Response to Steve Gregg's article-Is Tithing For Christians?

[Guest]

However, just because they can defend it well does not make it so and neither does this idea of the tithe being done away with. That's simply the point I am trying to make.

So then, on what basis do you support your view of the tithe? After all, you might lay out a great case using nothing but scripture and still be wrong about it. Is your basis "hearing the Lord"? Lots of cults have been started by people who claimed to hear God (but contradicted scripture). Is your basis the teachings of your pastor? Paul's commendation of the Bereans would seem to indicate that you have a responsibility to search the scriptures to see if what you are taught is Biblical.

So I ask again, on what basis do you support your view of the tithe?

[Guest]

Hi Sean,
Yes, I suppose it's true. I did consider it a blank check to go after Steve when he made his remarks. Not the most mature thing to do I suppose. However, I thought I did answer your posts the best I could.

You said that the Bible nowhere says that we should stop animal sacrifices so it is just as sensible that we continue them as the tithe. I stated that animal sacrifices only covered sin and now cannot even do that. The blood of Christ "takes away" our sins which animals could never do. That was in Heb 9 and 10. Though you pointed out it never says stop doing it - it does say that the true sacrifice has been offered and it is of no benefit to continue.

You also stated that the Bible nowhere mentions Church buildings or a local church. I know it doesn't say so exaclty but the epistles are written to churches in different cities. I suppose you could assume that they just passed the notes from house to house or you could assume that they had a place that certain believers met. THat's how I would assume.

Gal 6:6
6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.
(KJV)

This is what is said we are to do with our teachers. Share our resources because they are to live from the gospel they teach. Where are they teaching it? In the churches.

God laid out a plan for us to give Him what he said belonged to Him, the tithe. He never repealed it. Jesus when given the chance did not spit at it.
We can say that it was a Pharisee or whatever he was speaking to, but he was also speaking to a Pharisee when He said the God so loved the world that He gave His only begoten Son the whosever believeth in Him might not perish...........So do we also toss that aside?

SOrry for not responding to you as completely as I should have Sean. Hope this did it. If not please respond again.

[Guest]

There's been several comments about Steve's asking Aaron how old he was.

I don't find this question at all inappropriate or offensive given the somewhat anonymous nature of this forum. I think it would be inappropriate for any of us to carry on a unsupervised conversation with a teenage stranger if we knew that to be the case (I wouldn't want my kids conversing with strange adult men on the internet, Christian or not). Given the litigious environment we live in these days, it might even be detrimental.

There has been other threads in this forum where it was pretty evident that the antagonist was underage and some that appeared to be if the person hadn't indicated elsewhere that they were an adult. So I think the question Steve raised was valid and very appropriate since he is the moderator of the forum.

No offense intended here Aaron, but like Steve and Mort, I also shared the theory that you were much younger than you are. Some of your posts and arguments had a juvenile tone, frankly. Your repeated rhetorical comments (i.e. robbing God), and your unsubstatiated blanket statements about Steve's teachings have the earmark of immaturity in my opinion.

I hope you are able to recognize that and show a little understanding when someone poses the question, without being offended by it.

Lord bless.

[Guest]

Hey Chris,
I find it pretty obvious what was meant by the comment. I still have yet to have anyone truly answer my problems with the theory of tithing is done away with. I asked a question and Steve gave no answer but asked my age.
In my opinion, it is because he cannot give an answer to his flawed theory. You may think I'm an antagonist, I'm sorry if you do, but why can't you and others like you simply answer a question without continuing to call me immature?
It's obvious to me that it's because your philosophy on this subject is flawed. I am trying to discuss it and you continue to bring up the problem that I have admitted was mine for 2 or 3 posts now.
So can we all stop being immature (myself and the rest of you as well) and get on with the topic at hand?

[Guest]

Now Aaron, if you don't consider this an answer than I would say you only want an arguement.

The LORD commanded the Israelites to "Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house...." (Malachi 3:10) "Christians are often urged to tithe based upon a mistaken appeal to this Old Testament text, which is wrested out of its rightful context, when applied to such a purpose....The storehouse is clearly the temple, not the church....Taken in context this passage lends no support to the mistaken doctrine of `storehouse tithing,' whereby Christians have been directed to restrict all their financial giving to their own denomination or local church, or as a variation, church members have been directed to pay the tithe to the local church, and restrict giving to outside organizations to amounts over and above the church tithe." (The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, Jerome Smith, p. 1026.)

In Christian theology, the Mosaic Law is usually divided into three parts: the moral, the ceremonial, and the judicial. The Ten Commandments comprise the moral part. The ceremonial part regulated the worship of Israel. The judicial part pertained to rights between men. However, the Law should be viewed as a unit. "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it." (James 2:10) Obviously, "no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin." (Romans 3:21) "...The law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law." (Galatians 3:24-25) Indeed, Christians need not be burdened under the law. "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery." (Galatians 5:1)

In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ demonstrated his deity by issuing several commands which supersede the Law. Six times he repeated the following couplet about various Mosaic commands: "You have heard that it was said......But I tell you..." (Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32, 33-34, 38-39, 43-44) Each time he raised the standard of the Mosaic Law above that which was perceived to that which was intended. His final command fully encapsulated the intent of the Law -- holiness: "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." ( Matthew 5:48 ). However, perfection was impossible under the Law. Therefore, Christ came as a priest in the order of Melchizedek. "If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood...,why was there still need for another priest to come -- one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?" (Hebrews 7:11)

Along with the change of the priesthood came a change of the law: "For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law." (Hebrews 7:12) "The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God." (Hebrews 7:18-19) "Now the Mosaic Law was done away in its entirety as a code. It has been replaced by the law of Christ. The law of Christ contains some new commands (1 Timothy 4:4), some old ones (Romans 13:9), and some revised ones....All of the laws of the Mosaic code have been abolished because the code has. Specific Mosaic commands which are part of the Christian code appear there not as a continuation of part of the Mosaic Law...but as specifically incorporated into that [Christian] code, and as such they are binding on believers today. A particular law that was part of the Mosaic code is done away; that same law, if part of the law of Christ, is binding." (Basic Theology, Charles C. Ryrie, p. 105)

The tithe, therefore, as a component of the Mosaic Law which was never restated as part of the law of Christ, does not apply to Christians. "While not requiring a tithe of believers today, the New Testament does speak of God's blessing on those who give generously to the needs of the church and especially to those who labor in the Word." (The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, p. 1585.) "Tithing is not taught in the New Testament as an obligation for the Christian under grace....Because we are not under law, but under grace, Christian giving must not be made a matter of legalistic obligation, lest we fall into the error of Galatianism...." (The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, Jerome Smith, p. 1152.)

[Guest]

Although I run the risk of throwing a log on a fire that probably is in need of a bucket of water, I can’t help but add my two cents, or log for that matter.

I think Paidon made a pretty profound statement when he said, “I don’t think our Lord allows 10% disciples”, while livinglink put it another way in saying we should give 100%-all. I understand where Aaron is coming from, but he is making a bold assertion when he accuses people of robbing God, and doing so with the word of God. I also understand where Steve is coming from.

We need to give money to our local church. I think it’s great that we have the internet now and that we are able to listen to and donate money for causes, teachers and ministries around the world. However, we must not lose site of the church community, that is, the local community, and its importance as well as the plain and simple fact it needs monetary compensation to sustain itself. I don’t think anyone is disputing that.

I don’t divvy up my money at the end of the month; I do give when I feel compelled to or when I am asked. I also donate my professional services at church and Christian and non Christian based auctions. If there is someone in the community with cancer or needs an organ transplant I have given my time to help pay for such needs. I think in the end it is worth much more than 10%, perhaps even the immeasurable amount that is the sum of a soul saved by a local or foreign missionary.

I think what Aaron and the original responder to the post is missing, is what I think Steve and others have tried to convey to Aaron, and is what Paul tells us in Romans 7:4

Therefore, my brethren, you also were (C)made to die (D)to the Law (E)through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.
5For while we were (F)in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were (G)aroused by the Law, were at work (H)in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.
6But now we have been (I)released from the Law, having (J)died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in (K)newness of (L)the [a]Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

We are no longer bound by decimals and percentages. I think it is easy for people to have a nice neat number to take out of their paycheck, to throw a few dollars into the offering plate on Sunday and feel secure they have done their ‘job’. If that is what the spirit compels them to do, then that is not something I have no authority to question. What I do have the obligation to discern is whether or not my money really needs to go towards replacing the refrigerator in the Church café this month, or to the homeless shelter or just another living soul in need. If this is robbing God in the eyes of some, only Jesus will have the final say and we should refrain from speaking for Him.

[Guest]

A certain woman found by the wayside a lamb perishing with cold and hunger. She had pity on the lamb and took it to her house, nursed it, and brought it again to life.

And it came to pass that the lamb grew up and was a goodly ewe and had a large fleece. And the poor woman sheared the ewe; when, lo! the priest came to the woman and said, "The first fruits of everything belong to the Lord, and I must have the wool." The woman said "It is hard"; the priest said "It is written", and so he took the wool.

And it came to pass that soon after the ewe yeaned and brought forth a lamb; when lo! the chief priest came again to the woman and said "The firstling of every flock belongs to the Lord - I must have the lamb." The woman said "It is hard." The priest said "It is written" and took the lamb.

And when it came to pass the woman found she could make no profit from the ewe, she killed and dressed it; when lo! the chief priest came again to her and took a leg, a loin, and a shoulder for a burnt offering.

And it came to pass that the poor woman was exceeding wroth because of the robbery; and she said to the chief priest, "Curse on the ewe! Oh! that I had never meddled therewith!" And the chief priest said to her, "Whatever is cursed belongs to the Lord" - so he took the remainder of the mutton, which he and the Levites ate for their supper.

(from The Christian Baptist, Feb 2, 1824)

A point well taken re the fruits of legalism.

I would be interested in hearing any comments in response to my posting on this thread on April 25 regarding corporate vs individual application of offerings.

Blessings, Homer

[Guest]

I've read all your comments. I understand everyone's justification of this. I just don't agree that it constitiutes the cessation of the tithe.

I guess I really can't say a whole lot more that I have about why I feel it is still for now.

It was seen as given not only to the Levites but to the priesthood of Melchisedek, whom the Lord's priesthood is after the order of. I do believe we are still robbing God if we don't tithe.

The only mentions of tithing in the NT are not speaking of it ceasing, but are mildly condoning the continuation of it. If you give your tithe to the Lord - one way to do that is through the organized Church, to distribute to specified destinations, as my church does. If you do not have a local church that you feel is truly following the lead of the Lord, it would seem to me you could find a way to give your tithe to the Lord through another Church or giving in a way the Lord leads.

I suppose I'll just go ahead and disagree with you all and I feel very comfortable doing so.

Really doesn't look like we're gonna convince each other of our points of view anyhow.

[Guest]

If you give your tithe to the Lord - one way to do that is through the organized Church, to distribute to specified destinations, as my church does. If you do not have a local church that you feel is truly following the lead of the Lord, it would seem to me you could find a way to give your tithe to the Lord through another Church or giving in a way the Lord leads.

Please provide an example from the New Testament where the tithe is given to the church. The tithe which Jesus told the Pharisees they should give was given to the temple, to support the Levites & priests, to provide supplies for festivals and to help the poor. The temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. Now, each of us is the temple. We do not have Levites. Our priest (according to the book of Hebrews) is Jesus Christ. He is also our sacrifice (we don't need to provide our own, other than our bodies). Secondarily, we are all priests. The temple system, it's priesthood, it's sacrifices and it's festivals have all passed away (again, read Hebrews).

Show me the scriptures that allow you to transfer the tithe from the temple system onto the New Testament church.

If your basis is simply that nowhere is the tithe explicitly revoked in the New Testament then I must ask how many of the other Levitical laws do you still keep? For example, do you make sure not to wear two different types of fabric at once?

I have no problem with tithing as a guideline. Hank Hanegraaf refers to it as "training wheels" for learning to give. I have a BIG problem, however, with misusing scripture to yoke believers with a Tithing Law that is contradictory to the values shown in the New Testament church.

[Guest]

Once again, mort, you make it all about the Levites. Why do you insist that it is only a "law" thing. Was Abraham under the law, was Jacob under the law. Did the Lord say that all the tithes belong to the Levites or did he say they all belong to Him?
27:30
And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD's: it is holy unto the LORD.

You have to convince me that the Levites were the only ones that were supposed to receive tithes before I believe your opinion.

7:8 - 10
And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.

So if the tithe was given to the Lord prior to the Levitical priesthood, you can't simply tie it to that and now that it's gone - so is the tithe.
Jesus is still receiving the tithe, He does so through His body, the Church.

If you wish to convince me, making it all about the Levites will not fly, you are leaving important parts out of the equation, since it precedes the Levitical priesthood.