked.I want to share that I do not believe the Lord will hold us "bound" to 10% as the amount of tithe we are to give, because that would make it a law. I believe that He only asks of us based on all that He has given us. Everything comes from above. We cannot even love Him without the fact that He first loved us. I do believe that we are to follow the ways of Abraham. This does not mean that because Abraham prayed a certain way, therefore we are to pray that way. Not all are called to go to a land that they have never been before, not knowing where they are going as our father Abraham. So, to apply the specifics to Abrahams tithe to having to give "exactly" 10% would cause many to be bound by that, which places a yoke of expectation on them. The law binds, but the Spirit gives us liberty in Christ our Lord.I totally agree that the tithe is not an Old Covenant principle, but to HAVE to give EXACTLY the amount Abraham gave would make it a RULE that we are bound to.Our Lord wants us to know His ways and there are some that have nothing to give that would feel guilty knowing they HAD to give 10%. Our obedience in all things is not all about the Old or the New, but about our Cevenant with Christ based on a relationship. Out of that relationship, we will want to give cheerfully, not out of obligation. It is all due to our love and obedience based our love for Him. It isn't about the amount, but the willingness of our heart. If you love Him, you will do what HE commands. It is between you and Him. Abraham gave from his heart and a law of 10% was birthed out of that. The Lord fulfilled the law which made it complete. Our being like our father Abraham is based on our walk of faith in Christ. All that we give to the Lord already belongs to Him, because we cannot give anything that He did not give us first.So, to summarize without going too deep, which I am trying to avoid typing out, I would say that our tithe is a heart to heart matter with the Lord. It is not based on the letter, but it is giving of all that the Lord would require based on what He has given us. Obedience is better than sacrifice. The Lord is not wanting any to give grudgingly, but out of a willing heart that is intimately related to Him. One that is part of a covenant with the Lord and doing all for Him, to Him and because of Him. We have to come into agreement with the Lord in all things based on our covenant relationship with Him, not in agreement with any man. All For His Glory,Karen Francis