In this season, we begin an exposition of Hebrews chapter 7 where tithing (both the pre-law and according to the law) was disannulled, abolished and nullified. My exposition of Hebrews 7 is NOT to teach whether tithe was money or not, it is to reveal the truth that WHATEVER is called tithing, tithe or tenth has ended, set aside, nullified, abolished and disannulled both tithing, “before” or “pre” Law and tithing "according to the Law". I have heard many criticisms against me and other anti-tithe teachers in the past that we are stingy; we do not want to give our money to church or to God. This is a false allegation against our person. What I/we (anti-tithe teachers) believe is that, giving in the New Testament is according to Grace and not according to percentage nor according to the law. We believe the NT doesn't place a certain percentage to giving unlike tithe of the OT. We believe tithe according to the law was specifically from crops and animal but giving can be of/from anything including money.

I will like you to tell and/or invite your friends, family and neighbor(s) who are still being coerced and manipulated in their churches to follow and/view this thread for an eye opening truth and exposition. You can also invite your pastor(s) who teaches tithe in your local church to come partake and/or challenge the truth of this exposition that brought an end to tithing.

I will be doing the exposition verse-by-verse and presenting the truth/evidence where and how tithing (pre-law and law) was brought to and end. After each post or verse exposition, contribution, questions and criticism (not insult) is allowed for participation.

Hebrews chapter 7 is extremely important because it is the only New Testament scriptures that mention tithing (both the pre-law and according to the law) after Calvary! By this statement, I mean that, Jesus is the Mediator of the New Testament and as such, when Jesus was still physically walking the earth, the New Testament has not began and biblically speaking, the Old Testament was still in effect until after the death of Christ and resurrection.

For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. Hebrews 9:15-18 New International Version.

Although this chapter, Hebrew 7 is not primarily a discussion of tithing but it draws heavily from Numbers 18, which is the ordinance establishing the priesthood and tithing as tithing “according to or under the law” and also pin down on the "pre-law tithing or tithing before the law". It contrasts the mortal Aaronic priesthood, which was partially sustained by tithing principles (according to the law), with Christ’s Melchizedek priesthood (pre or before the law), which is eternal and is sustained by grace principles of the unlimited eternal power of God.

Also, let me state clearly that the writer of “The Letter to the Hebrews” did not set out to teach tithing as a topic or practice per say in Hebrews chapter 7 but to teach an in-depth exposition of the superiority or betterness of the priesthood of Christ for the New Testament believers compared to the Old Testament Levitical Priesthood that was established in the Pentateuch. However, tithing (both pre-law and according to law or during the period of law) was referenced because tithe/tenth also pertained to the Levitical Priesthood that is being discussed by the writer. There are many laws, ordinances and commandments that are inseparable from the Levitical Priesthood and one of such is tithe/tenth. So, one cannot discuss or teach the Levitical Priesthood in totality without mentioning or teaching tithe/tenth alongside because they are inseparable!

Once again, kindly tell and/or invite your friends to follow and/or participate in this thread on Nairaland even if they are not members, invite and/or tell family members and neighbor(s) who are still being coerced and manipulated in their churches to this thread for an eye opening truth and revelation. Also invite your pastor who teaches tithe in your local church to come partake and/or challenge the truth of this exposition that brought an end to tithing. I will be doing the exposition verse-by-verse and presenting the truth/evidence wherein and how tithing (both pre-law and law) was brought to and end. After each post or verse exposition, contributions, questions and criticism is allowed and welcomed for participation and teaching purpose.

...to be continue

Okay, let’s get started right now!

Hebrews 7 is a continuation from Chapter 6 carrying on from the very first chapter and beyond to the last verse of the last chapter. Hence, I will start my exposition from the last verse of Hebrews chapter 6 to make a continuation into chapter 7 where the reference to Jesus becoming a High Priest “according to the order of Melchizedek” was re-emphasized.

20. Where the forerunner has entered for us, [even] Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. Heb. 6

Here, we have an introduction to something that was established and will continue into chapter 7:1 and beyond. We have Jesus becoming High Priest forever according to the "order of", not the "person of" Melchizedek. Clearly and without ANY CONTRADICTION, “JESUS” WAS COMPARED TO “MELCHIZEDEK”. Jesus is not Melchizedek and Melchizedek is not Jesus. It means Melchizedek was “something” or that he “set a pattern/order” and Jesus was “after or according to that something, pattern or order” fulfilling the type/shadows in which Melchizedek was. Melchizedek was a man (Heb. 7:4) and no man fall from heaven, he had to be born of a woman - this will be explained in details as we continue. Now, who is this Melchizedek and what is it about him that made Jesus to “become” High Priest forever “according to the order” of Melchizedek? Let’s not guess. Let the writer explain to us since it is written.

Kindly bear in mind, the writer of Hebrews referenced Melchizedek in three (3) dynamic ways namely:

1. The Historic Melchizedek – Type and Shadow of Christ, Genesis 14.
2. The Prophetic Melchizedek – Prophetic foreshadow of Christ’s eternal Priesthood, Psalm 110.
3. The Fulfilled Melchizedek, Jesus Christ. Heb. 6:17-20; 5:6, 10; 7:17-21.

We shall expound on the three dynamic references to Melchizedek as we study along. However, here in Heb. 6:20, the writer is using Jesus Christ as the fulfilled Melchizedek of the Prophetic Melchizedek from Psalm 110:4 in the phrase “having become”. The writer pulled from the prophetic Melchizedek of Psalms 110:4 and made it fulfilled in Christ,

4. “The LORD has sworn, and will not relent; You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” Psalm 110.

In Hebrews 6:20, it says[b] “having become”[/b] and in Psalm 110:4 it says, “You are a priest...after the order…” not after the “person” of Melchizedek. So, here in this verse, Christ becomes or is the fulfilled (Melchizedek) of the prophetic (Melchizedek) from the historic (Melchizedek) who was first mention in Genesis 14. Now, let’s put everything together:

It’s important we understand the difference between the “historical” Melchizedek of Genesis 14, which was a type and shadow and the “prophetic” Melchizedek of Psalm 110 and “fulfilled” Melchizedek of Hebrews 6:20. For instance, “Out of Egypt I have called my Son” (Hosea 11:1) “historically” refers “The National Israel” but as a type and shadow, it “prophetically” refers Jesus Christ (Matt. 2:15). “A virgin shall be with child…” (Isa. 7:14-16) “historically” referred to Isaiah’s wife and child, but as a “type and shadow” and “prophetically” it refers to Mary and Christ (Matt. 1:23). First, the “historical” Melchizedek appeared in Genesis 14. Second, Melchizedek appeared “prophetically” when David mentioned him in Psalm 110 almost a thousand years later. And, third, the writer of Hebrews used him as the “fulfilled” of both the[b]“prophetic”[/b] and “type/shadow; historic” - both "fulfilled" in Christ.

...to be continue

1. For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; Heb. 7

The writer had already established the "fulfilled" Melchizedek in Christ right from Hebrews 5:1-6 from the "prophetic" Melchizedek of Psalm 110. It was re-emphasized in Hebrews 6:20 and then he begins Hebrew Chapter 7 as a continuation from Heb.6:20 introducing us to the "historic" Melchizedek (who was a type and shadow and from whom the prophetic came to be in Psalms) of Genesis 14 and discussed the Pre-law tithing that was done by Abraham to the historic Melchizedek.

The Historic Melchizedek as Type or shadow of Christ and the Pre-law tithing.

“For this Melchizedek…”

It is very important for us to understand which Melchizedek the writer referenced here in this verse – the historic Melchizedek. We know it is the historic Melchizedek by the writer referring to first appearance of Melchizedek in Genesis 14 when he met Abraham when returning from slaughter of kings. This is the first mention of Melchizedek in the bible. Who then is “this Melchizedek?” [/b]The writer made reference to this historic Melchizedek as [b]“who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him” so we can therefore trace this back to history in Genesis 14:14 – 24. Clearly from this scripture, the historic Melchizedek did not appear as a type and shadow in order to receive tribute or tithe from Abraham BUT to bless. How much more the fulfilled Melchizedek?

The writer drew heavily from the historic event of Genesis 14 still talking about Melchizedek that, he is a “king of Salem, priest of the most high God”. Now, we understand that “this Melchizedek" (historic) was a king (of Salem) and also a priest (of the most high God). Hence the historic Melchizedek was a “king and a priest” at the same time. Israel's king later descended from the tribe of Judah and house of David and the priest on the other hand descended from the tribe of Levi and the house of Aaron. No King in Israel is a priest and a king at the same time but Melchizedek was a king-priest and Jesus and the NT believers fulfilled that as a type and shadow. Today, no Christian goes on “slaughter of kings” like Abraham and Christ had made every believer or Christian a king and priest unto himself; he (Christ) being our “High Priest” (Revelation 1:6; Hebrews 3:1, 5:1-6, 8:6 and 10:12).

“…who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him”

Abraham in this context is extremely important because,

1. He is the "Patriarch" of the Hebrews nation or national Israel and

2. He is the (spiritual) [b]"father" [/b]of them that are of faith.

We shall expound on Abraham as “Patriarch” of the Jewish nation and as a “father of them that are of faith” – it is extremely important. Melchizedek met Abraham returning from the slaughter of kings and the scripture simply records that he blessed Abraham without first demanding tithe or tribute from Abraham. In like manner, the fulfilled Melchizedek (Jesus Christ) blesses Christians without first demanding tithe in order to bless them, Christians are blessed by the sacrifices of Christ.

What did Abraham do in order to receive blessing? Absolutely nothing - foreshadowing the blessing of God without works to believers through Christ as the fulfilled Melchizedek. In this account where the historic Melchizedek is a type and shadow, that is under the type and shadow in the appearance of Melchizedek, Abraham did nothing to get the blessing, how much more under the fulfilled Melchizedek of Christ. The historic Melchizedek therefore becomes the first to be a king and a priest at the same time. This is how and where he is a type of Christ but not Christ himself.

What then is “biblical type or shadow”?
“…and blessed him”.

This is very important! Every word of this writer is extremely important. Abraham, actually Abram in Genesis 14:18-24 was blessed by the historic Melchizedek “before” Abram gave (not pay) tenth from the spoils of war. It will be scripturally wrong to teach that giving of tithe/tenth is what makes God bless someone under the new covenant even as it wasn’t like that in the case of Abram and Melchizedek as type and shadow of better covenant. Also Abram was rich in silver and gold (Genesis 13:1-2) prior to his encounter with Melchizedek and we are not told he became rich by tithing before the event of Genesis 14. Abraham wasn’t rich or blessed by his tithing! He was pronounced blessed by the historic Melchizedek and it was written,

And he blessed him, and said, blessed [be] Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all. Genesis 14:19-20

Now, we are told in Heb. 6:20 that Jesus become or became High Priest "FOREVER according to the order" of Melchizedek and in Heb.7:1, we are told “this Melchizedek” is a priest and a king. It therefore means Jesus is also a King and Priest also because Jesus became a High Priest "forever according to the order of Melchizedek".

In Israel, NO KING IS A PRIEST AND NO PRIEST IS A KING AT THE SAME TIME. It’s either one or the other, not both at the same time. So Jesus is King and Priest according to the order or pattern of Melchizedek because this Melchizedek is a priest and king at the same time. This is the first thing being established by the writer about Jesus and Melchizedek when the writer said Jesus became High Priest “forever according to the order of Melchizedek” – they were both kings and priests as Jesus took “after” the “order” of Melchizedek but Jesus himself is not Melchizedek. We will establish the "forever" aspect of the "according to the order of Melchizedek" as we expound further.

...to be continue

2.To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

The writer still expounding and describing “this Melchizedek” from verse one says, “To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all”. We must understand the context of “tenth of all” by the writer. “All” in the context does not imply everything that Abraham possessed but all that he recovered from war as specified by the writer in verse 4,

“…unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils”.

Since the writer of Hebrews is using Melchizedek in Chapter 7 as a type, shadow and historic, we also need to agree with the context of “all” as in verse 2 here and was limited only to “spoils of war” in verse 4. Let’s travel back to Genesis 14:14-24, quoting from New King James Version.

[b]"Now when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his three hundred and eighteen trained [servants] who were born in his own house, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. He divided his forces against them by night, and he and his servants attacked them and pursued them as far as Hobah, which [is] north of Damascus. So he brought back all the goods, and also brought back his brother Lot and his goods, as well as the women and the people. And the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh (that [is], the King's Valley), after his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who [were] with him. Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he [was] the priest of God Most High. And he blessed him and said: "Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; And blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand." And he gave him a tithe of all. Now the king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give me the persons, and take the goods for yourself." But Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have raised my hand to the LORD, God Most High, the Possessor of heaven and earth, "that I [will take] nothing, from a thread to a sandal strap, and that I will not take anything that [is] yours, lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich'- "except only what the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men who went with me: Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion."[/b]

Here we see that the content of this “all” was specified as Heb. 7:4 and Genesis 14:14 – 24 both agree. So we understand that the “all” that is being spoken of is the spoils of war, not from “all” that Abraham possessed. The “spoils” as specified in Genesis are as follow,

Goods
Abraham’s brother – Lot and his goods.
Women and
People.

These are the context of the “all” as recorded in Genesis and specified by the writer of Hebrews. We also see in this account that there was a "king of Sodom" that also met Abraham as well as Melchizedek, who is also a king of Salem and priest of Most High God. Also, after Abraham gave tithe/tenth to Melchizedek; Abraham also gave the rest of the “spoils” (women, people and the goods excluding his brother Lot and his goods) back to King of Sodom that first met him before the appearance of Melchizedek. This proves that the “spoils” of war were not the possessions of Abraham and doesn’t belong to Abraham as he clearly acknowledged the spoils of war doesn’t belong to him saying, “But Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have raised my hand to the LORD, God Most High, the Possessor of heaven and earth, "that I [will take] nothing, from a thread to a sandal strap, and that I will not take anything that [is] yours, lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich'- "except only what the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men who went with me: Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion."

Abraham also gave some parts to his servant and APPARENTLY TOOK NOTHING TO HIMSELF. The example of Abraham as Pre-tithe era is flawed in many ways. If Christians are to follow this example of Abraham on this account of tithing in Genesis 14 for those who teach that tithing existed BEFORE the law as in the case of Abraham, then Christian will ALSO need to do the following:

1. We will go to war and slaughter kings – Heb. 7:1

2. We will give tithe/tenth from spoils of such “war and slaughtering” of kings – Heb. 7:2, 4

3. We will acknowledge that what we recover from such “war and slaughtering” of kings doesn’t belong to us and must return them to the rightful owner(s) – Genesis 14:22 – 24

4. We will keep nothing for ourselves – Genesis 14:22 – 24.

The context of “all” is clearly specified in the scripture. If the context of “all” included Abraham’s possession, the scripture would probably have made it clear to us that Abraham gave tithe from his possession or income. If the context of "all" includes our monetary income and we are to follow Abraham’s example, then we should also follow Abraham’s example by not keeping anything to ourselves. The truth of the matter is this,

1. Abraham was very rich before the account of tithe to Melchizedek and scripture did not make it clear he was rich by giving tithe of his possession or income in order to become rich – Genesis 13:1-2. It is unbiblical to teach that tithing makes one blessed financially. This clearly contradicts the teaching of tithing in the example of Abraham as “before the law or Pre-law”. Tithe teachers say tithing antedates the law in the example of Abraham but we understand that Abraham did not tithed from his own possession or income. Abraham clearly acknowledged that what he gave the tenth from was not his personal possession but tithe teachers say Christians should tithe from their personal possession or income.

2. Abraham gave tithe/tenth from spoils of war and he acknowledged the spoil of war doesn’t belong to him as he returned them to the rightful owner. What a Christian works to earn belongs to such Christian and he/she cannot return the rest to any rightful owner because it belongs to him as income.

We also see in the account of Genesis that Abraham "after" being blessed that Abraham gave tithe/tenth of “all” the spoils of war. The tithe teachers teach that you have to tithe in order for God to bless you or before God can bless you. This is GROSS HERESY! In the account of Genesis, blessing was pronounced on Abraham “before” he gave the tithe/tenth part of all as being referred to here in Heb.7:2 and witnessed in Genesis 14:14 – 24. “tenth part of all” (of Goods, Woman, People, His brother - Lot and his good). These are the content or context of "all" being referred to here in Heb.7:2.

“…first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace”

The writer continues to reveal Melchizedek’s historical identity and says it is “being by interpretation”. In Hebrew, “Melchi” means “king,” “zedek” means “righteousness,” and “Salem” means “peace”. Therefore Melchizedek as a type by interpreting his name, the “King of Righteousness” and also the “King of Peace.” Both of these titles are appropriate for the Messiah in the Old Testament. Hence, historically speaking, Melchizedek was not actually the King of Righteousness or the King of Peace (that is, Christ); he was only that person divinely used as a type and “by interpretation”. Abraham as we know did not tithe to the “person” of Jesus but to a “type and shadow” of Christ and when Christ came as the reality of the types and shadows, no one tithed to him neither did he demanded tithe from anyone for our Christ came to bless and not to receive tithe/tribute.

3. without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

The writer continues to describe Melchizedek. Remember the writer started chapter 7 with the phrase, “For this Melchizedek” (v1). Now he is telling us about this man, Melchizedek and how Jesus was made a High Priest forever "like", not "is" according to the “order of this Melchizedek”.

“without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life…”

What kind of statement is this? If someone is a man like Melchizedek according to verse Heb. 7:4 (Now consider how great this man was...), how can he not have a mother or be without mother, without father, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life but the bible says of every man:

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble. Job 14:1

New Living Translation (©2007)
For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman and everything comes from God. I Corinthians 11:12

“having neither beginning of days, nor end of life…”

The writer is not saying that Melchizedek is God because only God, as we understand do not have “beginning of days nor end of life”. The writer also identified Melchizedek as a man in verse 4. So, how can a man be “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life…?”

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; Ecclesiastes 3:2

Put all these together, this is a rabbinical hermeneutics or exegesis based on the fact that Melchizedek’s lineage or genealogy is not given or recorded in Gen. 14:18-20, before or anywhere in scriptures. It is not literal neither is it historic for a man not to have a mother, father decendants, birth and death record. He suddenly appeared and then disappears from history only to show up again in the prophetic psalms. Like all human beings Melchizedek had parents, but the Holy Spirit sovereignly gave no account of the beginning of Melchizedek's days (birth record) or of the end of his life (death record), that he might be a proper type of Christ eternal priesthood as revealed by the writer of Hebrews. As our perpetual High Priest, he (Melchizedek) serves as another type of the eternal priesthood of Christ not the person of Christ. Melchizedek’s unrecorded family decent or genealogy is used to illustrate that Christ was eternal, pre-existed his incarnation, and was superior to the law, not Christ being the very person of Melchizedek.

“Having neither beginning of days, nor end of life” must be understood “typically or as a type”, not literally and not historically. This is because Melchizedek was not Jesus Christ living in the flesh before his virgin birth. For all the important persons in Genesis, except Melchizedek, there is a genealogy. In the divine writing, the Holy Spirit sovereignly gave no account of the beginning of Melchizedek's days (birth record) or of the end of his life (death record), that he might be a proper type of Christ as the eternal One, as our perpetual High Priest. This corresponds with the presentation of the Son of God in the Gospel of John. Being eternal, Jesus has no genealogy (John 1:1). But as the Son of Man, Christ does have a genealogy (Matt. 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). Historically, Melchizedek since he was a man and every man born of a woman dies at a certain time, Melchizedek also died but the writer, using rabbinical hermeneutics or exegesis says he does not have end of life because his death record was not recorded just at his birth record was not recorded.

“…but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually”.

This is where the type and shadow of Melchizedek as fulfilled in Christ was revealed; clearly revealing to us that Melchizedek and Christ are not the same person. It was Melchizedek that is being compared to Christ here not other way round. This proves that Christ, the fulfilled Melchizedek is superior to the historic Melchizedek in that Christ became our high priest interceding for us.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
But Jesus lives forever, so he serves as a priest forever. That is why he is always able to save those who come to God through him. He can do this because he always lives and intercedes for them. Heb. 7:24-25

New International Version (©1984)
Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that, who was raised to life--is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. Romans 8:34.

But made "like" the Son of God is the comparison. This Melchizedek REMAINS A PREST CONTINUALLY because historically, his death record was not recorded and considered as a king-priest. This is the type and shadow that Jesus fulfilled and the "forever” aspect in the phrase “after the order of Melchizedek”. If Jesus as man died, Melchizedek also died but since no death record was found and Jesus was also raised to live again, continues to be not just a priest but our high priest; Jesus lives continually and forever.

The historical Melchizedek was not the Son of God, but was “made LIKE the Son of God.” His name, title, and lack of genealogy all make him into a type of Christ, not the person of Christ. Christ is “after the order of,” “like” (v. 3), or “after the similitude” of Melchizedek (v. 15). It was the Christ-event, not Melchizedek’s historic rule as priest-king that fulfilled the types and shadows in Christ. However, those who use the description from Hebrews 7:1-3 to teach that Melchizedek was actually Christ in a pre-incarnate form destroy both the meaning of the incarnation of Christ and the necessity for Abraham’s calling. The write here in verse 3 stated that Jesus is NOT Melchizedek “BUT MADE LIKE (similar to) THE SON OF GOD, remains a priest continually. If Jesus and Melchizedek are same, there will be no need for comparison and Jesus will not have to “become” if he already is Melchizedek.

4. Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

“Now consider how great this man was…”

The writer takes us away from the phrase that begins chapter 7:1, “For this Melchizedek” and brings us to the phrase, “Now consider” to begin verse 4. Therefore, the writer wants us to consider this man, the historic Melchizedek. The first evidence that Melchizedek was superior to Abraham and the Mosaic Law is that Abraham gave tithes to him. With “now consider” the author of Hebrews begins to lay foundation for the groundwork for his crucial declaration in verse 18 that the entire Levitical system (which was also done in the act of Abraham giving tenth of spoils of war – vs. 5, 9-10) of worship, including its high priesthood and tithing, has been “set aside” or “disannulled”. “Now consider” begins a presentation of four evidences which prove to the Hebrew mind that Melchizedek’s priesthood replaced that of Aaron. This list of evidences is found in verses 4-10 and the conclusions begin in verse 11. The writer made it clear how he wants us to consider how great or the greatness of this man, the historic Melchizedek, who is also a type and shadow of Christ’s king and priesthood giving the evidences saying, [b]“…unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils”. [/b]Referencing from Gen 14:14-24). Here, there is a deliberate and conscious use of word changing from “a tenth part of ALL” in verse 2 to “tenth of the SPOILS”. Make no mistake friends; the writer is still referring to the same historic event because items taken from war are referred to as spoils.

First, Abraham like I mentioned earlier is extremely important in this context because,

1. He is the Patriarch of the Hebrews nation or national Israel and

2. He is the father of them that are of faith.

Expounding on Abraham as “Patriarch” of the Jewish nation and as a “father of faith”. It is extremely important we understand the deliberate use of word. The writer didn’t ground Abraham as the “father of faith; that is, of them that believe but as a “patriarch”. This is a reminder that all Israel traces its lineage through Abraham.

New Living Translation (©2007)
Consider then how great this Melchizedek was. Even Abraham, the great patriarch of Israel, recognized this by giving him a tenth of what he had taken in battle.

One of the revelations the writer of Hebrews was sharing is to tell the national Israel is that, many of their laws, rituals and ordinances and OT laws was a type and shadows off good things to come and the Old had come to an end because the New has come. Using Abraham is a “patriarch” of national Israel is not a typical of example for them that Abraham is the father of faith to those who believe. To them (Christians) who believe in God, righteousness is imputed unto them, not by work but by grace through faith. Abraham is historically the patriarch of the national Israel but a type and shadow of those who are called and who believe in God through faith that is fulfilled in Christians who come to Christ. Hence, Abraham becomes the "father", not "patriarch" of them that of faith. How? Under Grace, righteousness is not by works or religious activities, it is by faith. When we believe, righteousness is imputed unto us, we don’t work for it.

New Living Translation (©2007)
In the same way, "Abraham believed God, and God counted him as righteous because of his faith". Galatians 3:6

New Living Translation (©2007)
Circumcision was a sign that Abraham already had faith and that God had already accepted him and declared him to be righteous--even before he was circumcised. So Abraham is the spiritual father of those who have faith but have not been circumcised. They are counted as righteous because of their faith. Romans 4:11.

In a sense, the reference to Abraham as he gave tenth of the spoil is not as father of faith or them that are of the household of faith or them that believes but as a patriarch of the national Israel. This destroys the teaching that Abraham’s example should also bind on Christians because Abraham’s act was not revealed as the “spiritual father of those who have faith” according to Romans 4:11 in New Living Translations but as patriarch of national Israel. To further demonstrate this truth of Abraham as patriarch of national Israel and father of them that believes, the writer wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that Levi, one of the tribes of Israel also gave tithe/tenth “in” Abraham when he met Melchizedek (vs. 5, 9-10) and gave the tenth of spoils.

“…the tenth of the spoils”

Scripturally speaking then, it is wrong for someone like Abraham, and then he was still Abram to give tithe/tenth from what doesn’t belong to him. However, one can argue that the spoils of war belong to Abraham because they become the properties of a victor after the victory of war. If we take this argument contrary to the fact that Abraham himself clearly acknowledged the properties does not belong to him to justify tithing for Christians, then we must also consider the following as example of Abraham as mentioned earlier:

1. We must go to physical war and slaughter kings, not spiritual war. – Heb. 7:1 but the scripture says our fight, battle or war is not physical anymore unlike that of Abraham, Ephesians 6:12.

2. We must give tithe/tenth from spoils of such “war and slaughtering” of kings – Heb. 7:2, 4

3. We must acknowledge that what we recover from such “war and slaughtering” of kings doesn’t belong to us and must return them to the rightful owner(s) just as Abraham did, Genesis 14:22 – 24.

4. We must keep nothing for ourselves, Genesis 14:22 – 24.

Those who use the example of Abraham as tithing for Christians as “Pre-law” or “before the law” tithing clearly ignore the truth that Abraham did not tithe from his “all” as it relates to his possessions or personal income he labored to get by himself but the context of “all” is clearly limited to the spoils of war in this verse which does not originally belong to Abraham and cannot be taken as his personal possession or monetary income which is being taught today in the body of Christ by the pro-tithe teachers.

It also negates the tithe teaching today that Christians should tithe from their monetary income with the claim that it precedes the law but when it comes to the practice itself, it is done “according to the law” because they will tell you the "storehouse" is the church where you worship and being fed with the word so you must bring your tithe else the devourer will do its job - To the contrary then, the so called “pre-law” tithing in the example of Abraham was NEVER given or taken to the "storehouse" BEFORE the law. Hence, we understand the tithe teachers ONLY camouflage with the statement that tithe was before the law while they practice the context “according to the law”.

The Historic Melchizedek as Type or shadow of Christ VS Tithing “according to the Law”.
[color=#990000][/color]
5. And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they are descendants of Abraham:

From this verse, the writer begins to lay another ground foundation and shift away the attention of his readers from the “pre-law” tithing of Abraham (which was historic and given to a type and shadow, not the person of Christ) unto the “law” [/b]tithing as commanded, that is, [b]“tithing according to the law”. This clearly proves that the former, the “pre-law” tithing wasn’t commanded to Abraham but the “law” tithing was commanded by God and that makes it tithing “according to the law” to the national Israel, not to Christians and specifically to the tribe of Levi, cf Numbers 18.

“And verily they that are of the sons of Levi…”

Here, the writer added something using the conjunction, “And” to begin verse 5. Remember the writer in verse 4 with the phrase, “Now consider…”, then joins verse 4 and 5 together with the conjunction, “And”, making a case for “comparison” between “this man - the historic Melchizedek” (v.4) and “those who are of the sons of Levi” (v.5), and says theses sons of Levi are those (1) “who receive the office of the priesthood; (2) have a commandment to take tithes of the people”. This is the reason we cannot talk about the Levites of the Levitical priesthood of the law without talking about tithe that God commanded the national Israel to be given to the sons of Levi as they serve in the Levitical Priesthood.

“Sons of Levi” reminds the readers that the Levitical priests owed much of their existence and authority to their commandment of receiving tithes. The writer of Hebrews first reminds his readers where the authority of the Levitical priesthood originated before he proves that Christ’s authority is greater and replaces the former.

“…have a commandment to take tithes of the people…”

“have a commandment” refers specifically to the book of Numbers chapter 18. Those who study Numbers 18 in order to support New Covenant tithing are compelled to discard it and concentrate on more obscure texts as we will soon discover in the context of Hebrews 7 as we proceed further. However, one who takes the time to study Numbers 18 will soon discover why tithing is never commanded for the new covenant believers neither does anyone one in the new testament have a "commandment to take tithe" like the sons of Levi from the new testament believers. Since Numbers 18 actually contains the “commandment,” “ordinance” or “statute” of tithing, it should be carefully studied by every serious bible student with the goal of discovering exactly what the bible says.

This “ordinance” or “statute” of tithing which provided sustenance for the Levites had abolished the centuries-old tradition which had designated the male head of the household as the family priest. The tithing ordinance forced Israel, not Christians (because Christ had not yet come physically and died for the new testament church) to support the Levitical system through tithes and offerings. It also applied a death penalty on anyone trying to “draw near” to worship God directly.

“…according to the law…”

It establishes the connection between “tithing” and the Mosaic Law for the Levites who receive the commandment to receive tithe from the national Israel because it says, “that is, of their brethren, though they are descendants of Abraham”.

...to be continue

6. But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

Many tithe teachers/preachers will quote this verse out of context to mean and interpret that it was JESUS who is being referred to in this verse that received tithes from Abraham but I’m referencing other translation to show that it was still the historic Melchizedek

New Living Translation (©2007)
But Melchizedek, who was not a descendant of Levi, collected a tenth from Abraham. And Melchizedek placed a blessing upon Abraham, the one who had already received the promises of God.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Although Melchizedek was not from the tribe of Levi, he received a tenth of everything from Abraham. Then Melchizedek blessed Abraham, who had God's promises.

This is the second evidence that Melchizedek was greater Abraham.

The writer begins this verse with the phrase, “BUT HE” “BUT" introduces a negative or contrary statement to the comparison being made in verse 4-5. The writer had said whose genealogy IS NOT derived from them. That is, whose genealogy is NOT from the genealogy of Levi because the writer already told us in verse 3 that Melchizedek is without genealogy. So the writer is telling us that there was a Levi, who received commandment to receive tithes BUT there is one, Melchizedek who IS NOT from such genealogy of them that are commanded to receive tithe but still, received tithe from Abraham who had the promise.

Therefore, at this point; the writer proves two points or established two groups between verse 5 and 6:

1. The SONS OF LEVI - who receive the priesthood and have the commandment to receive TITHE FROM THEIR BRETHREN ACCORDING TO LAW.

2. HE (MELCHIZEDEK) WHO IS NOT FROM SONS OF LEVI RECEIVED TITHE FROM ABRAHAM.

7: And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.

Here we see beyond all contradiction in continuation to v6, that the lesser is blessed by the better. This is tying up to the blessing being referred to v6 when the writer said,"and blessed him who had the promises". Who is the lesser and who is the better? When we link it to the previous verses 1 and 6 which states the same thing about blessing and the record in Genesis 14:14-24. We come to conclusion that the lesser is Abraham who had the promises while the better is Melchizedek who released/gave the blessings. We can also prove this by consulting other translations below:

8. And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives.

The most twisted verse of Hebrews chapter 7 is verse 8 to justify tithing for Christians. Like I said above, the writer up till this point had established two groups in comparison from verse 4 and 5 where he said:

“NOW CONSIDER how great this man [was], to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils. – v4”

“AND INDEED THOSE WHO ARE OF THE SONS OF LEVI, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham – V5”

These are the two groups verse 8 is referring to in context. Many false tithe and scripture twisting teachers read into this verse and grossly apply/abuse it saying, Jesus is the “he” of this verse – nothing is being said of Christ in Hebrew 7 until verse 13-14. Now, we come to TWO groups here and we see both of them receive tithes. The writer brings the two groups together and compare thus, “HERE MORTAL MEN (many or plural) receive tithes, BUT THERE HE (one or singular) [receives them], of WHOM IT IS WITNESSED THAT HE LIVES.

Who is the “he that received or receives” being referred to in this verse? Simply Melchizedek - whom it is testified or witnessed that "he" lives as stated in verse 3 because Melchizedek was considered that he lives continually or forever since v3 already told us he has neither beginning of days nor end of life - so he is considered to live continually as his death record was not written anywhere in scripture. However, let look at other translations to prove this truth:

Hebrews 7:8
Amplified Bible (AMP)
Furthermore, here [in the Levitical priesthood] tithes are received by men who are subject to death; while there [in the case of Melchizedek], they are received by one of whom it is testified that he lives [perpetually].

I love this translation because it states clearly that it's two groups we are looking at now. "HERE", IN THE LEVITICAL PREISTHOOD.....while "THERE" IN THE CASE OF MELCHIZEDEK.......Melchizedek is considered as he lives forever or continually as the bible recorded in Heb 7:3,6 and he was the ONE being referred to here that received tithe from Abraham.

Hebrews 7:8
Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)
Those priests get a tenth, but they are only men who live and then die. But Melchizedek, who got a tenth from Abraham, continues to live, as the Scriptures say.

Hebrews 7:8
GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)
Priests receive a tenth of everything, but they die. Melchizedek received a tenth of everything, but we are told that he lives.

This makes the interpretation of the writer using the comparative word, “HERE” and “BUT THERE” here in Heb.7:8 saying, Here MORTAL MEN (plural and many, referring to sons of Levi) receive tithes, BUT THERE HE (singular and one, referring to Melchizedek even as seen from different translations) [receives them], of whom it is witnessed that he lives. It’s like saying in our modern day English, “On this hand…..on the other hand…”

So “The he that lives here” is Melchizedek simply because his death record wasn’t found in scripture and hence he is “considered” (not in reality) that he lives, this was typified of Melchizedek and fulfilled in Christ as the “Fulfilled” Melchizedek. I DON'T KNOW WHERE ON EARTH IMAGE123 AND OTHER TITHE TEACHERS GOT THEIR INTERPRETATION THAT JESUS IS THE "HE" BEING REFERRED TO IN THIS VERSE. THIS IS READING INTO GOD'S WORD YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION AND GROSS MISINTERPRETATION OF GOD'S WORD TO SUITE YOUR TITHE TEACHINGS. JESUS NEVER RECEIVED TITHE AND WILL NEVER RECEIVED TITHE, AT LEAST NOT IN THIS PRESENT WORLD.

9-10. And as I may so say, Levi also, who receives tithes, paid tithes in Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him.

I call these verse the most overlooked and ignored verses of Hebrews chapter 7.[color=#990000][/color]

The writer by the Holy Spirit buried some revelation and truth in these two verses. The writer says, EVEN LEVI who receives tithes PAID TIHES THROUGH ABRAHAM. By saying this, it doesn’t mean that Levi who are commanded to receive tithe from their brethren (v5) LITERALLY OR PHYSICALLY PAID TITHES because the writer went further to tell us that he (Levi) was still in the lions of his father (Abraham) when Melchizedek met him. The writer by the Holy Spirit, SPIRITUALIZED AND BURIED the act of PAYING TITHE OF LEVI "IN" or "INSIDE" or "THROUGH" THE ACT OF ABRAHAM WHEN HE "GAVE" TITHE TO MELCHIZEDEK.

This is the same truth Apostle Paul taught and engaged in Romans 5:12,

New Living Translation (©2007)
When Adam sinned, sin entered the world. Adam's sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned.

How can everyone sin because Adam sinned? The truth here is because “everyone was in Adam when he sinned”. Those who teach that tithe existed before the law as in the case of Abraham obviously ignores verses 9-10 that what God instituted as tithing for the Levitical Priesthood under the law was also done or spiritualized in the act of Abraham according to these verses.

This is a clear revelation to say, "SO TO SPEAK"; that SHOULD IN CASE ANYTHING HAPPENS TO THE LEVI "PAID/PAYING" TITHE WOULD ALSO MEAN THE SAME THING HAPPENING TO THE ABRAHAM ACT OF "PAYING/GAVE" TITHES. IT MEANS IF ANYTHING HAPPENS TO THE ACTS OF ABRAHAM "PAYING/GAVE" TITHE, IT WOULD ALSO MEAN SAME THING HAPPENING TO LEVI "PAYING/GAVE" TITHE. IT MEANS ANY CHANGE OR CHANGES TO THE LEVI "PAID/PAYING" TITHE IS ALSO CHANGE OR CHANGES IN THE ACT OF ABRAHAM "GIVING/GAVE" BECAUSE ONE ACT OF LEVI HAS BEEN BURIED OR SPIRITUALIZED IN THE ACT OF ABRAHAM AS LEVI WAS STILL "IN" ABRAHAM THEN. ALSO, IF ONE IS SET ASIDE, NULLIFIED AND ABOLISHED, THE OTHER IS ALSO DONE AWAY WITH.

Apostle Paul continues to teach the truth in respect to Romans 5:12 and he says in verse 17,

New Living Translation (©2007)
For the sin of this one man, Adam, caused death to rule over many. But even greater is God's wonderful grace and his gift of righteousness, for all who receive it will live in triumph over sin and death through this one man, Jesus Christ. – Romans 5:17.

...to be continue

11. If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

The writer after making all his point and indepth exposition above from verse 1-10. He began v11 with "THERFORE" if perfection were through the Levi who received commandment to function in the levitical prieshood (v11, 5), receive tithes and also paid tithe to the priest, Aaron according to the law. The writer says there would not be need for another priest should perfection had being through these Levitical priesthood. And if there would even be a replacement of priesthood, why not according to the order of Aaron according to the law but which compares to the priesthood of Jesus being according to the order of Melchizedek (Heb 6:20). This is the whole exposition by the writer like I mentioned from the beginning of my explanation from Heb.7:1. The priesthood of Jesus did take after the "order of Aaron" (not hereditary) according to the law but according to the "order of Melchizedek" by to oath/power of endless life.(v15-17 of Heb.7)

“If therefore” [/b]begins drawing conclusions from the evidence presented in verses 4-10, which began with “now consider.” On the basis of the Levitical priesthood Israel “received the law,” that is, all of the Mosaic Law and including tithing commandment as stated in verse 5! Since this is a discussion of tithing and levitical priesthood, common sense teaches that “the law” must also include tithing for verse 5 says, “according to the law”. A compound Greek noun-verb here means that the law was “legislated” and “enacted” through the priests. After being initiated by God, the “legislated” law of tithing and other offerings provided for the very existence of the Levitical priesthood, and, in turn, the Levitical priesthood gave the whole law to Israel.

[b]“If therefore perfection were” (or could have been achieved) through the Levitical priesthood implies that something was lacking. The problem was that nothing, absolutely nothing, in the system of laws that established their priesthood, or that resulted from the ministry of their priesthood, had been able to produce the perfection required by God! This included tithing! All the financial support in the world cannot, and will not, produce a moral priesthood (or clergy). Therefore, there was need for another greater priesthood and change to the entire system says verse 12,

New International Version (©1984)
For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. – Hebrews 7:12.

In Acts 15:5-22, the apostles in Jerusalem, being Jewish Christians, had not required Paul to teach the Gentiles to observe the Mosaic Law and tithing. However, due to a lack of spiritual insight, they still required themselves and other Jewish Christians to continue observing all of the law. This error caused a multitude of problems which Paul faced and tried to correct in his letters, especially Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Second Corinthians, chapter 3. This failure to understand the impact of the gospel on the Mosaic Law also caused the situation in the church that was being addressed by this letter to the Hebrews.

Since all four “evidences” in verses 4-10 involved tithing, it is therefore logical to conclude that the “law” being discussed in verse 11 must also include the law of tithing in Numbers 18. This is especially true since the first use of both “law” and “commandment” in Hebrews refers to tithing. In verse 5,

English Standard Version (©2001)
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.

Tithing was singled out of the entire law because it best enabled the Levitical system to exist. The Levitical system, like human organizations, began with the means to support it.

12. For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

We must understand from context, verse 5 specifically that the “priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people” and this very verse says that priestly office is changed[/color] and as a result, the LAW that established the commandment of receiving tithe MUST also change.

As a matter of truth, “being changed” (past tense; already done) means annulment (v18) and it also means removal (Heb 12:27) according to same writer. “Being changed” begins this Greek sentence for emphasis. The Greek word, me-ta-ti-the-me-nees, is a present passive participle. It is a metamorphosis, a transposition, a change from one to another (Strong’s 3346). As used in Scripture, it means a great change. The word describes Jacob’s bones moving from Egypt to Canaan (Acts 7:16), the Galatians’ apostasy from the gospel (Gal. 1:6), Enoch’s translation (Heb. 11:5) and apostates (Jude 4). The following verses make it clear that this great “change” in the priesthood was its total abolishment and replacement.

“There is made of necessity a change also of the law”

Context leads to the conclusion that the “principle” being changed “from” is the Mosaic Law which have the commandments for the Levitical Priesthood. On the other hand, the “principle” being changed “to” is an eternal one which is governed by another set of laws. The following texts further clarify this principle. The instant that Christ died, “the [Levitical] priesthood” [color=#990000]was changed by being abolished, set aside and anuulled. The veil in the temple was ripped open and the Passover lamb’s blood was replaced by Christ’s blood. The result changed the history of the world! The high priesthood of Aaron was replaced by the high priesthood of Jesus Christ according to the order of Melchizedek and the regular priesthood of the other priests was replaced by the New Covenant doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers.” (See 1 Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6; 5:9.)

Exactly what was “changed”?—the law, the ordinances and the commandment which had established the entire Levitical priesthood—especially the primary law of tithing as in the context of Hebrews 7:5. The principle which now establishes the office and priesthood of Jesus Christ (and also believer-priests) is not derived from any kind of written law whatsoever, and this includes tithing! Instead, the principles of grace and faith are linked to the eternal nature of God which supersedes the law. Any change in the priesthood itself would make necessary changes in all the laws governing and supporting the priesthood and tithing is NOT excluded[/color].

13-14. For he of whom these things are spoken pertains to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah—of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.

[color=#990000]The key to Hebrews 7 is found in verses 13 and 14. NOTHING said from Hebrews 7:1-12 about Melchizedek referred to the “historical” person, but ALL referred to the “typical” or “prophetic” Jesus Christ! When you try to make it apply literally to the historical Melchizedek, it simply does not make sense at all—for example, Levi’s tithe to a Canaanite priest. The texts are not attempting to argue the validity (nor non-validity) of Abraham’s tithe. Instead, they are setting the stage for the necessity of tithing’s abolition as part of the total support system of the Levitical priesthood as recorded in Hebrews 7:18.

Truthful enough, our high Priest – Jesus Christ sprang from the tribe of Judah and the house of David. When the priesthood is being changed, it changed from tribe of Levi and house of Aaron to tribe of Judah and tribe of Judah don’t have commandment to receive tithe according to the law, meaning the law had also changed as specified in verse 12. The high priesthood of Christ NEVER collected tithe from anyone and NEVER instructed the Apostles to receive tithe in his name because none of them have the commandment to receive tithe as they were not from the tribe of Levi who had the commandment to take tithe. He came to bless those that believed in his name and concerning the principles of GIVING, the Apostles reminded us (The NT Church/believers/Christians) of the words of our Lord Jesus,

New Living Translation (©2007)
And I have been a constant example of how you can help those in need by working hard. You should remember the words of the Lord Jesus: 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.' – Acts 20:35.

All through my entire study of God’s word, I have read this verse BUT I’m yet to read a verse that says you should remember the words of the Lord Jesus how He said, “It is MORE BLESSED to TITHE than to GIVE” – The New Testament principle of sharing and putting our money towards God’s kingdom is based on the following scriptures,

New International Version (©1984)
On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. – I Corinthians 16:2

New Living Translation (©2007)
You must each decide in your heart how much to give. And don't give reluctantly or in response to pressure. "For God loves a person who gives cheerfully" – II Corinthians 9:7

“For he of whom these things are spoken…”

The writer begins pulling all of the evidences and conclusions together into the person of Jesus Christ. This “change of the law” was not minor, but catastrophic to the entire Levitical system! Jesus was from the tribe of Judah which was forbidden by the law to officiate as priests and receive tithe according to the law. Finally, the author makes it clear that he was speaking about Jesus Christ, and NOT the historical Melchizedek.

“Moses spoke nothing” about a change of the priesthood from Levi to another tribe. Whereas large portions of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy describe Levi’s financial support structure, authority, and duties, absolutely nothing is said in the law about how priesthood from Judah should be financially supported and served.

The reasons are, first, Christ’s priesthood is completely new and beyond the law.

Second, tithing is not required to support a “priesthood of every believer.”

Third, the New Covenant structure of pastor-teachers, evangelists and the ministry gifts; and deacons is foreign and NEW to the Old Covenant system. Therefore, by biblical interpretation and extension concerning tithing, neither can anything in the law be legitimately used to dictate how the New Covenant structure should operate! Christ commandment of “it is more blessed to GIVE…” is based grace-giving is even superior to the basic Old Covenant idea of tithing which is restricted to 10%, crops, animals and MANDATORY.

15-16. And it is yet far more evident: that after the similitude of Melchizedek there arises another priest, who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.


“Not after the law of a carnal [physical] commandment”

This must, in its context, include the commandment of tithing mentioned in verse 5. This adds to the statement that “Moses spoke nothing concerning [the] priesthood” beyond Levi, and especially not beyond Israel itself. The author of Hebrews has now taken the reader outside of the boundaries of the Mosaic Law for an answer to the legitimacy of Christ’s high priesthood! Clearly, Christ’s priesthood, the priesthood of believers, and the ministry of pastor-teachers and other church workers are NOT governed by instructions in the Mosaic Law!

“But after the power of an endless [indestructible] life.”

This is heavy! What a statement! The “commandment” “law” or (better) “principle” that authorizes and makes Christ’s priesthood work, comes from his divine eternal character which preceded the law. This remark is drawn from Psalm 110:4’s statement about Melchizedek being a priest “forever.” Because of this, he cannot fail! Because of this, we, as priest-believers cannot fail! The church will be victorious!

Again, in its basic context, this primarily refers to “the priest’s office who had commandment in the law to collect a tenth” from verse 5[b](which refers back to Numbers 18:19-28)[/b]. By extension, however, it applies to every aspect of the Levitical system, including dress code, ritual anointing, how to offer sacrifices, etc. Whereas Levi had the ordinance of Numbers 18 from the law establishing his priesthood and support by tithing and other sacrifices, Christ’s greater priesthood needs neither! Christ has the power, the authority of God!

Grace principles of support, motivated by love for God, out-give legalistic forced principles of support such as tithing. Christ is the high priest of the church, which means every believer is now personally a priest—not giving tithes to other priests, but, as priests themselves, offering sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving. Christ is the head and the priesthood of believers is his body, this means his “power” flows into us and becomes our power. Therefore, the church does not need to use the weak Mosaic Law-power of tithing to further its goals; it has the eternal “indestructible” life-power of grace and faith from Jesus Christ!

17. For he testifies, You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.

Referencing Psalm 110:4 here.

18. For there is verily an annulment of the previous commandment because of the weakness and uselessness thereof.

The Most Important Text that ended and abolished tithing in the law!

God removed something that had been around since the time of Moses. He removed the ordinances of the Levitical system in order to establish the greater eternal priesthood of Jesus Christ.

New Living Translation (©2007)
When God speaks of a "new" covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear. –Hebrews 8:13

“There is a setting aside a former commandment.”

Question: What or Which is the "former" commandment being referred to here The context of this chapter can only point to Numbers chapter 18, as the “former commandment” being discussed and first mentioned in verse 5 of Hebrews chapter 7. The conclusive statement of this verse is the key statement of this chapter. Whether or not one cherishes his/her own understanding of tithing is totally irrelevant. What does the Scripture say? What does this verse mean in its context? These questions must be answered honestly. If tithing is indeed included in this verse, then the New Covenant Christian must deal with such conclusion in an honest manner, biblical and truthfully.

Take a look at this verse from many translations:

New International Version (©1984)
The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
But there was a change in the first testament because of its impotence, and there was no benefit in it.

American King James Version
For there is truly a cancellation of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Weymouth New Testament
On the one hand we have here the abrogation of an earlier code because it was weak and ineffective.

Amplified Bible (AMP)
So a previous physical regulation and command is cancelled because of its weakness and ineffectiveness and uselessness

Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)
The old rule is now ended because it was weak and worthless.

Again, Numbers 18 is “the former commandment in the law” from Hebrews 7:5 which established the support structure and described the broad duties of the Levitical priesthood. Numbers 18 is the basic statute/ordinance which details the fundamental use of the first tithe by both the Levites who served in the tabernacle and the priests who offered sacrifices before the altar. As mentioned in the discussion of verse 5, the first use of both “law” and “commandment” in the book of Hebrews are both tied together and inseparable in the context of tithing.

It is totally unbiblical, heretic and abuse of scripture to teach that 7:18 abolished every ordinance pertaining to the Levitical priesthood except tithing! In reality, by first abolishing tithing (its chief financial support) the priesthood would end. The domino effect from abolishing tithing knocks down every other authority and function of Levitical priests. This is exactly why tithing has such is an important role in Hebrews 7.


I will like to stop here as other scriptural verses of Hebrews 7 further explains the better privileges we have in Christ Jesus. To this end, legalistic tithing is NO WHERE INSTRUCTED TO THE NEW TESTAMENT CHRISTIANS.

This Thread is further open to questions, criticism and sound doctrine. You are welcome!

Goshen360: Chei, the thread that set the tithe captives FREE. Many folks emailed me to thank me for bringing them to the knowledge of truth.

You have done well my dear brother. The devil has lost it at Calvary. We only walk in the victory the Lord secured for us. This is the victory - our faith.

MostHigh:

For sure they will jeer you on till the end.

DrummaBoy:

And what is that supposed to mean? Do you want to assume the devil's job: accuser of the brethren?

Goshen360:

He is a hater! A murderer! From henceforth, I will spare him not. I used to respect him but he had pushed me to the wall. Anyway, I'm going to the righteousness thread to reply Bidam. I have seen your good write up on the other thread. Sweet dreams. It will take me few minutes to finish my reply to Bidam. I hope I can help him see what the scriptures says. Bless you brother!

DrummaBoy:

And what is that supposed to mean? Do you want to assume the devil's job: accuser of the brethren?

DrummaBoy:

In this thread, I endeavored to put the whole discuss in one form for those who may wish to learn from it.


Another reason for putting this up is bc this expose is the only expose on scriptures I have found, by a nairalander , on the very contentious issue of tithing.