A Question For Tithe Payers

The apostle did not condemn tithes in Hebrews 7. We've dealt with that chapter in another thread to show that it was not tithes that the apostle described in Hebrews 7:18 as 'weak and useless'.

The one question that is left unanswered is WHAT exactly does Scripture describe as "weak and useless"? The reason why anti-tithers have never had an honest answer to that question is because they have substituted 'tithes' for the Law that Paul discussed in that chapter; and when they got stuck, it probably occured to them that they've argued completely off-course in the ambit of that chapter.

How many honest theologians think that Hebrews 7:18 ('a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof') was referring to "tithes"? Not one that we know of. The remarkable thing is that even honest anti-tithers who do a bit of theology have never described that verse as describing 'tithes' to be weak and useless. Why? Simple: they will not find any other verse in the entire Bible that describes tithes as such. I also quoted just a few honest Bible scholars who have commented on Hebrews 7:18 - none of them regard that verse as pointing to 'tithes':

Quote
[1] Verse eighteen specifically states that “there is a setting aside of
a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness.”

The former commandment is a reference to the Mosaic Law^[54]

The reference to weakness refers to the inability of the Law of Moses
to empower the saint to fulfill the requirement.
~~ Essential Christianity, on Hebrews 7:11-22.

Quote
[2] "For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before".
The reference here is to the entire system of the Mosaic institutions.
That system is here spoken of as "the commandment going before".

. . . The commandment going before was that which regulated the
worship of God and obedience to Him prior to the Christian dispensation;
but this had now been cancelled and a new law of worship given.
~~ A. W. Pink, Commentary on Hebrews 7:17-19

Quote
[3]  Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament,
Hebrews 7 >>
|
"Verse 18
For there is a disannulling of a foregoing commandment because of
its weakness and unprofitableness.

This turns attention to the very nature of the Levitical system
of which that priesthood was the support and center. It was not of caprice that God
annulled the old covenant, for it deserved to be annulled because of its weakness
and unprofitableness. God had never considered the Levitical system to be complete,
final or efficacious in itself; but "it was added because of transgression, until the seed
should come to whom the promise hath been made") Gal. 3:19). The law expired, therefore,
by limitation, when Jesus was revealed as that "seed" so long anticipated. The weakness
and unprofitableness of that foregoing commandment refers to
the whole system of Moses;
and Macknight explained the weakness of it thus, . . . ."

Quote
[4]  John MacArthur (himself an anti-tither),
'Jesus the Superior Priest, Hebrews 7:11-19' >>
|
"For there is verily an annulling of the commandment going before for the weakness
and unprofitableness of it."  God set aside the old standard.  Now watch.
Now put a parenthesis at the beginning of verse 19.  "(For the law made nothing perfect),
but the bringing in of a better hope by which we draw near unto God."  Or you'd use and.
Lemme read it this way.  "For there is verily an annulling of the commandment going before
for the weakness and unprofitableness of it.  (For the law made nothing perfect), and
the bringing in of a better hope, cross out did, by which we draw near unto God."  You see?
God says, "I am setting aside the old one, and I'm bringing in a new one; and in
the new covenant, you have what?  Access to God.

Now, the word disannulling, afaytises, has to do with the doing away of something that
is established.  It is used, for example of annulling a treaty, of annulling a promise, a law, a
regulation, of erasing a man's name from something.  It has to do with removing what is
established. The whole paraphernalia of the sacrificial system, the whole
ceremonial system is wiped out.  It is annulled.  It is done away with.  God wipes it
out; and He wiped it out for good in 70 AD when He destroyed the temple. The old system
could reveal sin.  It could cover sin.  It could give a relative measure of drawing near to God,
 but not full perfection.  It brought nothing to conclusion.  The priesthood of Jesus Christ made
all that Israel looked forward to a reality.  Access to God.

So many other Bible scholars know that Hebrews 7:18 was referring to the Levitical law and its system, and not an argument against tithes - even anti-tithers know this for a fact, more so because they cannot find any verse in the Bible describing tithes to be weak and useless. It remains, therefore, for those using that verse to attack tithes to please show us from Scripture HOW exactly it is weak and useless - no excuses will do the magic for them; and if they cannot show this, it is because they are bending the verse to argue what it does not argue.



You can't be slyly putting down others if you've been doing the very same thing you condemn. You seem to be the only anti-tither we know who forces Hebrews 7:18 to say what it does not teach, even though many anti-tithers know better.

@SirJohn,


I'm quite honoured, thank you.


I thought the thread said "A Question", but now it's a "few questions"? Lol, just teasing ya.


Your inference is wrong. Verses on tithes in the Bible are not as hard-and-fast as you implied or assumed.

               ____________________________________


Now, your questions:


I don't know.


I don't know.


I don't know.
I could only speak for myself - that promise has proven true every single time in my life.


Precisely what the Word teaches there, and which has been proven in the lives of those who have experienced it.

I've complied by being brief and straight to the point. Before you assume anything not implied in my answers, it would be great if you invite me to offer explanations for what you're not clear about.

Regards.