Tithing - The Truth Please

[BeforeThereWas]

I hope you are not against giving to the real cause which God wants us to do.

Not at all. The scriptures not only command, but they also exemplify the meeting of needs as being the primary consideration in our giving. There are many ministers out there, but not all of them are worthy of our support, for many of them are only transplanting our failed system of churchiainity overseas, which is not what we have been called to do for the Lord.

Wealthy people should give much more than 10%.

Absolutely.

If we are limiting our giving only up to 10%, then we are being legalistic.

This is true.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

And, Jesus said the gates of hell would not prevail against his church, so that church never died. It has been going on all along behind all this other junk.

Very true.

And is still very much alive today, praise the Lord.

Unfortunately, many people think organized religion (meaning ALL those institutions most people call "churches") are the earthy representation of the Church. This, of course, could not be further from the truth.

I am in part of that very movement, and I can tell you the tithe is not an issue that ever comes up. If there is a need we just give to that need, the church is a family and not a business.

Pharoah was used of God and of the enemy. The same is true of organized religion. God can use it to His glory, and it is also a tool of the enemy that steals from the needy. Jesus said that whatsoever we do to the least of His brethren, we do unto Him. When people hand over the primary portion of their giving to organized religion, they are party to the theft of the least of His brethren.

Does your church has a leadership, and does it have to pay bills for a building and committees for this and that, are there people who mow the grass? You can not have a building based church that is not organized religion.

Very true indeed.

Oh you must know that I get slammed all the time, not only do I think the tithe is just wrong, so is the building and the pastor and all that other stuff. Not they are not good and God fearing men, just been fooled and pulled into the system. Victoms of their own game, as it where.

I am not one to take away other people's liberties in any way. If a group wants to have a building and a singular or group of professionals run the show, that's fine by me. The problem is when they hand over the primary portion of their giving for that orgainzation for it to abuse. It is mostly done out of ignorance, but then they also have the Bible in order to become knowledgeable of the truth, so they have no real excuse. That leadership also has a burden of guilt upon its shoulders for which it will answer.

1. Abraham never tithed on his own personal property or livestock.

Ah, yes. I've been saying this for years, and people seem to fixate on the idea that the spoils were his to keep if he wanted. What they fail to realize is that if this were true, then why did the king of Sodom give him permission to keep it all, except the people? I have been amazed at the lack of critical thinking in so many otherwise educated people.

2. Jacob wouldn’t tithe until God blessed him first.

This too has been pointed out many times, mostly in vain since people only want to believe what those false teachers behind the pulpit teach.

3. Only Levite priests could collect tithes, and there are no Levite priests today.

This is one of the points at which they retreat back to Abraham and the alleged "principle" he supposedly set forth for us to follow. What's funny is that not even his descendents (the Israelites) followed that principle.

4. Only food products from the land were tithable.

Well, that and the herds and flocks.

5. Money was never a titheable commodity.

Which goes hand in hand with my sattement that wage earners were never required to hand over any portion of their wages as a tithe or anything else. They did so freely without lawful compulsion because wages were NEVER biblically classified as a form of increase.

6. Christian converts were never asked to tithe anything to the Church.

True indeed.

7. Tithing in the Church first appears centuries after completion of the Bible.

We can thank the romish prostitute for that.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Ok. Let's see if I can break this down a little more simply:

1) When we observe the OT system of the tithe, we see 100% of it being used for the meeting of needs, except for that portion consumed by the tither at the celebration festival every third year at the temple. Not one morsel was used for the upkeep of the temple.

2) That OT tithe was defined ONLY as the INCREASE from the fields, orchards, vineyards, herds and flocks. No part of the Law defined the tithe to be any percent of anyone's wages. The implications of this fact are enormous, and condemnatory toward those who think they have legitimate grounding to point at the Law as their backing for the tithe today.

3) Those who think they can point at what Abraham did are faced with a huge dilemma:

a) He acted upon no requirement or principle for what he did........so far as we know. Therefore, this is a dead end street for those who think it traversible.

b) What Abraham did was never observed as a lasting principle for others to follow, therefore legitimately mimicked by anyone who followed him in the timeline of this creation. Not even Israel followed this alleged "principle." For example, the Lord told the people to hande over only 1/500th of the spoils to the priests, and 1/50th to the Levites of the spoils of one of their wars described in Numbers 31. These percentages are FAR removed from 1/10th.

c) So, the emotional appeal of pointing at Abraham's handing over a tenth of the spoils to Melchizedek is a stance upon shifting sand since not one other person mimicked his actions.

4) Then we sometimes hear about Jacob and his alleged "tithe". Well, we don't know that he ever fulfilled his promise even once. Besides, his offer of leaving a tenth at a pillar for the Lord was an empty, meaningless gesture when we consider the many strings that were attached to his promise. When you hand over your "tithe," do you say to the Lord, "I give this ONLY IF you provide for my raiment and my food, etc., etc."? Jacob's offer of a tithe was indeed a poor example for anyone to point at, much less to try and follow.

5) The NT is filled with examples of giving. Do we see even ONE example of those people engaging in the selfish and shallow practice of lavishing their giving upon themselves by way of an organization from which they themselves benefit? I'm not saying that it is completely wrong to have a building in common for gathering together, but when we observe people pouring the primary portion, even identifying it as their "tithe", of their giving into organized religion, which then is notoriously open about its abuse of that portion for its own expenditures, where is the discernment? Why aren't more people blowing the whistle on this practice?

6) "Ahh, but then what about all the good churches do for others in need, and the spreading of the Gospel and teaching the truth."

Do you honestly think those kinds of justifications would have worked to preserve, for example, Uzzah's life against the Lord's anger for his disobedience? For crying out loud! All he did was touch the Ark in order to keep it from falling off the cart onto the ground!!! It was a national treasure from which eminated Divine power!!!!! And yet, he slid to the ground, and gave up his last breath just for doing what he thought was a benevolent act, a just cause, a good deed........and yet it was STILL DISOBEDIENCE!

Where's the discernment?

How many of you women have ever experienced partial pregnancy? Is there such a thing?

Where's the discernment?

Partial obedience is like partial pregnancy. Neither of them exist!

Where's the discernment?

Partial obedience is DISOBEDIENCE, no matter what other colorful and creative label people may choose with which to try and cover it over. A partial truth is still a LIE. A loaf of bread infused with a LITTLE leaven is still LEAVENED.

Where's the discernment?

Hmm. Discernment must have been on vacation for the past 1700+ years.

BTW

 

[Heidi]

I know. I know. ANOTHER thread about tithing. Well, I've run across a new twist to this pesky little subject for which I can't seem to get any straight answers. This can be an interesting discussion from both sides of this issue. Please remain civil, because this subject isn't worth getting all worked up.

First of all, it needs to be understood that I have no problem with a group of people supporting a building, its professional staffing and operating costs secondarily with their giving. There's no injunction in God's word against such an endeavor.

For those of you who believe in tithing, it's a biblical fact that the tithe was the first and primary portion of the farmer's and rancher's giving. All the offerings were secondary to the tithe since the tithe was an established portion of the increase.

QUESTIONS:

1) Where does God's word redefine the tithe as being, for example, money rather than a tenth of the crops and herds?

2) Where does God's word make a change from the Levites, who were the only one's authorized to collect the tithe, to ushers within organized religion?

3) Where does God's word allow for the tithe (or any of the primary portion of believer's giving) to be used for the upkeep and support of organized religion, its buildings and real estate, and operating costs rather than the Old and New Testament examples and commands of 100% of the tithe (or the primary portion of people's giving) being used to meet legitimate needs of people?

4) Where does God's word redefine wages exchanged for labor as a form of increase, such as what is seen from the fields and herds?

5) Where does God's word declare the buildings of organized religion today to be the replacement of the temple and its storehouse?

6) Where does God's word declare that the leadership within organized religion automatically qualifies as being leaders of biblical calibre, therefore qualified to receive of believer's giving for their own sustenance?

I would appreciate intelligent discussion on all this rather than knee-jerk reactionism and ad hominem (personal attacks) such as accusing those who don't tithe of being greedy. Such a rash, blind judgment serves only to distance the accuser from reality.

Thanks

The very fact that tithing is not mentioned in the NT indicates that it is not a law that we must follow. Once again, Jesus fulfilled the law for us. Tithing is now a suggestion of what a minimum investment in God's kingdom should be. The old woman in Jesus's example is evidence of this. She gave all she had, not merely 10% like the Jews do out of obligation instead of from the heart. It is again just like the analogly of wanting your spouse to love because she's supposed to love you or loving you because she loves you. Which one would you prefer? Would you want her to follow a list of rules to show she loves you or would you want her to follow her heart? :o And that's the difference between the Old and the new testaments. The OT is simply a shadow of what Jesus would write on our hearts.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Tithing is now a suggestion of what a minimum investment in God's kingdom should be.

Yes, but how is handing it over to organized religion a form of supporting God's Kingdom, especially when you consider that most of organized religion abuses that portion of believer's giving?

The old woman in Jesus's example is evidence of this. She gave all she had, not merely 10% like the Jews do out of obligation instead of from the heart.

What that woman gave was not a tithe. The tithe was never a portion of the people's wages. The tithe had nothing to do with currency.

BTW

 

[guibox]

Here's a situation where who to tithe too comes into play.

Our SDA school has had a chaplain for 3 years. He was 75% funded by our Conference. This past year, the conference decided to cut the funding for our chaplaincy program all the while saying that 'the spirituality of our youth is of utmost importance :roll: ).

We managed to fundraise from our constituents to raise his salary because of the great impact he has made with the kids.

This year, the conference doesn't look like they will budge from their position and we just can't expect a few people to fork out $50K again.

So some of us are seriously thinking of using our tithe to pay for his ministry instead of sending it to the Conference who end up mismanaging it anyway. Why should we pay for everybody else's ministry through the conference when the conference refuses to see the necessity of the ministry we have and desperately need here?

What do you tithers think?

 

[Henry]

guibox

The tithe and the salary are both totally unbiblical. But the idea of giving support to someone whom you feel is a doing the work of God is very biblical.

I would encourage you to forgett the entire idea of a tithe, and just give to whom it is you feel God would have you give to. 10% 50% 100% what ever you think the spirit is leading.

Just don't think of it as a tithe or salary, just a gift. Your sharing a gift God has given you with another.

We would all be much better to just stop letting the institution rob us with the false doctrine of the tithe.

 

[Lyric's Dad]

I just love how people use the teaching of Christ that He came to fulfill the law as an excuse to no longer try to keep His commands.

His fulfilling it did not do away with it. Conveniently they also skip over this portion of the same teaching.

His fulfillment merely made it possible that it be kept perfectly as we cannot. His forgiveness of our sins makes our efforts meaningful and full. He fulfills it but we are still expected to try our best to follow His commands.

Creeds. :roll:

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Here's a situation where who to tithe too comes into play.

Well, I suspect that you will find that the conference will not stand for mere "laymen" getting around their authority and control by your diverting your tithe out from under their control. Be careful. They are very much like the pharasees of 2000 years ago. Religious leadership never likes being thwarted in their decision-making by "laymen".

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

The tithe and the salary are both totally unbiblical. But the idea of giving support to someone whom you feel is a doing the work of God is very biblical.

He's talking about the SDA leadership. They tend to be FAR more legalistic when it comes to matters of the Law, such as the tithe. That's why I caution against doing something that may get them disfellowshipped from a denominational group they like.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I just love how people use the teaching of Christ that He came to fulfill the law as an excuse to no longer try to keep His commands.

His fulfilling it did not do away with it. Conveniently they also skip over this portion of the same teaching.

His fulfillment merely made it possible that it be kept perfectly as we cannot. His forgiveness of our sins makes our efforts meaningful and full. He fulfills it but we are still expected to try our best to follow His commands.

Creeds.

Well, this sounds nice and all, but there is an inherent inconsistency in this philosophy. You are still stuck with having to pick and choose those rudiments of the Law that happen to suit your lifestyle. I would bet that you wear garments woven with more than one kind of fiber, right?

For those who are so hip on following the Law, then why don't you DO with your tithe exactly as that same Law demands? Additionally, why don't you GIVE what the Law DEFINED as being the tithe? Can you show me one instance where the Law defined the tithe as being a portion of anyone's salary? Please be honest. Don't twist things around to suit your case when you don't have a case to begin with. If you were actually following the Law's guidlines as to whom the tithe was to be given, then you would not be handing over a tenth of your salary to organized religion for them to abuse. Every morsel of the tithe went for meeting needs, not for the temple upkeep. Today, most religious organizations absorb a portion of the tithe for their own expenditures.

THAT, my friend, is anti-biblical.

BTW

 

[Henry]

Lyric's Dad

His fulfilling it did not do away with it. Conveniently they also skip over this portion of the same teaching.

skipping over? not at all, not at all. You see by fulfilling the law there is no longer a need for a sacrifice, as Jesus is the last sacrifice once and for all. The reason for the tithe, which was a tax on the people of Israel, was to tend to the temple and it’s workers who would perform the sacrifice. That is no longer needed and so the tithe is also no longer needed.

Sorry, but the Church teaching that we are commanded to pay a tithe to some institution is just unbiblical and flat out wrong.

Oh, we are not skipping over anything we are seeing the truth of the matter, and this truth sets us FREE. We do not have to give the “Church†a thing, we can just give to our brothers and sisters as our heart is lead.

I am here to tell you we ARE NOT commanded to pay a tithe.

And never should we sacrifice and animal, to do one or the other is just as much an insult to the cross of Christ

BeforeThereWas

Oh the SDA my spiritual supervisor is SDA and it can be a challenge.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

skipping over? not at all, not at all. You see by fulfilling the law there is no longer a need for a sacrifice, as Jesus is the last sacrifice once and for all.

The issue of the Law is a hard one to settle for many people because they assume that the fulfillment of the Law, to our thinking, means the abolition of, or doing away with, the Law. For me, this is not the case at all. The Law will stand as the one thing that will condemn the unrighteous since the righteous are placed outside that condemnation. The unrighteous have no blood to which they can lay claim for the atonement of their sins. We who are in Christ, on the other hand, have the ultimate blood sacrifice upon which we rely for that atonement. This doesn't mean that the "moral" aspects of the Law are no longer valid for us. We who are in Christ live a higher life and standard than the Law since it is inferior to the Divine fulfillment sealed in the blood of Christ. We have a Law written upon our hearts that is superior to that which was written upon stone since we have been given hearts of flesh.

This really is a simple concept, but it's made so difficult because of all the convolution of the many "teachers" out there who are themselves confused, and yet assumed to be competent ministers and teachers of God's word.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

You know, there seems to be a serious problem with most people's reading comprehension skills. Here's a case in point from one of the christianforums.com threads with which I've been involved:

**************

azee wrote:

no you are robbing god by accusing everyone else a church of robbing him

If you read my posts more carefully, you will see that I did not EVER say that ALL church organizations rob God. Please read other's posts for what they actually say.

Now, I have a nationwide survey that I'm relying on for my information as to the fact that most institutions are using a major portion of the people's primary giving for their own use. What are YOU relying on for YOUR information? Are you just pulling it out of thin air? What? What is your source?

My source is the periodical Christianity Today. They published a chart with basic expense and giving indicators, with percentages, showing that more than 95% of all the 12,000 church organizations they surveyed used at least a portion of the "tithe" to meet their own expenses. This shows that there is a serious problem in the leadership's understanding about God's priorities.

i will this again and you listen if anyone missuses the money you give they will be judged.

Those who give to those abusive leaders will also be judged, because they have the Bible from which they can verify what I've said. If they had studied their Bibles, then those abusive leaders would not be supported, therefore they would not have resources to abuse. Ignorance has never served as an excuse for disobedience. This attempt at placing all the responsibility on the shoulders of the leadership is highly suspect. It opens up the road to accusing them of other areas of our own sin. Where do you stop? I'm not saying that the giver is responsible for an initial infraction on the part of the leaders, but when it's ongoing and the givers don't confront those leaders, then they BOTH share in the responsibility.

You seem to think you keeping the money is what god wants you do when its not .

No. Again, read my posts for what they say. I stated quite clearly that a person who gives to meet the needs of family, fellow believers and neighbors is more faithful in their giving than those who give to religious institutions that abuse that portion. I never said that it's ok to keep all that one has, and neither has anyone else so far as I've seen. Again, you're assuming what I clearly denied. READ WHAT I ACTUALLY SAID! False accusation is wrong, in case you haven't read your Bible.

God said give your tithe he did not say give to a honest pastor he just said give

It sounds like you're mixing in the Law that governs the tithe. The Law governing the tithe obviously has nothing to do with this. If you're relying upon Malachi, then you're relying upon the Law. If that's the case, then you have a serious problem on your hands, because most churches don't DO with the tithe what that SAME LAW DEMANDS, the very Law upon which Malachi stood.

Additionally, who are you to say that the giver doesn't have a responsibility to make sure their giving is being used properly? What is the source of your authority for this?

do you think that god did not know the evil in peoples hearts when it comes to money he did remember nothing is new under the sun back then there where corrupt people in church but jesus himself let JUDAS handle the money for his ministry do you not think that our heavenly father who knows all knew who judas was and what his weakness was

This is apples and oranges. Judas served a purpose based upon his character and moral flaws that was beyond his handling of the money. His betrayal of the Lord to the religious leadership is the pinnacle of his stature. You don't know that he ever abused the money. He may have been greedy, but I don't recall his being accused of robbing the general fund if that's what you're leading up to.

the real question here is are you failing the test that god has put in front of you because the real reason is not the church

Would you mind differentiating between organized religion and the Church? When using a capital "C", we then know that reference is being made toward the entire body of believers worldwide. When using a small "c", it's understood that one is talking about the local body of believers within a city or locale. Organized religion isn't necessarily representative of the Church, nor the local church within a given city. It's a stand-alone organization that may or may not have denominational affiliations. Without your making these distinctions, it's difficult to keep track of what or who you're talking about.

is it possible that the problem at hand is that WE JUST DONT WANT TO GIVE BECAUSE MONEY AS A SPIRIT AS IT HAS GOT US RIGHT BY THE NECK AND NOW WE LOOK AT EVERY REASON WHY WE SHOULD NOT REALEASE IT??????

You're way off in left field because you're not reading our posts for what they actually said. Nobody EVER suggested that anyone KEEP what they would normally give. At least, I haven't seen anyone do this.

MY FRIENDS GIVE THE BIBLE SAYS GIVE TO Caesar WHAT BELONGS TO CAESAR AND IF JESUS KNEW WHO CAESAR WAS HE STILL SAID IT SO LETS GIVE TO GOD WHAT BELONGS TO GOD AND HE WILL BLESS YOU

I agree. Give to meet needs with the primary portion of your giving, and then support your local organization with your secondary giving. Remember, giving to organized religion isn't necessarily synonymous with giving to God, especially considering that the vast majority of them abuse the primary portion of what's given. Check the books of your institution to see if they're absorbing more than, say, 33% of what they take in. If they are, then there's good reason to believe that they're not being obedient to God's commands and examples within scripture, therefore they are robbing God.

Now, azee, if you can disprove what I've said, then do so, but, please, at least stick to what I and others actually said. Dreaming up all these statements nobody ever made is dishonest, therefore displeasing to the Lord.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I listen, with unsympathetic ears, to the many radio and television "preachers" who routinely complain about maladies that are simply natural outflows of institutional religion itself. This incessant whining about things that are the creation of their own institutions would be quite comical if it weren't for the fact that these men are dead serious. It seems like complaining about the drop in giving each time the seasons change from one to the other has become an industry standard. With the coming of Spring and Summer, we will once again hear the whines and complaints of the economic crisis ministries are in because of all those horrible people who diverted the priorities in their finances, for a time, away from giving to those ministries.

Well, these men, who seem to lack discernment, don't seem to understand that there are economic problems with many families. Locally, a company laid off some 10,000 workers, which inevitably affected many religious institutions. The problem is that the leaders in those institutions automatically placed the blame on the people rather than recognizing that a serious upheaval in the lives of many families just took place. They whined like there was no tomorrow. Some even closed their doors, much to the pleasure of those of us who are not so insensitive to the pulse of families and what they are suffering.

Some of these institutions that closed their doors and were reposessed by the bankers reaped exactly what they had sown. They wanted grand architecture that cost far more than plain architecture, and therefore going further into debt than they could possibly afford in the midst of any fluctuation in the local economy. The local university purchased, for pennies on the dollar, the largest of these edifices for its own use as a place to put on plays and concerts.

So, when institutions sow the seeds of greed by errecting huge, overly expensive structures simply because they want the visual stimulation of architectural sophistication and appeal, it comes as no surprise that many of the people who attend such institutions are themselves moved by the same greed. After all, in a manner of speaking, they want their own lifestyles to pattern the same gaudiness of their religious institution, following its example. So, it comes only natural for them to keep more of their wages for themselves rather than to hand it over to the very thing that helps to motivate them in the direction of self-seeking avarice. After all, who would want to show up at such a structure driving a beat-up, 1972 model Ford, huffing blue smoke like the car driven by Uncle Buck? No. That would never do. A new Cadillac or Mercedes is the only suitable style that gives one the desired status when observed by their fellow congregants and the leadership.

Nope. It's hypocritical for ministries to live above their means, like Crown Ministries, and yet turn right around and teach that their followers need to learn to live below their own means as a show of "good stewardship." What this does is it convinces people to live a lower lifestyle so that these ministries can then get from them. I can only shake my head that there are so many gullible people who simply don't see the truth for all the glitter and irrational fanfare. The motivation for so much of this has more to do with what I call "pharisaical bludgeoning" on the airwaves and through loud speaker systems all across this nation. What is going on is simiar to what secular advertisers practice on a daily basis. They spend billions convincing the consumer that they can't live without the product being advertised. You single guys aren't getting dates because of those flakes on your shoulders, and those yellow teeth. Never mind the fact that even though you do away with those flakes and whiten those teeth, you may still have the same problem getting a date. Why? Because you only changed a couple of features on the outside, but nothing inside.

I hope that more and more people eventaully wake up to all this fooolishness. Robert Tilton wasn't/isn't any worse than many of our religious institutions, ministries, and all their tactics. Be transformed within by the Holy Spirit rather than to allow yourself to be infuenced by the blatant fallacies of institutional religion and ministries. Give as the Lord taught, not as men teach.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Here was an interesting post from a guy who calls himself "PastorEric".

*****************

"An individual doing the same thing over and over again an yet expecting different results!"

Psychologists use this simple definition to describe "insanity". At The Tree of Life we use it to define "religion" or "tradition".

In one example Y'SHUA described it thusly;
Mat 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen [do]: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

If you have ever heard someone that the world classifies as insane you will notice that "vain repetitions" is often a relatively normal aspect associated with this lifestyle. In the KJV the word "Heathen" is used to describe those Y'SHUA was speaking about. Other versions render the word as "Gentiles" or "Other religions" or "The nations" but the warning is clear! Avoid the repetitious aspect commonly associated with prayer. At the end of this verse Y'SHUA gives us the method by which we are to avoid this. "Seek YHVH"!

YHVH is a creative GOD. Until the Sabbath rest HE is continually creating. Creating is to make something new. In the scientific community they are continuously discovering something new. A new virus; a new species of animal; a new star or whatever, this is our GOD at work! Thus, if we are to find our GOD, then we should expect to find new revelations or aspects of HIM. These aspects of HIM have always been there but we have not always been prepared to see them. All of the great "Moves" or developments within the church have been built upon another. Each has taken as it's base something else. When the "great reformation" took place Martin Luther had started within the Catholic Church. His base was their doctrine. The Pentecostal movement of the early 1900's was built from the Books of Acts 1:8 & 2:1-4.

Mar 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

When we fail to look for YHVH, when we fail to "seek" HIM! When we stay where we are in YHVH we become stagnant, we become stuck in our "tradition"! When we come into a "tradition" we make HIS word of none effect. We become "repetitious"! If you have been in CHRISTianity for any length of time you have heard this cry, "LORD send us revival?" "LORD send us revival?" "LORD send us revival?" "LORD send us revival?" "LORD send us revival?"

Why does the church think it is continually asking for the same thing and yet getting nothing?

The church is not "seeking YHVH"!
They are vainly repeating what they have heard for generations.
They are seeking with their head and mouth but their hearts are far from HIM!
The church is insane!

Take a moment and consider your "normal" church service!

Is there basically a pattern to it?

Do you basically start with a song to bring the body to some sort of order? Then do you take time to greet visitors and make new announcements? Then maybe you go back to the so-called "Praise & Worship" with maybe two or three fast songs followed by two or three slower ones? Then maybe you take up tithes, offerings and/or missions giving followed by three points and a prayer (a.k.a. The Sermon)? Maybe your service is different than this but is there "basically" a pattern?

Is there a "tradition" to its format?
Is there a repetitious structure to it?
Is there an overall anticipation that this "vain repetition" will create different results?
Isn't this "insanity"?

I understand the validity to some "pattern, some repetitious structure" but can you also see that if you are calling upon YHVH to bring "revival", If you are calling upon HIM "to do something different" in your congregation, then you have to give HIM something to work with? That you have to move out of your "tradition" in order for HIS word to have an effect? That you need to open your theology to see where HE may want to take you?

Mar 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Isn't that what Martin Luther had to do?

Isn't that what happened at Azusa Street?

Psa 53:2 God from the heavens looked on the sons of men, To see if there be an understanding one, [One] seeking God. YLT

Our "tradition" stops YHVH from moving, from creating new life within our midst! It tells HIM that all HE can do is what our "tradition" allows for. We effectively box HIM into a structure and then we call upon HIM to bring new life (a.k.a. revival) to us!

Do you see the insanity?

When the nation of Israel was delivered from the hands of Pharaoh they were all enthusiastic and jubilant. Then reality set in! YHVH had taken them from their "tradition" into the unknown! HE had led them from what was a pattern into a place where they would have to forge their own way. A place without a prescribed pattern to it! A wilderness! HE had brought the nation of Israel from stagnancy, from "tradition", from death to "revival"!

Luk 11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
After Y'SHUA had used this in a parable HE then proceeded to illustrate it.
Luk 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall [your] heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?
Luk 11:14 And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered.
Luk 11:15 But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.
Luk 11:16 And others, tempting [him], sought of him a sign from heaven.
Luk 11:17 But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house [divided] against a house falleth.
Luk 11:18 If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub.
Luk 11:19 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast [them] out? therefore shall they be your judges.
Luk 11:20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.
Luk 11:21 When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace:
Luk 11:22 But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.
Luk 11:23 He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.
What happened here, in the general sense?
Y'SHUA did something "different" from what was expected of any man!
HE cast out a demon!
HE brought new life; "revival" to this man!

Sometimes "revival" may be harder on us than it was before, as we see for the nation of Israel when it came out of Egypt. At other times it may be easier on us, as it probably was for this man who was delivered. Yet even in this deliverance it was hard on those who fought to keep their "traditions" alive.

If we REALLY want revival we must first stop the insanity!
We must step out of our "traditions"!
We must stop boxing YHVH into a pattern!
We must seek a "creative" GOD!
We must not be like Lot's wife, longing and looking back to what we once held dear to us!
We must be willing to follow the leading of the SPIRIT through the wilderness!

Insanity: "An individual doing the same thing over and over again an yet expecting different results!"
The church is insane!
It is sick!
Hsa 5:15 I will go [and] return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they will seek me early.
Until we acknowledge our offense; our insanity; our "tradition" we cannot be healed; we cannot be revived!

YHVH knows of our sickness and HE has allowed it to come upon us that we might turn to HIM!
Jhn 11:4 When Jesus heard [that], he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.
HE is calling HIS church from their insanity that they might move closer to HIM!
That they might shed some of the world that has stuck to them and begin to look more like HIS Son!
2Cr 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, [even] as by the Spirit of the Lord.

The SPIRIT of the LORD is calling for HIS children to come out of Egypt.
To come out of the world and out of what they know!
HE is calling them out of what they do over and over again!
YHVH is calling HIS Church to revival!
To new life!
2Ch 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
Change will come when we stop the insanity and seek HIM rather than our "tradition"!

Why does the church think it is continually asking for the same thing and yet getting nothing?
The church is not "seeking YHVH"!
They are vainly repeating what they have heard for generations.
They are seeking with their head and mouth but their hearts are far from HIM!
"LORD send us revival?"
"LORD send us revival?"
"LORD send us revival?"
"LORD send us revival?"
"LORD send us revival?"

The church [note the small "c"] is insane!

 

[Terral]

Tithing Is Biblical, But NOT For Christians Today

Hi Henry:

Thank you for writring on this thread.

Henry >> The tithe and the salary are both totally unbiblical. But the idea of giving support to someone whom you feel is a doing the work of God is very biblical.

While we agree on most everything else you say in this post, to say that the ‘tithe’ is unbiblical is simply not true. The Lord God gave specific commands for tithing to Israel ONLY for the ‘sons of Levi’ (Numbers 18:21), which has NOTHING to do with Gentiles who have never been under the Law (Romans 2:14-15). Many modern day preachers are trying to take advantage of the members of their congregations by trying to apply OT Law for ISRAEL upon those for whom Christ died.

Henry >> I would encourage you to forget the entire idea of a tithe, and just give to whom it is you feel God would have you give to. 10% 50% 100% what ever you think the spirit is leading.

We agree. Younger members of the body are less equipped to be handing money over to their local churches in the years they are paying off their homes and raising families. However, later in life we are usually more able to support those carrying God’s Word to others in our communities. The money amounts should be determined by the examination of each individual heart before the Lord totally apart from any ‘tithing’ commands given to Israel. Those teaching ‘the truth’ should be the recipient of our gifts along with those less fortunate than ourselves at the digression of each individual member of Christ’s body. Blindly giving money to support those carrying false doctrine represents you tossing your lot in with the ‘sons of disobedience’ (Ephesians 2:2) and we should be very careful about providing support for those teaching unsound doctrine. Those gifts to the dark side will show up as ‘wood, hay and straw’ (1 Corinthians 3:12) at your judgment (2 Corinthians 5:10) for good works and rewards.

Henry >> Just don't think of it as a tithe or salary, just a gift. Your sharing a gift God has given you with another. We would all be much better to just stop letting the institution rob us with the false doctrine of the tithe.

We agree 100 percent. Give from looking upon your own heart apart from the guilt trip instituted by false teachings from Scripture. Take those errant calls from the pulpit as a sign to move your family into the direction of another church where the preacher and his ministry are rewarded for teaching you ‘the’ truth. If every Christian followed that rule, then those preaching heresy would fall by the wayside to be ‘cut off’ and only those heralding the truth would remain.

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Good stuff Terral.

It's fascinating that the soldiers who took a portion of the spoils for themselves didn't hand anything over even a morsel or a penny to Melchizedek (for those who like to say that tithing predates the Law). If tithing were indeed what Abraham did, then one would think that all parties would have followed suit, especially the soldiers who were with Abraham. One would also think that there would be record of Abraham giving a tenth of his own property since he was very wealthy already. Instead, he was the only one there who decided to give Melchizedek a tenth of war spoils, which Abraham knew didn't belong to him in the first place. He was on his way to return what he knew was someone else's property.

So, for those pro-required-tithing defenders out there, where's the example of Abraham tithing on a regular basis? Can you give us even one verse showing this to be the case? If not, then why do you insist upon hammering a false assumption that finds no support anywhere in scripture? That translates into a LIE! It is an outright LIE to say that Abraham practiced tithing when there is no evidence of the kind anywhere in scripture.

BTW

 

[Terral]

Tithing Is Biblical, But NOT For Christians Today

Hi BeforeThereWas:

Thank you very much for writing.

Before >> Good stuff Terral. It's fascinating that the soldiers who took a portion of the spoils for themselves didn't hand anything over even a morsel or a penny to Melchizedek (for those who like to say that tithing predates the Law).

What makes you believe Abraham failed to give Melchizedek 10 percent like everyone else? Scripture says,

“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, 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 7:1-2.

“In this case mortal men receive tithes (Levites), but in that case (Melchizedek) one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on. And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.†Hebrews 7:8-10.

Scripture says that even Levi and all the priests gave tithes to Melchizedek, who is typical of the Holy Spirit Himself. Therefore, the notion that Abraham failed to give tithes to Melchizedek is simply not based in Biblical fact.

Before >> If tithing were indeed what Abraham did, then one would think that all parties would have followed suit, especially the soldiers who were with Abraham.

No sir. Melchizedek received ten percent of "all*" even before those soldiers. Otherwise Abraham paid no ‘tithes’ (apodekatoo = #586) at all. The second half of that word (dekatoo = #1183) means “to extract or receive the tenth part.†http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/ ... -2895.html

Before >> One would also think that there would be record of Abraham giving a tenth of his own property since he was very wealthy already.

Tithes do not work that way, according to Mosaic Law or Jewish tradition. Rather than extract a 10th of what you own, the priest can take the best of your sacrifices and a tenth of your ‘income.’ Abraham’s spoils from war fall under the ‘income’ category. If you brought a lamb or even a bullock for a sin offering, then the priest had the option of taking the best portions. Lots of sin means the priests eat very well. : 0 ).

Before >> Instead, he was the only one there who decided to give Melchizedek a tenth of war spoils, which Abraham knew didn't belong to him in the first place. He was on his way to return what he knew was someone else's property.

The spoils of war are indeed your own property and represented ‘income.’ Abraham paid the tithe from the entire amount, because everything belonged to him. The men then received their portion from Abraham also.

Before >> So, for those pro-required-tithing defenders out there, where's the example of Abraham tithing on a regular basis?

Yes; to Melchizedek in Hebrews 7. However, there is no equivalent Intercessory Priesthood on the earth today, while Mosaic Law and those commands were given to Israel of the flesh only (Romans 9:1-4). The Law given to Israel concerning tithing was derived from the relationship that Abraham had with Melchizedek, because the king of Salem is typical of the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 7:3) in the Temple served by Levi. The remainder of the Twelve tribes do not divide their possessions and give that to the priests, but only their ‘income.’ That still has nothing to do with Gentiles who have been ‘without the Law’ (Romans 2:14-15) from the beginning.

Before >> Can you give us even one verse showing this to be the case? If not, then why do you insist upon hammering a false assumption that finds no support anywhere in scripture?

Even if Scripture felt the need to give us fifty instances of Abraham paying tithes to Melchizedek, then who represents the ‘king of Salem’ in the world today? He is the “Holy Spirit†now in our mortal bodies (1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 6:19), and Christ Himself is our High Priest at the “right hand of God†(Romans 8:34) making intercession for us as we speak. The ministry under God providing for the ‘body of Christ’ (Ephesians 4:12) and the maturity of the body (Ephesians 4:11-13) is worthy of our financial support, which has NOTHING to do with Mosaic Law or any Levitical ordinance. Pulling money out of your own pocket to help the needy around you is far more about you and your relationship with God than about those in need. If Christ is “IN†(Colossians 1:27) the ones you are helping, then your reward shall be multiplied time and time again at the judgment (2 Corinthians 5:10).

Before >> That translates into a LIE! It is an outright LIE to say that Abraham practiced tithing when there is no evidence of the kind anywhere in scripture.

Well, Scripture does indeed teach that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek in Hebrews 7. Perhaps you are forgetting that the Lord God instituted Mosaic Law 400 years later to the Twelve Tribes and that no written law was given to Abraham. However, Abraham continued to enlarge and be blessed through the intercessory working of Melchizedek, which is why Christ became part of that holy order in the first place and “forever†(Hebrews 5:6). That is still no evidence at all that Gentiles today are bound by Mosaic Law or anything else to give any percentage to any religious organization. We are under grace and not under law (Romans 6:14) and God shall judge the secrets of men according to Paul’s “my gospel.†Romans 2:16. The heavenly rewards upon your head, fingers and garment will tell everyone whether you supported or neglected the ‘body of Christ’ during this life. Each individual can decide for himself whether those heavenly garments will be glorious or not.

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Re: Tithing Is Biblical, But NOT For Christians Today

Hi BeforeThereWas:

What makes you believe Abraham failed to give Melchizedek 10 percent like everyone else? Scripture says,

Umm, I think that if you read what I said, I stated that the soldiers who went with Abraham didn't hand Melchizedek anything of what they took for their full portion. I didn't say Abraham didn't give Melchizedek a tenth of the spoils. Sorry if I didn't make that more clear.

It's also understood that Abraham's personal property was still up in northern Canaan, so he wasn't able to give a tenth of his own property when he handed over a tenth of the spoils.

Scripture says that even Levi and all the priests gave tithes to Melchizedek, who is typical of the Holy Spirit Himself. Therefore, the notion that Abraham failed to give tithes to Melchizedek is simply not based in Biblical fact.

Well, unfortunately, you misunderstood me. I never denied that Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of the spoils of war.

No sir. Melchizedek received ten percent of "all*" even before those soldiers. Otherwise Abraham paid no ‘tithes’ (apodekatoo = #586) at all. The second half of that word (dekatoo = #1183) means “to extract or receive the tenth part.†http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/ ... -2895.html

Agreed. The tenth came out before the soldiers got their full share. What I said was that the soldiers, after receiving their full share, gave nothing to Melchizedek. Abraham handed over a tenth of property he knew was never his in the first place, and he gave a tenth based upon no prerequisite, command or requirement. He did so freely. This is one aspect of that event that flies in the face of the pro-required-tithing camp.

Tithes do not work that way, according to Mosaic Law or Jewish tradition. Rather than extract a 10th of what you own, the priest can take the best of your sacrifices and a tenth of your ‘income.’

Income? How do you figure that, if you don't mind my asking...basing strictly from the Law. The Law required not one wage-earner to pay a tithe of his income. After all, they did have currency, and lots of it, and there were also many wage-earners.

Abraham’s spoils from war fall under the ‘income’ category.

Indeed? This only holds true if one can prove that Abraham ever intended to keep what he knew was never his to begin with. He brought it all back to it's original owners, so his actions alone seem to indicate that he was above the usual mindset of men like the heathen Vikings, who always considered the spoils to be theirs.

Additionally, why would Abraham ever think to keep what was needed by those from whom it was taken? Would YOU keep property you retrieved from a band of thieves when you knew who it belonged to in the first place? Can you tell me that the Christian thing to do is to keep it to yourself? Would you consider what you retrieved to be your "income"? Somehow, what you have said here just doesn't seem to set right with the Christian ethic to which we are all called to aspire.

If you brought a lamb or even a bullock for a sin offering, then the priest had the option of taking the best portions. Lots of sin means the priests eat very well. : 0 ).

Very true.

The spoils of war are indeed your own property and represented ‘income.’ Abraham paid the tithe from the entire amount, because everything belonged to him. The men then received their portion from Abraham also.

Well, that certainly would have merit if we didn't have the rest of the story, which means that Abraham's actions speak otherwise. I am curious: Why would you think that a man of the atature of Abraham would do what you would never think to do, which is to keep stolen property for yourself? I'm not talking about our social laws here in the USA, I'm talking strictly along the lines of moral absolutes.

Now, I agree that while it was under Abraham's control, it was his to do with as he pleased...within reason. And yet, if he ever considered it to be his personal property, then why did he bring it back, and why did the king of Sodom tell him to take the spoils, excepting the captives, and why did Abraham ask that the soldiers be allowed to take their portion for going to war?

Yes; to Melchizedek in Hebrews 7.

Hebrews 7 says nothing about Abraham continuing to tithe to Melchizedek, if I understand you correctly.

Even if Scripture felt the need to give us fifty instances of Abraham paying tithes to Melchizedek, then who represents the ‘king of Salem’ in the world today?

Any and all assumptions that Abraham ever met Melchizedek a second time in his life here on earth is just that...assumption.

Let's kick it up a notch, shall we? If the spoils were indeed considered to be Abraham's property by any one of the men standing there, watching this event unravel before their eyes, then, pray tell, why did the king of Sodom give Abraham permission to keep the spoils if either of those two men ever considered the spoils to be the property of Abraham for having gone to war? Abraham's going to war had only to do with Lot having been taken captive. No other reason is given. In other words, Abraham was not out on a conquest for spoils. He got what he went after, and he was in the process of returning the stolen property, just like any other true believer would do, knowing full well that this is the truly moral thing to do. Abraham was already wealthy. He didn't need that stuff.

Well, Scripture does indeed teach that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek in Hebrews 7.

You rendered the term "tithe" in the plural (tithes). Why is that? Not all of our English translations render it in the plural, and the Greek makes no such stipulation according to the Greek rules of grammar.

Perhaps you are forgetting that the Lord God instituted Mosaic Law 400 years later to the Twelve Tribes and that no written law was given to Abraham.

Really? My Bible says otherwise. What does yours say in Gen. 26:5?

Here's what mine says, "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

That is still no evidence at all that Gentiles today are bound by Mosaic Law or anything else to give any percentage to any religious organization. We are under grace and not under law (Romans 6:14) and God shall judge the secrets of men according to Paul’s “my gospel.â€Â

Agreed.

Thank you again for writing,

And thank you. I look forward to your response.

BTW