Should Christians Tithe?

[WASR10]

I think this may be my last post on the subject. My previous posts and this post cover just about everything. I've had to repeat myself more times than I like, and I see no benefit for anyone if I continue. I may change my mind, but as for now this is it. If there any specific questions, I will be happy to respond to those.

In the most simple of terms, justification Romans 5:9 tells us the source of this justification, this gift.

In the most simple of terms, sanctification

By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all- Hebrews 10:10-12

This blood, which these verses show us, brings us justification and sanctification. It also forgives our sins. (Matthew 26:28). This is a new covenant, which is different from the old.

The New Testament teaches that we today are under no part of the Old Law (Galatians 3:24-25; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 8:7).

by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances,- Ephesians 2:14-16

written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.
Such confidence we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God, who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones,

one of the Ten. The law we are dead to and discharged from, therefore, includes the Ten Commandments.

Paul, in Colossians 2:14, discusses the fact that the Old Law has been blotted out by Christ. In verse 16 Paul says, (since the Old Law has been nailed to the cross) to not allow anyone to judge you according to the Old Law with such things as food, drink, or the Sabbath day. Since the Sabbath was part of the Ten Commandments, we can see we are not under that Law.

things which are a mere shadow of what is to come;

The scriptures show that the Ten Commandments were only given to the nation of Israel. At Mt. Sinai, after they left Egyptian slavery, Moses said to them:

The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, - Deuteronomy 5:2-3.

This law had not been given to their ancestors. It was given only to the children of Israel. God said to Moses, Some might say that since heaven and earth have not passed away that the Old Law and its Commandments are still in effect. But Christ said that it would be easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the Law to fulfill its purpose. The task set before Him was indeed difficult.

Luke 16:16-17

It is true that the New Testament encompasses and includes the moral principles inherent in the old Commandments. However, these principles are applicable to Christians today only because they are included in the New Testament, not because they were a part of the Old Testament. Tithing as a command, of any set percentage or minimal offering, is not found in the New Covenant, New Law, or New Testament. The spirit of giving, yes! But not tithing.

The term, found in 1 Corinthians 16:2 refers to instances of a person gaining rather than being indicative of portion(2 Corinthians 9:7)

I can see Paul making no parallel between the Levites, Christian preachers, and tithing in 1 Corinthians 9. The passage says:

If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? If others share the right over you, do we not more? Nevertheless, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so that we will cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ. Do you not know that those who perform sacred services eat the food of the temple, and those who attend regularly to the altar have their share from the altar?

I can see no statement that the Levites tithed to Christ through Abraham in Hebrews 7:10.

For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also

In Romans 1:18-32 I can see no teaching that there is no new law. I do read about the consequences of disobedience, though.

We as Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old Law; including the Ten Commandments and tithing. Paul said those who seek to be justified by the Old Law are (Galatians 5:4).

Thank you for reading.

[LBC1689guy]

WASR10 I respect your desire to not comment further on the subject. I agree and yet here I am. I believe that you have misrepresented my arguments in several places. I believe that your statements have made my point that many Christians do not understand the difference between justifcation (a legal judgment for the sake of Christ's finished work on the cross and resurrection) and sanctification (the work of the Spirit to progressively conform the justified Christian to the righteous character of Jesus Christ). There continues to be major misunderstandings about the law and its place under the New Covenant and much of this flows from poor hermeneutics.

1. I never claimed that the moral law (10 Commandments) was outside the Law of Moses. I claimed that it was distinct from the civil and ceremonial laws given to Israel. I gave reasons that this was the case. Spoken by God. Written by His finger. Written on tablets of stone. Placed into the ark of the covenant. Scripture illustrates that this law is unique from the ceremonial and civil law...but you want a verse that says this and are unlikely to be convinced without one...but I know that you don't follow this hermeneutic consistently because you believe in the doctrine of the trinity which is nowhere explicit, but it is only properly deduced from Scripture. Again your view is guilty of committing the word-concept fallacy.

2. Your view of Christian Sanctification is incomplete. You are correct when you say that sanctification in one sense is to be set apart to Christ. Yet this is not the entirety of the range of meaning of this word. Sanctification is also a progressive (on going) work of God's Spirit within the life of the believer wherein as the Christian obeys and progressively repents and dies to sin he is brought into great conformity to the character of Jesus.

I think that this is seen in passages such as the glorious golden chain of salvation in Romans 8:29-30 which teaches that once justified the Christian carries on to glorification. We who believe are not glorified (made perfectly sinless in body and soul) until death in the case of the soul and until the return of Christ in the case of the body.

Ephesians 4:17-32 is a great text to illustrate the Christian's duty to progress in holiness and sanctification. You'll notice that the apostle lists several of the commandments as the guid to this sanctification:

(9th commandment), let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and give no opportunity to the devil. Let the thief no longer steal (8th commandment), but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need. Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths (9th commandment), but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger [According to Jesus in Matthew 5:21-26 this is a violation of the 6th commandment) and clamor and slander(9th commandment) be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you."

All of this is progressive. He's not writing to unbelievers so that they might be justified; Paul is commanding those who have already been justified by grace to pursue holiness through obedience to the commandments.

In Philippians 2:12-13 Paul commands his justified audience to continue on in obedience: Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." Paul urges Christians on to greater obedience. He then makes reference to the Spirit's work through the law written on the new heart. This is a promise of the New Covenant in Ezekiel 36:25-27 and Jeremiah 31:31-34...texts that you did not interact with in your rebuttal. The same law written by the finger of God on tablets of stone (10 commandments) is written by the finger of God on the new heart of flesh to be the Christian's rule for obedience. The Christian can desire to obey these because God's Spirit is within him and cause him "both to will and to work for His good pleasure." Compare this with Ezekiel 36:27: "And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules."

Paul goes on to talk about his own pursuit of perfection. Was Paul justified? Yes. Was he yet glorified? No. Did he believe that glorification was something that he could obtain in this life? No. Did he practice a progressive obedience to Jesus Christ [B]because[B] he was united to Christ by faith? Yes. Philippians 3 speaks of Paul's past life and failure to achieve justification through obedience to the law. He has been justified by grace and his response to grace is to progressively press on toward glory...something that he acknowledges he has not yet obtained but exerts great effort towards apprehending. He then tells Christians to imitate his example:

"Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you. Only let us hold true to what we have attained. Brothers, join in imitating me, and keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us. For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself."

All of the passages that you cited about the end of the law deal with justification. No one can be justified by works of the law. Right legal standing before a holy God is by faith (and that faith is a gift from God to the elect Cf. Ephesians 2:8) in the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ. Sanctification is the progressive working out (not working for) that justification freely given by God.

Your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 9 ignores the context of the entire chapter. Paul asserts his right, and the right of every gospel minister to be supported in the ministry through the faithful, cheerful giving of the Christian. He argues that it is ridiculous to think that a soldier serves at his own expense. He asks if the vinedresser does not eat from what he has planted. Does the shepherd not partake from the sheep that he tends? He then quotes the law and says that it isn't about animals that God is concerned but for his ministers. He returns to the right of the plowman and the thresher to receive from their labors and then says that it is right for the one who ministers to receive financial compensation from those that he ministers too. then he makes the comparison between priests and levites serving the temple and the alter and ministers in service to the gospel. In the same way the Lord commanded..." How were the Levites supported? Through the tithe. How are gospel ministers to be supported? in the same way. It is intellectually dishonest to deny this because this is the whole thrust of Paul's argument. If you say, as you do, that the tithe is not in the text, it is only because you refuse to read the Scriptures comprehensively.

The presuppositions that you bring to the text have forced your interpretation. Presupposition 1. Israel's laws expired at the cross. Presupposition 2. There is no law under the New Covenant. Presupposition 3. Unless a command is explicitly stated in the New Testament it is not binding on a Christian. Conclusion: because 1 Corinthians is written to Christians on this side of the cross, and because the law has been done away with at the cross, and because the word tithe is not used in 1 Corinthians 9:14, therefore Paul cannot be commanding Christians to tithe in order to support their ministers. If this is your hermeneutic, and it appears to be, then there really is no point in having the Old Testament.

You said: "I cannot find the idea of a separate law of morality in the Bible..."
Just because you can't find something to be in Scripture does not mean it's not there. I've shown you the uniqueness of the 10 commandments and their abiding nature under the New Covenant. Whether you will see it or want to see it is your issue.

[LBC1689guy]

You said: "The claim that the Ten Commandments are outside the Law of Moises is not supported by scripture. In 2 Corinthians 3:1-8 Paul refers to the Law as letters engraved on stones. The part of the Law written on stone was the Ten.

Again, I never said it was outside of the law of Moses. I said is was unique because God wrote them which speaks of its perpetual nature.

You said: "The New Testament teaches that we today are under no part of the Old Law (Galatians 3:24-25; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 8:7)."

For our justification not our sanctification which is not the same thing.

You said: " But Christ said that it would be easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the Law to fulfill its purpose."

No He didn't. He said, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." and what follows this statement is the second table of the 10 commandments.

Your whole thesis is untenable. Do you continue to sin? Of course you do. "Sin is lawlessness." (1 John 3:4). There is no knowledge of sin apart from the law. (Romans 7) If you continue to sin, and you are aware of the sin of others, then there must be abiding moral law.

"By this we shall know that we are of the truth and reassure our heart before him; for whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything. Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God; and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him. And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ (commandments 1-4) and love one another (commandments 5-10), just as he has commanded us. Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us." (1 John 3:19-24)

You say: "I can see no statement that the Levites tithed to Christ through Abraham in Hebrews 7:10."

Again it is clear and it appears that you will not see it. It is explicit in the text.
"See how great this man was to whom Abraham the patriarch gave a tenth of the spoils! And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers, though these also are descended from Abraham. But this man who does not have his descent from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him."

And so NASB, NIV, KJV, NKJV.

You said: We as Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old Law; including the Ten Commandments and tithing."

This is absurd. As a justified Christian do you really believe that having other gods before Jehovah, committing idolatry, taking the name of the Lord in vain, profaning the Sabbath Day, not honoring lawful authority, murdering, sexual immorality, stealing, lying, and coveting are acceptable for you because Jesus died on the cross? May it never be!

Christ has overcome the sins of this world for His elect. Grace is greater than sin. Where sin is present grace abounds all the more. "What shall we say then? Are we (who believe) to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?"

[WASR10]

LBC1689guy,

We can go back and forth like this until Christ’s return. I will continue to explain why you’re wrong; you will continue to explain why I’m wrong. I so very much want to go through your last post point by point and defend my position and your comments on my knowledge. But I won't. Instead I will finish this exchange. There is most certainly a misunderstanding of these scriptural concepts, and some rather bold mishandling of the Word. It remains my position that this is on your part. Your assessment of the scriptures and my viewpoints come from a place of deep rooted tradition derived from your denomination. You are an intelligent, well learned person according to your tradition. But your assumptions and conclusions of my comments, my beliefs, and the hermeneutical process are in error.

Please reread what I have written, compare it to the actual words of scripture, and try not to add what you feel or have been taught to see. Reread what you have cited in the proper context. I will restate: We as Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old Law; including the Ten Commandments and tithing. The Bible teaches so.

Have a nice day.

[LBC1689guy]

So as a bible believing Christian you are free to commit murder, adultery, to steal, to lie, and to covet? I doubt that even pagans believe this.

If my views come from my denomination or tradition, then where do your views come from? My presentation has been consistent with the witness of the broadest spectrum of the Christian church through its first 20 centuries. It would seem that your apparent antinomian, dispensationalism is the novel hermeneutic.

I'm still waiting to hear your answer concerning what law is put within the new heart of the believer under the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33). What statutes are the Spirit going to cause those in the New Covenant to be careful to obey? These issues directly undermine your assertion "We as Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old Law; including the Ten Commandments and tithing. The Bible teaches so." The two classic texts on the New Covenant from the Old Testament explicitly teach that there is law on the hearts of New Covenant members and the Spirit who enables them to obey.

I've neither misrepresented your views nor misunderstood your assertions. I have challenged them, offered clear, more consistent, expositions of the relevant texts, and have made my case from all of Scripture...(Old and New Testaments.) "For whatever was written in former days was written for our (the elect of God) instruction, that through endurance and encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope." (Romans 15:4)

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:17-17)

[WASR10]

Sigh... okay. Your first sentence demonstrates my point exactly. That is either a misunderstanding or a mishandling. But you goad me too much. I will, once again, respond to your posts. I will be clear and consistent and scriptural, but it will be of no use. You will repeat your same arguments. You will not be convinced by my words, and will I not be convinced by yours. I will be back in a couple days.

WASR10 I respect your desire to not comment further on the subject.

Obviously you don't.

[LBC1689guy]

My first statement is in direct response to this last restated quote from you:

"We as Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old Law; including the Ten Commandments and tithing. The Bible teaches so."

Not sure how you can say that I have misrepresented what you have made very plain (multiple times)? Did you not say "Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old law; including the Ten commandments and tithing. The Bible teaches so."? Or is this just an anomaly on my screen? If you said this, and I have directly quoted you, how have I mishandled what you have said?

I think that you are right. I will repeat the same arguments as the topics at hand demand that I do so. You will likely not be convinced. You will continue to conflate justification and sanctification. You will continue to offer proof texts to demonstrate that justification is by faith alone...to which I will agree...but these verses do not go to the issue of the abiding nature of the moral law as the Christian's guide in sanctification.

I don't misunderstand your arguments. I've not misrepresented your arguments. I simply reject your arguments as not being consistent with the full counsel of God's word.

I do respect your desire not to comment. I never said that I wouldn't comment. It's just that what you say must be refuted for the sake of those who are reading this thread. I wish that you wouldn't comment but I suspect that you want the last word between us.

[WASR10]

My first statement is in direct response to this last restated quote from you:

"We as Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old Law; including the Ten Commandments and tithing. The Bible teaches so."

Not sure how you can say that I have misrepresented what you have made very plain (multiple times)? Did you not say "Christians are not obligated to follow any part of the Old law; including the Ten commandments and tithing. The Bible teaches so."? Or is this just an anomaly on my screen? If you said this, and I have directly quoted you, how have I mishandled what you have said?

I think that you are right. I will repeat the same arguments as the topics at hand demand that I do so. You will likely not be convinced. You will continue to conflate justification and sanctification. You will continue to offer proof texts to demonstrate that justification is by faith alone...to which I will agree...but these verses do not go to the issue of the abiding nature of the moral law as the Christian's guide in sanctification.

I don't misunderstand your arguments. I've not misrepresented your arguments. I simply reject your arguments as not being consistent with the full counsel of God's word.

I do respect your desire not to comment. I never said that I wouldn't comment. It's just that what you say must be refuted for the sake of those who are reading this thread. I wish that you wouldn't comment but I suspect that you want the last word between us.

I'm not arguing that your first statement isn't in direct response to my statement, I maintain it demonstrates a lack of understanding or deliberate mishandling. I will go in to further detail when I give a proper response.

Not once have I used the word 'misrepresented' in reference to your use of my arguments. Please understand that.

I don't 'conflate' justification and sanctification, a clear definition I have given or each. I reject your definition of sanctification, or rather I do not believe it is quite a Biblical definition.

Not once have I expressed that the scriptures teach justification by faith alone.

I understand you reject my arguments, and that alone would be fine. I think you either misunderstand them or choose not to completely consider them, and so when you respond to them I need to further comment on your responses.

I don't care for the last word, but when you comment on my posts in such a manner, I must respond. As you, I feel what you post on this subject must be refuted, and for the most part I have done that. Now what is left is to correct the things you have posted regarding my statements.

[LBC1689guy]

WASR10 do you deny that justification is by faith alone?

Not once have I expressed that the scriptures teach justification by faith alone

[WASR10]

WASR10 do you deny that justification is by faith alone?

Not once have I expressed that the scriptures teach justification by faith alone

That opens a whole new door, my friend. One that is more appropriately discussed in a separate thread (this thread is about tithing). But to answer your question, I believe the scriptures teach that justification is indeed by faith, but not by faith alone.

[LBC1689guy]

WASR10 thanks for this statement: That opens a whole new door, my friend. One that is more appropriately discussed in a separate thread (this thread is about tithing). But to answer your question, I believe the scriptures teach that justification is indeed by faith, but not by faith alone.

To deny justification by faith alone (sola fide) is to deny the Christian faith. Finally things have been made clear. See I should have asked questions rather than engaging in debate based on faulty assumptions.

No need for you to respond to me anymore.

[WASR10]

WASR10 thanks for this statement: That opens a whole new door, my friend. One that is more appropriately discussed in a separate thread (this thread is about tithing). But to answer your question, I believe the scriptures teach that justification is indeed by faith, but not by faith alone.

To deny justification by faith alone (sola fide) is to deny the Christian faith. Finally things have been made clear. See I should have asked questions rather than engaging in debate based on faulty assumptions.

No need for you to respond to me anymore.

I have been told this many times, that I am not a real Christian because I believe in that one fact. I am sorry you feel that way. We will end the discussion here, then. Good day.

[Not a Cook]

Brothers: let us be careful to remember that (as some have already pointed out) this thread likely has readers who have not participated by posting. Although many likely know the Lord; some surely don't. As such, let us be mindful to leave a good witness for Christ. He taught us, By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:35, NKJV). Although we obviously have differences in particular doctrines, let those of us who know Christ be mindful to actively love one another and do as Paul instructed us in Ephesians 4:1-5 (NKJV),

I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Let us be careful not to needlessly divide (nor be quick to divide) as Satan would like the church to do. It can be easy to misunderstand exactly what someone else is attempting to say on a forum such as this. Given that, how much more ought we to bear with one another in love as we endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace?

Please don't misunderstand me: correct doctrine is vitally important, of course! I think all (or most) here would agree with that basic point. But it can be easy to misunderstand a person on this forum about some of the finer points of doctrine. I myself have been badly misunderstood on more than one occasion here.

As this particular thread has veered from the original question regarding tithing into questions regarding the law, the covenants, justification, etc., perhaps it would be prudent to deal with such additional topics in different threads of their own. Two suggestions:
1) starting another thread concerning "the Law and the Christian", if anyone is interested, as this seems to be a MAJOR topic that arises in multiple threads in this subforum. IIRC, such a thread already happened, but most of the current contributors in this thread weren't involved in that thread.
2) WASR10 - I am interested to understand what you meant when you mentioned you believe in justification by faith, but not faith alone. However, I don't want to get this thread any more off course than it already is. If you'd like to clarify in another thread or via PM, I'm interested to read it.

[Wordupmybrotha]

2) WASR10 - I am interested to understand what you meant when you mentioned you believe in justification by faith, but not faith alone. However, I don't want to get this thread any more off course than it already is. If you'd like to clarify in another thread or via PM, I'm interested to read it.

WASR10 had a thread a while back similar to what you're asking about.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=945027

Refer to post#19

[Wordupmybrotha]

1) starting another thread concerning "the Law and the Christian", if anyone is interested, as this seems to be a MAJOR topic that arises in multiple threads in this subforum. IIRC, such a thread already happened, but most of the current contributors in this thread weren't involved in that thread.

Our venerable OP, hasserl, had a thread about that.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1046033