₦airaland Forum

Do tithing proponents have anything to add?

We shall supply more prove that today noise about tithe is just stealing by method.

Hnd-holder:
We shall supply more prove that today noise about tithe is just stealing by method.

I think the same argument could be adduced for any other type of giving you read of in the Bible - OT or NT. It is just as pointed to ask: to give or not give? And then the same roundabout argument all over again.

The thing is this: if anyone can argue against tithing, they should be prepared to argue also against any other type of giving. So far, I haven't read a sound persuasion on the real essence of NT giving from those arguing merely against tithing.

Governmental collection of religious offerings

Nigeria
?

England
The right to receive tithes was granted to the English churches by King Ethelwulf in 855. The Saladin tithe was a royal tax, but assessed using ecclesiastical boundaries, in 1188. Tithes were given legal force by the Statute of Westminster of 1285. Adam Smith criticised the system in The Wealth of Nations (1776), arguing that a fixed rent would encourage peasants to farm more efficiently. The Dissolution of the Monasteries led to the transfer of many tithe rights from the Church to secular landowners, and then in the 1530s to the Crown. The system ended with the Tithe Commutation Act 1836, which replaced tithes with a rent charge decided by a Tithe Commission. The records of land ownership, or Tithe Files, made by the Commission are now a valuable resource for historians.

At first this commutation reduced problems to the ultimate payers by folding tithes in with rents (however it could cause transitional money supply problems by raising the transaction demand for money). Later the decline of large landowners led tenants to become freeholders and again have to pay directly; this also led to renewed objections of principle by non-Anglicans.

The rent charges paid to landowners were converted by the Tithe Commutation Act to annuities paid to the state through the Tithe Redemption Commission. The payments were transferred in 1960 to the Board of Inland Revenue, and finally terminated by the Finance Act 1977.


Scotland
In Scotland teinds were the tenths of certain produce of the land appropriated to the maintenance of the Church and clergy. At the Reformation most of the Church property was acquired by the Crown, nobles and landowners. In 1567 the Privy Council of Scotland provided that a third of the revenues of lands should be applied to paying the clergy of the reformed Church of Scotland. In 1925 the system was recast by statute and provision was made for the standardisation of stipends at a fixed value in money. The Court of Session acted as the Teind Court. Teinds were finally abolished by the Abolition of Feudal Tenure etc. (Scotland) Act 2000.


France
In France, the tithes -- called "la dîme" -- were a land tax. Originally a voluntary tax, in 585 the "dîme" became mandatory. In principle, unlike the taille, the "dîme" was levied on both noble and non-noble lands. The dîme was divided into a number of types, including the "grosses dîmes" (grains, wine, hay), "menues" or "vertes dîmes" (vegetables, poultry), "dîmes de charnage" (veal, lamb, pork). Although the term "dîme" comes from the Latin decima [pars] ("one tenth", same origin for US. coin dime), the "dîme" rarely reached this percentage and (on the whole) it was closer to 1/13th of the agricultural production.

The "dîme" was originally meant to support the local parish, but by the 16th century many "dîmes" went directly to distant abbeys, monasteries, and bishops, leaving the local parish impoverished, and this contributed to general resentment. In the Middle Ages, some monasteries also offered the "dîme" in homage to local lords in exchange for their protection (see Feudalism) (these are called "dîmes inféodées", but this practice was forbidden by the Lateran Council of 1179.


Germany
Germany levies a church tax, on all persons declaring themselves to be Christians, of roughly 8-9% of the income tax, which is effectively (very much depending on the social and financial situation) typically between 0.2% and 1.5% of the total income. The proceeds are shared amongst Catholic, Lutheran, and other Protestant Churches. In 1933 Hitler had the entry "church tax" added to the official tax card, which meant that the tax could now be deducted by the employer like any of the other taxes.

Some believe that the church taxation system was established or started through the Concordat of 1933 signed between the Holy See and the Third Reich. This is a simple misunderstanding or misrepresentation of §13 of the Appendix (The Supplementary Protocol) of the Concordat (Schlußprotokoll, §13). The article reads: It is understood that the Church retains the right to levy Church taxes . Notice that §13 states that the Church "retains the right" .The church tax (Kirchensteuer) actually traces its roots back as far as the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss of 1803. Today its legal basis is §140 of the Grundgesetz (the German "constitution" in connection with article 137 of the Weimar constitution.

Church tax (Kirchensteuer) is compulsory in Germany for those confessing members of a particular religious group. It is deducted at the PAYE level. The duty to pay this tax theoretically starts on the day one is christened. Anyone who wants to stop paying it has to declare in writing, at their local court of law (Amtsgericht) or registry office, that they are leaving the Church. They are then crossed off the Church registers and can no longer receive the sacraments.


Ireland
Tithes were local religious tax-like payments paid in Ireland by members of other faiths as well as its own adherents to maintain and fund the established state church, the Anglican Church of Ireland, to which only a small minority of the population belonged. The collection of tithes was violently resisted in the period 1831-36, known as the Tithe War. With the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland, tithes were abolished.


Denmark
All members of the Church of Denmark pay a church tax, which varies between municipalities. The tax is generally around 1% of the taxable income.


Spain and Latin America
Both the tithe (diezmo), a tax of 10% on all agricultural production, and "first fruits" (primicias), an additional harvest tax, were collected in Spain throughout the medieval and early modern periods for the support of local Catholic parishes. The tithe crossed the Atlantic with the Spanish Empire; however, the Indians who made up the vast majority of the population in colonial Spanish America were exempted from paying tithes on native crops such as corn and potatoes that they raised for their own subsistence. After some debate, Indians in colonial Spanish America were forced to pay tithes on their production of European agricultural products, including wheat, silk, cows, pigs, and sheep. The tithe was abolished in several Latin American countries, including Mexico, soon after independence from Spain (which started in 1810); others, including Argentina and Peru still collect tithes today for the support of the Catholic Church. The tithe was abolished in Spain itself in 1841.


Sweden
Until the year 2000, Sweden had a mandatory church tax to be paid if one did belong to the Church of Sweden which had been funneling about $500 million annually to the church. Due to change in legislation, the tax was withdrawn in year 2000. However, the Swedish government has agreed to continue collecting from individual taxpayers the annual payment that has always gone to the church. But now the tax will be an optional checkoff box on the tax return. The government will allocate the money collected to Catholic, Muslim, Jewish and other faiths as well as the Lutherans, with each taxpayer directing where his or her taxes should go.


Austria
Church tax is compulsory in Austria and Catholics can be sued by the Church for not paying it. Anyone who wants to stop paying it has to declare in writing, at their local municipal council, that they are leaving the Church. They are then crossed off the Church registers and can no longer receive the sacraments. The tax amounts to about 1% of the income.


Switzerland
There is no official state church in Switzerland; however, all the 26 cantons (states) financially support at least one of the three traditional denominations--Roman Catholic, Old Catholic, or Protestant--with funds collected through taxation. Each canton has its own regulations regarding the relationship between church and state. In some cantons, the church tax (up to 2.3%) is voluntary but in others an individual who chooses not to contribute to church tax may formally have to leave the church. In some cantons private companies are unable to avoid payment of the church tax.


Finland[/b]Members of certain churches pay a church tax of between 1% and 2.25%, depending on the municipality.


[b]United States
The United States has never collected a church tax or mandatory tithe on its citizens, under the principle of separation of church and state. The United States and its governmental subdivisions also exempt most churches from payment of income tax (under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and similar state statutes, which also allows donors to claim the donations as an income tax itemized deduction). Also, churches may be permitted exemption from other state and local taxes such as sales and property taxes, either in whole or in part. However, churches are required to withhold Federal and state income tax from their employees along with the employee's share of Social Security and Medicare taxes, and pay the employer's share of the latter two taxes, unless the employee is an ordained minister.

Actual collection procedures vary from church to church, from the common, strictly voluntary practice of "passing the plate" in Catholic and mainline Protestant churches, to formal, church-mediated tithing in some conservative Protestant churches (as well as the LDS Church), to membership fees as practiced in many Jewish congregations. There is no government involvement in church collections (though some contributions are considered tax-exempt as charity donations), but due to less-strict income and tax reporting requirements for religious groups, some churches have been placed under legal and media scrutiny for their spending habits.

@Hnd-holder,

I appreciate the articles you offered just above on Governmental collection of religious offerings.

However, how does that answer the question from a Biblical perspective on tithing and giving being argued for and against?

This topic is "To Tithe or Not to Tithe?"

Do you mean to start new topic such as

bari_kade:
@Hnd-holder,

Biblical perspective on tithing and giving being argued for and against?

Tithe War
From Wikipedia
The Tithe War in Ireland (1831-36) refers to a series of periodic skirmishes and violent incidents connected to resistance to the obligation of Catholics in Ireland to pay tithes for the upkeep of the Church of Ireland. The first clash of the Tithe war took place on 3 March 1831 in Graiguenamanagh, county Kilkenny when a force of 120 armed police forcibly took possession of cattle belonging to a Roman Catholic priest, in lieu of Tithes. He had, with the approval of his bishop, organised people to resist Tithe collection; his example soon spread, and shortly afterwards, in Bunclody, county Wexford, a crowd resisting the seizure of cattle was fired upon by the Constabulary, resulting in twelve deaths and twenty fatally wounded.

Tithing is unscriptural under the New Covenant , Prophet Malachi was sent to the priests and nation of Israel not Nigerian "Wherein have we robbed Thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse….": "Will a man ROB God?"
Malachi 3
SOME SHOCKING TRUTHS ABOUT THE TITHING DOCTRINE
1. Abraham never tithed on his own personal property or livestock.
2. Jacob wouldn’t tithe until God blessed him first.
3. Only Levite priests could collect tithes, and there are no Levite priests today. 4. Only food products from the land were tithable.
5. Money was never a titheable commodity.
6. Christian converts were never asked to tithe anything to the Church.
7. Tithing in the Church first appears centuries after completion of the Bible.

bari_kade:
I think the same argument could be adduced for any other type of giving you read of in the Bible - OT or NT. It is just as pointed to ask: to give or not give? And then the same roundabout argument all over again.

Au contraire, I'm not sure how one could ever reach this conclusion in light of what both the OT & NT detail about tithing and giving  .

bari_kade:
The thing is this: if anyone can argue against tithing, they should be prepared to argue also against any other type of giving. So far, I haven't read a sound persuasion on the real essence of NT giving from those arguing merely against tithing.

I expected more from you sir. The thread has been about whether NT Christians should tithe or not. We've done a very good job of reaching a broad consesus on some major points. To try and swing the discussion round to one about "giving" is at best a backward step. Nobody has suggested that giving is to be considered anything other than standard Christian lifestyle/practice, afforded by grace. To claim that to argue against tithing is to argue against giving is disingenuous at best .

Once more, attempting to use the "stick or carrot" approaches to validate tithing - i.e. it's mandatory with a curse for non-compliance, or voluntary with blessings for conforming - are the flip side of the same coin of religious deception (or ignorance). I totally concur with HND-holders "stealing by method" tag. I'll go further add emphatically state that anyone who preaches that is either decieved or a deciever.

Unless someone can introduce some hitherto unpresented truth, insight or revelation that clearly accords with scripture, there is nothing to make me rethink. You promised to bring some unseen truth to the discussion, which we eagerly await.

God bless
TV

Jesus christ did not use tithe as a condition for miracles. He demanded for FAITH.

“Abraham went to war on behalf of Sodom (SODOM, mind you), to rescue his nephew, Lot. He then gave 10% of these spoils of war to Melchizedek, and allowed Sodom to keep 90%, while he himself kept NOTHING”

God will first give to Jacob, Jacob will give God back a tenth

"The God Who makes the world and all that is in it, He, the Lord inherent of heaven and earth, is NOT dwelling in temples made by hands, " (Acts 17:24).

How then, under the New Covenant, does a believer give a tenth, when he is supposed to give his all
(Rom. 12:1), to a priesthood that does not exist, but now he himself is part of a priesthood (I Peter 2:9),
at a temple that does not exist (Mat. 24:1-2),
but rather he himself is the temple wherein God dwells.
No longer do we have priests with spiritual infirmities interceding for us, but rather we have Christ Jesus as our perfect intercessor and High Priest seated at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens (Heb. 7:28-8:1).
At this time in history, Israel owes no tithe to anyone. And, of course, we who are a new creation and the true Israel of God--Gal. 6:16 were never instructed to tithe in the first place.

Gentlemen,

I suppose my enquiries are straightforward and should not be hard to decipher.

To tithe or not to tithe is by extension to ask another question: "to give or not to give"?

Since tithing is a matter that is always to be argued against, what then is the precedence to argue in favour of any type of giving in the Bible at all - OT and/or NT?

I still haven't read any substance in your arguments at all; and the same default human passions are still being offered as if those are the main reasons against tithing. Please, if you guys really have answers from God's Word, I'm all yours. But the latest efforts I've read so far are not actually answers to the core questions I've tried to offer.

Regards.

Dear Hnd-holder,

Let me exemplify why I feel that arguments of the kind you offer are actually not answers to my core concerns.

Hnd-holder:
How then, under the New Covenant, does a believer give a tenth, when he is supposed to give his all
(Rom. 12:1), to a priesthood that does not exist, but now he himself is part of a priesthood (I Peter 2:9),

This is a classic example of the kind of roundabout statements that I have tried to draw your attention to. If a priesthood does not exist, the believer under the New Covenant does not even belong to one. You can't make a statement and then contradict it in the same breath.

Hnd-holder:
at a temple that does not exist (Mat. 24:1-2),
but rather he himself is the temple wherein God dwells.

In which case, probably a believer then should not give at all. It is not just a question of whether or not there is a temple before one decides to give; the question is whether or not one should tithe (or give) at all.

When you kept reminder readers and contributors about the topic of the thread and you go spinning off the topic yourself, I don't suppose you're asking for good answers but mere arguments for its sake.

Hnd-holder:
No longer do we have priests with spiritual infirmities interceding for us, but rather we have Christ Jesus as our perfect intercessor and High Priest seated at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens (Heb. 7:28-8:1).
At this time in history, Israel owes no tithe to anyone. And, of course, we who are a new creation and the true Israel of God--Gal. 6:16 were never instructed to tithe in the first place.

Two things here that are deeply flawed.

(a) tithes and giving were not predicated on the intercessory work of priests - that would make it sound like the OT encouraged the same roguery you complain against;

(b) Gal. 6:16 does not teach that the Church is the true Israel of God! The Church does not displace Israel, and you only have to look again at other texts to see this:

I Cor. 10:33 - "Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God"

Rom. 11: (1) I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. (2) God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, (3) Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. (4) But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

(2)5 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. (26) And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.

There is no warrant in Scripture for miscontruing the Church as the "true Israel" - perhaps, that is why so many ideas expressed are still missing the gist.

As I said earlier, there are still very serious flaws in the arguments advanced so far; and rather than the default position of arguing against "tithes" by referring to peppered ideas and doctored articles, what is Scripture saying about this very issue?

@TV01,

Let me remind you once again: inspite of the over 900 posts on this thread and other kindred threads discussing the same topic, there is very little persuasion coming from those arguing against tithing. More than anything, again and again, the appeal is often from far-fetched ideas that only weaken such arguments.

Which brings me to the repeated query: what infact justifies any type of financial giving in the NT at all if tithing is so much a bane to those opposed to it?

That some have tried to reach a concensus does not mean that such concensus is/are actually demonstrating what Scripture teaches. And that is why I've expressed these concerns of late that such arguments in opposition to tithing have not even justified their arguments for any type of NT giving!

When I read seasoned arguments addressing these issues, perhaps then I would be in a better position to share what we all have been missing.

Cheers.

no one is obliged to do anything.
i pay my tithe to honor my God and say thank you. i no dey miss am. i'm all the richer for it.

Somebody here must be feeding fat on the so called tithe. They will do everything possible to maintain their stand.

bari_kade:
When I read seasoned arguments addressing these issues, perhaps then I would be in a better position to share what we all have been missing.

Cheers.

I hope it will not be too late then if by now you can not keep to the right lane. " Another seat and look style"

@Hnd-holder,

I've made inputs to the point that the arguments in opposition have not been addressing the core concerns of this debate. Nobody is feeding fat on any so-called tithes; and to maintain that idea again and again is to say the very same thing against any type of giving you may read in the NT.

Aside from my rejoinder to your recent post that deviates from the "the right lane" on this topic, I've asked yet another question: what actually justifies the argument in favour of any other type of giving at all in the NT? I'm not reading answers to that from you; and I think it's a bit tiresome now to hold on to the idea that people should keep to the topic while you have not been doing that very thing.

Hnd-holder:
They will do everything possible to maintain their stand.

I do hope that you're not doing everything to maintain your stand against tithes. I'm requesting answers from the Bible; not arguments from mere pessimism.

Cheers.

Start another topic on giving

bari_kade:
@Hnd-holder,


what actually justifies the argument in favour of any other type of giving at all in the NT?

@Hnd-holder,

Why is the very question on giving such a puzzling one? I offered that question because it only confirms that while it is convenient to argue against tithing (a type of giving), those in opposition have never tried to look at the broad spectrum of what they've been arguing against.

I'm sure that when we look at the arguments against tithing and try to hold those arguments against any other type of giving, then the real issues of our hearts begin to emerge. This is why it seems to me that those opposed to tithing are quite frequently reluctant to face up to the question of what exactly justifies the other types of giving that they favour in the NT.

Again, once we lay down our pessimism against the question of tithes and rather look into the Bible, answers will be proffered. But as long as any one takes a default position to argue against tithes without first examining the whole picture from Scripture itself, then we don't get any wiser for arguing against what we really haven't grasped. Which is why I really wonder in the flawed views you offered earlier as seeing the Church interpreted as "the true Israel".

The old questions again

What is the real message of Malachi’s prophecy for believers today?

Did Paul finance his international ministry through the tithing system?

Is there even one example of Christians paying tithes in the Bible?

Why did Jesus not pay tithes or the Temple tax commanded by the Law of Moses?

Will you or anyone be "cursed with a curse" for not tithing?

If God wanted more money in His house, why did Jesus do what He did in the House of God?

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the MONEY changers… and said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves" (Matt. 21:12-13).

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:
The old questions again

What is the real message of Malachi’s prophecy for believers today?

Did Paul finance his international ministry through the tithing system?

Is there even one example of Christians paying tithes in the Bible?

Why did Jesus not pay tithes or the Temple tax commanded by the Law of Moses?

Will you or anyone be "cursed with a curse" for not tithing?

The same old questions on giving:

Malachi does have a message to believers today; and if you don't know, it is because you really haven't found out the answer to the fundamental question: what exactly justifies ANY type of giving in the NT?

Did Paul (or any other apostle) finance their ministries by any type of giving system?

What examples are in the NT for Christians who "paid" anything as far as giving is concerned?

Did Jesus condemn tithes at all in the NT?

Will anyone be cursed with a curse for giving or not giving anything?

Hnd-holder:
If God wanted more money in His house, why did Jesus do what He did in the House of God?

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the MONEY changers… and said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves" (Matt. 21:12-13).

Jesus reaction in that text is no pretext for denouncing money matters in God's House, the Church. The answer to your question is in that passage you quoted; but notice Jesus was not casting out those that gave tithes! Rather, He "cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple" - and trying to use those verses against tithes/tithing is dribbling round this very question with a weak mechanical device to force-fit it into your argument against tithing.

See the reason why I said earlier: mirror your arguements against any other type of giving and see if you pass the test! It is so convenient to argue against tithing; but so far, I haven't read any sound reasoning on this questions from those opposed to it. Rather, you gentlemen continue to misread texts and suppose that your default arguments against tithes fits all and every case. Please settle down and try not misreading issues out of context!

Not to tithe is still my point. I support the idea of Giving. Giving is not the topic here.
Tithe is by force, it is a law which chritians need not obey but those that use that to steal always made it a condition for GOD blessing.


"By all these things,  I have shown you that by working in this way we must help  the weak,  and remember the words of the Lord Jesus that he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35).

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:
Not to tithe is still my point. I support the idea of Giving. Giving is not the topic here.

I can understand the point you've been trying to make; and I can appreciate that. The one simple concern that informs my entering this discussion is this:

we've been narrowing the issue of giving, and therefore have not quite understood why
the arguments often advanced against tithing are the very same arguments that weaken
the justification for any other type of giving!

Once we take the time to see what exactly is the basis for ANY type of giving (including tithing) in the OT and NT, we would have come round understanding why the arguments so far adduced against tithing are mere pessimism (IMHO).

Hnd-holder:
Tithe is by force, it is a law which chritians need not obey but those that use that to steal always made it a condition for GOD blessing.

Okay. There again is another mistake that is often adduced as arguments against tithing. Let me remind you that tithing is NOT by force - and the example I would like you to consider is that of Abraham! The patriarch was NOT FORCED to give tithes of all to Melchizedek! Even the other extreme pessimism of the argument that Abraham gave tithes from what was not his is again another pessimistic idea that fails to carefully read issues.

Tithes are not a matter of forceful, mandatory, coerced, or compelled exercises. This is the one thing I've often asked that we disabuse our minds from and look into Scripture! As long as we take this default position, it will continue to blur issues and produce flawed reeasoning.

Clearly, we pay our TAX in Nigeria to state. The tithe was a form of TAX. Given to the needy, donation to churches are voluntary.

"…freely ye have received, freely give" (Matt. 10:8b).


Look so many are sick in the hospital looking for help that never came. But churches are boasting of Billions and fastest growing.----Stealing in the name of the lord.

The Catholic Church knows its own history and   how tithing got back into the Church after being absent for nearly five centuries:
"As the Church expanded and various institutions arose, it became necessary to make laws which would insure the proper and permanent support of the clergy. The payment of tithes was adopted from the Old Law, The earliest positive legislation on the subject seems to be contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the [canons] of the Council of Macon in 585."—The Catholic Encyclopedia.

bari_kade:
Let me remind you that tithing is NOT by force - and the example I would like you to consider is that of Abraham! The patriarch was NOT FORCED to give tithes of all to Melchizedek!

Hebrews 7

7:1 Now this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him.
7:2 To him  also Abraham apportioned a tithe  of everything. His name first means  king of righteousness, then king of Salem, that is, king of peace.
7:3 Without father, without mother, without genealogy, he has neither beginning of days nor end of life but is like the son of God, and he remains a priest for all time.
7:4 But see how great he must be, if  Abraham the patriarch gave him a tithe  of his plunder



7:11 So if perfection had in fact been possible through the Levitical priesthood – for on that basis  the people received the law – what further need would there have been for another priest to arise, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in Aaron’s order? 7:12 For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law must come  as well.

No Family of JESUS ever officiate at the alter

7:13 Yet the one these things are spoken about belongs to  a different tribe, and no one from that tribe  has ever officiated at the altar.

7:14 For it is clear that our Lord is descended from Judah, yet Moses said nothing about priests in connection with that tribe. 7:15 And this is even clearer if another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, 7:16 who has become a priest not by a legal regulation about physical descent  but by the power of an indestructible life. 7:17 For here is the testimony about him:   “You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.

7:18 On the one hand a former command is set aside  because it is weak and useless,  7:19 for the law made nothing perfect.

7:28 For the law appoints as high priests men subject to weakness,  but the word of solemn affirmation that came after the law appoints a son made perfect forever

Philippians 4:15 And as you Philippians know, at the beginning of my gospel ministry, when I left Macedonia, no church shared with me in this matter of giving and receiving except you alone.
4:16 For even in Thessalonica  on more than one occasion  you sent something for my need.
4:17 I do not say this because I am seeking a gift.  Rather, I seek the credit that abounds to your account.
4:18 For I have received everything, and I have plenty. I have all I need because I received from Epaphroditus what you sent – a fragrant offering, an acceptable sacrifice, very pleasing to God. 4:19 And my God will supply your every need according to his glorious riches  in Christ Jesus.

If you feel it is wrong to tithe, then don't tithe. If you feel it is right then do so. I don't think anyone is compelled. You can chose to believe certain things your preacher says and choose to disbelieve some. the end would tell

@donmayor,
Thank you for sounding that call once again.

Is that Self justification or a case of birds of a feather. Every one have that free will to pay tithe. In my own I chose NOT TO PAY
The topic once again is "To Tithe or Not to Tithe?" QED

@Hnd-holder,

Hnd-holder:
Clearly, we pay our TAX in Nigeria to state. The tithe was a form of TAX. Given to the needy, donation to churches are voluntary

This again is another reason why you're getting it wrong about tithing! The Bible does not uphold this idea of tithes being another form of tax as far as giving in spiritual service is concerned.

Hnd-holder:
"As the Church expanded and various institutions arose, it became necessary to make laws which would insure the proper and permanent support of the clergy. The payment of tithes was adopted from the Old Law, The earliest positive legislation on the subject seems to be contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the [canons] of the Council of Macon in 585."—The Catholic Encyclopedia.

That the Catholic Church adopted the practice of tithing from the Old Law does not mean that their argument for tithing is standard for all Christians who tithe. The Catholic Church has adopted many of their traditions on basis that have no connection to NT teaching; so trying to figure that the Catholic tradition must hold as reason why many argue for tithing is untenable. This again is another reason why I called your attention to a Biblical view of tithes and not doctored articles for a pessimistic treatment of the subject.

How is it that the arguments coming from those opposed to tithing are rather far-fetched; and none of these guys are actually presenting a sound view of what they understand from the Bible concerning the subject?

First, they say tithing is mandatory or forced; whereas that is not true. Then they see tithing as a matter of people stealing in the name of the Lord; which again is not true! Or, again that tithing was never in terms of money but merely a matter of agricultural products; which yet again is not true! Do these fellows have anything to share on what tithing in the Bible really is, and what we are to understand from God's Word on it?

Hnd-holder:
Hebrews 7

7:11 So if perfection had in fact been possible through the Levitical priesthood – for on that basis  the people received the law – what further need would there have been for another priest to arise, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in Aaron’s order? 7:12 For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law must come  as well.

No Family of JESUS ever officiate at the alter

I wonder then what you would have to say about several other NT tenets that no family of Jesus ever officiated. Arguing like this is quite limiting; and it does not help a thorough understanding of the subject we're trying to discuss here.

I'm not one of those who argue in favour of tithing from the Levitical priesthood; and I'm still appealing that we look at the subject in its broad context from Scripture, so that the default pessimistic position often assumed can be set aside and not blur our discussions.

Hnd-holder:
Is that Self justification or a case of birds of a feather. Every one have that free will to pay tithe. In my own I chose NOT TO PAY
The topic once again is "To Tithe or Not to Tithe?" QED

I'm glad you asked. It shouldn't surprise any reader that you have birds of the same feather in your camp applauding your stance on this subject, even though on many occasions your views have actually been flawed.

If you choose not to tithe, you cannot militate against anyone's choice to do so! Your arguments have not dealt fairly with the topic, especially because you have made some very unsubstantiated statements which cannot be defended from God's Word.

It is a weak device to hold on to a narrow idea of the topic, especially because no justification has been advanced in your arguments for any type of giving! When you apply the same arguments against tithing to any other type of giving you read of in the OT or NT, you definetly will come away seeing the huge flaws in your arguments!

It seems some one here thought Christianity came out of those electronic organs.
Leaving out catholic means leaving out your authority.  What is the meaning of BIBLE? Go on tell us why we should continue to give out money in the name of tithe to those who call themselves tithe eaters (stealing in the name of the lord)